Wicket keepers comparison pre 2000 and post 2000

[Chakdephatte]

I thougt De Cock was just average wk-batsman. But he retired with an average of 38.8. Similarly Pant, Watling, Mushfiqur () average in 36-39 range. Haddin, Buttler, even Paine are other examples of Wicket Keepers from recent times to average above 33. And we know how average Paine was with the bat.

 

Compare it to the keepers before 00s. 30 was what only the best keeper batsman would average. Healy 27, More 26, Rod Marsh 26.5, Ian Smith 25.5, Moin Khan 28. Except Stewart, no one was that good with the bat.

 

For those who have played and watched a lot of cricket, why is it so? Is there some rule change which benefited them or they have to work less hard behind the stumps? @vvvslaxman, @rkt.india

Edited January 13, 2022 by Chakdephatte

[vvvslaxman]

One word. Gilchrist. He set the standard. Andy flower was ofcourse good. But he was their best batsman who happened to be the keeper. Gilchrist took that role to another level. By default batting became a requirement. Parthiv was persisted despite woeful keeping was because he could bat a bit. Then Dk replaced him after we found  PPs drop cost more runs he made. But DK was erratic. That is when Dhoni stepped up. Dhoni was leeping like a goal keeper than wicket keeper at the start. But his batting put him above all others. After 2000s genuine batsmen were preferred as keeper. 

[Chakdephatte]

6 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

One word. Gilchrist. He set the standard. Andy flower was ofcourse good. But he was their best batsman who happened to be the keeper. Gilchrist took that role to another level. By default batting became a requirement. Parthiv was persisted despite woeful keeping was because he could bat a bit. Then Dk replaced him after we found  PPs drop cost more runs he made. But DK was erratic. That is when Dhoni stepped up. Dhoni was leeping like a goal keeper than wicket keeper at the start. But his batting put him above all others. After 2000s genuine batsmen were preferred as keeper. 

Are keepers today as good as they were earlier. Logic says it will be difficult to bat after keeping for 100 overs. Why it isn't it the case with today's wks, they are averaging as good as batting all-rounders. 

[maniac]

Because teams might compromise on keeping skills but not on batting skills.

 

you just can’t play 5 bowlers + a specialist keeper.

 

anyway I feel that in the few years, forget keepers even batters will have lower averages. Conditons for tests are bowling friendly now. Boards don’t want to put forward roads where teams score 600+ runs etc.

[vvvslaxman]

50 minutes ago, Chakdephatte said:

Are keepers today as good as they were earlier. Logic says it will be difficult to bat after keeping for 100 overs. Why it isn't it the case with today's wks, they are averaging as good as batting all-rounders. 

 

Expectation from keepers as batsman was limited back then. They expected them to be crisis men. Keeping was treated a specialist role. So their failure as a batsman was never magnified. Also back then it was normal to keep for 100 plus overs. With Guys like Gilchrist, Sangakkara, Baz, Dhoni  it became an all round position rather than specialist position.  Even now England has several keepers.  Bairstow, Pope, Butler, Foakes. ALl can bat. If i remember right they played 3 keepers in one Test. Ofcourse there were guys like Engineer who opened the innings for us. Those were exceptions.