SA Footy

This was in the AGE newspaper today.

MOST BYES AFTER 15 TESTS ( Australians )

Don Tallon 208 @ 6.9 an innings
Jack Blackham 181 @ 6.5
Brad Haddin 179 @ 6.2
Gil Langley 144 @ 5
Wally Grout 142 @ 4.9
Rod Marsh 142 @ 4.7


ALL COUNTRIES

Dinesh Karthik Ind 223 @ 8.3*
Tommy Ward SAf 217 @ 8.3
Bert Strudwick Eng 216 @ 7.4
Don Tallon Aus 208 @ 6.9
Matt Prior Eng 200 @ 7.7
Les Ames Eng 193 @ 6.9

* Karthik has only kept in 14 tests

Well there you go. Don Bradman always claimed Don Tallon was the best wicketkeeper of them all, but those figures present an argument. I guess we need to know team totals for it to make any sense .. eg ... 6 byes out of 100 is a lot worse than 6 out of 600. Haddin has kept in some huge totals, so maybe his figures aren't too bad.

Haddin's won't be helped by India...but...no excuses for some of the bye returns in Aus and SA.

Dogwatcher wrote:Haddin's won't be helped by India...but...no excuses for some of the bye returns in Aus and SA.

Good post, i totally agree!
You would expect in Gilchrist's first 15 tests they wouldnt have conceeded over 400 too many times, and therefor his byes would be down a bit compared to Haddin who is keeping for a bit longer one would think.

Do the modern day keepers also "keep up" to bowlers that 60 years the keeper wouldn't have? Such as Stuart Clark and Andrew McDonald in Haddins case. That may have some effect on his tally as well as the large totals others have mentioned.

AH or Rog will correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it, keepers have kept 'up' throughout the ages. Blackham kept up to Spofforth on occasions.
While CTB Terror Turner, who wasn't especially fast but got prolific bite off the pitch also had keepers up to the stumps.
As far as I can tell it's only in modern times (ie: since the West Indian shock brigades) where the trend of not keeping up to faster bowlers has prevailed.

There is a picture in one of McGuilvrays book of Strudwick (I think) keeping up over the stumps to Maurice Tate at Sydney (IIRC) in 1924-25. Tate was " 'right sharpish" so you have to respect that 'keeping skill

By the 1920s by and large keepers were keeping back to faster bowlers.

Ah the info on Tallon surprised me too my only thinking was that when he was good he was very good but when he was bad he wasn't too flash. The war saw Tallons best 'keeping years lost abd he arguably should have gone on the 1938 tour when Barnett and Maddocks (IIRC) swapped roles in teh tests (it was Australia's first series without Oldfield).

It is also well documented his 'keeping tailed off towards the end of his career so it would be interesting if his innings where he let through lots of byes occured later on in his career. He went on teh '53 tour to Engand as back up to Langley. My understanding was that while Langley lacked the flair and brilliance of Tallon his was a very safe 'keeper and his selection from 1950 onwards when Tallon was still playing is arguably supported by the Australian Selectors of the time. Bradman was a selector then IIRC.

AH your thoughts???

It should also be remembered that pitches weren't covered in the earlier era.

IMO Haddin is a very ordinary wicketkeeper who is there for his batting.

Dinesh Kathik playing his 15 test today against NZ. MS DHONI out injured im presuming. not sure why yet

am Bays wrote:There is a picture in one of McGuilvrays book of Strudwick (I think) keeping up over the stumps to Maurice Tate at Sydney (IIRC) in 1924-25. Tate was " 'right sharpish" so you have to respect that 'keeping skill

By the 1920s by and large keepers were keeping back to faster bowlers.

Ah the info on Tallon surprised me too my only thinking was that when he was good he was very good but when he was bad he wasn't too flash. The war saw Tallons best 'keeping years lost abd he arguably should have gone on the 1938 tour when Barnett and Maddocks (IIRC) swapped roles in teh tests (it was Australia's first series without Oldfield).

It is also well documented his 'keeping tailed off towards the end of his career so it would be interesting if his innings where he let through lots of byes occured later on in his career. He went on teh '53 tour to Engand as back up to Langley. My understanding was that while Langley lacked the flair and brilliance of Tallon his was a very safe 'keeper and his selection from 1950 onwards when Tallon was still playing is arguably supported by the Australian Selectors of the time. Bradman was a selector then IIRC.

AH your thoughts???

You are probably right, although it was always my understanding that Langley gained selection due to Tallon being unavailable for selection. He was unavailable for the 1949-50 South African tour, regained the keeping role in the 1950-51 series against England, but then lost his spot to Langley after that.

Wicketkeeping is one area I stay right away from when it comes to criticism. Apart from a few overs in a social match, I've never done it. I've always regarded wicketkeeping the most difficult discipline in cricket, with the possible exception of leg spin. For that reason you will never see me having a shot at Haddin, or any other keeper.

If Bradman thinks Tallon was the best he saw, I'll take him on his word. I never saw Langley keep, but I got involved in a drinking session with him back in 1977. He was great company, and if he kept like he drank, he must have been a superstar!!

You are right about the effect of World War II on Test cricket careers. Players such as Tallon, Morris, O'Reilly etc lost a lot of cricket due to the War. Bradman didn't play Test cricket between the ages 30 to 38, imagine how many Test runs and 100s he would have made. Tendulkar would still be chasing him

I don't know if Tendulkar would've necessarily still been chasing him AH.
Just the way I read the bloke, if the war years hadn't intervened he would've retired significantly earlier. His health and 'desire for privacy', plus his growing business interests would've seen to that. Also, from what I've read, he felt a compunction to play after the war and didn't totally desire to.

All supposition, of course.