NZ All Time XI
-
@crazy-horse said in NZ All Time Test XI:
I remember listening to Rutherford's debut - opening (I think) against the Windies in the Windies. The poor fuck, no wonder he under achieved in the long run.
His overall career stats are pretty ugly. I wonder what Sir Paddles thought when he looked at many of the specialist batsmen in his team that he actually averaged more than?
-
@crazy-horse said in NZ All Time Test XI:
I remember listening to Rutherford's debut - opening (I think) against the Windies in the Windies. The poor fuck, no wonder he under achieved in the long run.
Lamb thrown to the wolves - that tour was all about revenge for 1979/80 for the Windies - most of the WI players have admitted as such - Pace like fire. Funny thing is, I hold no grudges for that tour - Crowe was just out of this world - but it was definitely the end for the last of the amateurs like Coney etc
-
There was another young batter that got selected as well and I don't think we heard much more of him after that. Ron Hart?
-
@dogmeat There were high hopes for that 04 team after the SA series that year. Martin had come from nowhere to tear the South Africans up but looked very mediocre along with Tuffey, Vettori had been badly out of form for a while, and our batting was very poorly balanced. Richardson was a star but our middle order let us down big time. Franklin should have been picked from the start but wasn't and came in for the 3rd test and bowled brilliantly.
-
@african-monkey said in NZ All Time Test XI:
@dogmeat There were high hopes for that 04 team after the SA series that year. Martin had come from nowhere to tear the South Africans up but looked very mediocre along with Tuffey, Vettori had been badly out of form for a while, and our batting was very poorly balanced. Richardson was a star but our middle order let us down big time. Franklin should have been picked from the start but wasn't and came in for the 3rd test and bowled brilliantly.
What a strange career he had. Started as a left handed Hadlee ( the great man's exact words ) who could hold a bat then transformed into an incredibly average 'batsman' and his bowling pretty much fell of a cliff.
-
I've been watching since 87 or so, and Smith is the best technical keeper I've seen from any country in that time. If we want a keeper solely on keeping ability, it's Smith, but if batting is important, any of Parore, McCullum or Watling are better options, and are all excellent keepers in their own right.
-
@godder said in NZ All Time Test XI:
I've been watching since 87 or so, and Smith is the best technical keeper I've seen from any country in that time. If we want a keeper solely on keeping ability, it's Smith, but if batting is important, any of Parore, McCullum or Watling are better options, and are all excellent keepers in their own right.
Nope. His stats indicate otherwise. I remember he played as a specialist bat at 3 for awhile too!
Personally I reckon a Sangakara/Flower/Gilly type is far more beneficial to a team cos then you have the option for essentially 7 batsmen if need be.
-
-
@godder said in NZ All Time Test XI:
@mn5 Parore was a better batsman than Smith and a world class keeper, but agreed that McCullum and Watling have shown more with the bat than Parore (such a high bar to clear...).
Smith was an entertaining low order slogger but Parore only averaged 26 in tests. Not worthy of discussion in my opinion.
-
Parore was McMillan-lite who kept. Promised a lot but never put it together. Only caught the tail end of smith but from all reports and statistically when it came to actual output he matched Parore.
Wadsworth was supposed to be a gun according to the old man.
-
Parore's averages suffer because he was asked to spend time at first drop to accommodate specialist captain Lee Germon. He did flatter to deceive but at #6 in the order he averages 35.
Still as a batsman/keeper he is below Watling and McCullum (although Baz only averages 34 as a keeper).
@rotated Wadsworth died tragically young and your Dad isn't wrong - he was an easy player to like - particularly in the rather conservative 70's.
He was a batsman first and then a keeper but only averaged 21 with the bat.
He started off keeping inconsistently but became much more reliable towards the end of his career.
He wouldn't seem so remarkable today but for the time - he'd come in and smash it around and then get out in some often bizarre way. He'd also pull off some superlative piece of keeping and then let through a bye. But he always seemed involved and looked as though he was having a great time. As I said a breath of fresh air and easy to be a favourite player but not a top drawer keeper
-
@Donsteppa said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@bayimports said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@MN5 said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@bayimports said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@MN5 Turner
Wow, I’m genuinely shocked that Martin Guptill who had what I’ve always thought of as a short and unsuccessful test career is sixth !!
or that Conway already in top15
D K Morrison and M C Sneddon also on the list, each with a well compiled 1* to win a Test match together.
Yeah they essentially sent in two nightwatchmen for that one.
There are some serious journeymen on that list though, crikey.
Australia ( off the top of my head ) would have Hayden, Langer, Taylor, Slats, Warner, Lawry etc who it could be argued are all better than anyone we’ve produced.
-
@MN5 said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
Australia ( off the top of my head ) would have Hayden, Langer, Taylor, Slats, Warner, Lawry etc who it could be argued are all better than anyone we’ve produced.
At the risk of not checking stats first, I'd go with Hayden and Langer. Wright might be in the same ballpark as Taylor and Lawry. Maybe. I didn't see Turner, but wonder from what I've read if he had the ability to be more aggressive like Slats and Warner.
Wright's stats are very impressive from the era he played in as an opener (check out K R Rutherford on page 2 for comparison....). Latham is well on track to sail past his numbers.
-
@Donsteppa said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@MN5 said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
Australia ( off the top of my head ) would have Hayden, Langer, Taylor, Slats, Warner, Lawry etc who it could be argued are all better than anyone we’ve produced.
At the risk of not checking stats first, I'd go with Hayden and Langer. Wright might be in the same ballpark as Taylor and Lawry. Maybe. I didn't see Turner, but wonder from what I've read if he had the ability to be more aggressive like Slats and Warner.
Wright's stats are very impressive from the era he played in as an opener (check out K R Rutherford on page 2 for comparison....). Latham is well on track to sail past his numbers.
Dunno. Lawry was bloody good so I doubt it.
Slater actually scored more runs as an opener than Langer who got seven out of 23 test tons batting in the middle order.
-
@bayimports said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@bayimports said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Chris-B said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@MN5 said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@bayimports said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@MN5 Turner
Wow, I’m genuinely shocked that Martin Guptill who had what I’ve always thought of as a short and unsuccessful test career is sixth !!
Rod Latham averages more than Tom!!!
If ever there was an incentive for Tom to increase his average at opener, surely that's it. Tom "5000 runs as an opener, second only to J Wright", Dad " You're also second as an opener on batting average in this family lol"
Knowing Rocket the first thing he would say was my 2 test average doesn’t stack up to your 72 test average Son.
Humble dude is Rocket.you would know better than I would and from what I've heard from him I would agree, would be a funny dig though..
Yeah always amusing to think how sporting families chat at get togethers.
I mean Mark Waugh scored 18 ODI tons to Steves three……but 32 and 20 respectively at test level means “Tugga” would get first choice of the Xmas Turkey I would have thought.
-
@Donsteppa said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
I didn't see Turner, but wonder from what I've read if he had the ability to be more aggressive like Slats and Warner.
Absolutely Turner had the ability to score quickly. He started out as a bit of a dasher but modified his technique when he went to County cricket.
He was a bit like a cross between Kane (for his unflappable nature and percentage play) and Hadlee with his focus on statistics and ambition.
He was the first batsman to score 1,000 runs before the end of May since WWII (around 1973) and scored his 100th century in a day - the first time that had been achieved in decades. His last year for Worcester he averaged in the 90's.
Different era's but he is the most talented opener NZ has had in my lifetime. By some way better than Wright and capable of scoring faster too. Although no opener from that era scored at the rate of modern batsmen. Not even Greenidge.
I would have him as one opener and then a toss-up between Wright and Latham.
-
@MN5 said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
Australia ( off the top of my head ) would have Hayden, Langer, Taylor, Slats, Warner, Lawry etc who it could be argued are all better than anyone we’ve produced.
For Oz you have Lawry and Simpson back in the early 60's but no one has mentioned NZ's best opening partnership.
Wright / Franklin 1500 odd runs @ 50 compared to Wright / Edgar 1600 @ early 30's
-
@dogmeat Stewie Dempster wants to know how much he had to average.
Roy Fredericks...
The Spin | Roy Fredericks aka Kid Cement | Andy Bull
Andy Bull: If I could offer you a free ticket to any day's play in the history of cricket, which would you pick?
-
@Chris-B I bowed to the Fern orthodoxy that cricket didn't exist before RJ Hadlee made his debut.
I've mentioned Dempster, Donnelly, Sutcliffe and Cowie many times before but apparently, they don't count.
That Perth text is also apparently what cemented Lloyd's strategy of a four-man pace attack.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
