Cricket: NZ vs Aus
-
@Mokey said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Blundell scored half our runs. Nicholls, Watling, and Santner another 82. Remaining six scored 27 runs between them. Unacceptable.
Blundell was the top scorer in the match and we lost by 247 runs...
-
@No-Quarter And that was with a sporting 2nd innings declaration...
-
How do we turn it around for last test?
Number one is getting top 6 to bat time. Thought the Aussie paceman didn’t look so threatening when they had bowled a few overs.
Problem was then Lyon came into it and he is fantastic. Really adds a balance to their side that makes us look like the poor country cousins. So question is Astle the answer? Too late to introduce Ajaz and Sommerville you would think and selectors will want to see their backup option given a go. Hope he can do a Blundell.
Do they get to provide feedback on the Umpires? They were average at best. But changing Umpires call would make that right. Simple thing that would improve the game immensely.
-
@Mokey said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Surely must retain his spot in Sydney, too.
Without a doubt.
He’ll have an extended run there now.I’m not putting a line through Raval’s name just yet though, he was extremely consistent before he hit this bad run of form. If he finds his form again for Auckland I’m sure he’ll still be in the mix.
-
-
Well this is not going to plan at all!
I’ve been ensconced in enemy territory since the last Boxing Day Test and have to say we have been very bloody average!
To beat Oz in Oz you need to have a couple of players at the top of their game! Can’t knock Wagner but can’t find anyone else who has played to their true potential so we’re getting our asses kicked....
Congratulations to Blundell on his well deserved ton but who decided his nude balls were the ultimate attacking weapon after lunch yesterday?
Weird shit ????
So no one gives The Craps a snowflakes chance in hell in the Sydney Test?
Time to double down and put the house on them because we all know they’ll get smashed 🤓 -
-
@Donsteppa said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Does anyone know enough about Kyle Jamieson to say whether he's a realistic option to replace Boult at this stage, rather than Henry taking that spot?
Otherwise Astle in for Santner.
He's very tall but doesn't have much pace about him. I would pick Henry over him (as poor as Henry's test record is).
-
Watching the capitulation, I wonder if Jordie actually arranged to be kicked out of the MCG.
-
@antipodean said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Watching the capitulation, I wonder if Jordie actually arranged to be kicked out of the MCG.
Good to see some folk pushing back on his exit, pretty crap that its described as police evicting 2 New Zealanders for bad behaviour. It's complete BS, on boxing day I saw at least 10 guys removed for crimes ranging from sculling a beer, to making a cup snake, to standing near someone sculling a beer to being seated in the general vicinity of someone making a cup snake. Other mates at the ground in other areas saw the same thing, would have been hundreds removed. Officers and security were clearly given a mandate to remove young blokes.
-
Well, that was really crap once again.
As has been mentioned, the key difference between the sides is the bowling. Not that ours have been bad, but I think every batting lineup in the world (including theirs) would struggle against their quicks backed up by the very consistent Lyon in those conditions. We just haven't been able to survive the new ball so by the time their big boys start to tire, the damage has been well and truly done.
Losing Ferg to injury has turned out to be a real blow for us. We really needed that point of difference against a very disciplined Aus batting lineup. They've been batting uncharacteristically slow, grinding our bowlers down and not giving us anything. Wags short stuff has been effective because it's something different to medium pace swing bowling, and I think Ferg (once his nerves settled) could have made life a lot tougher for them.
Santner should have been dropped for Astle or Henry. He's not good enough at either discipline in tests so is really a waste of a spot. His bowling really let the pressure off Aus in this test, going at 5s without looking threatening was unforgivable. Just don't think his game is suited to test match cricket.
Anyway, the positives:
- Wagner as always. Such a consistent performer, he's the perfect third seamer in that he offers a point of difference, but can also bowl long spells when the going gets tough.
- Blundell. Apparently Bryan Young made the team in similar circumstances - had given up the gloves and was slotted into the opening position out of desperation against Aus. Would be great if Blundell can fill that opening slot for us - albeit with a much higher average than Young ended up with! He looked good in the first innings and was absolutely superb in the second. Can handle the pace and bounce easily, so there's no reason he can't make the position his own. Before the 2nd test I said I was far from convinced he would fare any better - boy did he prove me wrong, the find of the tour by miles.
- Warner is still yet to crack a 50 this tour.
That's it though. Two shining lights in one of the darkest tours in recent memory.
The negatives - far too many to list, but the ones that stand out:
- Kane's form was a little patchy leading into this series, and he's been somewhat found out by the Aus quicks. They've worked him over and he's ended up playing some really poor shots to get out - shows mentally he's not there. If we wanted to have a chance this series we needed him to score big.
- After Ross made 80 in the first test in some of the toughest conditions you'll see, he's not fired a single shot. Again we needed so much more from him, our two gun batsmen have not been able to handle the Aussie quicks this series.
- Boult and Southee were good but didn't get the early wickets we needed. If they don't get the early breakthroughs with the new ball it becomes fairly easy to bat time against a medium pace attack with an older ball. It's amazing Wags got so many wickets in those circumstances.
- And finally, BOWLING FIRST! WTF! That was the single stupidest decision at the toss I've ever seen. At 1-0 down I was hoping, praying that we'd win the toss to give us a sporting chance. Aus must have fallen off their bloody chairs when they saw us choose to bowl. What the hell were we thinking?
On that last point, let's run through a quick hypothetical to try and illustrate how bad that decision was:
Let's say we manage to knock Aus over for 250. We'd all be stoked with that and people would say the decision to bowl was justified. Then we come out to bat and really apply ourselves, getting to 400. Again we'd all be over the moon and think we are dominating this test. Aus then come out to bat again and dig in, grinding themselves through to 350 which again we'd have to be happy with.
But hang on, they've now set us 200 to win on a day 5 pitch against the best bowling lineup in the world. That would be absolutely massive pressure on our batsmen, trying to handle their quicks steaming in on a dodgy wicket. BATTING LAST IS ALWAYS BY FAR THE HARDEST THING TO DO! There's a reason the highest ever test chases makes for such dismal reading, it's damn near impossible.
Bowling first 100% played into their strengths because it meant at the business end of the test they'd have their worlds best bowlers winning it for them, not their batsmen under pressure. It was such an incredibly short-sighted decision and smacked of us running scared, wanting to delay having to face their quicks as long as possible. Not to mention the fact that it's harder coming out to bat when you're 400+ runs behind and their bowlers have plenty of runs to play with.
I think choosing to bowl first was the most disappointing part of the whole series. It was so defeatist and it was really hard to see us getting anything more than a draw out of the match from there.
So anyway on to Sydney and we really have nothing to lose. I'd like to see us play some aggressive cricket and restore a little bit of pride, even if it is a dead rubber. Picking a spinner that actually spins it would also be a step in the right direction.
-
@Rembrandt I guess the Boxing day test will go the same way as the Welly sevens. No fun allowed.
"He had half a beer … and the boys said/chanted 'skull'. Jordie was seated down and finished his half vessel of mid-strength, over-priced 'Great Northern' and a security guard walked over and requested he leave.
It would be good if the press stopped calling it the police that did it. Security guards are like immigration officials, some people just shouldn't be given a uniform and get all overcome with their authority.
My wife will now feel justified to evict me every time I mow the lawns on a hot day.
-
@Snowy Yeah it was pretty gross what was going on. To be fair I was no fan of the crazyness of the early 2000's in NZ when going to a match would guarantee you'd be drenched in beer from piston wristed gibbons who Mexican wave with full cups. This though was a massive over-reaction. Had a women cop taking names of a whole row of guys while a bloke cop was trying to force a reaction by being massive jerk booting guys literally sitting their quietly watching the cricket and when they questioned why it was all 'Because I said so'. I went to the bathroom after the first load of guys were evicted and there was a 8 person security/police huddle near the entrance discussing who they wanted to turf next. I know I'll not go back there for the cricket, just a massive display of authoritarian wankery left with a bitter taste and not just due to the Black caps performance or that expensive shitty brown water that the MCG calls 'beer'.
-
@Rembrandt said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Had a women cop taking names of a whole row of guys while a bloke cop was trying to force a reaction by being massive jerk booting guys literally sitting their quietly watching the cricket and when they questioned why it was all 'Because I said so'.
Just to clarify, "cops" being police, or security guards? Enormous difference in the vetting process for who these people are and how they behave.
-
@Rembrandt said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@Snowy Yeah it was pretty gross what was going on. To be fair I was no fan of the crazyness of the early 2000's in NZ when going to a match would guarantee you'd be drenched in beer from piston wristed gibbons who Mexican wave with full cups. This though was a massive over-reaction. Had a women cop taking names of a whole row of guys while a bloke cop was trying to force a reaction by being massive jerk booting guys literally sitting their quietly watching the cricket and when they questioned why it was all 'Because I said so'. I went to the bathroom after the first load of guys were evicted and there was a 8 person security/police huddle near the entrance discussing who they wanted to turf next. I know I'll not go back there for the cricket, just a massive display of authoritarian wankery left with a bitter taste and not just due to the Black caps performance or that expensive shitty brown water that the MCG calls 'beer'.
Yeah the security guards are all part of a big left wing conspiracy.
Pretty easy not to get kicked out. Drink normally, don't dump a bunch of plastic cups over everyone around you and enjoy the cricket.
Maybe the security where I was was a bit more lenient than where you were, but everyone I saw get kicked out was clearly there for a piss up and not that interested in the cricket (except the guy who got booted for player abuse, where the Aussies definitely had a lot more protection than the kiwis. Tom Blundell was copping it from the crowd all day two, so glad he got a ton in the end.)
-
@Snowy said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@Rembrandt said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Had a women cop taking names of a whole row of guys while a bloke cop was trying to force a reaction by being massive jerk booting guys literally sitting their quietly watching the cricket and when they questioned why it was all 'Because I said so'.
Just to clarify, "cops" being police, or security guards? Enormous difference in the vetting process for who these people are and how they behave.
Those two were cops, a 3rd cop who came in and out of it seemed to be liaising with security and seemed to be more in charge. He initially told the guys that if they put all the cups in the bin then they could stay. The guys did as he asked, he then came back and said 'nope security says you all have to go'. Seems like it is security calling the shots. The kids obeyed. I would have hated to see this with some of my mates of yesteryear, would be a couple in the cells for resisting arrest for sure.
-
@Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@Rembrandt said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Maybe the security where I was was a bit more lenient than where you were, but everyone I saw get kicked out was clearly there for a piss up and not that interested in the cricket (except the guy who got booted for player abuse, where the Aussies definitely had a lot more protection than the kiwis. Tom Blundell was copping it from the crowd all day two, so glad he got a ton in the end.)
That's entirely possible, I can only 100% vouch for the row of guys in front of me, unless there was some mischief in the bathrooms that I didn't see. My cousin had a similar story regarding blokes being kicked for a snake, an older gentleman saw them get booted so stood up with 2 cups held them apart and put them together while the crowd cheered him on. He did that about 3 or 4 times before he got the boot too to the crowds applause.
Not sure how they do the seating there or if its been tried before but maybe there should be some sort of party area where security is a bit more lax and people know what they are going into. Definitely understand no one wants their kids around any potential larikinism.
-
@Rembrandt said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
some sort of party area where security is a bit more lax and people know what they are going into
Hong Kong sevens south stand. Works well, go in there at your peril.
