Prior starting to relish Test cricket
The second day of the second Test, , was another very good one for Matt Prior.
After making such a promising start to Test cricket, the Sussex wicket-keeper's halo began to slip towards the end of last summer.
This was through more than merely dropping catches - most notably at the Oval in the final Test against India - but also for his apparently constant, aggravating chirping behind the stumps which all came to a head during the
His name was the most obvious and deliberate absentee from the list of players awarded 12-month central contracts in September.
This was as much as a challenge to Prior to have a think about life and cement his position behind the stumps as it was a punishment, and it appears to have had the desired effect.
Not only has Prior cut down on the verbals (we have pitch microphones here and can listen in) but he has now recorded his second determined half-century of the series.
Scores of 63 and 79 have been made when England were really up against it, and it seems that Prior relishes these situations.
His wicket-keeping has, thus far, stood up to scrutiny as well.
There was a possible off Monty Panesar, but with the ball spinning and coming through at different heights (and, in Panesar鈥檚 case, out of the rough) keepers are rigorously tested in this part of the world - much more so than in England.
Prior鈥檚 able assistant on day two of the second Test was Ryan Sidebottom who, for the second time, made a significant contribution with the bat.
Just as well, too, for - and probably not even that.
But Sidebottom gave England just the start they needed with the ball in nabbing Upul Tharanga - Prior flinging himself in front of first slip - and, vitally, Kumar Sangakkara to reduce Sri Lanka to 25-2.
I was impressed with Stuart Broad鈥檚 first effort in Test cricket. He deserved a wicket, but it was his attitude which was tested when he was warned twice for running on the pitch within his first five overs.
What a situation to find yourself in your first Test: from bowling again in the innings.
But Broad changed ends and, in shrugging off any worries that he had, would certainly have made an impression on his captain.
颁辞尘尘别苍迟蝉听听Post your comment
Can somebody please tell me why Monty Panesar always bats at number 11? I heard he has been working hard with the bat, ever time I look at a scorecard I seem to see Panesar not out. Maybe the tail wouldn't collapse so often if the moved him one up the order.
Complain about this comment
Nice to see Prior getting some credit for a change. Even after his first test effort he received negative comments from some commentators. I wonder if they are ready to eat their words!
Complain about this comment
Prior has done a great job for England and looks like he could be wk for a long time. Today it seemed like England missed Hoggard as harmison and panesar were innnefective. Although I think that if the ball starts to reverse swing in day 3 we could see England bowling them out for 300. England will need to make sure that they have a healthy lead for the second innings as t Bayliss said the ball will spin on day 4 and 5 so England will nedd enough on the board before murali gets his conditions or it mat be another England defeat
Complain about this comment
I think he is maybe a better batsman than Anderson. But Sidebottom is a much better batsman, Broad has proved in the one days that he can bat and Harmison has a pretty good record with the bat. So seeing him at number 11 in this test is not realy a surprise.
Complain about this comment
He is NO so often because he does not play any shots. He comes in, blocks where he can, gtet the odd single and lets the other guy take any risks. This is what a #11 is meant to do. More often than not #11's are usually the ones left NO.
Complain about this comment
What a compelling days cricket. Early breakthrough tomorrow and its game on...but we cannot underestimate Sri Lanka's batsmen, they are good attacking players and have the potential to put our "par" score into some sort of context (we were 167-1 at one stage...!)
Broad did well and showed some guts to come through those first 5 overs...has Aleem Dar umpired him before..its just odd the "problem" arose today on his debut....
Whats happening to Monty? Sharpness seems to have gone - wonder if its a confidence thing as he's EXPECTED to take wickets on this pitch.
If he's not careful people will be clamouring for Swann in the next test....
Looking forward to day 3 now....
Complain about this comment
Maybe we should open with him then!!!
Complain about this comment
I agree with the appraisal of Matt Prior's display. He has taken a lot of criticsm in recent months, some of it justified, but much of it personal. He is in international terms young, and still learning; but his keeping has more potential than his critics allow, as anyone seeing him keep to Mushtaq in the last 2 years has seen. What he's now showing is that he also has the temperament to succeed at Test Match level and the ability to learn from past mistakes. However, I suspect it will only take one more low score from him and the critics will be back! Perhaps if he grew his hair he'd attract fewer enemies?!
Complain about this comment
Prior has done a great job for England and looks like he could be wk for a long time. Today it seemed like England missed Hoggard as harmison and panesar were innnefective. Although I think that if the ball starts to reverse swing in day 3 we could see England bowling them out for 300. England will need to make sure that they have a healthy lead for the second innings as t Bayliss said the ball will spin on day 4 and 5 so England will nedd enough on the board before murali gets his conditions or it mat be another England defeat
Complain about this comment
michael scott
because he's the eleventh best batter in the team? Maybe in today's situation he could've come in before harmison but harmy is probably an all-round more capable batter!
Complain about this comment
2. At 01:56 PM on 10 Dec 2007, Ross wrote:
Nice to see Prior getting some credit for a change. Even after his first test effort he received negative comments from some commentators. I wonder if they are ready to eat their words!
------------------------------------
Couldn't agree more - we seem so keen nowadays to write someone off as not up to it or alternatively put them on a pedastall as 'world class' after 5 or 10 tests. great to see prior playing well - perhaps all those slagging him off pre series will think again.
Complain about this comment
I was listening this morning when the Sri Lanka innings began and was dismayed to find Harmy not opening the bowling. Really, i know that his problems are public property and most of the people who comment on his attitude show an enormous amount of ignorance, but what exactly are we hoping to achieve with him? I would be delighted to see Harmy enjoy some good times in an England shirt but feel that having Broad [on debut] open the bowling when Harmy is on the field, well its just not right is it?
Delighted for Prior, hope he continues in this vein, some of the cricitisms of him [and Geraint Jones before him] were ridiculous and offensive. The bloke is a rookie at the top level, and i dont see such harsh words surrounding Monty or James Anderson when they perform poorly.
Complain about this comment
I was listening this morning when the Sri Lanka innings began and was dismayed to find Harmy not opening the bowling. Really, i know that his problems are public property and most of the people who comment on his attitude show an enormous amount of ignorance, but what exactly are we hoping to achieve with him? I would be delighted to see Harmy enjoy some good times in an England shirt but feel that having Broad [on debut] open the bowling when Harmy is on the field, well its just not right is it?
Delighted for Prior, hope he continues in this vein, some of the cricitisms of him [and Geraint Jones before him] were ridiculous and offensive. The bloke is a rookie at the top level, and i dont see such harsh words surrounding Monty or James Anderson when they perform poorly.
Complain about this comment
Prior has kept quiet and the improvement in his play is obvious. Perhaps above all things, he has grown up. He has the ability to be a very good lower order Test batsman. Broad is very lucky not to have received a third warning.Changing ends is fine but doesn't that suggest inconsistent umpiring? Sidebottom is a great trier and deserves a lot of praise for his wholehearted approach and attitude. Sulky Kev needs to lighten up and deliver in his next few innings.
Complain about this comment
Dear Aggers,
I always look forward to your blogs, which never fail to combine fair, incisive comment with generosity of spirit towards players and umpires alike: a pleasure to read, and a highlight of any day of test match coverage. Keep it up!
Sincerely,
James Ballance
Complain about this comment
It *IS* nice to see the critics getting off Matt Prior's back for a while. With these two innings he has at least demonstrated that he can get runs against other sides than the West Indies and broken the downward spiral. However, the fact that he is away from home and not under such pressure and scrutiny probably had a lot to do with it. Perhaps the critics who turned first Geraint Jones, then Paul Nixon and thn Matt Prior into nervous wrecks will take note. Hopefully he'll score more runs in the remaining 3 innings in the Tests, take one or two more blinding catches and will go to New Zealand with his position totally secure. If we can finally stop the endless procession of wicket-keepers who have been tried in the last year (5 now), that will be enormous progress.
351 was a disappointing effort with the bat after such a good start, but one feels that Muttiah Muralitharan is not dominating the England batting the way he did on the last tour: it might be timid progress, but his wickets are more expensive and he is finally being milked for a few runs rather than bowling endless spells where runs barely keep up with the overs.
The game is fabulously balanced. Sri Lanka will feel that they have a platform to wrestle the Test away from England, as they did on the 4th day at Galle. England will feel that one or two quick strikes in the morning will put them right on top.
Complain about this comment
Perhaps the reason Broad wasn't bothered by being warned for running on the pitch was because his dad is Aleem Dar's boss?
Complain about this comment
Fair play to Prior, he's battled hard in this series after his duck in the 1st Test. However, it was a little rich to see Alec Stewart championing his abilities last week - his objectivity is questionable given he's Prior's agent !
James Foster was the coming man six years ago & did well on the Indian sub-continent in 2001/02, but his star seems to have waned completely.
Anyone else think Harmison is drinking in the last chance saloon with the next Ashes series 18 months away ?
Complain about this comment
Delighted for Matt Prior.He has proved that he has more potential than any of his rivals for the wk position. I cannot understand the unfair, and often personal, criticism, to which he has been subjected- described disgracefully as a 'buffoon' in the Telegraph. Wicketkeepers have always taunted opposition batsmen. Jim Laker memorably referred to George Duckworth's 'antics' as a reason to go and watch cricket when his county was in town. I bet Duckworth was not treated with such disdain by the press!
Complain about this comment
Cricket seems to have become a lottery, with poor Umpiring in current test matches in Sri Lanka and India.
Complain about this comment
I'm not sure how Chris Broad can be described as Aleem Dar's boss.
Broad is a match referee, but is not (obviously) in that role in this game.
Complain about this comment
SL is in trouble. Their middle order is very brittle. With early morning swing Sidebottom should be able to strike early. It is unfortunate I did not get to watch the world's best batsman playing another classy innings. This game is in England's favour. As for Prior and his sledging, and blabbing, we all know the OZs and Brits love to sledge and distract batsmen and now SL gives it as good as it gets compared to the ugly days where your folks used racial insults and called Roshan Mahanama and Sanath J "darkie" and other racial insults when they played in England or in OZ.
With Sanga's superior intellect he gives it as good as he gets in intellectual ways that the working class Brit and OZ working class teams cannot fathom. So it is ok for a bit of exchange of words now because Sanga will not resort to profanity but use superior humour to get back when he kept stumps.
So it is ok if Prior wants to sledge and we all know you folks have a tendency to use profanity but SL and India gives it as good as they get now. It is ok for Prior to shoot his mouth off as long as he bats well for England. SL was a disappointment again with Tharanga getting off to a poor shot.
Complain about this comment
Maybe time to discard Panesar for Swann, at least he can bat, Panesar's bowling is average at the very least and the hype around him is starting to wane a litle.
Complain about this comment
back to the tail batting order...
broad:
has scored 45* for england in and odi. obviously can bat
sidebottom:
test avg of 20. obviously can bat.
hoggard:
test high score of 38 but a low avg of 7 in test cricket.
harmison:
test high score of 42 (nice) and a modest avg of 11 in test cricket.
panesar:
highest test score of only 26 and an avg of only 7.5
OTHER:on panesar's test debut, he batted 42 and only score 9 then got out. harmison (or hamison as the sri lankans spell it) batted 43 balls in the same game and score 39 not out.
CORRECT TAIL BATTING ORDER:
8.SIDEBOTTOM
9.BROAD
10.HARMISON
11.PANESAR/HOGGARD
(IF EITHER SIDEY, BROAD OR HARMY ARE INJURED THEN I RECKON HOGGARD BATS ABOVE MONTY)
Complain about this comment
Of course, Matt is a very good middle order batsman emerging in the test cricket.His patience at the wicket commendable.Like I mentioned earlier in one of these colmuns, his shot selectin is great. Test batsmen must be able to play long innings and ofcourse Matt has shown his ability and the fitness in him in last couple of innings.When it comes to Sri Lankan side, they are stil trying to find good two middle order batsmen besides Samaraweera.They have continously failed in it. However, England's middle order is better and Ravi Bopara should work hard to stay at the wicket.He has been a failure through out.Seemingly, this game is also going to be a great game and there is a higher possibility to draw the match.Anyways, congratulation Matt.Keep it up. The best is yet to come ha.......
Complain about this comment
Can anybody explain why Steve Harmison returned to the side in the place of Anderson?
Generally bowlers are replaced by a bowler who demonstrates that he can be more effective with the ball, but Harmison has done nothing to show this for at least 18 months.
Throw in the laughable situation of Harmison practicing on the square at lunch, and you have a bowler low on confidence (and unable to pull his finger out judging by his whingeing and excuses in Australia), and an England team low on options.
Fair play, drop Anderson if there is a better bowler available, but Steve Harmison is certainly not at this present time.
Complain about this comment
in response to comment 1, Panesar should definitely be no11 in this test as harmison, broad and sidebottom are all much more capable batsmen. However, i think he is of similar standard to hoggard and anderson when they play although probably deservedly no11 still.
Complain about this comment
Sometimes the comments here are a little bewildering, but Andy Lea (#26) takes the biscuit!
13 wickets in 2 matches in South Africa is hardly "nothing". Nor a quite respectable 16 wickets v the West Indies. Nor a 5 wicket haul on a lively track v Pakistan in summer 2006 where he intimidated the batting viciously. Nor being by some way the leading wicket-taker in England after the first 4 rounds of the County Championship last summer. All these were in the last 18 months.
The problem is not doing it consistently and not being as big a threat away as he is in England. That the ability is there no one who actually follows the game should doubt.
Incidentally, it used to be a regular feature of England that the physio would take the expected new ball bowlers out between innings to bowl some looseners on the outfield, or to send down a few at lunch to get ready for the post-lunch session. It was recognised that the quick bowlers generally needed to do this to get ready to bowl. The fact that he bowled 10 overs for 23 with no wides or no balls suggests that it was time well spent!!
Last summer people lauded Allan Donald for the work that he was doing with the quicks. Should we complain because Otis Gibson is working with Steve Harmison to help him get back to his best?
Complain about this comment
What's wrong with the rat from Kandy? (mono rat from kandy)..What's wrong with being working class?..I am a working class Sri Lankan like most other Sri Lankans..
So what, Kumar can speak Englisn..Leave your elitist comments to yourself..This is a cricket blog..Only objective comments need be here..
Complain about this comment
One of the things that has baffled me is the non-selection of Graeme Swann thus far in the tests.Given the form Matty Prior was in, I think he could have batted at 6 in this test with Swann at 7. Its not as if Swann can't bat and he did well in the ODIs and with Broad at 8, it doesn't weaken the batting too much.
It was a gamble worth taking because it allows England to play an extra bowler. SL have 4 left-handers in the top 6 plus any rough created by Sidebottom/Vaas could have been handy for him when bowling to right-handers as the test match progressed.
Playing 2 spinners would also have taken pressure off Monty as he is the sole spinner otherwise and also would have allowed the quick bowlers to bowl short sharp bursts or even longer spells without having too worry about rotating them from one end when Monty bowled from the other.
Given that England's best bowler from the first test, Hoggard, was injured and the heat and humidity in Colombo, playing 5 bowlers should have been an option. But I am surprised that there was no talk of it from the England camp in the build-up to the game!
Complain about this comment
RE: comment 22.
Not quite sure what planet on you are on mate. This game is evenly poised and could tip either way. Prior's success in this match has been because he has cut down on the chirping and played 'cricket'. Sangakarra is well known for his thoughtful comments on the game - and I enjoy listening to what he has to say. To say he has a superior intellect is daft - consider the insightful comments of Englishmen such as Hussain, Boycott, Vaughan etc... (If you want to see a daft sense of humour watch Hoggard's video diary on the Times!)
As regards this match, England seem to have a dysfucntional bowling attack, while Sri Lanka seem to be slowly but surely integrating new batters into their line-up. It makes the match quite even.
Complain about this comment
I think Monty's batting practice is to stop him getting himself out without rather than scoring any runs himself, in case he has to support a specialist batsman like Prior or Collingwood. With respect to Monty his batting does not stand up to much and in Sri Lanka where big scores can be crucial England cannot afford any wickets to be a gimme.
Complain about this comment
I am thrilled that Prior has silenced his critics. At least for a day or two!
He is making good runs again and against decent bowling and his keeping has been sharp.
England need runs at number seven and he is doing the business.
If he carries on like this I hope Santa brings him a central contract!
Complain about this comment
Once again, the use of technology (by accident) saves an umpire from the ignominy of making a very public blunder.
Had Sidebottom been dismissed without referral we would all now be desperate for a change in the way umpires (fail to) ask for video clarification of difficult decisions. And yet this evidence only became available by chance.
Surely something must be done. It's beginning to make cricket look too silly.
Complain about this comment
Prior
There seems to be any number of people who think that a couple of decent innings, and no blundering errors behind the stumps, so far, in Sri Lanka, somehow establishes beyond reasonable doubt that Prior is the right person to be England keeper. Isn't this no more than wishful thinking? The 21st Century's substitute for reason and logic.
The chance of "no blundering errors" being the norm for Prior's keeping is really pretty slim. His batting's always been attractive, but he had years to impress the selectors that his keeping was good enough, and he failed to do so. For Jones to be preferred to him in 2004 just shows how lowly Prior's keeping was regarded - below that of Jones, who at the age of 27 had only played one full season of first-class cricket.
Because I can't prove any different, I'm quite happy for advocates of batting keepers to claim that keeping quality's unimportant compared to batting ability. I don't agree with this, but what really galls me is when they also try to make out that for sheer keeping quality there's nothing between a top-class professional like Read and a pair of converted batsmen like Jones and Prior. It's as though they know how dreadfully weak their case is, but they've nailed their colours to it, so they try to make out that the downsides don't exist. Again, very 21st Century - as practised by all those with real ambition.
Complain about this comment
In reply to Graeme (comment 13): we can only presume that MV has more faith in Broad with a shiny new ball than Harmison. Harmison has twice in the last year or so opened a match with a slip-catch wide, and maybe there is a feeling that he can control a ball more once the shine has come off it so he can grip it better (in the same way that many spinners dislike bowling with a new ball as they can't grip the ball properly).
Also, IIRC in several tests over the last two summers Harmison has been denied the new ball and has responded by being more controlled when he has been given the ball. Maybe there's also the possibility that at the very start of a match he has a bit of an adrenaline rush, goes too hard at his first couple of deliveries, then loses confidence in himself because he hasn't got the control he wants.
He certainly appears to have trouble if his confidence drops - I was at Headingley in the summer for the Yorkshire / Durham 2020 and the Yorkshire crowd started getting on his back - he responded with a wide that would've been called in a test, let alone a one day match. My guess would be that if things don't quite go right, or if a crowd gets on his case, he puts extra pressure on himself to prove he can do it and so can't relax and find a rhythm. That's a problem for sports psychologists everywhere to mull over!
In the end, whatever the reason behind the decision, Broad bowled 11 overs for 19 runs, Harmison bowled 10 for 23. So it looks like Vaughan (quite rightly) gave the new ball to the bowler who had better control (albeit marginally).
Complain about this comment
Interesting Aggers that you don't mention the way in which the 'nothing more than adequate 351' was only just 351 - England would have been well beyond it had it not been for absolutely appalling umpiring yesterday - and I heard Ryan Sidebottom being given out yet again, and then the decision changed just as I was going to work this morning (on 大象传媒 Sport at 7.30).
The umpiring in this match is an absolute disgrace and the ICC should be looking very carefully at the way these umpires are trained and selected.
Utterly disgusted with the way this match is going (and that's not because of the England team's performance so far, either).
Complain about this comment
Prior isn't the best keeper/ batsman in the world; but he does what is written on the tin. His keeping is good, not world class, and he can make quick 50's and keep batsmen going as well as the tail.
This`is good enough for now where others have`promised so much and haven't delivered consistently. Priors 25 so age is with him.
Mustard is the only other keeper who is worth blooding in ODIs in preference to prior.
Complain about this comment
Sri Lanka will get a first innings lead of 200-odd and England will try to occupy the crease to bat the game out but won't get anywhere near. Murali will trundle in all day, probably pick up another Michelle (Pfeif-fer) without breaking a sweat.
Strauss for Captain this summer.
Cook
Bell
Strauss c
KP
Shah
Bopara
Prior
Broad
Sidebottom
Anderson
Panesar
Complain about this comment
I think this whole situation with Harmison isA quite ridiculous and extremely annoying. I am an avid test cricket follower and from what I can remember he has only ever had odd moments of what some people have described 鈥渂rilliance鈥, although personally I would say it was more luck.
He is undoubtedly inconsistent and he bowls more wides and no balls than any other respectable bowler I know of. Also if you get Simon Hughes to analyse him you will notice there is no consistency in his bowling direction or placing, which almost leads one to think that he doesn鈥檛 even know where he鈥檚 bowling it! Yes.. I really do mean that. You may remember the Australians saying they found Harmison hard to play because they never knew where he was going to bowl it.
The only times he鈥檚 ever done anything good with the ball is on pitches which really suite him, which generally isn鈥檛 many. I know he鈥檚 always good on Headingly but that suites him down to a tee.
Eventually anyone will have luck and bowl a ball which will get someone out, he鈥檚 a tall guy and sends it down with some pace and no one can take away the fact that he tries, but unfortunately England don鈥檛 have that main strike bowler at the moment, they just have a few reliable medium-fast bowlers who can swing it but without Flintoff there are no match winners.
He is a courageous bowler who can throw a match away, so why pick him when we鈥檝e lost the first test and can鈥檛 afford to lose again? Ok I realise his figures in this match so far actually aren鈥檛 too bad and there鈥檚 not much in it for the fast bowlers but I personally think Anderson being a similar bowler to Sidebottom (the only person to have really caused any problems with the ball) would have been more effective.
Like someone else mentioned previously, Anderson has done nothing wrong and has been in very good form over the past year, his problem has always been low confidence and injury so how will this do him any good, just being dropped again just because Harmison turns up and decides he wants to play.
I really do think if Anderson was given the right support and given more of a chance on a regular occasion he has more potential than any of the England bowlers currently available.
Complain about this comment
ciderguzzler - if you look at all the other decent test sides, they have a batsman who keeps wicket. Gilchrist - his keeping was poor to start with but has improved to be best there is. Dhoni, Akmal, Boucher....batting is their strength.
And don't give us this Read "model professional", all I've ever seen from him when he goes out to bat, is a man who can't bat at test match level. Now that's not just a 21st century fact!!
Complain about this comment
Why is Andy Lea complaining about Harmison, the bloke has come back and performed very well on a difficult track. I am glad he has got his wicket but his radar is working and he is being very economical.He is a class above Anderson who at test level is just not good enough. He is far to expensive and offers nothing that the outstanding Hoggard always provides. Personally I am looking forward to Jones getting back and having the strike force of Jones Harmy, Hoggard, Flintoff and Panesar. In regards to Prior well done for knuckling down and getting back to what we know you can do. I would also be tempted to bowl Pietersen more he seems more dangerous than Panesar. If he bowls more and Monty is struggling we could have a tail end of Flintoff, Jones, Hoggard, Harmison. Having Flintoff as a bowler would give us that extra batsmen.
Complain about this comment
How about this team for the next test series.
Trescothick, Still our best opener)
Cook
Bell (Can bowl)
Vaughan (Can bowl)
Pietersen (Looks very promosing with ball)
Collingwood (Can bowl)
Prior
Flintoff
Jones
Hoggard
Harmy
Just incase Monty needs a break, lets get Pietersen bowling more, plus Vaughan is quite handy. Then your tail doesn't really start till Hoggard as Jones is very handy with bat. Then have Bopara, Broad, Monty, Strauss in background.
Complain about this comment
Why not praise Harmy he has come back and bowled very well on a difficult track. Anderson has never bowled well at test level.If he took lots of wickets for lots or runs you could handle that but he doesn't. You cant compare Sidebottom and Anderson one is left one right and they pose different problems. Lets get behind Harmy he has had problems but he is working hard.
How about this team for the next test series.
Trescothick, Still our best opener)
Cook
Bell (Can bowl)
Vaughan (Can bowl)
Pietersen (Looks very promosing with ball)
Collingwood (Can bowl)
Prior
Flintoff
Jones
Hoggard
Harmy
Just incase Monty needs a break, lets get Pietersen bowling more, plus Vaughan is quite handy. Then your tail doesn't really start till Hoggard as Jones is very handy with bat. Then have Bopara, Broad, Monty, Strauss in background.
Complain about this comment
I have always been a big prior fan and think he is showing that in tough conditions he has the minerals for test cricket. As for Harmison, I think he has been trying hard and steaming in, but for people to be saying things like "oh he has been out the game a few months give him a chance" and "he will be nervous" is ridiculous, this guy is 29 years old and has over 200 test wickets, he should be able to step up, but I still rate him. KP needs some runs 2nd innings!
Complain about this comment
Comment 38 : Rob Whittle
"His [Prior's] keeping is good
"Good" by what standard? Byes at 129 and counting after 8陆 Tests, plus a load of spilled chances - any self-respecting club keeper, who's genuinely a keeper, would reckon to do better than that.
"This is good enough for now when others have promised so much and haven't delivered consistently"
The only selection who's promised high-quality keeping is Chris Read - all the others have been picked on the hope and wishful thinking that the inadequacies of their keeping won't cost us as much as we hope (and wish) we're going to gain from their batting.
And as far as batting's concerned, in 2007 no keeper matched Read's total of 1,001 first-class runs, and only two, Gareth Cross (71.00 from 1 match for Lancashire) and David Nash (60.85 from 7 for Middlesex) exceeded Read's seasonal average of 52.68.
Promise?
"Mustard is the only other keeper who is worth blooding in ODIs in preference to Prior"
ODIs require a completely different set of calculations regarding the most effective keepers to have. It's at least arguable that the best way to select for ODIs is to ignore keeper/batsmen and batsmen/keepers altogether and pick another batsman - then choose the best keeper from the batsman to keep wicket. In Twenty20 this is almost certainly the best plan, unless you have a keeper such as Gilchrist, who might only just fail to get selected purely as a batsman.
But I'm only talking about Tests really, and nothing anyone has said or written over the last 2 years has convinced me that there is clear nett benefit from selecting a batting keeper in preference to an out-and-out keeper.
Complain about this comment
Comment 38 : Rob Whittle
"His [Prior's] keeping is good
"Good" by what standard? Byes at 129 and counting after 8陆 Tests, plus a load of spilled chances - any self-respecting club keeper, who's genuinely a keeper, would reckon to do better than that.
"This is good enough for now when others have promised so much and haven't delivered consistently"
The only selection who's promised high-quality keeping is Chris Read - all the others have been picked on the hope and wishful thinking that the inadequacies of their keeping won't cost us as much as we hope (and wish) we're going to gain from their batting.
And as far as batting's concerned, in 2007 no keeper matched Read's total of 1,001 first-class runs, and only two, Gareth Cross (71.00 from 1 match for Lancashire) and David Nash (60.85 from 7 for Middlesex) exceeded Read's seasonal average of 52.68.
Promise?
"Mustard is the only other keeper who is worth blooding in ODIs in preference to Prior"
ODIs require a completely different set of calculations regarding the most effective keepers to have. It's at least arguable that the best way to select for ODIs is to ignore keeper/batsmen and batsmen/keepers altogether and pick another batsman - then choose the best keeper from the batsman to keep wicket. In Twenty20 this is almost certainly the best plan, unless you have a keeper such as Gilchrist, who might only just fail to get selected purely as a batsman.
But I'm only talking about Tests really, and nothing anyone has said or written over the last 2 years has convinced me that there is clear nett benefit from selecting a batting keeper in preference to an out-and-out keeper.
Complain about this comment
Comment 41 : James Benham
Everyone else
Well yes, because they鈥檝e all gone into the selection process with the precondition that the keeper鈥檚 got to be a capable batsman. They鈥檙e not even considering keepers who don鈥檛 bat any better than the bowlers, so it鈥檚 hardly surprising that all Test teams contain batsman/keepers.
This doesn鈥檛 make it right. It just makes it what everyone鈥檚 doing.
And why are they doing it? Partly because it鈥檚 a lot less hassle just to believe what鈥檚 currently orthodox, and partly because they鈥檙e forced to do this because otherwise public opinion would call for them to be hung, drawn and quartered. Also, if it goes wrong, they鈥檝e got the ready made excuse 鈥淲e only did what anyone else would have done鈥
Why did it become orthodox? Well I think the thought process went something like 鈥 Australia are the best team in the World -> Australia have a batting keeper -> therefore to be the best in the world we must have a batting keeper. Not even the remotest inkling of the thought that perhaps Gilchrist is a bit of a freak, really; Australia are extremely lucky to have a talented batsman who can keep wicket at a decent enough level to play Test cricket; but that it鈥檚 a fallacy to lead on to the conclusion that no keeper鈥檚 good enough unless he can bat.
21st Century Fact
Well of course it鈥檚 a fact that your opinion is that Read鈥檚 not a good enough batsman to be England鈥檚 keeper. It鈥檚 a fact that this is a lot of other people鈥檚 opinion as well.
It鈥檚 also a fact that many people鈥檚 opinions are derived neither from reason nor logic. That鈥檚 the point I was making.
Complain about this comment
Matt Prior is by far the best man for the job and quite frankly some of the views expressed are just those of either jealous or biased fans from counties other than sussex. keep going matt you are the real deal.
Complain about this comment
Prior may be relishing Test cricket, but are Sidebottom and Pietersen relishing having him behind the stumps? Sidebottom's "cursing" may perhaps have been partly provoked by the fact that he is used to having a proper wicket keeper when he plays for Notts. Whatever the rights and wrongs of picking batsmen who are only adequate keepers, I would be surprised if any bowler was not of the opinion that he should be supported by the best pair of gloves available.
Complain about this comment