CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan
-
I've been up since 5 so have seen the last ten overs or so. When i wemt to bed we had just lost Latham so to wake up to a score of 238 and someone other than Williamson getting close to a ton was a pleasant surprise. Pakistan were 120-3, so i was optimistic. But in eyeballing the game situation as things have unfolded since, a few things have come into acute focus.
The main thing is selection. Blind Freddie can see Munro is a bag of arse holes in this format, and has to go. Today he's contributed significantly to an irrecoverably poor start. Latham is also terribly out of form. Today was made for him but he failed. Another 20-30 runs from the top five and this chase could still look dramatically different. That's not a lot to ask. Guptill has class so will come right, plus they can't all be replaced anyway. Even replacing Latham and Munro is problematic as we only have one spare batsman. More on that later.
We've badly mid-read the pitch today. I think setting a total was an ok call but we desperately needed an attacking spinner. Sodhi should have played, probably for Henry. We may not strike a pitch like this again but i hope if we do that Stead and Kane can be more flexible with selection.
So Australia next. Sodhi for Henry if we get another pitch of this ilk but otherwise it's just the batting which needs a rejig. Blundell and Nicholls should come in but this does shorten the order a tad as Blundell is a keeper who can bat as opposed to a batsman who keeps wicket like Latham. We could try him at the top in the dasher role but that's a lot of pressure especially under the conditions in which we'll face the form side in the tournament. But Blundell at five makes the order look a little light. I'm thinking Nicholls for Munro and Blundell to six with Neesham promoted especially given he now has form.
-
Actually when i think about it, there's another option, assuming we don't need the second spinner. We could retain Latham at 5 as a batsman only and bring Blundell in as well at 7 between Neesham and CDG. Then Santner (or Sodhi as the need for the spinning 'all-rounder' diminishes with the lengthened batting), Ferguson and Boult. This does limit the bowling options though as Neesham and CDG would need to bowl 20 or close to it as the only other option would be Kane.
-
Terrible captaincy from Kane. Why bowl himself for so many overs and give a part timer in Munro a bowl instead of utilising his front line bowlers? That period of play released the pressure that we had built and gave the Pakis the momentum they needed. If he has so little faith in Henry, why pick him in the first place? Munro and Henry have to go, they offer nothing. Bring in Nicholls and Ish.
-
@akan004 said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
Terrible captaincy from Kane. Why bowl himself for so many overs and give a part timer in Munro a bowl instead of utilising his front line bowlers? That period of play released the pressure that we had built and gave the Pakis the momentum they needed. If he has so little faith in Henry, why pick him in the first place? Munro and Henry have to go, they offer nothing. Bring in Nicholls and Ish.
Agree with the assertion around Kane bowling himself too long and the Munro over. There was a three over period there where two Williamson overs sandwiched the Munro over and the pressure came right off. Those three must have cost 25 or so. Can't blame Henry for that though. He hadn't bowled badly, but Santner and Boult needed to come back in around the time the target dropped below 100.
-
-
The only possible excuse for batting first and then the bowling variations is that we didn't care about the result and wanted a practice run at batting first in unfavourable conditions and to give every bowling option a go. Yeah nah
There is no possible excuse for picking Munro
I had a midnight teleconference - I expected to have one ear on the phone call while engrossed in the cricket. Instead I contributed to the call with one eye (frequently raised to the heavens) on the cricket
-
It's the business end of the tournament now. We CANNOT afford scorecards where our openers do jack shit, and then a few others have an off day. Neesh and CdG plus Kane dragged us to near respectability, but four top order batsmen scoring 21 between them is disgraceful.
We need to make good totals. Our bowling attack is so fucking hot and cold, they can't be relied on to bowl the other side out, or clamp down and make them sweat. Not when we offer the pressure release with pie overs and dropped catches.
Farrrrk it's frustrating. -
Pakistan starting to resemble their 1992 CWC run which means I'll nearly get hit by an ul Haq six in the semi-finals.
No need to panic (unless you're England then start panicking) but our only batting moves are either move Latham to the opening spot and give the gloves to Blundell who bats at six, or just a straight swap of Nicholls for Munro and Blundell for Latham.
Only thing we can all agree on is Munro must go.
-
@Sneakdefreak said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
Pakistan starting to resemble their 1992 CWC run which means I'll nearly get hit by an ul Haq six in the semi-finals.
No need to panic (unless you're England then start panicking) but our only batting moves are either move Latham to the opening spot and give the gloves to Blundell who bats at six, or just a straight swap of Nicholls for Munro and Blundell for Latham.
Only thing we can all agree on is Munro must go.
The ACC post a graphic that shows Pakistan are trending the exact same way in terms of win/loss/abandoned as when they won in 1992 (Game for game in order too)
-
@Sneakdefreak said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
Only thing we can all agree on is Munro must go.
I think they may keep him. They're gambling on him going nuts on a tear - that's still a gamble. He may smoke a 40 ball ton in the semi, and then win us the final ... it's just really really unlikely
He's a wildcard who might just fire and win us a critical game. We're not going to win the WC playing conservative -- so the risk/reward may mean he's kept.
But yeah, seems a bit weird really doesn't i
-
Well shit. Back down to earth we go.
The positives:
Neesh and CdG digging us out of that hole was an incredible effort in tough conditions. Those two are both extremely dangerous players that now have some form. If we can just give them a base to work off then we are a threat to any side.Now I'm all out of positives...
The negatives:
-
We continue to persevere with Munro who, well before this CWC started, was proven to be not good enough at this level. To the point that we straight out dropped him for Nicholls who not only had some initial success, but has proven himself at the top level already. Craziness.
-
Pakistan seemed well aware of the spin on offer, to the point they opened with a spinner in overcast conditions. Why weren't we? Sodhi would have had a field day turning it square on that pitch. Very poor selections and very costly in the end.
-
Batting first was an insane decision. Not only were Pakistan able to exploit the spin, it also allowed them to maximize the seam movement on a damp pitch. And given their key strength is their bowling, coupled with the fact that our openers are badly out of form, I simply cannot understand why we would just hand them that advantage to begin with. If we roll them for 200 - 250 then I firmly believe we could have paced our innings and knocked it off with a few overs to spare - Kane and Ross are real weapons in that regard, with Neesh and CdG able to up the ante if required.
Overall a very frustrating result. A guaranteed semi final berth was up for grabs and we really just threw it away with poor tactics and selections. That said, Pakistan did bowl well and look to have paced their chase to perfection, so credit to them for that.
-
-
@No-Quarter said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
.....Took the words right out of my mouth.
That game was more or less lost as we walked out to bat. Monroe... how long will they persist. Latham is horribly out of form as well. -
@shark said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
We could try him at the top in the dasher role
That horse has bolted, and having seen how most of the pitches have played this tournament wickets in hand looks to be a more viable strategy than trying to get the hot start.
Tactically the batting line up picks itself from the middle out. It's all about putting Kane and Taylor in the best position possible to play a match winning knock and for me that means putting as much legitimate quality batting behind those two in the order as possible to ease the pressure on that partnership and whoever is left patting with the lower order. There are a couple of ways to do that...
Latham to open and Nicholls at 5 seems like the most natural solution.
I would be more out of the box and take a similar approach to 2003 where one of the opening slots was a tire fire and Flem punted it completely and put Vettori and then McMillan there. Put the spinning all-rounder in there to open with Guppy, then have a deep tail of Nicholls, Latham, Neesham, CdG behind Taylor/Williamson. Pick your poison. If they set 280/6 and fall 30 short of par and get beaten so be it... that is preferable to yet another CWC knock-out game where the top order fails and the middle order has to perform triage through to a undefendable total.
Henry out, Southee in - although not much conviction. He is an opening bowler and Williamson had no faith in him today, and who can blame him after the Windies game.
-
Latham has been tried as an opener and has failed. And not just failed, but ruined his form in other roles. He's well-suited to batting in the middle order, lack of form not withstanding (and moving up to open won't help that). I think it's Nicholls or Munro.
