Which keeper would you choose

[spaga1994]

Who would you rather in your team

-A keeper who is superb behind the stumps and takes all the easy chances but also takes 95% of those half chances,Doesn't miss a stumping and has a way of motivating the fielders around him with brilliant catches but only averages 15 with the bat and has a strike rate of 40-45.

or

-A Keeper who averages 40-45 with the bat a strike rate of 55-60 in tests and has the ability to take games away from opposing teams but struggles behind the stumps takes regulation catches but never takes a spectacular catch "drops the diving to your left outstretched catches" and is quite slow to take the bails of when a stumping opportunity occurs

ah and by the way they both stay like this for their career so they cant be trained to be better with the bat or better with the gloves.

 

[pcfan123]

Which format? In a test I would definitely take the true keeper, anything else, the batsman

 

[spaga1994]

Which format? In a test I would definitely take the true keeper, anything else, the batsman

Umm hadnt thought about that but probably tests

 

[Brook]

Option A, wickets are more important.

 

[angryangy]

The trouble is that in reality well balanced keepers who actually stand a good chance of taking all their catches and scoring 50 odd will slaughter you. At lower levels of cricket, great keepers are heroes, though.

 

[Dare]

Prasanna Jayawardene, I would take him. He sort of fits into option #1.

 

[123karan]

I'd prefer Gilchrist

 

[pcfan123]

Answer the question dammit

 

[TheGreemSim]

Atleast the guy averaging 15 will have the occasional 50 and maybe a couple of hundreds over his career and won't be lettign past quite a few byes.

 

[Masood]

I will go with Sangakara ....

 

[Mike23]

I will go with Sangakara ....

Sanga doesn't keep in test matches, he plays as a genuine batsman.I'd go with prasanna jayawardene.He is a brilliant keeper and also handy with the bat.To answer the question i'd go with option A, i would bank on my batsmen to cash in on the runs so that the keeper can concentrate on only keeping wickets.

 

[stefan]

Depends how strong my batting lineup is. If its strong I would go with the genuine keeper. If its week I would go with the batter/keeper.

 

[Brook]

Answer the question dammit

They are























































answering the thread title and not the question in the post

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

it would depend on lots of things.

personally I felt Matt Prior was the right choice with flintoff in the side for england. South Africa do not need to pick option 2, if their 6 batsmen who are specialists and very good ones at that, can't make the runs then a number 7 won't make much difference.

Sri Lanka I feel would pick a better batting one, but being keeper is detrimental to sangakkara and he's too important to have anything effect his batting. They just don't have another option. not that I'm complaining, prasana is great.

ironically they might be in the same position in a few years time as Kashual Silva is a a young wicket keeper but also one of the best batsmen in the domestic circuit. He may also need to start specialising in batting.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

I'd take Option A, but I'm a purist in this sense and also feel that no matter how talentless a batsman may be, he should be able to stick around and support the other batsmen until he gets a delivery too good for him. All about mental strength...