Cricket: NZ vs England
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
I can see why they're digging in. Flailing and being all out for 440 makes no sense given the slowness of the pitch. If they can occupy the crease then the runs will come - still think this is heading for a draw though and the pitch has let down the grand occasion of Bay Oval's first test
Wow... That's a terrible post. This pitch has made a game of it heading into day 5. That's the main goal of a test pitch.
No that's just one of the goals of a test pitch. Not sure what your point is - the pitch lacks pace and bounce, hence why the chosen method of bowling has been dibblies bowling straight and waiting for a mistake. Which makes for dull cricket. It's not a disastrous pitch but it could be better and I'm fairly sure the groundsman will be told that.
You literally said the pitch has ruined the test....
No if that was the case I would have said "the pitch has ruined the test" - that is what literal means. What you're looking for is "implied" I think.
OK I suppose it has bounce but lacks pace - so the bounce is rather gentle. Santner was fending them off as he appears to have no technique to play the short ball.
What the test has showed is that England appears to be very poor at having a plan to take wickets and sticking to it. They let the test drift on and 2 middle to lower order players bat for a very long time.
Well we are getting somewhere I guess... Now you are just complaining about a supposed lack of pace letting down the test. Which is still nonsense .
So is it the pitch or bowlers fault that the 2 batsmen batted a long time? Personally I think it was good batting and sub-par bowling.
And the pitch has already had good feedback from both camps.
Why are you so defensive about the pitch - it is slow, full stop, nothing supposed about it. It has contributed to some anaemic cricket at times. Similar to a pitch on the sub-continent, although with not so much turn. It was striking how ineffective Leach looked though when there was some turn there for Santner.
Because your over the top criticism of the pitch was stupid, and you have been walking it back ever since . A pitch supposedly being a little slow has not let down the test. All results are on the table. Bowlers have had to work for wickets and batsmen have had to work for runs. Why are you being so negative and churlish about the pitch?
Actually your interpretation of my criticism of the pitch was that it was over the top - I've got nothing to walk back whereas you keep saying the pitch is "supposedly" slow where it is in fact slow as many pundits have stated. But we can keep going if you still want to argue that the pitch isn't slow ....
-
More stats. If Santner gets two more wickets he'll be the first NZ spinner to get a home 5fer since Jeetan Patel in 2008. (Keeshav Maharaj x2, Danish Kaneria, Harbajan Singh and Sunil Narine have also done it since then). Vettori is the only other kiwi to have done it this millenium.
-
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@KiwiPie said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
I can see why they're digging in. Flailing and being all out for 440 makes no sense given the slowness of the pitch. If they can occupy the crease then the runs will come - still think this is heading for a draw though and the pitch has let down the grand occasion of Bay Oval's first test
Wow... That's a terrible post. This pitch has made a game of it heading into day 5. That's the main goal of a test pitch.
No that's just one of the goals of a test pitch. Not sure what your point is - the pitch lacks pace and bounce, hence why the chosen method of bowling has been dibblies bowling straight and waiting for a mistake. Which makes for dull cricket. It's not a disastrous pitch but it could be better and I'm fairly sure the groundsman will be told that.
You literally said the pitch has ruined the test....
No if that was the case I would have said "the pitch has ruined the test" - that is what literal means. What you're looking for is "implied" I think.
OK I suppose it has bounce but lacks pace - so the bounce is rather gentle. Santner was fending them off as he appears to have no technique to play the short ball.
What the test has showed is that England appears to be very poor at having a plan to take wickets and sticking to it. They let the test drift on and 2 middle to lower order players bat for a very long time.
Well we are getting somewhere I guess... Now you are just complaining about a supposed lack of pace letting down the test. Which is still nonsense .
So is it the pitch or bowlers fault that the 2 batsmen batted a long time? Personally I think it was good batting and sub-par bowling.
And the pitch has already had good feedback from both camps.
Why are you so defensive about the pitch - it is slow, full stop, nothing supposed about it. It has contributed to some anaemic cricket at times. Similar to a pitch on the sub-continent, although with not so much turn. It was striking how ineffective Leach looked though when there was some turn there for Santner.
Because your over the top criticism of the pitch was stupid, and you have been walking it back ever since . A pitch supposedly being a little slow has not let down the test. All results are on the table. Bowlers have had to work for wickets and batsmen have had to work for runs. Why are you being so negative and churlish about the pitch?
Actually your interpretation of my criticism of the pitch was that it was over the top - I've got nothing to walk back whereas you keep saying the pitch is "supposedly" slow where it is in fact slow as many pundits have stated. But we can keep going if you still want to argue that the pitch isn't slow ....
No I am more interested in your nonsense that the pitch has let down the occasion and reduced the bowlers to bowling dibbly dobblies.
As for pundits... So what? I disagree it is slow, so does the groundsman and at least one of the bowlers. NZC is also very happy with the pitch -
-
@Hooroo Google says 6 foot
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Hooroo Google says 6 foot
Cheers, I Wiki'd and it had nothing.
He 'appears' taller than that on TV.
-
@Hooroo said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Hooroo Google says 6 foot
Cheers, I Wiki'd and it had nothing.
He 'appears' taller than that on TV.
Yeah he does. Something else weird about him, the better he is batting the more he looks like a golfer playing cricket.
-
-
@Bovidae normal inches? Or Ardie Savea inches?
Sat Nav and park cricket Colin. Contining in the long line of bits and pieces NZ cricket heroes.
-
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Bovidae normal inches? Or Ardie Savea inches?
Sat Nav and park cricket Colin. Contining in the long line of bits and pieces NZ cricket heroes.
Bits and pieces? He has a batting average close 40 and a bowling average of 30. Better than Stokes in both categories.
-
@mariner4life Just an eye test. Ardie inches requires a certain haircut as a measurement unit.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Bovidae normal inches? Or Ardie Savea inches?
Sat Nav and park cricket Colin. Contining in the long line of bits and pieces NZ cricket heroes.
Bits and pieces? He has a batting average close 40 and a bowling average of 30. Better than Stokes in both categories.
stats shmats. Park. Cricketer.
-
Been reading some commentary about Joe Root and how the captaincy is dragging him down brought up a fun question about best batsmen to never captain a side.
For NZ who would our best batsman who never captained the team be? Captain is defined as being the captain at the toss. So guys who only captained a couple of games when the regular captain was injured are counted.
I'm struggling to come up with names for the list. In recent times the only guys that come to mind are Astle and Richardson. Styris if we're counting ODIs.
Some of the older names might get in though. I don't think Donnelly, Dempster, Sutcliffe or Turner ever captained a test.
-
-
@Hooroo said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@canefan said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
Andrew Jones
Nice!
What about John Wright? Did he ever captain the team?
You could comb the players who batted at 3 and 4 but never captained
