Chappell-Hadlee
-
@mariner4life said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@ACT-Crusader said in Chappell-Hadlee:
I'd love to know what Kane had planned for the final 2 overs if it got to that....
I'm not sure he plans much
I think cricket ( well any sport really ) needs to realise that the best player isn't always best choice for captain. However in this BCs line up there's nil to fuck all other options given that Hesson would probably saw his own nuts off rather than ask Ross Taylor.
-
@MN5 said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@mariner4life said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@ACT-Crusader said in Chappell-Hadlee:
I'd love to know what Kane had planned for the final 2 overs if it got to that....
I'm not sure he plans much
I think cricket ( well any sport really ) needs to realise that the best player isn't always best choice for captain. However in this BCs line up there's nil to fuck all other options given that Hesson would probably saw his own nuts off rather than ask Ross Taylor.
I don't think Taylor would be any better, and a captain is only as good as his cattle.
-
Fuck off with disappointed /unhappy we won shit. @Mokey @Hooroo and @anyoneelse ...
It's Straya.
We gave them a sniff. They thought they had it and we whipped it from under their noses. And partly due to their own fuck up by the sounds. Ha fucking ha. Makes it sweeter.
Do you think they'd be gutted for us?
Two words: Haddin and Brad.
-
In the old days Halewood would get an absolute fucking roasting in the sheds. Wonder if that still happens - prolly not
We would have lost that game but for Hazelwoods help. Nearly got Stones run out, turned down an easy 2 and then gave up the last wicket when he would have been better served just sitting down at long off.
but what a brilliant innings that was from Stoinis.
Hope the win doesn't paper over the cracks, but for a long part of that game Kane and his boys did enough to warrant a victory.
Latham was excellent behind the stumps. We lost Ranchi setting the fielding standards in Oz. BJ was too quiet and too sloppy with returns and tidying up (something that Luke does very well. Latham today was vocal and energetic and took all the half volleys and those are the little things that non cricket people (like MN5
) don't seer understand - a wee bit like the value of an opensider running the right lines - perhaps not obvious but bloody important for the team to gel in the field. One of the reasons Luke kept getting the job despite his runs or lack thereofLatham was very good today, I was a little surprised and very impressed, well done that man
edit - fuck off Apple predictive text - I knoe what I watn too rite!
-
The thing to love most about @booboo's Kiwi bitterness, is how well its been honed in Queensland aka victim country.
@taniwharugby said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@Donsteppa ah I thought there was another ball.
No, you play the same 6-ball overs as the rest of the world.
Its your rugby 7s team that has an extra count
-
@MN5 Not sure I'd be completely harsh on Kane's captaincy in this one - I can understand what he was trying to do - to just completely shut the gate by getting Stoinis (and Cummins) out before the 40th over.
It's out of the BMac playbook.
I wouldn't have done it, though, because after 35 overs Neesham/Munro still had four overs to bowl and Santner had two. That's too many.
Give himself one over and give Munro, who was going OK, one more and suddenly you've got quite a lot of bowling insurance - there's a chance you'll get a cheap wicket and there's probably still too many overs for them to really go to town on you..
Of course, he wasn't to know that none of Southee/Boult or Neesham would be able to land a yorker and the go to delivery would be half track shit that could be flat-batted for six. Well, maybe he was...
And he could have helped himself by catching Stoinis or running him out earlier.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Chappell-Hadlee:
I'd love to know what Kane had planned for the final 2 overs if it got to that....
He definitely made the right choices though. He bowled his best bowlers out. It would be unforgivable if he bowled Munro and 20 were plastered from his over and Australia won with Boult and Southee having an over to spare.
-
@Siam said in Chappell-Hadlee:
In the old days Halewood would get an absolute fucking roasting in the sheds. Wonder if that still happens - prolly not
We would have lost that game but for Hazelwoods help. Nearly got Stones run out, turned down an easy 2 and then gave up the last wicket when he would have been better served just sitting down at long off.
but what a brilliant innings that was from Stoinis.
Hope the win doesn't paper over the cracks, but for a long part of that game Kane and his boys did enough to warrant a victory.
Latham was excellent behind the stumps. We lost Ranchi setting the fielding standards in Oz. BJ was too quiet and too sloppy with returns and tidying up (something that Luke does very well. Latham today was vocal and energetic and took all the half volleys and those are the little things that non cricket people (like MN5
) don't seer understand - a wee bit like the value of an opensider running the right lines - perhaps not obvious but bloody important for the team to gel in the field. One of the reasons Luke kept getting the job despite his runs or lack thereofLatham was very good today, I was a little surprised and very impressed, well done that man
edit - fuck off Apple predictive text - I knoe what I watn too rite!
I've never had issued with Ronchis keeping its his batting which has sucked and like it or not the days of Smithy like keepers are dead and buried.
-
@MN5 said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@Siam said in Chappell-Hadlee:
In the old days Halewood would get an absolute fucking roasting in the sheds. Wonder if that still happens - prolly not
We would have lost that game but for Hazelwoods help. Nearly got Stones run out, turned down an easy 2 and then gave up the last wicket when he would have been better served just sitting down at long off.
but what a brilliant innings that was from Stoinis.
Hope the win doesn't paper over the cracks, but for a long part of that game Kane and his boys did enough to warrant a victory.
Latham was excellent behind the stumps. We lost Ranchi setting the fielding standards in Oz. BJ was too quiet and too sloppy with returns and tidying up (something that Luke does very well. Latham today was vocal and energetic and took all the half volleys and those are the little things that non cricket people (like MN5
) don't seer understand - a wee bit like the value of an opensider running the right lines - perhaps not obvious but bloody important for the team to gel in the field. One of the reasons Luke kept getting the job despite his runs or lack thereofLatham was very good today, I was a little surprised and very impressed, well done that man
edit - fuck off Apple predictive text - I knoe what I watn too rite!
I've never had issued with Ronchis keeping its his batting which has sucked and like it or not the days of Smithy like keepers are dead and buried.
Oh no MN5, please don't misunderstand me, it's your knowledge of all cricket, not just wicket keeping
-
@Siam said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@MN5 said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@Siam said in Chappell-Hadlee:
In the old days Halewood would get an absolute fucking roasting in the sheds. Wonder if that still happens - prolly not
We would have lost that game but for Hazelwoods help. Nearly got Stones run out, turned down an easy 2 and then gave up the last wicket when he would have been better served just sitting down at long off.
but what a brilliant innings that was from Stoinis.
Hope the win doesn't paper over the cracks, but for a long part of that game Kane and his boys did enough to warrant a victory.
Latham was excellent behind the stumps. We lost Ranchi setting the fielding standards in Oz. BJ was too quiet and too sloppy with returns and tidying up (something that Luke does very well. Latham today was vocal and energetic and took all the half volleys and those are the little things that non cricket people (like MN5
) don't seer understand - a wee bit like the value of an opensider running the right lines - perhaps not obvious but bloody important for the team to gel in the field. One of the reasons Luke kept getting the job despite his runs or lack thereofLatham was very good today, I was a little surprised and very impressed, well done that man
edit - fuck off Apple predictive text - I knoe what I watn too rite!
I've never had issued with Ronchis keeping its his batting which has sucked and like it or not the days of Smithy like keepers are dead and buried.
Oh no MN5, please don't misunderstand me, it's your knowledge of all cricket, not just wicket keeping
I've predicted every single BC result correctly so far this year. You should be treating me like a God.
-
-
@booboo said in Chappell-Hadlee:
Fuck off with disappointed /unhappy we won shit. @Mokey @Hooroo and @anyoneelse ...
It's Straya.
We gave them a sniff. They thought they had it and we whipped it from under their noses. And partly due to their own fuck up by the sounds. Ha fucking ha. Makes it sweeter.
Do you think they'd be gutted for us?
Two words: Haddin and Brad.
Misquoted there your honour. It's the least happy I have been. I am still happy we won
-
Eden Park must one of the toughest grounds to defend on (Pakistan 1992 anyone?)
Think we are being a bit hard on KW. We were well on top for the most of Aussies innings, were we doubting him when oz were 65/5?
That was a freakish one in a thousand innings from a guy none of our bowlers had ever bowled to. When the ball is been smacked as cleanly as that it's fucken hard to pull it back.
Got out of jail but will take that win. -
Alright, back from the game and fuck me that was a roller coaster. Enjoyed this thread - thanks lads - some vintage stuff in here. Was amazed at the Aus comeback but now it makes sense as @mariner4life was on here posting bloody gifs of fat ladies.
From Guppy getting us away to a flier, then sinking to 130/5, to Broom and Neesh resurrecting our innings, then having them 60 odd for 6, to Stoines nearly hitting them home, this game was a hell of a ride.
The mandatory streaker was fat and ugly but remarkably light footed for a big man. Managed to put a good step on a couple of the security to make it to the other side of the field where he jumped the fence, landed on the concrete and was engulfed by a bunch of large security officers leaving their feet, so in hindsight was probably better to take the tackle on the grass.
Anyway some light analysis...
With the bat:
- Guppy was excellent but we need him to go on with those starts he's getting.
- Neesh is a classy player, looked very untroubled on his way to 48 before top edging a pull. I'd bat him ahead of Munro who at best is a dirty slogger suited to the final overs.
- Broom is in the prime of his career, he should command a spot in the ODI team until retirement. Very composed under pressure today.
- Boult is lots of fun to watch, tinny as fuck and really got the crowd going in that final over.
We've actually got a very solid batting lineup. Put Cory in for Munro and that helps with the balance of the side a lot.
With the ball:
- Southee/Boult very good at the start of the innings, got the early breakthroughs and put us on top.
- Lockie was brilliant, he has real pace and got the crowd going with the way he was troubling the Aussie mid-lower order. Great to watch, and I thought Kane used him well today.
- Unfortunately for Neesh it was his bowling that got Stoines going, who really got in the zone after that and started belting it all over the place. Neesh may be good for an over or two here or there but I don't like the idea of relying on him to bowl. As @MN5 says he's very much a batting allrounder.
- @Chris-B mentioned it on here but I'd really like Kane to give himself 2 - 3 overs per match in the middle stages in combination with Santner. He's unlikely to get tonked, it gets through a couple of the 5th bowlers overs, and he's a bit of a wicket taker. The fact he's probably the most unselfish player in the history of the game probably plays a part, but he should take the ball more often.
- On Santner, he was bloody effective, very accurate bowler and the two wickets he took were all class. Great to see.
But for all that, by far the best performance of the match came from the unheralded Stoines. That was a bloody pleasure to watch, and his composure belied his years. Rebuilt the innings from a dire situation, and then put his foot on the pedal at the right time to get them from way behind the run rate to comfortably ahead of it. The way some of his partners threw their wickets away was criminal given the way he was playing.
50 partnership where one guy doesn't face a ball wouldn't happen very often - perhaps one of the Ferns statisticians can tell us how rare that is.
The NZ summer of cricket rolls on, still yet to drop a game at home though that record will be severely tested in the coming weeks.
Yay Black Caps!
-
-
