McCullum considers giving up the gloves

[aussie1st]

Brendon McCullum will spend New Zealand's off-season pondering his future as a Test wicketkeeper after the successful emergence of Gareth Hopkins in the shorter formats. McCullum opens in one-day and Twenty20 internationals but bats at No. 7 in the Test team and made his fifth century against Australia in Wellington this week, an innings he described as his best Test hundred.

Although McCullum has for many years been considered the best wicketkeeper-batsman in New Zealand, he has expressed a desire to hang up the gloves and focus on his batting. During the Twenty20s and ODIs against Australia, Hopkins kept wicket and proved a very handy lower-order batsman and New Zealand will discuss whether that could work at Test level as well.

Brendon McCullum considers giving up the gloves | Cricket News | New Zealand v Australia 2009-10 | Cricinfo.com

He definitely has the potential to play as a batter alone but his figures don't stack up. If he plays like he did in the 1st Test more consistently then its definitely a possibility but it does stuff up the balance of the team having to bring in a keeper.

 

[pcfan123]

Meh part of the McCullum appeal is that at least he keeps well if he fails with the bat. I don't doubt he'd fare well but his stats are not that impressive. Even his FC average is below 35.

 

[Robelinda]

Agree. Gilly averaged 50 pretty much all through his career and he never thought of playing as a specialist batsman, nor was it put to him. McCullum is an average batsman, but the times he batted 3 I thought he was impressive, like at Lords in 04.

 

[riz7khan12]

i say; vettori should kick him out of the team, if he doesn't want to keep wicket. straight up.

 

[CG123]

He's not good enough to play as a specialist batsmen in the longer version of the game.
His stats and consistency is just nowhere near good enough.
In T20's I don't mind it at all, in ODI's I would prefer that he kept the gloves, and in test's I wouldn't even play him as a specialist batsmen.

 

[Iridium]

I certainly hope he doesn't give up keeping. If he does, it means that Hopkins would most likely fill in, and while he did do relatively well against Australia in the ODIs, I just don't think he would be able to cut it at Test level. McCullum is NZs best keeper-batsmen, and that's how it should stay.

 

[AkshayS]

He do not deserve a place in test team if he'll not keep. He's one of the best keepers in today's game.

 

[angryangy]

The quandary is not about what he offers now, but if he can offer more. It appears to have helped Sangakkara find his best form in Tests and NZ are always desperate more batting.

 

[Varun]

i say; vettori should kick him out of the team, if he doesn't want to keep wicket. straight up.

I say this^

 

[pcfan123]

The quandary is not about what he offers now, but if he can offer more. It appears to have helped Sangakkara find his best form in Tests and NZ are always desperate more batting.

If im not mistaken Sanga averaged close to 50 while keeping and close to 90 when he was not keeping. No wonder he gave up the gloves.

 

[Iridium]

That's true but McCullum is nowhere near as consistant as Sangakkara is. Besides, Sanga is a much better batsman in Tests. But hey if McCullum can average 90 without the gloves, then go for it.

 

[Howsie]

If im not mistaken Sanga averaged close to 50 while keeping and close to 90 when he was not keeping. No wonder he gave up the gloves.

I read somewhere yesterday that Sangakkara averaged 44 with the bat when keeping (this might of been when he first gave up the gloves).

Anyway, while I don't like the idea of McCullum giving up the gloves as he's easily the best keeper in the country, without them I reckon he's got the ability to average 40+ (Which for us will be good enough) The only problem with him not keeping though is that he wont be able to bat at seven, so where will he bat?

He's batted at three for New Zealand before, just after he made his debut. He made 96 batting at Lord's at three in 04, but that's about it iirc (I don't think he's played too much of three). Ross Taylor has four sewn up, likewise Jesse Ryder does with five when he get's back. Kane Williamson will take up the number six posistion while he gains experience at this level before moving to three you would think, and Daniel Vettori would have number seven.

The only place McCullum would be able to get at the moment is three, whether or not he's good enough too bat there right now I don't know but I don't see him wanting that postion for some reason.

 

[Ari]

He's batted at three for New Zealand before, just after he made his debut. He made 96 batting at Lord's at three in 04, but that's about it iirc (I don't think he's played too much of three). Ross Taylor has four sewn up, likewise Jesse Ryder does with five when he get's back. Kane Williamson will take up the number six posistion while he gains experience at this level before moving to three you would think, and Daniel Vettori would have number seven.

The only place McCullum would be able to get at the moment is three, whether or not he's good enough too bat there right now I don't know but I don't see him wanting that postion for some reason.

Do you think Guptill will end up opening again then?

If Guptill ends up making 5 his spot would it be stupid to think that Ryder could be a test opener? Does it in ODI's already and would certainly do a better job than current openers even if he was suited to being down the order a bit.

 

[Howsie]

Do you think Guptill will end up opening again then?

If Guptill ends up making 5 his spot would it be stupid to think that Ryder could be a test opener? Does it in ODI's already and would certainly do a better job than current openers even if he was suited to being down the order a bit.

Barring what he's done against Bangladesh, Martin Guptill's done nothing in test cricket. When Ryder does come back (which you would have to think will be our next test series) unless Guptill racks up a 100 he isn't going to keep his place in the team. Some might argue that he'd just drop down too six and Williamson wouldn't come in, but Guptill's done nothing in his entire career in FC cricket. He averages 30 and has one 100, I don't care how talented you are the chances of doing well in test level with those kind of stats isn't very likely.

As for Ryder opening, I wouldn't be a fan of that happening it must be said. While I think he'd do a better job then the likes of Watling and McIntosh what Ryder's done at number five so far for New Zealand is fantastic, don't see any reason why we'd wont to move him.

 

[Iridium]

Yea, the only reason Guptill is in the Test side is because he has done well in ODIs, which are two different forms requiring different disciplines.

As for Ryder opening, I wouldn't be a fan of that happening it must be said. While I think he'd do a better job then the likes of Watling and McIntosh what Ryder's done at number five so far for New Zealand is fantastic, don't see any reason why we'd wont to move him.

I agree with keeping Ryder from opening and leaving him in the No. 5 postition. But we have to sort out an opening partnership. McIntosh is probably going to be safe after that fighting 83. He showed he can occupy the crease and take the shine off the ball. Watling has looked out of sorts and his 33 in the second innings was quite scratchy. But then who would you get to cover Watling or McIntosh if one of or both get axed? Jamie How is one that comes to mind, but he always muffs up his chance at an international recall.