Cricket 2021

D

Deleted member 18588

Guest
Unfortunately he is called Bairstow, and that tends to mean...well, lets be fair, he is the most messed around player in English cricket, so it would not surprise if he did make way. He shouldn't though - he has batted well enough in this series without quite kicking on, and he provides the middle order with mongrel and impetus.
The most overrated player in English cricket, certainly as far as the red ball game is concerned.

Shockingly bad wicketkeeper and his batting, whilst very good in one day cricket is totally unsuited to Test Matches.
 

Grizzly

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
361
The most overrated player in English cricket, certainly as far as the red ball game is concerned.

Shockingly bad wicketkeeper and his batting, whilst very good in one day cricket is totally unsuited to Test Matches.
Really? He may not have been a good wicketkeeper to begin with, but he worked hard at it and is a more reliable red ball keeper now than Buttler. As for his batting, who else, Root and Stokes apart, do we have who has made hundreds at home, in Australia, South Africa and on the sub continent? He may have had a bad run of form 2019-20, but this was exacerbated by his being in and out of the side and up and down the order.
 
D

Deleted member 18588

Guest
Really? He may not have been a good wicketkeeper to begin with, but he worked hard at it and is a more reliable red ball keeper now than Buttler. As for his batting, who else, Root and Stokes apart, do we have who has made hundreds at home, in Australia, South Africa and on the sub continent? He may have had a bad run of form 2019-20, but this was exacerbated by his being in and out of the side and up and down the order.
Quite the reverse.

Butter is the one who has worked at his keeping and finally become adequate at Test level.

Bairstow continues to be "hard handed".

Irrelevant in any case as Foakkes should be our keeper once fit again.
 

Grizzly

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
361
Quite the reverse.

Butter is the one who has worked at his keeping and finally become adequate at Test level.

Bairstow continues to be "hard handed".

Irrelevant in any case as Foakkes should be our keeper once fit again.
OK, I agree with you that Foakes ought to be first choice. On the rest, not so much. Bairstow is undoubtedly... Hard handed is the wrong words, more over optimistic in what go goes for. But the stats show he doesn't miss much, whereas Buttler misses a lot of chances and gives away more byes. Buttler is better in the white ball stuff, where the ball moves less so fast hands can hide awful footwork.
 
D

Deleted member 18588

Guest
No player will ever be a good keeper if he attempts to take the ball with his hands going "at" the ball rather than "with".

Footwork won't save that.

As for byes in Test cricket, there are rarely many and, in defence of all keepers, I would say that the majority I witness should have been called wides.
 

sunshine

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
2,910
[Bairstow] may not have been a good wicketkeeper to begin with, but he worked hard at it and is a more reliable red ball keeper now than Buttler.
:oops:
Bairstow is still untidy as a keeper and a bit erratic I think. He's a good fielder and adds more out in the field than behind the stumps.
Buttler is quietly effective as a keeper and has become increasingly reliable. He is not a specialist keeper like Foakes but as metal mickie stated - he is adequate.
 

sunshine

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
2,910
One thing that annoys me about Bairstow is that he is always going to burn a review when batting. One day he is going to be bowled out and still ask for a review.
 
D

Deleted member 18588

Guest
Foakes apart, I don't think we have any good keepers, merely functional ones (well, unless you go down to lads like Harry Duke and Jamie Smith in the county game)
I blame Gilchrist and Sangakkara.

Both were exceptional at two disciplines, batting and keeping thereby allowing their teams to select say an extra bowler or strengthen their batting line ups.

The problem was that they were exceptional and other nations who went down the keeper/batsman route placed greater emphasis on the latter of the two thus lowering the standard and perception of wicketkeeping.
 

Tongo

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 20, 2013
Messages
3,378
Location
Southampton
I blame Gilchrist and Sangakkara.

Both were exceptional at two disciplines, batting and keeping thereby allowing their teams to select say an extra bowler or strengthen their batting line ups.

The problem was that they were exceptional and other nations who went down the keeper/batsman route placed greater emphasis on the latter of the two thus lowering the standard and perception of wicketkeeping.

Yep. I did a blog piece about that a while back on how it hampered teams in more than one aspect:

https://yahooovercowcorner.wordpress.com/2018/11/12/frivolous-observations-the-gilchrist-effect/
 

Tongo

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 20, 2013
Messages
3,378
Location
Southampton
I see the organisers of the PGA Pro-Am have channelled their inner USGA by adopting the old policy of putting three of the US Open's more obnoxious players together under a very pejorative name. Messrs Pietersen, Vaughan and Gough are in the same group. Poor old Bernd Wiesberger is the pro
 

GB72

Money List Winner
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
11,858
Location
Rutland
I see the organisers of the PGA Pro-Am have channelled their inner USGA by adopting the old policy of putting three of the US Open's more obnoxious players together under a very pejorative name. Messrs Pietersen, Vaughan and Gough are in the same group. Poor old Bernd Wiesberger is the pro
That seems like a last minute change as they were talking about James Nesbitt being in the group instead of Vaughan on Talksport last night.
 

Lord Tyrion

Money List Winner
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
19,386
Location
Northumberland
I see the organisers of the PGA Pro-Am have channelled their inner USGA by adopting the old policy of putting three of the US Open's more obnoxious players together under a very pejorative name. Messrs Pietersen, Vaughan and Gough are in the same group. Poor old Bernd Wiesberger is the pro
Blimey, what the heck has Bernd done wrong?
 

Mudball

Assistant Pro
Joined
Sep 21, 2017
Messages
2,805
I blame Gilchrist and Sangakkara.

Both were exceptional at two disciplines, batting and keeping thereby allowing their teams to select say an extra bowler or strengthen their batting line ups.

The problem was that they were exceptional and other nations who went down the keeper/batsman route placed greater emphasis on the latter of the two thus lowering the standard and perception of wicketkeeping.

Agree... they are legends.
While not a legend among these, Dhoni was another exceptional accidental keeper. Grew up wanting to be a goalkeeper, but became a keeper with some unorthodox actions. While more suited to white ball, he was a very useful batsman. Above all, definitely one of the best keeper-captains that the game has produced.
 
Thread starter #1,677

fundy

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
22,639
Location
Herts/Beds border
I see the organisers of the PGA Pro-Am have channelled their inner USGA by adopting the old policy of putting three of the US Open's more obnoxious players together under a very pejorative name. Messrs Pietersen, Vaughan and Gough are in the same group. Poor old Bernd Wiesberger is the pro
posted my sympathy for Wiesberger on twitter yesterday lol
 

Grizzly

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
361
I blame Gilchrist and Sangakkara.

Both were exceptional at two disciplines, batting and keeping thereby allowing their teams to select say an extra bowler or strengthen their batting line ups.

The problem was that they were exceptional and other nations who went down the keeper/batsman route placed greater emphasis on the latter of the two thus lowering the standard and perception of wicketkeeping.
I think it was an issue before then - Alec Stewart was probably the first example of a (admittedly very good - he was much closer to a proper wicketkeeper than the converted likes of YJB and Goldenballs) keeper being given the gloves over someone better than him (Jack Russell) because he was a stronger batsman.
 
Top