Australia v NZ - CH Series I
-
@mariner4life said in Australia v NZ - CH Series I:
We have completely lost our way here. Substandard all round since Henry dropped that sitter
Dropping Smith a couple of times and and lbw not reviewed didn't help
Neesham bowling three wides in an over, either
-
@mariner4life said in Australia v NZ - CH Series I:
We have completely lost our way here. Substandard all round since Henry dropped that sitter
Yeah - this has got the hallmarks of getting very ugly. Our bowling looked like our strong suit and it's been pummeled. Our batting looks to have a lot of guys that you hope might come off rather than expect to come off.
If they get Kane cheaply it could easily be a rout!
-
@Bovidae said in Australia v NZ - CH Series I:
@hydro11 Do you still think that? I would have rolled the dice for Smith.
It's what I would have done at the time. It hit Smith on the top of the knee roll - hard to get those overturned. I think that was a situation where there wasn't really a right or wrong option.
-
We let em off the hook.
-
Pretty shit bowling effort actually. A lot of dropped catches, but worse was the actual bowling. Ferguson being wayward I pass cos he was on debut, but Henry 2/74, and Neesham 2/58 off 6 were way, way too expensive. 325 will be a very tough score to run down, a number of guys will need to step up big time.
Latham bowled Hazelwood for 2. Not a great start.
-
@Mokey said in Australia v NZ - CH Series I:
Pretty shit bowling effort actually. A lot of dropped catches, but worse was the actual bowling. Ferguson being wayward I pass cos he was on debut, but Henry 2/74, and Neesham 2/58 off 6 were way, way too expensive. 325 will be a very tough score to run down, a number of guys will need to step up big time.
Latham bowled Hazelwood for 2. Not a great start.
Neesham bowled his first 4 overs for 24. The only reason Neesham had to come back for two more was because Ferguson was hit out of the attack and Williamson only got 9 overs out of Santner. Neesham is always going to get tonked if he has to bowl there. Colin de Grandhomme ends up with good figures but his figures would probably be as bad or worse than Neesham's if he had to bowl at the death. Henry looked dangerous early but was poor late on.
Our strategy when B Mac was captain was to bowl our strike bowler (Boult) out upfront. I think Henry should perhaps be the one to do that role for us. McClenaghan and Anderson are good death bowlers but both are currently injured. I think Williamson shouldn't have left Boult to bowl 4 of the last ten overs. I think we needed him to get another 2 over spell there in the middle. I suppose he didn't feel confident doing that because then it would be Henry/Neesham/Ferguson to bowl more at the death.
-
Now Kane goes. Our sloggers are going to have to come off big time.
-
-
@hydro11 said in Australia v NZ - CH Series I:
@Damo said in Australia v NZ - CH Series I:
Neesham should not be a number 4. He's a 6 at best.
Then Munro probably has to be at 4 - unless you want Nicholls.
Munro should definitely be at four. He is playing as specialist batsmen, Neesham is the bowling allrounder and should be batting at six.
