Nasher

You'd think we'll cope if only two of them are there. Especially if one of the two is Clark.The bigger question is whether the lads in the middle will make a better fist of getting it down there anyway.

Paine has been in poor form with the bat, but he's such a long way ahead of Wade with the gloves that I'd still prefer the former.

Back to the present day - what happens if Bailey scores a century in the second innings?

Andy Flower was Zimbabwe's one and only genuine Test quality batsman. He must have been fiercely loyal to his country, because he could happily have slotted straight in to the South African side and enjoyed some Test success. His record in a garbage team is outstanding.

Number of Test nations notwithstanding, I still think it's not common. South Africa, who we'd all agree are a strong cricketing nation, their last regular keeper was Mark Boucher who averaged 30. Since they rejoined the Test circuit, AB is the first Test class batsman/wicket keeper they've had. Because of the small number of Test nations (and the even smaller number of quality ones), you'd have to look at the "next best" from each nation to really be able to draw a conclusion. In Australia, the cupboard is completely bare for keepers who bat at Test quality. These are the first class averages of the first choice wicket keepers of each state: MS Wade (Vic) - 39.00 - but he is known to be a rubbish keeper TD Paine (Tas) - 31.7 PM Nevill (NSW) - 38.6 CD Hartley (Qld) - 31.8 TD Ludeman (SA) - 24.1 SM Whiteman (WA) - 35.04 Prior you're right on. Jonny Bairstow (clear second choice keeper) has a first class average of 43, but hasn't looked near it in his 13 Tests to date. Ian Healy had a Test average of 27. You couldn't forge a Test career as a batsman alone with that kind of record. If that doesn't meet the definition of "modest batsman" I'm not sure what would. I suppose I expected that after Gilchrist, we'd start to see far more wicket keepers who could bat in their own right come through the system world wide. It hasn't happened to the degree I thought it would.

I agree, but it's hardly a huge pool, is it? Modest batsmen who occasionally pull out a big innings in the Prior, Wade, Ian Healy mould are more the norm.

Nevill's first class record is pretty good, better than I expected. Probably a silly question, but why are wicket keepers who are genuine Test quality batsmen in their own right, so rare? I'm assuming it's borne out of a combination of spending a lot of energy keeping, and spending most of their careers batting in the lower-middle order for that reason, so they get less focus than other batsmen in terms of coaching and practice. When was the last time we saw a keeper stroll out at number 3 in a Test?

There's also an element of having not much to choose from as well though, to be fair. The last time I remember any significant election was when the Gardner board was formed. Since then it's all been board members being re-elected unopposed, or in the case of the Stynes board, a coup.

Have a look at the balance sheets of those clubs and see what portion of their income is from the AFL. I haven't looked in a couple of years, but I expect you'll find every club is completely dependent on the AFL and that the notion of "independence from the AFL" is nothing but a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.

I should delete your post, but I can't bring myself to. The irony of it is one for the ages.

I agree P-man. Any criticism of Haddin in particular is absolutely laughable. Since his return he's arguably become the world's premier keeper-batsman, with genuine first rate contribution from both aspects. AB de Villiers is the only close rival IMO. I couldn't be more pleased with his game. The criticism levelled at he and Lyon is just a classic case of people allowing their preconceived views to cloud their assessment.

Who comes in if Harris doesn't come up? Pattinson and Bird have both been playing in the BBL, but I'd want to see them play some four day cricket first. I'd have thought Doug the Rug would be next off the rank, given his early Shield form.

The common thread was that we batted well and scored a shit tonne of runs. The link between that and batting first is tenuous and based on nothing but circumstantial evidence.

Because those conditions were those conditions and these conditions are these conditions? With tosses, you can't take a strategy that worked on a pitch on the other side of the country and blanketly apply it to a pitch with different properties and conditions. As captain it's Clarke's job to determine when batting conditions will be at their best. Obviously he thought they would be at their best at the end of the game. I'll wait to see how the chase goes and how the pitch plays on day 5 before passing judgement. It seems a tad premature to slam the decision to bowl first two days in to a Test.

Not everyone, it's not uncommon for defenders to spend the whole match on the ground. I agree with the general premise though.

Gillies was no more a disaster than Isaac Weetra or Heath Neville. A bad pick, but ultimately one of no consequence.

Yeah, him and all the rest of us! Clark's injury recurring is the single most disappointing (credible) thing I could imagine happening in the off-season.

Charming.

Did you make it along today Rog?

That assumes he's got 10k to begin with. I'd be very surprised if he did.

That was a bloody amazing spell of bowling.

It's because our opinions of him aren't (yet) being slanted by years of frustration about his on-field performance.

Yep, they look very alike, no doubt. The eyebrows in the photo are what's convinced me that it is Sellar, but I do acknowledge that they look similar enough for it to be hard to tell.

It's definitely Sellar in the photo.

How so? No reference of Magner at all in that article.