CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh
-
I don't buy the argument that Southee is a better bowler than Henry in the shorter forms. Southee has had the majority of his best performances in the test arena, which is a completely different kettle of fish.
Henry's stats in the shorter form are significantly better than Southee's at every level.
-
Stats are bullshit when it comes to bowlers in the short form. Henry never gets bought back in when the batsmen are set and we need a wicket... cause he sucks at that. He never bowls at the death when the bats are swinging. Context matters.
Henry gets the bulk of his overs at the best possible time to bowl.
You imagine Warner at Smith batting, Aus are 167/2 after 25 overs. You think Henry is ever going to bowl in that situation, and if he does, make any difference. Hell no.Get back to me when Henry actually performs when we are in the shit and need a difference maker. Get back to me when he is capable of bowling at the death with effect.
-
You raise some valid points
According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's
Southee
Mat 39
Inns 39
Overs 334.3
Mdns 20
Runs 1912
Wkts 45
BBI 6/65
Ave 42.48
Econ 5.71
SR 44.6
4 7
5 2Henry
Mat 35
Overs 317.0
Mdns 18
Runs 1714
Wkts 70
BBI 5/30
Ave 24.48
Econ 5.40
SR 27.1
4 6
5 2I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.
Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.
-
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
You raise some valid points
According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's
Southee
Mat 39
Inns 39
Overs 334.3
Mdns 20
Runs 1912
Wkts 45
BBI 6/65
Ave 42.48
Econ 5.71
SR 44.6
4 7
5 2Henry
Mat 35
Overs 317.0
Mdns 18
Runs 1714
Wkts 70
BBI 5/30
Ave 24.48
Econ 5.40
SR 27.1
4 6
5 2I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.
Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.
Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.
Also his Economy rate is higher.
Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.
-
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
You raise some valid points
According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's
Southee
Mat 39
Inns 39
Overs 334.3
Mdns 20
Runs 1912
Wkts 45
BBI 6/65
Ave 42.48
Econ 5.71
SR 44.6
4 7
5 2Henry
Mat 35
Overs 317.0
Mdns 18
Runs 1714
Wkts 70
BBI 5/30
Ave 24.48
Econ 5.40
SR 27.1
4 6
5 2I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.
Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.
Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.
Also his Economy rate is higher.
Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.
As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
You raise some valid points
According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's
Southee
Mat 39
Inns 39
Overs 334.3
Mdns 20
Runs 1912
Wkts 45
BBI 6/65
Ave 42.48
Econ 5.71
SR 44.6
4 7
5 2Henry
Mat 35
Overs 317.0
Mdns 18
Runs 1714
Wkts 70
BBI 5/30
Ave 24.48
Econ 5.40
SR 27.1
4 6
5 2I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.
Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.
Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.
Also his Economy rate is higher.
Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.
As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?
In defense of Henry over Southee, I think henry is more likely to keep the foot on their throat. If we have a tea,m that is battling I simply dont trust Southee to not bowl a few shite overs and let them get momentum, sometimes his thirst for a wicket is detrimental and he is to clever for his own good.
But overall, Henry is also able to bowl some pies, and he just cannot be trusted to perform in any meaningful way when the opposition is on top, and that matters.... alot.
-
Yeah which is why I tried to give it some context by only including their spells bowling 1 or 2.
The sample is pretty similar - the results are not.
So for me the choice is between Henry bowling at the start of the innings and picking up a couple of cheap wickets while keeping the run rate under control versus Southee who is much more hit and miss. Great to have in the right conditions and will give his all but I don't recall him bowling us out of a hole that often recently.
He is a death bowling option which Henry isn't but he seems to be worse bowling at the top of the innings and I don't think he's that great at the end either.
All I'm saying is Henry is doing the job he has been for at the moment and doing it well so Southee shouldn't just walk back into the side 0- as he would have done four years ago. He remains an option but only that.
Boults the only bowling certainty
-
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
Yeah which is why I tried to give it some context by only including their spells bowling 1 or 2.
The sample is pretty similar - the results are not.
So for me the choice is between Henry bowling at the start of the innings and picking up a couple of cheap wickets while keeping the run rate under control versus Southee who is much more hit and miss. Great to have in the right conditions and will give his all but I don't recall him bowling us out of a hole that often recently.
He is a death bowling option which Henry isn't but he seems to be worse bowling at the top of the innings and I don't think he's that great at the end either.
All I'm saying is Henry is doing the job he has been for at the moment and doing it well so Southee shouldn't just walk back into the side 0- as he would have done four years ago. He remains an option but only that.
Boults the only bowling certainty
Fair enough. I did add a post above ytours which acknowledged a lot of what you said. And you are not wrong in your analysis, it comes down to what you value, and I think if the pitches flatten but you need a bowler with a bit more than what what Henry offers at the top. Southees variations are miles ahead of Henrys.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback Flat and / or slow pitches and I think we are pretty fucked whoever supports Boult unless we have a shed load of runs to defend
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback The warm up game against the WI showed Henry at his worst IIRC. He was chucking pies and they tonked us all over the park. As you say he is a good opening bowler in favourable conditions, but can't bowl on flat tracks with no assistance or at the death
-
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback Flat and / or slow pitches and I think we are pretty fucked whoever supports Boult unless we have a shed load of runs to defend
Ahh but it is degrees of fucked-ness. Southee with his variations and willingness is miles ahead of Henry in that situation.
-
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
You raise some valid points
According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's
Southee
Mat 39
Inns 39
Overs 334.3
Mdns 20
Runs 1912
Wkts 45
BBI 6/65
Ave 42.48
Econ 5.71
SR 44.6
4 7
5 2Henry
Mat 35
Overs 317.0
Mdns 18
Runs 1714
Wkts 70
BBI 5/30
Ave 24.48
Econ 5.40
SR 27.1
4 6
5 2I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.
Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.
Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.
Also his Economy rate is higher.
Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.
As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?
Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"
-
@canefan said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
As you mentioned previous BSG (I think?) Wagner in the squad would be a good point of difference, in the way the Mitch McClenaghan was able to make something happen with pure aggression
Yeah I love Wag, no idea why he hasn't played any ODIs. His List A stats are very good.
-
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@canefan said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
As you mentioned previous BSG (I think?) Wagner in the squad would be a good point of difference, in the way the Mitch McClenaghan was able to make something happen with pure aggression
Yeah I love Wag, no idea why he hasn't played any ODIs. His List A stats are very good.
And his batting isn't that much worse than Henry or Southee
-
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
You raise some valid points
According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's
Southee
Mat 39
Inns 39
Overs 334.3
Mdns 20
Runs 1912
Wkts 45
BBI 6/65
Ave 42.48
Econ 5.71
SR 44.6
4 7
5 2Henry
Mat 35
Overs 317.0
Mdns 18
Runs 1714
Wkts 70
BBI 5/30
Ave 24.48
Econ 5.40
SR 27.1
4 6
5 2I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.
Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.
Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.
Also his Economy rate is higher.
Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.
As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?
Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"
At the death and in hard spots? A lot more than henry.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
You raise some valid points
According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's
Southee
Mat 39
Inns 39
Overs 334.3
Mdns 20
Runs 1912
Wkts 45
BBI 6/65
Ave 42.48
Econ 5.71
SR 44.6
4 7
5 2Henry
Mat 35
Overs 317.0
Mdns 18
Runs 1714
Wkts 70
BBI 5/30
Ave 24.48
Econ 5.40
SR 27.1
4 6
5 2I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.
Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.
Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.
Also his Economy rate is higher.
Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.
As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?
Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"
At the death and in hard spots? A lot more than henry.
Can you give us some specific examples please ? cos from where I'm sitting Henrys stats speak for themselves in comparison, namely getting wickets at nearly twenty runs cheaper each time.
-
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
You raise some valid points
According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's
Southee
Mat 39
Inns 39
Overs 334.3
Mdns 20
Runs 1912
Wkts 45
BBI 6/65
Ave 42.48
Econ 5.71
SR 44.6
4 7
5 2Henry
Mat 35
Overs 317.0
Mdns 18
Runs 1714
Wkts 70
BBI 5/30
Ave 24.48
Econ 5.40
SR 27.1
4 6
5 2I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.
Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.
Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.
Also his Economy rate is higher.
Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.
As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?
Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"
At the death and in hard spots? A lot more than henry.
Can you give us some specific examples please ? cos from where I'm sitting Henrys stats speak for themselves in comparison, namely getting wickets at nearly twenty runs cheaper each time.
I have already addressed the stats argument.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
@dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:
You raise some valid points
According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's
Southee
Mat 39
Inns 39
Overs 334.3
Mdns 20
Runs 1912
Wkts 45
BBI 6/65
Ave 42.48
Econ 5.71
SR 44.6
4 7
5 2Henry
Mat 35
Overs 317.0
Mdns 18
Runs 1714
Wkts 70
BBI 5/30
Ave 24.48
Econ 5.40
SR 27.1
4 6
5 2I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.
Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.
Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.
Also his Economy rate is higher.
Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.
As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?
Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"
At the death and in hard spots? A lot more than henry.
Can you give us some specific examples please ? cos from where I'm sitting Henrys stats speak for themselves in comparison, namely getting wickets at nearly twenty runs cheaper each time.
I have already addressed the stats argument.
That's not what I asked though. Just seems to me you're pumping a guy who's best years are behind him.
