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.
-
@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.
-
@Cyclops said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
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.
If you look at his record he was actually quite good at opening:
Opening and keeping at the same time was terrible for him though. Looking at his record we are actually wasting him down at 5, moving him back to opener and finding another keeper could be a good idea.
Neesham looks like he is playing well enough to bat at five so perhaps we could bring in Blundell to bat six or seven. Can't see this happening though.
-
@LABCAT said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Cyclops said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
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.
If you look at his record he was actually quite good at opening:
Opening and keeping at the same time was terrible for him though. Looking at his record we are actually wasting him down at 5, moving him back to opener and finding another keeper could be a good idea.
Neesham looks like he is playing well enough to bat at five so perhaps we could bring in Blundell to bat six or seven. Can't see this happening though.
Neesh to open. You read it here first
-
If we really think other players were options, why haven’t they been selected to date?
I think our selectors are conservative and whilst the whole not disturbing a winning team might hold some water, given the individual nature of a sport like cricket, you have to look at individual performance and make the hard calls.
-
@LABCAT said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
@Cyclops said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
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.
If you look at his record he was actually quite good at opening:
Opening and keeping at the same time was terrible for him though. Looking at his record we are actually wasting him down at 5, moving him back to opener and finding another keeper could be a good idea.
Neesham looks like he is playing well enough to bat at five so perhaps we could bring in Blundell to bat six or seven. Can't see this happening though.
Both these are viable options. The irony of Latham opening, Neesham to five and Blundell in though would be we'd be attempting to fix our batting by doing everything but selecting the extra batsman in the squad.
-
@rotated said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
@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.
Thanks for refuting something I'd already refuted as my post continued!
No thanks to Southee and no thank you sir to the idea of Santner opening the batting.
-
@Darren said in CWC Game #7 Black Caps v Pakistan:
Drop Monroe, bring in Blundell or Nicholls, open with anyone, will still be better than Monroe.
Something has to change, I cannot understand why they don't when we do have options.
Cos Stead's a moron.
Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
