When Matthew Prior was called up to the England side for the first Test against the West Indies, there were many who saw his selection as a touch of favouritism employed by the new England coach, Peter Moores.

Both Moores and Prior came from Sussex and, unsurprisingly, the new coach was aware of the abilities of Prior with both bat and gloves. And in his very first Test innings, Prior demonstrated his class with an unbeaten 126 off 128 balls. He went on to score 324 runs during the series and ended up with a batting average of 64.8 and a strike rate of 79.02. Yet, for some reason, Prior’s original selection was apparently far from certain.

In the weeks leading up to the start of the series, cricket writers had been gunning for Chris Read, arguably the best keeper in the country, Geraint Jones, despite a run of low scores, or Paul Nixon, whose efforts during the World Cup merited a Test run, despite his age. Essex’s James Foster, Worcestershire’s Stephen Davies, Lancashire’s Luke Sutton and Surrey’s Jonathan Batty and Hampshire’s Nick Pothas were also in the mix.

'Virtually no-one chose to advocate Prior as the solution to England’s keeping problems, preferring instead to indulge in the debate between Jones and Read'


With so many keepers, it would be easy to assume that there was no obvious claimant to the job. Prior had spent the last four years as the England A keeper and had also toured the sub-continent with the full England side as the reserve wicket-keeper without ever being given a go in the Tests. He had also been involved in England’s one-day set up, albeit playing mostly as a specialist batsman. He was the next cab on the rank.

Prior’s record as a keeper batsman in county cricket was second to none, averaging 40 in first class cricket and being one of the leading (and fastest scorers) in one-day cricket. The fact that he was a key player for English cricket’s most successful county in recent seasons had at least alerted the England selectors. However, it did not seem to alert leading cricket journalists who carry much influence in the game. So why did Prior have to wait so long for his Test debut?

Since the retirement of Alec Stewart in 2003 the England wicket-keeping duties have been shared by Jones and Read. In 2003, Read was acknowledged to be the best keeper in the country but was not regarded as a good enough batsman to bat at No 7. However, he enjoyed a run in a successful England side until replaced by Jones midway through the tour of the West Indies in 2004. The decision to make the switch was taken by England coach Duncan Fletcher who, along with the captain, Michael Vaughan, had authority when England were on tour.

Read was presented as the wicket-keeping purist and Jones as the all-rounder as cricket followers up and down the country debated the dilemma. In truth, Read was a far better batsman than he was given credit and Jones was well short of Test class as a batsman. In truth, neither of them were good enough players to bat at No 7 for England and both ended up with lower batting averages than Jack Russell. Throughout this period of the Read-Jones debate, Prior was continuing to score heavily for Sussex and England A. Regrettably the media were not interested in Prior as Fletcher stubbornly backed Jones, and chairman of selectors David Graveney stubbornly supported Read.

Towards the end of the 2006-7 Ashes series, the standing of both Jones and Read was getting weaker. When the selectors met to consider their squad for the Commonwealth Bank Series, selecting Prior should have been automatic. However, the cricket media, who had consistently failed to advocate his inclusion was still silent. The selectors then went for Nixon. Had they picked Prior, and taken him to the World Cup, England’s poor power play performances might not have occurred.

I feel sorry for Prior who in my view has been robbed of two years of an international career. No reason has ever been hinted at as to why Prior was overlooked for so long. The most influential people in English cricket are those who write for the national daily papers and speak as experts on TV. Very few make the point of watching domestic cricket not covered by TV. Virtually no-one chose to advocate Prior as the solution to England’s keeping problems, preferring instead to indulge in the debate between Jones and Read.