Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

As it says on the tin....who would be your choice to start as wicket keeper in the first test match of the summer?

Ben Foakes

Jonny Bairstow

Ollie Robinson

Jamie Smith

James Bracey

Other


Mine would still be Ben Foakes, he is good enough with the bat, and is easily the best gloveman in the world, let alone England

Foakes for me though I don't know much about the last two on your list.

I take it Robinson is a typo?

Gingerfinch wrote:Foakes for me though I don't know much about the last two on your list.

I take it Robinson is a typo?

No he keeps for Durham and is highly thought of

andy wrote:

Gingerfinch wrote:Foakes for me though I don't know much about the last two on your list.

I take it Robinson is a typo?

No he keeps for Durham and is highly thought of

Oh in that case I don't know much about him either :-)

Foakes

Robbo is too busy

Foakes for me.

It should be Foakes.

But it won't be.

Like all wicket keeper debates this will always be running...

Depends a bit on (a) Form and fitness ; and (b) what they are prioritizing (ie , "next match" ; "future generally" or "next tour of Australia")

Foakes is the best technical wk but his use of reviews is dreadful , and his batting , while often solid enough in support of a senior partner , isn't very effective once left with the tail.

Bairstow struggled with the gloves on return from injury in the Ashes , and then had a rotten India tour with the bat. But probably worth remembering that he has scored centuries on each of the last two tours of Australia - something not many recent England bats have managed.

Smith has some good reports out of Surrey. But he rarely keeps there because of Foakes - and one might be inclined to somewhat discount Oval Runs in any case ;) Some of my Surrey friends would prefer him to just concentrate on winning a spot as a pure batsman.

Robinson of Durham seems to be doing OK . But can we possibly have TWO Ollie Robinsons in an England XI ? One seems to be enough trouble...

It won't be Bracey.

James Rew of Somerset might be an option - can certainly bat , although possibly not aggressively enough for the current preferred style ?

Lot of options... Nothing will surprise.

I think Foakes doesn't deserve to be dropped. I'd look beyond Bairstow as a keeper as he's not good enough in that role- and disappointing with the bat over the winter. If not Foakes, then look at someone coming through, but I don't see why BF shouldn't stay in the side.

I don't think Bairstow even makes the test side any more, so I see no reason to replace Foakes. He was only replaced last summer to accommodate Bairstow's batting

Is there supposed to be a poll here, which I'm not seeing?

if it was there, Arthur, it would say Foakes 100%, everyone else 0%, looking at the replies

It worries me slightly that Robbo scored 171 in pretty rapid fashion chasing a huge 4th innings total and only being one awful umpiring decision away from doing it, with the England captain watching him do it. It is the kind of thing that fits the Stokes/McCullum ethos. Last year England were quick to discard Foakes in favour of YJB in the hope that he would do that sort of thing. YJB is a busted flush now, but they might look at Robbo and think 'hmmm.... we might not need the best keeper in the world in English conditions'. They have form

Keep seeing Phil Salt's name appearing in these rumours now....As much as i think he is fantastic in white ball, there is no way he should be anywhere the test side especially with the gloves!

The problem with the great wicket-keeper debate is, certain players seem to benefit from a certain level of mythology when it comes to their keeping abilities. And then these demon keepers get called up to the national team, and it turns out they aren't actually that good. Like Chris Read, who was the modern day Alan Knott apparently, and then had matches like in Sydney where he couldn't catch a cold and was a general disaster show.

All the highly rated keepers in the county circuit, from what I see, are unreilable options that occasionally take stunning catches. John Simpson joined us for instance with a reputation as being arguably the best keeper in the country, hes taken one stunner and dropped 4 absolute clangers. He looks no better than any of the batting first keepers England have picked, but his reputation is somewhat different.

Foakes is clearly the best keeper from what I have seen. The rest are not noticeably better than Bairstow.

And yet England have been pretty ruthless with foakes in the past. I don’t understand it myself. Why pick a lesser keeper on the grounds that he might score more runs, when he’s very likely to drop many runs than he scores. It just baffles me