South Africa in England

[Skater]

Read will never play for England again because of his ICL involvement. If Ambrose gets dropped, it's one of four. Prior, Mustard, Davies or Batty. I doubt it would be Prior, though his form is excellent and his keeping is good enough based on what I saw at Arundel. Davies is a good player, opens in OD cricket for Worcs. Very competent keeper too. Batty is a county stalwart. Excellent keeper, opens in the Championship for Surrey. Think he does in OD cricket too. Mustard is probably the best keeper of those 4 mentioned. But he is the weakest batsman. But we shouldn't forget his 67, 2 test matches ago.

I understand Read is in danger of never playing for England again because of his involvement with the ICL. That is ridiculous, though. The Indian Cricket League never started to rebel against the status quo, nor is it likely to be successful. It was started to nurture young Indian cricketers and to give low key and retiring cricketers a pay day. In an ideal world, this negativity towards ICL players would be stopped and players would be picked on merit once more.

I have read the same article on England's wicket keepers as you have in The Wisden Cricketer, and based on that, Read is the best statistically since Alec Stewart. In 12 Tests since 2001-02 Read costs England just 3.25 runs per match, on average. His keeping abilities are a given, his batting is a bonus. As the editor says, that is how it should be. We need to pick the best players, politics aside.

 

[Arunava]

18 wickets at 50.66 with a strike rate of 95.3 is awful, no?

awful is an understatement. that is extremely awful for a player who is there as a bowler.

England should've picked up bowlers with Average below 35, atleast 3 bowlers they should have filled with this criteria or Strike rate around 10 overs.

 

[evertonfan]

Read's had more than enough chances in the England team. He's not good enough as a batsman and that is clearly what the selector's look for in their wicket keepers. He will never play for England again.

 

[angryangy]

That was all Fred.

 

[WestIndian]

A great catch to end a super inning, well played AB, well played.

 

[Kiko_97]

Yay! What a catch by Freddie, dangerman out now. Well done Broady.
Monty now as well

 

[WestIndian]

Well I guess England will wrap thing up now and SA will be relishing a bowl at this time.

 

[Skater]

Read's had more than enough chances in the England team. He's not good enough as a batsman and that is clearly what the selector's look for in their wicket keepers. He will never play for England again.

Read averaged 49.00 with the bat for 5 county seasons in a row. Obviously not as high a level as Tests, but the County Championship is a high standard with internationals playing in it. This is no mean feat.

Also, it is right for the selectors to pick wicketkeepers on their batting? It should be the other way around. I just don't think Ambrose is the answer to our long term keeping problem. He said himself he thought he would need a very good season this year before he could even break into the side. Instead, he has been there all year.

 

[evertonfan]

Yes it is right to pick them on their batting. This is the modern era and wicket keepers have to be able to bat. Read's days are finished.

 

[Skater]

Yes it is right to pick them on their batting. This is the modern era and wicket keepers have to be able to bat. Read's days are finished.

Then, should bowlers be selected on their batting ability? Batting is not a wicket keeper's specialty. Wicket keeping is! Even so, I have said Read averaged 49.00 with the bat for 5 consecutive county seasons, and is only now coming up to his 30th birthday. 5 more years of the best wicket keeper in the country.

 

[manee]

Then, should bowlers be selected on their batting ability?

Worst analogy ever, imo.

 

[Skater]

Worst analogy ever, imo.

Is it not the same? A wicket keeper is a wicket keeper, not a batsman. Wicket keepers should be selected on their wicket keeping ability. Batting is a bonus.

 

[manee]

Is it not the same? A wicket keeper is a wicket keeper, not a batsman. Wicket keepers should be selected on their wicket keeping ability. Batting is a bonus.

No, it is not the same. The role of a wicket keeper is also that of a lower order batsmen in the modern game. Wicket keepers are expected to bat eight at the lowest and as you know, eight is the position of someone expected to be able to average low 20s in Test cricket.

 

[Skater]

To have any chance at all England needed to be unblemished at the close. This battle now between Vaughan and Steyn is of Atherton and Donald proportions. Exciting stuff.

 

[ZexyZahid]

The only thing that England can do is now to evade an innings defeat. Or they can hope on the weather. Nine wickets to go for South Africa.