Print

[97notout]

Although not the best and making a return to cricket after a number of years away I class myself first and foremost as a  wicket keeper.
I was going to put specialist keeper but that might sound a bit pomp what I mean first and foremost is I keep wicket and my passion has always been that. I watched Knott and Taylor as a kid and that was it I was hooked.

 I can bat a bit, a highest score of 97 not out, albiet in a friendly against average bowling and I once averaged 50 in one season.

I have been netting with a staffs league team, expecting to play 3rd eleven cricket but was told the other night at nets that I would be playing 2nd eleven as they had no keeper and where did I normally bat. I said anywhere even 9, 10, Jack so long as I keep wicket.

My point is that in the modern game do clubs need a 'purist' keeper, a keeper/batsman or a batsman/keeper and does it affect decisions on selection nights 

[Johnny]

I don't think in club cricket your keeper has to be able to bat. I've played in several teams where the keeper sees themself as a keeper and as long as they keep wicket are happy at 11.

As amateurs who play for enjoyment I think that clubs have a duty to their members to make sure everyone gets a game, so personally having someone like yourself is a god send as I don't have to worry about where to slot you on the order.

Having too many good allrounders is a nightmare as if you're not careful you end up with a select few people doing the bulk of the batting and bowling. Our current first team keeper also opens the batting, but we have toyed with the idea of bringing in a specialist keeper just to spread the workload a bit.

Curiously I've also played with a guy who saw himself as a keeper, and would only play if he kept wicket. He preferred to play 2nd team cricket and keep as opposed to playing 1st team cricket as a batsman, even though he though he should definitely have been in the 1st team as a batter, he just wasn't the best keeper at the club

[Simmy]

id like to think am a keeper batsman, but i do tell the skipper im not arsed where i bat!

[roco]

Too many all rounders is a problem as I had it last year where our no 1,3,4,5 were 4/6 best bowlers so leaves tough calls to make although the keeper batted 9 so helped

[Simmy]

i just bat where i am told some days 1 some days 4 some days 6 7 8 doesnt matter im not arsed. i dont bat any diff no matter where i bat

[richthekeeper]

depends on the kind of batsman you are as well really.

in our club both myself (2nds) and the first team keeper are openers. i wouldn't want to bat 4-7 if i could help it; if i'm not opening or batting 3 then i don't have the ability to bat in the middle order.

on batting ability i probably wouldn't get into our current first team even though i was the highest 2nds run scorer last season. however if i had the choice of playing 1s as a lower order batsman or keeping/opening for the 2s it would be an easy choice.

[Johnny]

When I skipper a team I believe everyone should have a role to play.

Our 1st XI have 2 very good all-rounders, plus a keeper batsman. They end up picking at least one sometimes 2 TFC's every week and I don't agree with it.

[richthekeeper]

TFCs?

last season our first team basically had 8 all rounders, a keeper/batsman, one specialist bat and a specialist fielder!

[Johnny]

TFC = Thanks for coming

[dhackett89]

which staffs league club?

[dhackett89]

im a keeper who bats in the top three and captains now so i must ruin everyones day!

in reality the most important thing is having a keeper who will take the chances regardless of their batting ability. in amateur cricket the balance of the side can generally be covered in other areas

[97 n.o.]

Depends on standard, but I always think a keeper who can bat is a bonus. As long as they do the job behind the stumps i'll be happy as captain!

[Aswani Cricket]

I'd put the keeper as probably the most important position, and to have a good one is very comforting. For me, it's not necessary for the keeper to be a top order batsman .

[Canners]

Depends on standard, but I always think a keeper who can bat is a bonus. As long as they do the job behind the stumps i'll be happy as captain!

agree with this 100%

i think the keeper that is the better batsman will generally get ahead of the better keeper that doesnt bat so well...

take James Foster for instance IMO the best wicketkeeper in England for quite some time but didnt make the cut

[dhackett89]

was at a dinner with paul nixon recently and he described foster as the best gloveman in the world by some distance.
yet geraint jones was selected ahead of him!