Cricket: NZ vs Aus
-
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@westcoastie Tim Southee was decent in the first test. Rossco and Kane were bloody brave in that night session on the second day.
Blundell was good in the second test and OK in the first innings here.
Tom Latham's had a couple of decent innings.
But, as a unit we have crumbled badly. In Perth especially and Melbourne, the Aussie pace attack was too hot to handle. But, on this pitch, they have been less of a threat, but we haven't been good enough to make runs.
A lot of the wickets Southee took were when Australia were 50+ overs deep and very well set. Thats not his job. His is to take wickets early. Any number of our players had 10 or 15 over spells when they might've look the goods, but never good enough for long enough.
The one positive is (so long as we don't put it down as a one-off aberration) is that every single deficiency we have has been exposed. -
FFS.
what a capitulation. -
@westcoastie said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
The one positive is (so long as we don't put it down as a one-off aberration) is that every single deficiency we have has been exposed.
Actually, I largely disagree with your last comment. Far too often in our cricket history we've been routed by Australia, come home with our tails between our legs, dropped a bunch of players and replaced them with people who are worse.
So, while the Aussies have exposed our deficiencies when confronted with fairly extreme pace and bounce, I think the selectors should almost totally disregard this series when picking our future teams.
We have some work-ons, but harsh reality is that unless we uncover our own versions of Cummins, Starc et al, we are not going to seriously compete with this Aussie team on Australian pitches.
-
i can't begin to express how disappointed i am by this whole tour. okay, yes, i have expressed exactly that, repeatedly, throughout this thread, but, you know...
At the start i was bullish, we were finally sending a good team to Australia, and we were going to have a real crack at the Aussies, and put them back in their box. It didn't matter what they had just done to Pakistan, because we were the real deal.
And look what happens
As i always say, as a sports fan, it's the expectation that kills you.
-
As opposed to laying fault at our lot..
Full credit to Australia , before the series they looked a good team on paper, and boy did they show it..
There bowling attack is world class ,and that was without Hazelwood for most of the series..
They bowled continuously at the stumps and at pace.
and with you only really need one of your batsman to have a stellar series and that’s how it panned out..
Also full credit to their skipper, Paine ,thought his glove work in the main was excellent and managed his bowlers expertly ..
Sometimes you have just got take it on the chin and admit you have well and truly been beaten by a better team..
Gotta say, really enjoyed the coverage from the Australian commentary team..superb..! -
-
The fact of the matter is, a whole bunch of senior players went seriously MIA on this tour. If not for heroics at certain times, Wagner's bowling, Blundell's century, the odd 50 from lower order players, our humiliation would have been far worse.
You gotta ask - how did we fall so far. Even with a great Aussie bowling lineup (and no question there) our experienced senior batsmen like Ross and Kane were woeful. Unfortunately his captaincy wasn't much better. We all know Kane is a true great, so what the hell happened?
Like others have said, it's the nature of complete capitulation here. Aussie at home were always going to be a hard ask, but we brought wet bus tickets to a gunfight. And that's what hurts most.
-
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
i can't begin to express how disappointed i am by this whole tour. okay, yes, i have expressed exactly that, repeatedly, throughout this thread, but, you know...
At the start i was bullish, we were finally sending a good team to Australia, and we were going to have a real crack at the Aussies, and put them back in their box. It didn't matter what they had just done to Pakistan, because we were the real deal.
And look what happens
As i always say, as a sports fan, it's the expectation that kills you.
It's not the done thing, but post #3 on this thread.
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@Xpat61 I'm too haunted.
I fear we're going to end up wishing we had a couple of 6'6 bowlers who can bowl 145+ kmh.
But, I have to say, we've been much more disappointing than I expected. I thought we'd at least be as competitive as last time we were here, but we weren't close.
The most disastrous tour in more than a decade - back to the days when Dan Vettori was our captain, coach, bus driver and team.
-
@Mokey said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
You gotta ask - how did we fall so far. Even with a great Aussie bowling lineup (and no question there) our experienced senior batsmen like Ross and Kane were woeful. Unfortunately his captaincy wasn't much better. We all know Kane is a true great, so what the hell happened?
Kane? First innings in Perth was facing the pink ball under lights. I thought he and Ross were great against some of the scariest bowling I've seen.
Second innings caught Wade bowled Lyon - I can't recall.
First innings in Melbourne - a wild swipe.
Second innings - fired out by Marais.
I' suspect that first session in Perth got into our heads a bit.
-
I agree with Coney that you need to prepare properly for a tour. I just don't think it would have mattered here. We didn't really become better as the tour went on. Australia were just too good in these conditions. I think we should be disappointed - most of our best batsmen got a few starts but no really big scores from them. Reality is that we needed someone to stand up like Labuschagne did.
-
Well thank God that's over. I reckon a year ago we'd have given them a good shake, but Dave, Steve and now Marnus are too much for us.
In Perth I was proud of our bowling, really stuck at it despite the lack of penetration at the top, and the loss of a bowler early. Sliding doors, but there's a real scenario where we roll them for 300 and the game and series is on. Unfortunately, it just turned to shit and went downhill from there.
Positives:
Neil
CDG bowling
...
... Nah I'm out.Hope the mental damage isn't sustained, we did not show up at all. Stead has to answer some questions... Why throw a debut at Lockie there without playing against England first? Bowling in Melbourne? Ffs.
Anyway it's done, bring on India.
-
@hydro11 man for man they are much better team, the extra pace their bowlers generated had our batsman struggling with the extra bounce as well compared to out bowlers who did not look threatening..Wagner bowled with a ton of heart,but their were lot of deliveries that the batsmen did not have to play at and that was a common theme.
-
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
where he is giving key batsmen out LBW, but ONLY when the ball is just clipping the outside of the stumps.
Which he shouldn't be doing. Those should be not out from the on field call.
The basic tenet being that the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman. Which makes him poor or corrupt. Your decision, as I said.
-
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
I'll tip an Australian win, but a tied series or a Kiwi win wouldn't shock me
we're no chance. I don't think we'll win a game. 2-0 to Australia
Shit, I over-estimated us
-
@Snowy (whispering)...i don't think there's actually any official mention of benefit of the doubt in any binding laws or documents...
I'm led to believe it's a brilliant rule of thumb dreamt up years ago, probably to adequately school all umpires back in the day. Stinks of something W.G. would proclaim.
Sorry snowy. But I did get umpired by Aleem once....didn't trust him all game mate🤔
-
@Snowy said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
where he is giving key batsmen out LBW, but ONLY when the ball is just clipping the outside of the stumps.
Which he shouldn't be doing. Those should be not out from the on field call.
The basic tenet being that the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman. Which makes him poor or corrupt. Your decision, as I said.
I'm not opposed to the benefit of the doubt going to the umpire. As @barbarian said, they weren't great decisions, but they weren't howlers. The 'that mark could have come from anywhere'was a howler.
Jeez, we played so badly this tour
-
Thank fuck its over. Now we need to clear out heads before the Indians arrive. I'm with @Chris-B. We need to figure out how to use this experience to make our batsmen better rather than clearing the decks because for the most part there are our best players.
