Why does Prior not play limited overs cricket?

[sifter132]

Looking at the list of best strike rates in ODI cricket, anyone with a higher strike rate than Gilchrist, scored less runs than he did and had a lower average than he did, and that is the major thing: he kept that level of performance up for 10 years. Most hard hitting wicket keepers or even openers, tend to burn out pretty quickly. Even the longest serving ones haven't done as well eg. Sehwag and Afridi both have higher strike rates than Gilly, but both scored less runs at a lower average. Jayasuriya was one who kept going for longer - but Gilchrist has a better average and strike rate than Sanath as well. If just looking at keepers, it's even worse. McCullum would be the next one on the list probably. As keeper McCullum has 3 100s, Gilchrist had 16...that should tell you why he's the holy grail

Basically, Gilchrist gave Australia a fast scoring wicket keeper who could score 100s, and gave them that option for a long time. That's why he's the template.

 

[spooony]

Looking at the list of best strike rates in ODI cricket, anyone with a higher strike rate than Gilchrist, scored less runs than he did and had a lower average than he did, and that is the major thing: he kept that level of performance up for 10 years. Most hard hitting wicket keepers or even openers, tend to burn out pretty quickly. Even the longest serving ones haven't done as well eg. Sehwag and Afridi both have higher strike rates than Gilly, but both scored less runs at a lower average. Jayasuriya was one who kept going for longer - but Gilchrist has a better average and strike rate than Sanath as well. If just looking at keepers, it's even worse. McCullum would be the next one on the list probably. As keeper McCullum has 3 100s, Gilchrist had 16...that should tell you why he's the holy grail

Basically, Gilchrist gave Australia a fast scoring wicket keeper who could score 100s, and gave them that option for a long time. That's why he's the template.

Off course anyone with a higher strike rate have scored less runs but a average of 34 qagainst the major teams and a average of 35 against minnows included is not the holy grail of anything. It basically accounts to he scored 35 runs of 37 balls everytime he comes in which is not better than a 50 of 60 balls considering cricket is a team sport and those guys who got a strike rate of 200 came in and hit a quick fire 20 of 10 balls which be basically the same. In modern day cricket even 40 is considering average. The average and the amount of runs he scored already tell you he played more games than the other blokes. Strike rate do not beat runs scored in cricket. Gibbs played 60 matches less than him scored more hundreds and more 50 fifties as him and we call it talent not living up to its potential. But cause Gilchrist played in a awesome team we call it the Holy Grail? Cmon there were a lot better openers in ODI cricket than him. Tendulkar and Gayle, Jayasuriya. Even Sehwag played less matches higher average and higher strike rate than him. Gilchrist played something like the 3rd most matches than any other player in history.

 

[bigred]

I think certain users of this site may have lost what the concept of a public forum is.

Similarly, I think my initial point may have been lost. I realise Prior's stats are not good, but seeing as he has improved as a cricketer( in my opinion) in the last 2 years, I think that perhaps it is time to see if the improvement might translate into one day runs. If others believe that there are keepers who could bat at 6 better than Prior, than that is fine. I just don't.

 

[Owzat]

Gilchrist average 35 in ODI's. Was he really the holy grail?

If a keeper averages 35 in Tests he's doing well, if a batsman averages 35 in ODIs he's considered to be a good ODI batsman.

Maybe you're lost with numbers, this is the WICKET-KEEPER and it is ODIs not Tests. Or perhaps because these days some players average 40 and 50 in ODIs you're taking that as a benchmark, well Sehwag only averages 35 in ODIs, Tendulkar averages 44, Smith 38, Kallis 45, Jayawardene 33, Sangakarra 38, Clarke 45, Pietersen 41 and Watson 41. That's a sample of the kind of average some good batsmen achieve, there are others who average 50 but in the shorter form of the game that is still exceptional and largely down to much flatter tracks and rule changes.

And of course Gilchrist was notorious for big hitting, with a good ODI average for a keeper and opening he was bound to be a template. It isn't my "holy grail", I'd rather our keeper was like Gilchrist than not, but I wouldn't try and make every keeper open and hope he does what Gilchrist does which has been what England have done in the past. It's the whole pinch-hitting theory, while Sangakkara averages higher than Gilchrist, their respective SRs are around 75 compared to nearly 97. So let's have a little look at the averages of those listed with SRs

Sehwag : ave 35, SR 104
Gilchrist : ave 35, SR 97
Watson : ave 41, SR 88
Pietersen : ave 41, SR 87
Tendulkar : ave 44, SR 86
Smith : ave 38, SR 81
Clarke : ave 45, SR 78
Jayawardene : ave 33, SR 78
Sangakarra : ave 38, SR 75
Kallis : ave 45, SR 73

The most any of that sample could average with an SR above 80 was 44. The two with the highests SRs averaged well under 40, not really a surprise and given Gilchrist might just have spent 50 overs keeping, I'd say to knock an average of 35 is naive.

And to pick out some who average 50, or one on the brink :

Amla : ave 59.96, SR 91.73
Dhoni : ave 52.29, SR 88
Kholi : ave 49.99, SR 86


Oh and big hitter keeper McCullum averages a tad over 30. Amla seems to be the ODI batsman uber alles, phenomenal average and SR. I couldn't see any other batsmen listed as current with 50+ averages, I would reckon on 45 being a top average these days and 40+ would have been through most of Gilchrist's career. Either way, 35 from your keeper you would take and without hesitation if at an SR over 90. Most sides would want their keeper to score at a quick rate down the order, anything over 30 would do.

England "current" keepers (ODIs)

Kieswetter 30.67
Davies 30.50
Prior 24.19
Mustard 23.30
Read 17.65
Foster 13.67
Ambrose 2.50

Davies actually averages 34.14 opening and has an SR of 105.63, has only played Australia and Pakistan, so why he only appears as a blip on the radar I do not know. Funnily enough Kieswetter who was in the side to pinch-hit has averaged 33.83 at six compared to just 29.96 opening, although that is skewed by 3/9 being not out batting six, but then he didn't get to finish his 21no (224/4), face a ball in his 0no (252/4) or finish his 38no (288/6 after 50), so strictly speaking it's only two not outs that made any difference and in both he probably would have made a few more runs with more time to bat

 

[bigred]

Sounds like nasser is thinking prior over kieswetter from his comments on sky this morning.

 

[War]

Sounds like nasser is thinking prior over kieswetter from his comments on sky this morning.

Ye i heard him & Nick Knight talking about it. Its either they give Prior a third chance or try one of bairstow/buttler. Its sad of Kieswetter since i think he has wonderful ability, but he just has not taken his opportunities as an odi opener or # 6 & unfortunately his time is up.

 

[MUFC1987]

This really doesn't surprise me. First and foremost the fact that people want Kieswetter out. He'll come back to Somerset and carry on making tons and it's a shame, because no one in that England setup knows how to use him, to get the best out of him and he'll forever be the scapegoat because he doesn't get the opportunity to score the easy runs that others in that order do.

Prior may as well come back, he'll only screw up again, because he's not good enough, but hey, that doesn't matter does it? Guys like Bairstow and like Steve Davies bust their guts for 6 months all summer showing what they can do, to get one chance to play for England, yet time after time they're overlooked, because they're not the favourite of whoever happens to be picking the side. I think it's sad, that the County game can produce good players at a younger age, who never get that chance because their face doesn't fit or they don't play for the right team.

The system is broken and it's a bigger issue than picking Matt Prior again, but this decision epitomises it.

 

[bigred]

This really doesn't surprise me. First and foremost the fact that people want Kieswetter out. He'll come back to Somerset and carry on making tons and it's a shame, because no one in that England setup knows how to use him, to get the best out of him and he'll forever be the scapegoat because he doesn't get the opportunity to score the easy runs that others in that order do.

Prior may as well come back, he'll only screw up again, because he's not good enough, but hey, that doesn't matter does it? Guys like Bairstow and like Steve Davies bust their guts for 6 months all summer showing what they can do, to get one chance to play for England, yet time after time they're overlooked, because they're not the favourite of whoever happens to be picking the side. I think it's sad, that the County game can produce good players at a younger age, who never get that chance because their face doesn't fit or they don't play for the right team.

The system is broken and it's a bigger issue than picking Matt Prior again, but this decision epitomises it.

I'm a Surrey fan, and get down to watch them a few times a season. Not sure I agree that Davies has been proving himself. Glimpses of magic with a lot of rubbish in between. Bairstow clearly wouldn't have an issue batting at 5/6 for England. But I haven't seen enough of his glovework to judge whether or not he'd be a better pick than Prior right now. My worry is, we'll go between Kieswetter, Bairstow and Buttler for the next 2 years. They'll have the odd slump or dropped catch, and then Prior will be picked in the WC squad without playing any ODI cricket beforehand. He'll then have a dreadful torunament and we are back to square one.

Whoever they choose (and I suggest it is not Kieswetter), they need to play for the 12 months leading up to the WC. I think England's tournament squads of late have been confused. Like they haven't really known who their best side is.

 

[MUFC1987]

I didn't really mean right now for Davies. More so before the last World Cup, when he deserved a run in the side in Australia and then to play the World Cup, because on merit, he was our best option, yet he got cast aside. He deserved more of a go due to performing well, whether as Prior gets more of a chance even after squandering plenty of them.