Message Board Archives

Not their glovework. With the bat. I'd go for Jacob's any day. That's me.

In reply to InHindsight

You comparing keepers but not their glove work? Is this April 1st?

In reply to Halliwell






Bloc to compare keepers it must be about their glovework?!

For context I am adding to the debate, with the view that currently Da Silva does not look like a #6. I recall Jacobs on many occasions was the saving grace for WI and scoring faster than Da Silva dreams of.

Here, does that help

In reply to InHindsight

And I agree that currently in this series he doesn’t carry the #6 responsibility well. In line with the 5 guys above him mind you! And the 5 below! Joshua’s batting is cautious and restricted in its attempted textbook-ness. Something isn’t right technically.

Now we can reminisce all we like with concocted history, but let’s unpack that “many occasions was the saving grace” comment.

In reply to Halliwell

It's been decades now the mold of wicket keeper batters like Da Silva has become obsolete. Point is that the good ones score a lot more quickly and add that X factors to the batting.

It all started with Gilchrist

In reply to InHindsight

A few before Gilchrist
But you need a solid top order to empower you to loosen your shackles
And then you need to have the technical ability to not end up a low percentage vooper

The game has evolved greatly and Da Silva is of generations past - his style of batting as a wicket keeper.


In my eyes when Da Silva was scoring, he wax only borderline in being of any real significance. Now that he is going thru a lean run he look irrelevant.

Just as Tage style of batting. When Braithwaite goes thru a semblance of poor form notice how quickly we call for his head?

In reply to Halliwell

Many times Gilchrist came with his dashing innings was when Australia was in loads of trouble.

What is the likelihood that Da Silva or Tage will drag WI out of a hole with this style of batting?

In reply to InHindsight

Wriggley will vex you didn’t even get his name right

In reply to Halliwell

In my local parlance, "I am not his nenen"

In reply to InHindsight

Who is Redley Jacobs? Ridley was a piece of sh!t… a praying sh!t

Shiverarine Chanderpaul was of of the most useful servants of WI cricket with a beautiful average of 50 and some sterling match winning performances. He has over ten thousand runs. Yet to this day there has been debate ad to whether he is a great batsman. Why do you think?

Jus askin

In reply to Barry

Better than Da Silva, to date, if you ask me.

The dude always did enough that he was hardly the subject of diresion and at times saving WI from embarrassments

In reply to InHindsight Jacobs was a batsman who eventually learned to keep, you can't compare DaSilva at this stage with Jacobs.

In reply to InHindsight

Why can't Pooran play in the Test team as a wicket keeper?

In reply to Barry

If there was no Ridley jacobs, Lara would have struggled to get 400

Who's Redley?

In reply to brians_da_best

If there was no Lara, ‘redley’ wouldnt have that century

In reply to Halliwell

If there was no Lara, our cricket would be dead by now

This thread is about Jacob’s, and the point is Jacob’s is much more dependable than da silva

In reply to brians_da_best

We’d need hard stats for this, mate
Not just fuzzy memories

In reply to Seechy

I think chances of playing hope as keeper are higher

In reply to InHindsight

They laughed at his hypocritical prayers- ask the Dottie players

In reply to brians_da_best

Redley help with the 401… everybody else did

In reply to InHindsight

Jacobs was not pretty but he was very efficient behind the sticks and did not drop or miss
much and he kept to some of the best quicks.
Does he still have the WI record for dismissals in an innings ?
I think he was better as a bat than DaSilva and at this point, I would prefer him as wk too
but DaSilva is getting better as time goes on...no Ramndin ,tho

I think he needs to be rested to work on his batting he gets bowled and lbw to much

In reply to InHindsight

Ridley

In reply to InHindsight

Inhinsdsight, ur a genius

In reply to InHindsight

Lemme just make a couple points which puts this discussion into context.

1.Ridley Jacobs made his first class debut at age 24.

2.Ridley Jacobs made his test debut on his 31st birthday.

3.Joshua daSilva celebrated his 25th birthday last month.

Now allyuh can carry on the discussion.

In reply to Dukes

I'd take Hope over Da Silva in a reformed team including King, Hetty, Athanaze, Macca, and Pooran!

The salient point being made by InHindsight is: "...currently Da Silva does not look like a #6" batsman.

Anyone who brings age into the equation is just attempting to distract from the main point.

Sheer foolishness.

In reply to XDFIX

Hope's batting is worse than DaSilva and I don't see him as a better keeper.

what was Ridley's career batting average in test?

In reply to InHindsight

YES

In this modern day, they are called wicketkeeper batsmen. They do have stictly a keeping function.

There are many purely glovework keepers in England who are way ahead of Johnny Bairstow.

And that is the point being made by InHindsight.

In reply to camos

They bat Hope out of position at the start - 'irregardless' Hope is a better batter than Da Silva!

Moreover, I don't see Da Silva glove work as superior to Hope

I think Windies batting Da Silva out of position!

In reply to Courtesy

That is INACCURATE

The thread about DaSilva not being a # 6 is different and started by somebody else.
InHindsight started this thread with a Header to compare Jacobs to DaSilva in terms of their batting.He never posted on the thread about DaSilva bnot being a # 6 and in this thread never mentioned that.

the quality of analysis by West Indian fans has fallen further than the quality of play!

In reply to XDFIX

at the start? that was where he was at his best, he fell like lead after the start.

In reply to Dukes

InHindsight admitted in his next post that golvework is a given. He was taking the argument to another level:

Any comparative analysis of a modern day keeper would have a higher weighting on batting.

That's why I label you as cantankerous.

In reply to hubert

Yes he was petty- a pseudo-Christian

In reply to InHindsight

Allyu does argue some $hit on dis 'Bored'. After 23 Tests Ridley was averaging 24.32 with DaSilva averaging 26.42.

I am assuming dat you never watched Ridley bat

In reply to Maispwi And he made WI team ,coming in as Leeward number 3.

In reply to Courtesy

You can add that to the debate and it sounds valid.You can not however decide that somebody else meant something he never said, unless you are a mindreader.I think comparing somebody early in their career to a past player is invalid unless there is a significant gulf in their accomplishments at similar stages of their careers.
For the record after Ridley had played 24 test matches he had 4 half centuries and averaged 23.61 with the bat.DaSilva in the middle of his 24th test match averages 25.94 with 1 century and 3 half-centuries.I would suggest it is too early to determine the question posed by InHindsight.

In reply to Dukes

Ridley was definitely a better batsman (his numbers at FC is superior) and I've watched them both at intl

In reply to doosra

For clarity, did Ridley have the number 6 batting responsibility or did he batt at number 7?

what is that based on ,not the data out there.

In reply to doosra

he started as a better batsman, think be batted at number
3 for LI when he was picked.

In reply to camos

for good measure he averages above 40 in regional cricket if my memory serves me correct...he has 17 FC 100s..

In reply to Courtesy

as far as i can recall he was at 7 for WI and earlier for LI

In reply to doosra

Thank you.

So Da Silva has greater responsibility as a batsman in West Indies cricket. A capability that he does not have at the moment.

Thank you for making the point InHindsight.

In reply to doosra

His FC average is 39 (38.75) after 157 matches

In reply to Maispwi

yes true
but it got lower because of this tests...rem tests are combined with other fc to give the overall...so if one lower then the other would be higher to average out

In reply to Barry

Wasn't he that guy who stumps the batsman with his left hand while the ball is in the right hand?

In reply to InHindsight

Even in hindsight, where did Ridley bat?
The thing is, holder is to bat at 6, but with his ever declining "form" is hiding at 7.

In reply to natty_forever

when we bat second Holder should bat before the keeper.

In reply to doosra

Really doosie?

In reply to Courtesy

In 112 innings Ridley batted a mere 6 times at # 6 and averaged 17.He batted 86 times at 7 and averaged 31.
The reason DaSilva is batting at # 6 has to do with poor form with the bat by Jason Holder

In reply to Dukes

So DaSilva's batting is even more crucial than Ridley in the context of today's cricket. Would you say?

Ridley was a hypocrite just like Courtsey

What was his average?

In reply to doosra

Y did you allow these guys to lead you astray?

Ridley's International career started at age 31 and he scored 12 of his 17 first class centuries after age 31.

DaSilva reached age 25 last month and you are talking about him as though his career is over.

In reply to Dukes

there's no guarantee the current crop of wi cricketers will get better...but that not what i thought

i ent write off Josh...no where I am saying cast him away

i am just saying on the eye test and backed by overall numbers Ridley will be my batter if i had to pick one on batting...has done that higher up for LI if i recall

and ridley had a fight about him...

just to clarify

In reply to Maispwi

really on what lol

i said a lot of things

In reply to Courtesy

I don't support Da Silva. But .... said that-You want to pick wasteful dotties like A and M and then you want somebody to bat for them

In reply to doosra

The only West Indies wicketkeeper (I do not include Walcott) who could or should bat # 6 in test cricket is Jeffrey Dijon.The fact that we have put DaSilva to bat # 6 has little to do with DaSilva but everything to do with the poor state of our cricket.He should not be ridiculed for that.
Bits and pieces cricketers are not for TEST CRICKET.
A test team should have 6 batsmen,1 wicketkeeper and 4 bowlers
If one of your bowlers is also a decent batsman then good for you.If your wicketkeeper is also a good batsman then you are fortunate.
The reason WI went into this test match with only 5 batsmen is because we did not have fast bowlers capable of bowling 20 overs in a day.7 overs before lunch,7 overs before tea and 6 overs in the last session.Gabriel was bowling 2 over spells because of his age.When you pick two 35 year old fast bowlers you will find yourself in that position.
India on the other hand have 2 spin bowlers who are excellent batsmen and genuine all-rounders.

In reply to Dukes

People giving the keeper hell because he can't cover other people's weaknesses. DaSilva is about what you get from a keeper.

In reply to Courtesy

You weaken the batting and only play 5 batsmen, because your fast bowlers are incapable of bowling 20 overs in a day so you decide you need 5 bowlers and then because of this you want the wicketkeeper to play a more important role as a batsman and your 5 recognized batsmen repeatedly fail.That does not strike me as logical.

In reply to Dukes

Bruh, just answer de damn question?

Wasn't the brainstrust expecting Da Silva to play the role of a number 6 batsman. You are just contorting all over the place?

Forget about circumstances...Wasn't the brainstrust expecting Da Silva to play the role of a number 6 batsman.

Is Da Silva capable of batting at number 6? Or under the same circumstances would you chose Da Silva over Ridley?

In reply to Halliwell

In reply to granite

Since ALLYUH having fun,

How wunnuh nah mention RAMDIN as a better comparison of more recent vintage?

In reply to Courtesy

That is not clear enough for you?????

The Brainstrust selecting the team are as bereft of ideas as a piece of wood
Your team just got bowled out for 150 and 130 and you pick a team with 5 batsmen and 5 bowlers.Of the 5 bowlers,4 of them have no pretensions to be able to bat.
You then want DaSilva to suddenly become a front line batsman when he clearly is not.I believe you frequently talk of the PETER PRINCIPLE and here is a CLASSIC EXAMPLE.

A number 6 batsman should be able to average in the mid thirties

In reply to Dukes

WTF. The thread is titled :Compare Josh Da Silva with Redley Jacobs

You disingenuous skunt.

Why is it so difficult to compare the batting ability of Ridley with Da Silva and say which is better?

In reply to Chrissy

Thanks Chrissy. It was a typo. I am sorry that for many of my fellow posters it wasn't that glaringly obvious

In reply to Courtesy

.


Dukes surely is disingenuous. Even Doosra can see that

In reply to InHindsight

A big hard back man contorting on an MB.

No holes barred.

In reply to Dukes

Duksie I get the impression you think that this thread was to bash Da Silva.


I actually want him to surpass Ridley. Age by no stretch of imagination belongs in the conversation

In reply to InHindsight

He is doing what his coaching staff says to do. Go and stay and hold one end.
He is not that player maybe why he is getting out before he reaches 20.
Another cause could be his mindset. Maybe the whispers in the circles talking about replacing him so he is overly cautious.
I would love to see him come out tomorrow and attack Ashwin and Jageda as he knows he can.

In reply to InHindsight

It was written by an evil Dottie and meant to destroy him in spite/ I do NOT favour Josh/ However, Dottie’s are sons of Cain- envious and hateful/ just saying

In reply to Dukes

It's exactly this kind of thinking is why our cricket struggling.

In reply to InHindsight

That was exactly the plan, confronted with facts you are now wiggling and pivoting!

In reply to camos


Deceitfully you ascribe to me, false motives.

I wouldn't dodge if it was the plan

Does he belong to the same club as your son?

In reply to InHindsight
No comparison. Jacobs far better in all departments.

In reply to InHindsight

I believe in picking your best 6 batsmen, your best 4 bowlers and your best wicketkeeper.

When you start picking 2 all-rounders who can not make the team as pure batsmen or pure bowlers you end up with Jack of All trades who are poor bowlers and poor batsmen


Jonny Bairstow is not an accomplished wicketkeeper who had no place keeping wicket with his recent injury and the fact that he has not kept wicket for 2 years and as a result he missed 8 chances behind the stumps in 3 test matches.

Clive Lloyd who played with both Jackie Hendricks and Jeffrey Dijon has no hesitation picking the former as his wicketkeeper despite the fact that Hendriks is not in Dujon's class as a batsman.

Mind you Dujon is not in Hendriks class as a wicketkeeper.

In reply to Dukes

Aussies keeper batted 8 in this game.

In reply to camos

the quality of analysis by West Indian fans has fallen further than the quality of play!

THAT poster is the rub! it permeates the cricket Boardrooms of these islands! as I type this I am perusing a report on the just concluded U19 CWI Rising Stars Women U19 tournament and the dross I'm reading staggers belief. WI are never fixing this cricket thing with the thinking and subsequent analysis that goes on behind the scenes.

In reply to cumberland

Had a caller today echo the same sentiments on the radio show too.

In reply to Dukes

Dukes you just lost me there for a minute.

Are you suggesting the Dujon and Hendriks were in the same era?

I thought David Murray replaced Deryck Murray,
And Dujon replaced David Murray,
With Dujon first making the team as a batsman.

Stop trying to fool people.

What foolishness you writing here!

In reply to buds

Says the man who promotes smallwood (also known as lowscorewood)

In reply to TanteMerle

My statement is FACTUAL.
Clive Lloyd played test cricket from 1966 to 1985
He played with Hendriks in the 1960's and with Dujon in the 1980's



Not my fault if people have problems with reading comprehension.

Carl Hooper said he played with both Viv Richards and Brian Lara does not mean that Viv Richards and Brian Lara are from the same era.

Clive Lloyd played with Garry Sobers and Viv Richards does not mean those two are from the same era.

Hopefully with those examples I have helped you in reading comprehension.



I do not think it was foolishness

In reply to InHindsight
Anytime you start comparing our present players with players of Llyod and Richards era. you have not been following the game.Ridley had Robert, Richards, Rickie, Baptise, The Benjamins, and Ambrose.
I believe the Leeward Island tournament at that time, was much better than our present Regional tournament.
I dont know the number of hours our players are putting in, and if these players represent their clubs.

In reply to openning

Oh boy!!!!!!!!

In reply to Dukes

My point is that you were trying to obfuscate the topic at hand,
I believe your intent were to confuse people into seeing your point.

Let take what you were saying as not confusing.

Include other keepers that Lloyd chose, who were crappy batsman in the mix.

You trying so hard to mix up these comments to make your point.

Just compare Josh to Jacobs....

Let me repeat or clear up my point, which is
You were doing/going well until this stupid statement.

Two different eras and we all should know that decisions are flexible.

Didn't the same Lloyd pick 3 pacers b4 his era of the 4 prong?

Situation changes, as people and the game evolve.

Ridley was a very good WI player and let us hope that Josh also turns out to be one. I think we need to stop the comparisons with the past players. The more pertinent question is: if not Josh, who? Are there any better keepers at FC level? If we are considering Hope, dont Josh and Hope have roughly the same test average with both so far winning us one match each with the bat? Not enough to dislodge the incumbent, I think. Josh can do better. We saw his form in Bangla recently when he played freely and in Headley Weekes first match when he stood out in that first innings among all the batsmen. Perhaps he just goes into a shell in test cricket and needs some guidance on how to come out of that.

In reply to TanteMerle

Are Jos and Jacobs from the same era?

In reply to camos

As far as the process of choosing a keper.

YES

Was Dujon and Hendricks from the same era
As far as choosing a keeper-batsman,or a batsman-keper

HELL NO.

Were the terms or phrases around in Hendricks time.
Were teams choosing batsmen who can keep
or were they choosing the best keeper.

These conversations bring about questions and answers.
But one must use logic.
there are not yes and no discussions.

My point is Lloyd's choice of type of keepers were different in eras.
Ergo, Hendricks and Dujon comparison is pointless.
Although I undrestand what Dukes was saying.

Dukes point is tantamount to comparing Hayne's value/greatness an an ODI opener
to a present day opener.
ODI openers' role changed with the evolution of ODI.
Hendricks era and Dujon era, were diffrent.

ERAS count for some discussions.

Anyhow I dunn wid dis.

In reply to Dukes

I am only echoing Duksie with some embellishment. If he were was a selector allrounders would see the light of day in his squad.