New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time
-
-
@Chris-B that link took me to a D/N match I went to in 86 at the MCG. One of the more memorable Chatfield 10 overs.
-
@Rapido said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
Here is NZ's all time bowling perfromances in test victories:
cheers for the link.
It's weird. but I think of Southee as the 'elder statesman' of the bowlers. But he only debuted a year before Boult, adn has only played 4 more tests!
-
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@rotated said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@Crucial said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
It has that feel of the aussie ice speed skater that won gold when everyone in front of him crashed.
Yeah a little bit. For years I thought even getting top 3 in test cricket would be a massive stretch for NZ, to get 2 is incredible.
This doesn't feel like the best post-Paddles team but with the ascendance of Latham and Nicholls over the past year perhaps this is the most reliable batting line-up 1-7 we've had.
no perhaps about it, luckily the rest make up for CDGH.
We've had better fast bowlers in the past but never a trio as good as the one we have now.
Weak at spin and all rounder, very strong elsewhere.
Imagine how good we'd be with Stokes, provided NZ nightclubs were less fight-y than Bristols.
-
@TeWaio said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@rotated said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@Crucial said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
It has that feel of the aussie ice speed skater that won gold when everyone in front of him crashed.
Yeah a little bit. For years I thought even getting top 3 in test cricket would be a massive stretch for NZ, to get 2 is incredible.
This doesn't feel like the best post-Paddles team but with the ascendance of Latham and Nicholls over the past year perhaps this is the most reliable batting line-up 1-7 we've had.
no perhaps about it, luckily the rest make up for CDGH.
We've had better fast bowlers in the past but never a trio as good as the one we have now.
Weak at spin and all rounder, very strong elsewhere.
Imagine how good we'd be with Stokes, provided NZ nightclubs were less fight-y than Bristols.
he's good but really he's just a slightly better bowling Jimmy Neesham really. no where near world class in either discipline.
-
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@TeWaio said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@rotated said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@Crucial said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
It has that feel of the aussie ice speed skater that won gold when everyone in front of him crashed.
Yeah a little bit. For years I thought even getting top 3 in test cricket would be a massive stretch for NZ, to get 2 is incredible.
This doesn't feel like the best post-Paddles team but with the ascendance of Latham and Nicholls over the past year perhaps this is the most reliable batting line-up 1-7 we've had.
no perhaps about it, luckily the rest make up for CDGH.
We've had better fast bowlers in the past but never a trio as good as the one we have now.
Weak at spin and all rounder, very strong elsewhere.
Imagine how good we'd be with Stokes, provided NZ nightclubs were less fight-y than Bristols.
he's good but really he's just a slightly better bowling Jimmy Neesham really. no where near world class in either discipline.
Stokes pisses all over Neesham in my opinion. For a start he can string some games together.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@TeWaio said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@rotated said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@Crucial said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
It has that feel of the aussie ice speed skater that won gold when everyone in front of him crashed.
Yeah a little bit. For years I thought even getting top 3 in test cricket would be a massive stretch for NZ, to get 2 is incredible.
This doesn't feel like the best post-Paddles team but with the ascendance of Latham and Nicholls over the past year perhaps this is the most reliable batting line-up 1-7 we've had.
no perhaps about it, luckily the rest make up for CDGH.
We've had better fast bowlers in the past but never a trio as good as the one we have now.
Weak at spin and all rounder, very strong elsewhere.
Imagine how good we'd be with Stokes, provided NZ nightclubs were less fight-y than Bristols.
he's good but really he's just a slightly better bowling Jimmy Neesham really. no where near world class in either discipline.
Stokes pisses all over Neesham in my opinion. For a start he can string some games together.
Fair opinion but is Stokes World Class in either discipline ? not even close.
-
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@Crazy-Horse said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@TeWaio said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@rotated said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@Crucial said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
It has that feel of the aussie ice speed skater that won gold when everyone in front of him crashed.
Yeah a little bit. For years I thought even getting top 3 in test cricket would be a massive stretch for NZ, to get 2 is incredible.
This doesn't feel like the best post-Paddles team but with the ascendance of Latham and Nicholls over the past year perhaps this is the most reliable batting line-up 1-7 we've had.
no perhaps about it, luckily the rest make up for CDGH.
We've had better fast bowlers in the past but never a trio as good as the one we have now.
Weak at spin and all rounder, very strong elsewhere.
Imagine how good we'd be with Stokes, provided NZ nightclubs were less fight-y than Bristols.
he's good but really he's just a slightly better bowling Jimmy Neesham really. no where near world class in either discipline.
Stokes pisses all over Neesham in my opinion. For a start he can string some games together.
Fair opinion but is Stokes World Class in either discipline ? not even close.
No I wouldn't call him world class in either, but more than useful in both. A bit like Cairns.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@Crazy-Horse said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@TeWaio said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@rotated said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@Crucial said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
It has that feel of the aussie ice speed skater that won gold when everyone in front of him crashed.
Yeah a little bit. For years I thought even getting top 3 in test cricket would be a massive stretch for NZ, to get 2 is incredible.
This doesn't feel like the best post-Paddles team but with the ascendance of Latham and Nicholls over the past year perhaps this is the most reliable batting line-up 1-7 we've had.
no perhaps about it, luckily the rest make up for CDGH.
We've had better fast bowlers in the past but never a trio as good as the one we have now.
Weak at spin and all rounder, very strong elsewhere.
Imagine how good we'd be with Stokes, provided NZ nightclubs were less fight-y than Bristols.
he's good but really he's just a slightly better bowling Jimmy Neesham really. no where near world class in either discipline.
Stokes pisses all over Neesham in my opinion. For a start he can string some games together.
Fair opinion but is Stokes World Class in either discipline ? not even close.
No I wouldn't call him world class in either, but more than useful in both. A bit like Cairns.
Cairns was a far better bowler than Stokes. No ifs and buts.
Of current players Jason Holder might end up one of the best ever if he keeps going like he has.
-
-
@dogmeat said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 Stokes has 127 wickets @31.92 and 3,000 runs @ a shade under 34 so not as good a bowler as Cairns but he already has as many test runs.
He's definitely an international class all rounder - 4th seamer who bats 6 or 7.
Weird thing is, can normally dismiss an MN5 opinion as he just reads stats. But those stats are actually good.
Let alone actually watching shows how Stokes' bowling role perfectly dovetails into the current England bowling makeup.
-
-
@dogmeat said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 Stokes has 127 wickets @31.92 and 3,000 runs @ a shade under 34 so not as good a bowler as Cairns but he already has as many test runs.
He's definitely an international class all rounder - 4th seamer who bats 6 or 7.
I never said he's not international class I'm pointing out that Cairns was better.
Stats don't tell the whole story in lots of cases but they can be pretty invaluable as a guide as to how good a player is.
-
@Rapido said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
In retrospective rankings, NZ have been second before.
Official rankings date only from 2002.
Saw this on reddit:
Fascinating graph really. Thanks for posting it.
Gives some credence to that 2001-2004 team being in the same conversation; achieving a similar peak points total as the current side - just with a wider spread of teams. It looks as though the cursed 2004 England series (which you can clearly see on the graph where the teams start even then diverge) where NZ were winning every game going into Sunday and somehow lost the series 3-0 could have ultimately put them in second along with the current side and the late 80s side.
edit: The graph is a bit tricky in the sense it's a trailing measure so the peak for each team/era is likely already a year or two from the absolute peak of the team. A lot of the peak is going to be in "climbing" the rankings. Would be interesting to see it as a moving average +/- ~2 years.
-
@MN5 said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@dogmeat said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5 Stokes has 127 wickets @31.92 and 3,000 runs @ a shade under 34 so not as good a bowler as Cairns but he already has as many test runs.
He's definitely an international class all rounder - 4th seamer who bats 6 or 7.
I never said he's not international class I'm pointing out that Cairns was better.
Stats don't tell the whole story in lots of cases but they can be pretty invaluable as a guide as to how good a player is.
If you plucked a random test performance from Stokes and Cairns - Stokes is better. At peak performance Cairns was better.
I would say the inverse is true of Cairns vs Flintoff.
-
-
@Nepia said in New Zealand rise to No. 2 in Test rankings for the first time:
@MN5's post just disappeared as I was reading it.
If only that happened all the time aye....
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
