Quinton de Kock vs Adam Gilchrist

[notAgainPlease]

Both are babyfaces .... It seemed that no one could take a place of Glichrist .... But de Cock is easily surpassing him .. Much more consitent than Glilie ... Just need to see if de Cock can perform in world cup or big matches ....

 

[Arsalan Pro]

Adam Gilchrist better at the moment, but Quinton De Kock has the potential to surpass him.

 

[Protea Fan]

At the end of the carrier De Kock will surpass every wicket keper batsman's period

 

[Sachin136]

Quinton has only played 18 tests. It is ridiculous to compare him with someone like Gilchrist right now.

 

[Bilal7]

De Kock is better in ODIs.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Gilchrist is much superior atm. De Kock has a long way to go.

 

[Itachi]

Lol Gilchrist is a legend. Please don't make such threads.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Lol Gilchrist is a legend. Please don't make such threads.

Gilchrist played so many gun knocks against absolute champions of the game. It's just silly when people starting comparing and claiming he will "easily" surpass him.

 

[Sanzcool]

QDK often plays lazy shots, if he can shrug it off, he can be a gun player

 

[Executioner]

Gilly scored all those runs against top bowling, big matches and less batting friendly conditions

De Kock could become one of the best though but to be compared with Gilly he has a long way to go

 

[Hasan123]

He could surpass Gilly but he has a lot of work to do yet.

 

[Madplayer]

Too early to start such a thread.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

De Kock is better in ODIs.

You can't just look at averages to make an assumption.

 

[volcyz]

De Kock is the best young batsmen in the world, not even counting his wicketkeeping.

 

[Ab Fan]

Potential is the main word here..!!!

 

[shravan]

Gilly is a legend, Long way to go for QDK yet. Some people saying QDK iss better in ODIs is laughable.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

Lol Gilchrist is a legend. Please don't make such threads.

This. Gilly is a bona fide GOAT wicket keeper. A true legend in Tests/ODIs and even pwned bowlers in bit of tamasha leagues at the end of his career.

de Kock can surpass him but right now, Gilly is in a different league

 

[Mobashir]

As much as I appreciate QdK, I think the thread is pushing it.
Adam Gilchrist is the best Wicket keeper batsman ever.
QdK has the potential to go there, but so far he hasn't done enough,and it's normal, he is way too young.
A better theead name will be something like "QdK, the next Gilly?" Etc..

 

[Bilal7]

You look foolish when you just look at averages to make an assumption.

You should look at facts before questioning others. Apart from that WC hundred, Gilly's ODI performances were nothing great. De Kock scores more runs, scores centuries in lesser innings and at the same SR that Gilly did. Flush that nostalgia from your system.

 

[Hasan123]

You should look at facts before questioning others. Apart from that WC hundred, Gilly's ODI performances were nothing great. De Kock scores more runs, scores centuries in lesser innings and at the same SR that Gilly did. Flush that nostalgia from your system.

Your arguments are a little hypocritical. Virat LO stats can't be taken seriously because he is scoring on flat tracks and vs inferior bowlers. But De kock is better than Gilchrist even though he is playing in the same era as Virat.

Whilst I believe De Kock can surpass Gilly, for now Gilchrist is ahead.

 

[shaz619]

Your arguments are a little hypocritical. Virat LO stats can't be taken seriously because he is scoring on flat tracks and vs inferior bowlers. But De kock is better than Gilchrist even though he is playing in the same era as Virat.


Whilst I believe De Kock can surpass Gilly, for now Gilchrist is ahead.

De Kock got a fair amount to do before he can surpass Adam, Kami at one point was compared to him as well

 

[Abdullah719]

No need for personal comments.

 

[Adil_94]

QDK has the talent to match or even overtake Gilchrist but atm Gilchrist is miles ahead. He revolutionised wicket keeping and is a certified ATG.

QDK is potentially an ATG but not atm.

 

[Abdullah719]

QdK has so much ability but Gilly was a monster.

I'd like to see QdK move up a spot or two perhaps. He's really far too good for #7.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Let his career grow. There is no need for a comparison like that to an established great of the game.

For your reference, Gilchrist did average close to 55 at the peak of his test career. In an era other wicket keepers averaged 25-30.

 

[FreePalestine]

Gilly is a legend, Long way to go for QDK yet. Some people saying QDK iss better in ODIs is laughable.

QDK has 12 hundreds at 45 avg in 79 ODI games
Gilly had 16 hundreds at 35 avg in 287 ODI games

Therefore QDK can already make a strong statistical case for being better than Gilly in ODI's. Imagine how many hundreds he will have if he plays 287 games!

In test cricket, Gilly is ahead of De Kock and will be for some time, but the point of the thread is that De Kock is the first genuinely strong contender to have the potential to challenge Gilly's GOAT status when it comes to wicket-keeper/batsmen.

 

[Buffet]

Too early to make this kind of threads about this kid. After 5-6 years, it will be fine to create threads like this if he does well consistently. A long way to go ...

 

[Chrish]

Thread created only 4 years too early

 

[mkyawar]

Is dekock really the new gilchrist ?

I keep on hearing he is as devastating as Gilly. But this guy can not bat to saVe his life and against quality swing and seam. He will be a walking wicket against Starc, hazlewood and cummins.

 

[UN talkz]

QdK is nowhere near Gilly. No match whatsoever

 

[The_Odd_One]

Overhyped cricketer. Can score on roads only.

 

[Madplayer]

Always knew it was a joke of a comparison and an insult to Gilly, the father of moden day keeper batsmen. Itd still too early to be fair to de kock.

 

[Hasan123]

Too early to compare.

 

[Last Monetarist]

It's a bizarre comparison. One of them was a once in a generation cricketer, the other is merely another young talented cricketer.

 

[Chrish]

QDK is a better keeper.. But Gilly is indisputably greatest WK batsman of them all.

He would make any current test side on the strength of batting alone.

 

[ethan hunt]

Lol . What's wrong with people .
This softie is not fit to be mentioned in the same breath yet .
Absolute mental midget this guy along with miller .
Needs to take a leaf out of Graeme Smith's book and toughen up.
Look how gutsy kohli's innings were in this test match .

 

[MRSN]

Very overrated this guy is. Ever since his hundreds against India he has been living on great hype.

 

[Shafi]

De Kock is just another choker when it comes to deliver

 

[Shafi]

Just like Rohit vs Babar and Kohli vs Umar

 

[MMHS]

He has to fail in LOs to be successful in Test or in cricket overall - otherwise his mental strength won't grow. In terms of skill, still a fantastic WK and a frightening batting talent, but shallow.

Those who are saying he is out of form - just wait until he gets the chance to slog around 350+ white ball condition, with 60 metre boundaries.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

QDK has 12 hundreds at 45 avg in 79 ODI games
Gilly had 16 hundreds at 35 avg in 287 ODI games

Therefore QDK can already make a strong statistical case for being better than Gilly in ODI's. Imagine how many hundreds he will have if he plays 287 games!

In test cricket, Gilly is ahead of De Kock and will be for some time, but the point of the thread is that De Kock is the first genuinely strong contender to have the potential to challenge Gilly's GOAT status when it comes to wicket-keeper/batsmen.

Please don't compare stats directly like that. Its quite futile when many of us have actually watched both play. Glichrist played most of his cricket at a time when there was only one ball and scoring rates were not as high as they are now in ODIs. That average combined with his strike rate was unbelievable and he was a high impact player. Also scored a 50 in 1999 final, set the tone with another rapid 50 in the 2003 final and murdered Murali and co. in the 2007 final. QDK is nowhere bear that right now.

 

[FreePalestine]

Please don't compare stats directly like that. Its quite futile when many of us have actually watched both play. Glichrist played most of his cricket at a time when there was only one ball and scoring rates were not as high as they are now in ODIs. That average combined with his strike rate was unbelievable and he was a high impact player. Also scored a 50 in 1999 final, set the tone with another rapid 50 in the 2003 final and murdered Murali and co. in the 2007 final. QDK is nowhere bear that right now.

He is incredibly out of form atm so I would agree with you for now. But if you had watched QDK at the beginning of his career, you would know what an outstanding player he can be, and yes, if he finds that form again and carries on playing the way he did at the beginning of his career, he will rival Gilchrist. I have also watched them both play.

 

[in_cutter]

Not even a comparison. Gilchrist was a BEAST.

 

[jnaveen1980]

This guy is a sitting duck in helpful conditions. Technically he got out more than 6 times in this series

 

[sweep_shot]

Gilchrist wins by a mile.

QDK most face bad bowlers. International cricket is now full of such bowlers.

Gilchrist had to face champion bowlers.

 

[Mamoon]

Gilchrist wins by a mile.

QDK most faces bad bowlers. International cricket is now full of such bowlers.

Gilchrist had to face champion bowlers.

They were plenty of bad bowlers in the 2000s as well.

The best attack was Australia that Gilchrist obviously didn’t face, Pakistan attack was poor 2003 onwards, England, New Zealand, West Indies (post Ambrose/Walsh), Sri Lanka (pacers minus Vaas) all had average attacks.

Indian attack was good in the 2000s too but De Kock has performed against better Indian attacks.

After Australia, there was only one world class bowling attack in the mid 2000s and that was South Africa.

Put De Kock in that Australian team and I don’t think there will be a drop in quality, or you can put Gilchrist in the 2010s and 2020s South African side and he won’t do much more than what De Kock has done.

There is nothing between the two players at an individual capacity but all the other variables influence our perception. It happens in every sport.

 

[mominsaigol]

Gilchrist and de kock are both goated.

But we have gilchrist as a folklore legend lol. Gilchrist is > Quinton mainly cause he's a goated tournament player and quinton in the past has gone missing in big games, but in normal games the difference isn't that high lol, both are attacking and gilly also faced many trash bowlers like quinton did.

Gilly is leaps and bounds a better keeper though and a much much better tournament player.

 

[Technics 1210]

Gilly - 3 ODI World Cups
QDK - Zero

Lets not even talk about Tests.

No debate.

 

[Justcrazy]

If you ask any former or current cricketer from neutral countries , 99 % will chose Gilly. That is enough.

 

[Mas-LFC]

QDK is a great opener. But Gilchrist for me. Gilly played at eras where there was one ball used, 5fielders outside 30yard. QDK whole time since he started there was batting pp, fielding restrictions, two new balls, bats better than before!

 

[Visaal-E-Yaar]

Gilchrist all the way he was GOAT.​

De kock always failed on big stages and crumbled under pressure.

 

[Mas-LFC]

If you ask any former or current cricketer from neutral countries , 99 % will chose Gilly. That is enough.

Gilchrist today with only 4 max allowed outside 30yard in 40overs, wouldve scored many more tons.
Also this 5 outside from 40-50 came recently but pre-CWC19 it was 4 max outside 30yard circle from 11-50ov at one stage in time in ODI’s, heck even before that there was batting and bowling PP which we saw 2011 and 2015 wc if am not wrong. Gilchrist surely would’ve smashed more tons had he got chances to play in these rules!

 

[Justcrazy]

Gilchrist today with only 4 max allowed outside 30yard in 40overs, wouldve scored many more tons.
Also this 5 outside from 40-50 came recently but pre-CWC19 it was 4 max outside 30yard circle from 11-50ov at one stage in time in ODI’s, heck even before that there was batting and bowling PP which we saw 2011 and 2015 wc if am not wrong. Gilchrist surely would’ve smashed more tons had he got chances to play in these rules!

If Viv played today , with such restrictions and with modern day Bat. He would have murdered the bowlers. I have no doubt he would be averaging 75 with strike rate of 150.

 

[Mamoon]

If Viv played today , with such restrictions and with modern day Bat. He would have murdered the bowlers. I have no doubt he would be averaging 75 with strike rate of 150.

And Michael Holding would be averaging 30+ with the ball at an ER of 6+ because he will be getting reverse-lapped for sixes.

 

[160KPH]

If Viv played today , with such restrictions and with modern day Bat. He would have murdered the bowlers. I have no doubt he would be averaging 75 with strike rate of 150.

For sure. He was playing with a 90 SR back in the day when 70 was solid. If you just compare players to their peers, not sure anyone - aside from Bradman - was further ahead.

 

[160KPH]

And Michael Holding would be averaging 30+ with the ball at an ER of 6+ because he will be getting reverse-lapped for sixes.

I think he would have adapted. I think the greatest players in any sport could adapt to any era if given the time. People say the same thing and say modern day batsmen would have failed back then, but I 100% believe Kohli, ABD, Smith, etc would have found a way to dominate back then too. Greatness transcends eras.

 

[Justcrazy]

For sure. He was playing with a 90 SR back in the day when 70 was solid. If you just compare players to their peers, not sure anyone - aside from Bradman - was further ahead.

Bradman did not face such varied opposition or bowlers , also Cricket was not competitive that time. Personally I think Viv was the best .

 

[Justcrazy]

And Michael Holding would be averaging 30+ with the ball at an ER of 6+ because he will be getting reverse-lapped for sixes.

He would be averaging more , no doubt . The pitches are more flatter , more restrictions.

 

[Statpadder Inc]

Gilly - 3 ODI World Cups
QDK - Zero

Lets not even talk about Tests.

No debate.

Terrible logic
Brett Lee - 2 wcs
Waqar Younis - 0 wcs

 

[Saanji]

Terrible logic
Brett Lee - 2 wcs
Waqar Younis - 0 wcs

Of course Brett Lee is better than waqar .. what are you trying to say?

 

[mominsaigol]

Gilchrist, Dhoni are a slight class > Quinton.

But quinton is defo a solid bat and deserves praise.

 

[Rajdeep]

I am not a big fan of comparing different era's. Batting and overall cricket is much easier now than it was back in the days. The value of a 100 rupee note back in 90s was much higher than what it is now. If you had invested that 100 rupee in a stock, its price would be in thousands now due to its appreciate value. Similarly runs scored back in the day had much more value than what it is now. It is just the law of nature...everything moves on in life. This is the same reason I don't go gaga when people say Kohli is just 1 century away from Tendulkar's 49th ODI hundred's. Tendulkar's 49 ODI hundreds is probably worth 80 in modern era. On topic, Gilly was a much much superior cricketer than De Kock.

It is just my personal opinion...so De Kock fans pls don't come after me.

 

[shokz1408]

Of course Brett Lee is better than waqar .. what are you trying to say?

Brett Lee was awesome, I loved watching him run into bowl in excess of 90mph. But often people talk of the legendary bowlers, the kings of swing, it’s always wasim and Waqar. I’ve never heard anyone mention Brett Lee in the same sentence. In fact I’ve not heard anyone mention Brett Lee at all for many years.

 

[mominsaigol]

I am not a big fan of comparing different era's. Batting and overall cricket is much easier now than it was back in the days. The value of a 100 rupee note back in 90s was much higher than what it is now. If you had invested that 100 rupee in a stock, its price would be in thousands now due to its appreciate value. Similarly runs scored back in the day had much more value than what it is now. It is just the law of nature...everything moves on in life. This is the same reason I don't go gaga when people say Kohli is just 1 century away from Tendulkar's 49th ODI hundred's. Tendulkar's 49 ODI hundreds is probably worth 80 in modern era. On topic, Gilly was a much much superior cricketer than De Kock.

It is just my personal opinion...so De Kock fans pls don't come after me.

No one thinks quinton is > Gilly bro. gilchrist is top 3 odi wicket keeper bats of all time with dhoni and sangakara in that league.

Quinton is good but a tier below.