Print

[The 22nd Yard]

Take a look at this post...

http://blog.custombats.co.uk/2013/03/27/focus-matt-prior/

What are your opinions on Matt Prior, is the best ever or could he ever be?

[alba caerulea]

I would argue strongly that most fans agreed with the article by Michael Henderson. Most fans I know found the jelly bean episode quite amusing

Henderson calls Ali Cook 'dim' and Prior a 'buffoon'. They are now captain and vice-captain of their country

Prior is excellent at his job, if i was picking a World XI now he would bat at 7 for me and keep wicket. I also think that if he wasn't keeping wicket he would make an excellent captain of England. He speaks honestly and doesnt hide behind the same generic phrases most of the england team do in interviews. I really don't think you can underestimate his influence on the England team

To say he could be better than Gilchrist is a huge claim as he was a phenomenon. And to say he could be the best ever is again pushing it. However if you consider that before Gilchrist it was accepted for keepers to have an average of around 30 as long as they were good with the gloves Prior might be right up there as an all-round package

[Twelfth Man]

I wouldn't say that you're able to say Prior is better than what Gilchrist was, overall anyway. Gilly was dominant in all forms, whilst Prior seems to be forgotton on the One Day side of things by the selectors even though everybody keeps expressing the need to put him back in our side.

[The 22nd Yard]

Gilchrist definitely changed the standard of wicket-keepers, both in terms of their glove-work and batting. Looking past Sangakkara I really do think Prior is the closest the world has ever come to a Gilchrist standard wicket-keeper batsmen. The fact his early stint in the England team was so poor could really harm his chances, however.

Prior still has years left at the top of the game, a definitive answer will be impossible to decide until he has finished his career (and hopefully played some more ODI's and IT20's!)

[Rew162]

I wouldn't say that you're able to say Prior is better than what Gilchrist was, overall anyway. Gilly was dominant in all forms, whilst Prior seems to be forgotton on the One Day side of things by the selectors even though everybody keeps expressing the need to put him back in our side.

I agree, Gilchrist was a top order bastman in his own right, also having to keep to Warne could not have always been easy. Prior is a very good test player and currently one of the best keeper/batsman in test cricket (with Dhoni) but there is a reason he is not in the ODI or T20 teams. For me if he played ODI/T20 cricket like he plays tests he would get in but he always seems to try and overhit in the shorter forms of the game as shown with an average in this years Big Bash of just 8!

[alba caerulea]

Gilchrist definitely changed the standard of wicket-keepers, both in terms of their glove-work and batting

There have always been good wicket-keepers. That was their sole job in the side and they quite often batted at 8 and below in the past.

If anything I would argue that Gilchrist influenced a downward trend in global wicketkeeping standards as countries searched for a batsman who could keep rather than a specialist Keeper. England certainly did as Geraint Jones was not a good wicketkeeper when he came into the side but was selected on the back of some big scores for Kent

[Twelfth Man]

That's actually an interesting point of view that I've never taken into consideration. The craze of finding a top keeper-batsman definitely swept the world of cricket, trying to find their own Gilly and to give them something extra in the batting line up.

Would all of the current internationals (and since Gilly was playing) have been selected solely on their keeping ability? Obviously there must be, but who are those keepers who might be one of the best keepers in their country but just don't hold up so well with the bat as others do...

[neilbaker]

Excellent article, full of insight and glad you singled out (besides the Captain),  the most talented and reliable in the England Team.

[The 22nd Yard]

That's actually an interesting point of view that I've never taken into consideration. The craze of finding a top keeper-batsman definitely swept the world of cricket, trying to find their own Gilly and to give them something extra in the batting line up.

Would all of the current internationals (and since Gilly was playing) have been selected solely on their keeping ability? Obviously there must be, but who are those keepers who might be one of the best keepers in their country but just don't hold up so well with the bat as others do...

I think James Foster and Chris Read would have been chosen if the 'Gilly Revolution' never happened, without doubt the best two keepers in England over the last decade.

[Manormanic]

All a bit blah I fear!

So Prior.  Prior the grown up (as opposed to the slightly petulant Jack-the-lad of his first stint in the side) has been a superb cricketer for England and should continue to be for at least the next three/four seasons.   Indeed, there would have been a very good argument for him, rather than Cook, to take the reins at the end of last Summer; he seems tactically to be a littel more astute than Cook, and the trend for captain's to lose their job upon retirement means that Cook will have either a long and pressurized stint or an unnecessarily curtailed test career as a result. 

What England do need to think about is his role in the side; his body is starting to creak from the keeping and, at a point in the near future, it might be worth looking at Prior as a specialist batsman with one of the other young keepers coming through to take the gloves with him still in the side.

As for Gilchrist, thats a whole other debate.  Did he change the perception of keepers toward being batsmen who wore gloves to field?  I'm not convinced - I think the great West Indian sides had already done that with Derryck Murray and Jeff Dujon, who were front line batsmen who happened to keep rather than the best glovement available - thing is, with four big quicks, you didn't need a class keeper so much.  And Gilly had the key advantage of batting almost exclusively against sides who had used two new balls and all their energy working through a combination of Slater, Hayden, Langer, the Waughs, Martyn, Clarke, Lehmann, Katich...   

[Manormanic]

I think James Foster and Chris Read would have been chosen if the 'Gilly Revolution' never happened, without doubt the best two keepers in England over the last decade.

No they wouldn't, not for any length of time anyway.  England had showed as early as the 1986 Ashes that they would always favour the keeper who batted (then Jack Richards) over teh one who was suspect at the top level (then Bruce French); and they kept doing it thereafter with Stewart over Russell etc.

[Buzz]

This has been going on longer than that - the Alan Knott vs Bob Taylor debate was in the 70's-80's.

However, Matt Prior is a magnificent player and a huge asset to the side - I think he will finish with a better record to Alex Stewart and that will be a great effort.

[jamielsn15]

I never had Gilchrist down as a top keeper in terms of technique (previous points in this post are salient, thogh I do think he was very good) and I would think that Prior is marginally better than Gilly on his glovework, which has improved no end from a very ordinary start in Test cricket.

Best ever?  Boucher and Gilchrist did well in ODIs, which Prior hasn't done, but I think he will be classed as a great modern day keeper.  I don't think there's any doubt that he isn't as good as Knott, Taylor, Marsh, Boucher in terms of keeping but as a keeper/batsman, he's certainly up there

[Manormanic]

Prioris a long way ahead of Gilly as a keeper - Gilly was rated pretty poor for most of his career, especially by one Shane Warne, who used to grumble at the number of chances Gilly missed (which is pretty harsh if you ask me - after all, Warne cannot have been the easiest guy to keep to), whereas Prior has dragged himself up from being worse than poor to being as good as any other gloveman in the Test game save Prasanna Jayawardena (who, surprise surprise, is being phased out of the Sirils team in favour of Dinesh Chandimal)

[smokem]

...And Gilly had the key advantage of batting almost exclusively against sides who had used two new balls and all their energy working through a combination of Slater, Hayden, Langer, the Waughs, Martyn, Clarke, Lehmann, Katich...   

In tests, yes but he's played some blinders when they've been in trouble as well (record chase against Pak in Hobart, Indian tour - could've used him recently)... In ODI's, he opened on hard decks against swinging white balls and did a not too shabby job...