• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
cricket
353 Posts 34 Posters 8.6k Views
New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPie
    replied to mariner4life on last edited by
    #170

    @mariner4life said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @mariner4life said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @KiwiPie okay, not bad for a couple of shies at the stumps

    It's infuriating not knowing which is wrong

    as far as i can tell

    1
    2
    3 Kane
    4 Rosco
    5 Ryder
    6 Coney
    7 Cairns
    8 Dan
    9 Smith
    10
    11

    meaning i am off with my openers and the bunnies? Or is it Coney at 6 that's out? I am massively confident in Cairns at 7

    OK to speed things up here - all those 7 are the correct choices.

    shit. If it's not Southee and Boult at 10 and 11 it could be fucking anyone!

    As Chris Martin once sang "Nobody said it was easyyyyyyy"

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.
    wrote on last edited by
    #171

    If it's not Richardson as an opener, then it's probably Turner and Sutcliffe - unless it is someone even older - but I doubt CSD would qualify.

    Tailenders could be anyone, but probably people who often batted higher - how about Lance Cairns and Martin Snedden?

    Turner
    Sutcliffe
    The Mariner 7
    Cairns, L
    Snedden

    KiwiPieK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPie
    replied to Chris B. on last edited by
    #172

    @Chris-B said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    If it's not Richardson as an opener, then it's probably Turner and Sutcliffe - unless it is someone even older - but I doubt CSD would qualify.

    Tailenders could be anyone, but probably people who often batted higher - how about Lance Cairns and Martin Snedden?

    Turner
    Sutcliffe
    The Mariner 7
    Cairns, L
    Snedden

    Correct thinking. Openers are done - just 10 and 11 to go and neither has been mentioned so far.

    SmudgeS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SmudgeS Do not disturb
    SmudgeS Do not disturb
    Smudge
    replied to KiwiPie on last edited by
    #173

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @Chris-B said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    If it's not Richardson as an opener, then it's probably Turner and Sutcliffe - unless it is someone even older - but I doubt CSD would qualify.

    Tailenders could be anyone, but probably people who often batted higher - how about Lance Cairns and Martin Snedden?

    Turner
    Sutcliffe
    The Mariner 7
    Cairns, L
    Snedden

    Correct thinking. Openers are done - just 10 and 11 to go and neither has been mentioned so far.

    I was trying to work out how Dempster missed out as one of the openers, but then I see he batted #4 in the last of his 10 tests.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPie
    wrote on last edited by
    #174

    So still 10 and 11 to get for tonight.

    And for extra cricketing fun, which 2 openers who played 10 games or more have the lowest average? There are 15 averaging below 30 so there are a few to choose from!

    rotatedR 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CyclopsC Offline
    CyclopsC Offline
    Cyclops
    wrote on last edited by
    #175

    It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.

    KiwiPieK 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • PaekakboyzP Offline
    PaekakboyzP Offline
    Paekakboyz
    wrote on last edited by
    #176

    Hmm would tuffey or pocock happen to have a decent 10 or 11 average?

    KiwiPieK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPie
    replied to Cyclops on last edited by
    #177

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.

    Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83

    CyclopsC SmudgeS 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • PaekakboyzP Offline
    PaekakboyzP Offline
    Paekakboyz
    wrote on last edited by
    #178

    For openers would the guy who lost a tooth in England be a contender? Cant recall his name right now

    CyclopsC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPie
    replied to Paekakboyz on last edited by
    #179

    @Paekakboyz said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    Hmm would tuffey or pocock happen to have a decent 10 or 11 average?

    Sorry it isn't them

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CyclopsC Offline
    CyclopsC Offline
    Cyclops
    replied to KiwiPie on last edited by
    #180

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.

    Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83

    Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)

    KiwiPieK MN5M RapidoR 3 Replies Last reply
    1
  • CyclopsC Offline
    CyclopsC Offline
    Cyclops
    replied to Paekakboyz on last edited by
    #181

    @Paekakboyz said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    For openers would the guy who lost a tooth in England be a contender? Cant recall his name right now

    Daniel Flynn? Not sure if he opened the batting much, think he played more at 3 and 5.

    PaekakboyzP 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPie
    replied to Cyclops on last edited by
    #182

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.

    Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83

    Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)

    Good call. Franklin it is. So just a 10 and 11 to name. Neither of them played this century if that helps ....

    CyclopsC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CyclopsC Offline
    CyclopsC Offline
    Cyclops
    replied to KiwiPie on last edited by Cyclops
    #183

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.

    Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83

    Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)

    Good call. Franklin it is. So just a 10 and 11 to name. Neither of them played this century if that helps ....

    What about Dion Nash at 10?

    Edit: maybe Simon '97 test wickets' Doull at 11?

    KiwiPieK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • SmudgeS Do not disturb
    SmudgeS Do not disturb
    Smudge
    replied to KiwiPie on last edited by
    #184

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.

    Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83

    I suspect Hartland won't get to add to that tally of 9 games.

    MN5M 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • PaekakboyzP Offline
    PaekakboyzP Offline
    Paekakboyz
    replied to Cyclops on last edited by
    #185

    @Cyclops that was him, thought he was another middle order experiment as an opener for a game or two.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPieK Offline
    KiwiPie
    replied to Cyclops on last edited by
    #186

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.

    Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83

    Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)

    Good call. Franklin it is. So just a 10 and 11 to name. Neither of them played this century if that helps ....

    What about Dion Nash at 10?

    Edit: maybe Simon '97 test wickets' Doull at 11?

    No and no. Older than them.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • canefanC Offline
    canefanC Offline
    canefan
    wrote on last edited by
    #187

    Chats used to bat a fair bit. Could it be him?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.
    wrote on last edited by
    #188

    John Bracewell?

    What about Richard Collinge - he had at least one good score at 11?

    dogmeatD KiwiPieK 2 Replies Last reply
    0
  • MN5M Online
    MN5M Online
    MN5
    replied to Cyclops on last edited by
    #189

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @KiwiPie said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    @Cyclops said in New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2:

    It wasn't the two Blairs (Hartland and Pocock) was it? Not sure if they played enough games though. They were bad enough that Bryan Young was considered a reliable opener for a period though.

    Pocock is a YES - Hartland is poised on 9 games though with the outstanding average of 16.83

    Trevor Franklin then? I remember being shocked by his average given the reverence that he and John Wright get as an opening pair (not that it's undeserved, shows how much the game has changed, and probably also how much our standards have risen)

    Before I became such a stats nerd Trevor Franklin was always one of my favourites, not sure why cos he was no Davey Warner in terms on getting the run rate going....

    DonsteppaD 1 Reply Last reply
    0

New Zealand v Bangladesh Test #2
Sports Talk
cricket
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.