Matt Prior-should he be keeper?

[sd92]

After Matt Prior was given the go ahead to become the England wicket keeper, he hit 126 not out on debut.

But in the last couple of tests he has come under much scrutiny, as not having the best keeping skills. This has been exagerrated further, since he dropped Sachin Tendulkar at the Brit Oval yesterday. He was criticised for lack of foot movement, and the argument is, wicketkeepers should be on the move at all times, and he should have taken two steps the other way before taking the catch. He dived for the catch with two hands and another opinion is that if he dived at the ball one handed, he would have caught it. maybe he is not good enough with his hands, to dive one handed.

Bob Willis even went as far as saying "Matt Prior is not even in the top 15 wicketkeepers in this country, let alone getting into the England side"

What are your views, should Prior be in the side?

If not, who should take his spot?

 

[angryangy]

All I know is, no team should have 5 keepers.

 

[King Pietersen]

I knew this would happen. He has made a couple of mistakes and people quickly forget the fantastic work he did in the West Indies series. He had Harmison and Plunkett firing balls all over the place and coped magnificently. He proved his worth to me in that series alone. He has continued his fantastic form i think, yes he has dropped 1 or 2 catches, but what keeper goes a whole series without dropping one ? Mistakes happen, and the sooner people realise that cricketers arent robots, and are prone to mistakes the better. Prior still has a test match average of 42 after 10 innings, so his batting hasnt got any worse. I just think the majority of English cricket fans are too fast in criticising keepers. If Prior continues to drop simple catches, then yes we should consider another option, but he has dropped 1 or 2 catches, not 10, just give the guy a break.

 

[smssia0112]

England honestly have the worst attention span in the world. Perhaps you've all supressed memories of the Ashes Series that we won 5-0, but you had a wicketkeeper back then who was coping brilliantly with the gloves, and quite well with the bat.

 

[plympilgrim]

to be honest prior has only played 5 or 6 tests and we are yet to see how he copes against teams like the aussies. Like King P said all keepers drop one or two catches and that is what makes them human. I dont think so far we have given him a long enough chance to prove his worth

 

[Skater]

What you've mentioned is a technical error and can be fixed with some work in the nets. Bob Willis has always been a miserable old git.

One other way out - have different wicket keepers for tests and ODIs. When you think about it, what exactly did Paul Nixon do wrong? I'd have him in the side for ODIs and stick with Prior for tests. For now.

 

[rabeta]

When on this subject, the main thing you need to consider is how you are going to balance keeping ability and batting ability. With Prior, you have a very good, technically sound batsmen, who attempts to keep - not too badly. When Adam Gilchrist started, he will tell you that his keeping was not too good, maybe that highlights why we have to stick with Prior. With Fletcher, the decision was always between, a Prior-like player, though not as good a batsmen - in Jones, and a very good keeper who was capable to bat - Read. The same question is the one we have here, to we stick with natural batting ability and let his keeping progress. The simple answer, is yes we do this. We have been down the Read line, and as much as I like him as a player, he is not the future, Prior is.

If Prior can shut up behind the stumps, and concentrate on his keeping in the winter, we will have one of the best, I assure you. His batting ability is quality, he looks a class act out there in the middle, and although he needs a couple more scores to prove himself, they will come with the ability he has.

What you've mentioned is a technical error and can be fixed with some work in the nets. Bob Willis has always been a miserable old git.

One other way out - have different wicket keepers for tests and ODIs. When you think about it, what exactly did Paul Nixon do wrong? I'd have him in the side for ODIs and stick with Prior for tests. For now.

He's not the future, we need to be looking forward to the next world cup, Nixon would not be there.

 

[KBC]

Come on you rivals,calm down.:rtfl

Well,basically,England never had a consistent Wicket-keeper after G.Jones(GOJO,)

For matt prior,it's just a beginning,well,seeing accurately,the bowlers bowled too bad,the ball was swinging,bouncing too much.It's horrible for a WK,

If you guys think Matt is lazy,just replace them with gilly,boucher,any one could leave the balls instead of trying to stop the them.

Well,it's just the beginning,the time will say the rest of the Career of Matt Prior.

 

[Skater]

Why should we be looking towards the future when the present is rubbish? If Paul Nixon is the best OD wicket keeper in the country right now, he should be in the England team. When he retires, we get the best wicket keeper then.

 

[smssia0112]

What you've mentioned is a technical error and can be fixed with some work in the nets. Bob Willis has always been a miserable old git.

One other way out - have different wicket keepers for tests and ODIs. When you think about it, what exactly did Paul Nixon do wrong? I'd have him in the side for ODIs and stick with Prior for tests. For now.

They're both average keepers though, so there's no reason to differentiate them. Prior is younger so obviously he gets the nod.

In test cricket you honestly can't afford to drop catches, so you need a good keeper. It's more important in ODI cricket to have a good batsman, but wickets are hard to come by and you need to have your best keeper in, not your best batsman-keeper.

England are simply trying to replicate the one good keeper-batsman that they've ever had, and it's hampering their wicketkeeping stocks.

Let's not forget that you need a wicket-keeper to be a wicket-keeper. If Prior is good enough a batsman, he can still play, but you need your best keeper to be keeping. Simple as that.

 

[irottev]

He just needs work. England need to stick loyal to a handful of players so they can settle. He can;t be expected to be great every test. Players have bad series.

 

[King Pietersen]

Why should we be looking towards the future when the present is rubbish? If Paul Nixon is the best OD wicket keeper in the country right now, he should be in the England team. When he retires, we get the best wicket keeper then.

LOL, one drop and now he's rubbish. Lee you really surprise me, i thought you were cleverer than a comment like that. As mentioned in my post above, he proved against Harmison and Plunkett that he is a quality keeper, theres not many that could have got away with so little byes with them 2 bowling like they did. Prior also keeps to Panesar very well, maybe not as well as Nixon, but thats mainly due to experience. How is prior going to gain the experience if he isnt playing ? Using Nixon would be a very negative move, he is 37, has maybe 2-3 years of county cricket left in him, therefore would not be the right choice for England. Prior has let himself down once, dropping Sachin, and now people are writing him off saying we need to look at other options, its one mistake, people are prone to mistakes you know.

 

[Skater]

No - I didn't mean that Prior is rubbish - that's why I said about Nixon coming in for one day cricket, and keeping Prior for tests.

 

[King Pietersen]

You said "the present is rubbish", Prior is the present Wicket-Keeper is he not ? So what did you mean by that ?

 

[harishankar]

To be honest I think the commentators exaggerated his mistakes to a great extent. Sure, he's not the fleetest keeper around, but then a lot of the balls that went down leg side would have challenged the best keepers. The English bowlers were quite wayward on occasions. I was shocked at how commentators can be so blatantly biased. Don't just believe what they say without being a little critical. A lot of them seem to have hidden agendas and axes to grind.

Nasser Hussain seems to be the most balanced commentator of the lot. He neither praises too much nor does he tear down a player... He's level-headed and frank. The other English commentators except David Lloyd to an extent talk rubbish a lot. A lot of Indian commentators talk rubbish too (maybe except Ravi Shastri)... and that's my opinion.

I think Prior can improve provided he adjusts his technique a bit...

P.S. Those who remember the Indian keeper Deep Dasgupta -- haha... now that was one rubbish wicket-keeper!!