Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka
-
@hydro11 said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
Santner should not be automatically in the test team. He is a little better with the bat and a a little better with the ball than MMarsh (but only a little).
The thing about CDG is that we actually need a 4th seamer to bowl serious overs, especially at home. CDG is a much better batsman than Santner so if they both play CDG should be ahead of him. Since we don't tend to use the spinner at home, Santner is the type of player we would like to have but he just isn't good enough at the moment.
Word to this post brother. One would think he was KW/Taylor/Boult judging by some of the wank that people on here have written about him.
-
@Cyclops said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
Has Neesham sorted his bowling action during his sabbatical? He could be the answer here. He's good enough to bat 6 in tests and with his action sorted could be a genuine all-rounder.
The selectors seem to think he's in with a shot, as they have picked him for the ODIs. I heard an interview with the convenor, and he said Neesham's bowling had improved greatly, as had Doug Bracewell's batting, so both are moving in the right direction. CDG is getting a rest because he's basically in and they need to pick a backup, from the sounds of it.
-
@hydro11 said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
Santner should not be automatically in the test team. He is a little better with the bat and a a little better with the ball than MMarsh (but only a little).
So you're saying he'd be locked in for the Australian team?
And MN5 is agreeing!
-
-
@Godder said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@Cyclops said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
Has Neesham sorted his bowling action during his sabbatical? He could be the answer here. He's good enough to bat 6 in tests and with his action sorted could be a genuine all-rounder.
The selectors seem to think he's in with a shot, as they have picked him for the ODIs. I heard an interview with the convenor, and he said Neesham's bowling had improved greatly, as had Doug Bracewell's batting, so both are moving in the right direction. CDG is getting a rest because he's basically in and they need to pick a backup, from the sounds of it.
If this is as true as they claim and have done for fucken years then Bradmans descendents better get ready to have someone usurp the title off him.
-
@Chris-B said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@hydro11 said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
Santner should not be automatically in the test team. He is a little better with the bat and a a little better with the ball than MMarsh (but only a little).
So you're saying he'd be locked in for the Australian team?
And MN5 is agreeing!
It was late, I must have missed that bit
-
@Mokey said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
Well. Match over in 12 mins. Enjoy the rest of your Sunday, boys.
Damned inconsiderate. Have to work now.
-
@Chris-B said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@hydro11 said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
Santner should not be automatically in the test team. He is a little better with the bat and a a little better with the ball than MMarsh (but only a little).
So you're saying he'd be locked in for the Australian team?
And MN5 is agreeing!
Obviously not. Australia wouldn't play two spinners at home. They need a fast bowling all rounder as they already have a very good spinner.
-
-
@MN5 said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@Godder said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@Cyclops said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
Has Neesham sorted his bowling action during his sabbatical? He could be the answer here. He's good enough to bat 6 in tests and with his action sorted could be a genuine all-rounder.
The selectors seem to think he's in with a shot, as they have picked him for the ODIs. I heard an interview with the convenor, and he said Neesham's bowling had improved greatly, as had Doug Bracewell's batting, so both are moving in the right direction. CDG is getting a rest because he's basically in and they need to pick a backup, from the sounds of it.
If this is as true as they claim and have done for fucken years then Bradmans descendents better get ready to have someone usurp the title off him.
Sadly, both of them have probably left their runs a bit late... Being behind CDG in the pecking order suggests a low ceiling...
-
@MN5 said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@Godder said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@Cyclops said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
Has Neesham sorted his bowling action during his sabbatical? He could be the answer here. He's good enough to bat 6 in tests and with his action sorted could be a genuine all-rounder.
The selectors seem to think he's in with a shot, as they have picked him for the ODIs. I heard an interview with the convenor, and he said Neesham's bowling had improved greatly, as had Doug Bracewell's batting, so both are moving in the right direction. CDG is getting a rest because he's basically in and they need to pick a backup, from the sounds of it.
If this is as true as they claim and have done for fucken years then Bradmans descendents better get ready to have someone usurp the title off him.
Well Dougie averaged 23 in the Ford Trophy, with a high score of 42 - so I'm guessing Don's grandkids haven't lost complete control of their bowels.
Neesham did pretty well though - averaged 63 with two hundreds and three fifties plus 13 wickets @ 32.
-
@Chris-B said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@hydro11 Why not?
Lyon has the most wickets in this series - and Mitch was just there to roll his arm over while the quicks had a rest.
What they really need is a number 6!
CDG is a better batsman that Santner, so you would play him.
-
@Chris-B said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@hydro11 Why not?
Lyon has the most wickets in this series - and Mitch was just there to roll his arm over while the quicks had a rest.
What they really need is a number 6!
@Chris-B said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@hydro11 Why not?
Lyon has the most wickets in this series - and Mitch was just there to roll his arm over while the quicks had a rest.
What they really need is a number 6!
What they really need is a number 1-6
-
We're number 3!
We're number 3! -
had we won the first test, as we really should have, we would have been #2.
which is about right i reckon, I'm a little giddy at what this unit has achieved. Imagine if we actually played test cricket?
-
@mariner4life said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
had we won the first test, as we really should have, we would have been #2.
which is about right i reckon, I'm a little giddy at what this unit has achieved. Imagine if we actually played test cricket?
I know ranking points are corrected for games played but it was still depressing to see that the teams ranked above us all have played almost twice as many games in the ranking period.
-
@Cyclops said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
@mariner4life said in Cricket - NZ vs Sri Lanka:
had we won the first test, as we really should have, we would have been #2.
which is about right i reckon, I'm a little giddy at what this unit has achieved. Imagine if we actually played test cricket?
I know ranking points are corrected for games played but it was still depressing to see that the teams ranked above us all have played almost twice as many games in the ranking period.
yep. same every year. Despite our achievements, we are not a TV ratings pull, so we don't get tours. Simple.
Stuff