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

Russell was as mad as a box of frogs.

A trait common amongst the best English glovemen.

Wrogn.

Well, as a Man of Kent, I saw both Evans and Knott playing for Kent 'live' and Knott in particular for England on the box. Both had to live up to the legend that was Ames. The memory can play tricks especially as I was basically a child when Evans was around - he created his own aura but whether or not he was actually better than Prior I couldn't say. However Knott was a different kettle of fish and I entirely agree with MS on his comparison with Prior.

However that should not diminish Prior's contribution to England's period of success - it was pretty immense.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

Aidan11 wrote:Stewart kept out a very good keeper in Jack Russell.

It's all Adam Gilchrist's fault.

Stewart was the better keeper and batter, Russell the better painter.

Can't agree with that. Better with the bat by a mile ; but Russell was a better keeper. Though Stewart improved as he went on.

Never seen any Stewart artworks

I know that's what is accepted, but I've never seen an England keeper drop so many apart from Geraint. Stewart missed very little. I thought Russell got a bit better after he stopped playing for England, mainly standing up in limited overs games.

alfie wrote:

Arthur Crabtree wrote:

Aidan11 wrote:Stewart kept out a very good keeper in Jack Russell.

It's all Adam Gilchrist's fault.

Stewart was the better keeper and batter, Russell the better painter.

Can't agree with that. Better with the bat by a mile ; but Russell was a better keeper. Though Stewart improved as he went on.

Never seen any Stewart artworks

Difficult to imagine someone so immaculately tidy messing around with paint. He'd be trashed if any got on to his overalls even though that would be the purpose of wearing them.

Sounds like Phil Hughes is in a bad way, after being hit by a bouncer.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/c ... 02977.html

Dr Robert wrote:Sounds like Phil Hughes is in a bad way, after being hit by a bouncer.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/c ... 02977.html

Just seen that article, doesn't sound good. Rarely hear of a cricketer being this seriously injured in a game thankfully.

On this day in cricket history;

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/149088.html

kieswetter out of the game for the whole of next year with concerns over his vision after getting hit in the face with a ball last year

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/con ... 09201.html

concerning news and must be a possibility he'll never play again now

A nice, if a little too modest, recounting of Dizzy's day (and a half) in the sun: http://www.theroar.com.au/2014/12/12/dizzy-trueish-version-201/

I enjoyed that

Great stuff.

I can't let these comments go without defending Russell; I have watched Russell and Stewart and others now for the last 62 years and apart from Knott. he was top of the list for me. As far as Stewart goes he was much more use to England as a batsman and keeping wicket was necessary because our batting was so ordinary. Stewart could have been so much better as a batsman if he has not kept wicket. My selection would be
1 Knott
2 Russell
3 Evans
4 Taylor
5 Stewart
6 Prior

And the rest nowhere

Albondiga wrote:I can't let these comments go without defending Russell; I have watched Russell and Stewart and others now for the last 62 years and apart from Knott. he was top of the list for me. As far as Stewart goes he was much more use to England as a batsman and keeping wicket was necessary because our batting was so ordinary. Stewart could have been so much better as a batsman if he has not kept wicket. My selection would be
1 Knott
2 Russell
3 Evans
4 Taylor
5 Stewart
6 Prior

And the rest nowhere

Based on keeping alone? If so, Taylor would be above Russell.