• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

Cricket: NZ vs Aus

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
cricket
1.4k Posts 62 Posters 106.2k Views
Cricket: NZ vs Aus
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • boobooB Offline
    boobooB Offline
    booboo
    replied to Donsteppa on last edited by booboo
    #1310

    @Donsteppa said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    The bloke who hailed this as the best Black Caps side to go to Australia should give himself uppercuts for life.

    A much better comparison would be with the 94/95 Black Caps side for meek capitulations and ineffectual bowling.

    What really really shits is that we were, or at least should have been.

    I mean 6 of this XI are either solid first choices for a NZ All Time Test XI or are damn close too it.

    Latham
    Williamson
    Taylor
    Watling
    Southee
    Boult

    (You can throw Wags into that mix now ... we loves Wags)

    Superstars by NZ standards.

    Sure there were weaknesses, a second opener and a proper spinner.

    But the other batsman is in the "very good" tier, and the all rounder is at least adequate.

    Super disappointing to be as badly outclassed as we were.

    It's been years since we've been embarrassed like that. The 45 all out v SA?

    This deserves All Black loss reaction, analysis and vitriol. Does Gary Stead have a race horse we can split on?

    1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • L Offline
    L Offline
    LABCAT
    replied to ACT Crusader on last edited by
    #1311

    @ACT-Crusader said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @mariner4life Macca was our batting coach for five years under Hesson. The man was a coaching genius!

    And he had a test batting average of 38.5. Worthy!

    Worthy if you’re a number 7 or 8...

    Or are from New Zealand:
    http://stats.espncricinfo.com/newzealand/engine/records/batting/highest_career_batting_average.html?class=1;id=5;type=team

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • boobooB Offline
    boobooB Offline
    booboo
    replied to mariner4life on last edited by
    #1312

    @mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @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

    Me too

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • boobooB Offline
    boobooB Offline
    booboo
    replied to Cyclops on last edited by
    #1313

    @Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    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.

    Oh great. India.

    canefanC 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • canefanC Offline
    canefanC Offline
    canefan
    replied to booboo on last edited by
    #1314

    @booboo said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    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.

    Oh great. India.

    At least it's at home. And its unseasonably cold and windy at the moment ❄

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • boobooB Offline
    boobooB Offline
    booboo
    wrote on last edited by
    #1315

    Two thoughts:

    1. 38.4 is an awesome average for NZ batsman.
    2. Erasmus is past his useby
    ACT CrusaderA 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CyclopsC Offline
    CyclopsC Offline
    Cyclops
    wrote on last edited by
    #1316

    This is undoubtedly the best NZ team to have toured Aussie since the 80s, but I think it's shown that bowlers win you games, batsmen decide margins. I'd trade Kane for Paddles in a heartbeat.

    G 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • westcoastieW Offline
    westcoastieW Offline
    westcoastie
    replied to Chris B. on last edited by
    #1317

    @Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @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 didn't say we have to drop a bunch of players - now we know our weaknesses - we need to correct them. Can't handle pace - sort it. Develop some capable spin bowlers. Build our next gen. of pace bowlers. Find a bottle of mental fortitude and drink that stuff!

    Chris B.C 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT CrusaderA Offline
    ACT Crusader
    replied to booboo on last edited by
    #1318

    @booboo said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    Two thoughts:

    1. 38.4 is an awesome average for NZ batsman.

    And that’s part of the problem....

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • G Offline
    G Offline
    Godder
    replied to Cyclops on last edited by
    #1319

    @Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    This is undoubtedly the best NZ team to have toured Aussie since the 80s, but I think it's shown that bowlers win you games, batsmen decide margins. I'd trade Kane for Paddles in a heartbeat.

    Hard to argue with that.

    K 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • DonsteppaD Offline
    DonsteppaD Offline
    Donsteppa
    wrote on last edited by Donsteppa
    #1320

    Even the 93/94 NZ tourists put a top score on the board that was well above 256.

    When you win in Australia your top players front with performances like 188, or 9-52. Our big names this time fronted with nothing.

    Who would have picked Tom Blundell to be our one and only centurion of the series?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • dogmeatD Offline
    dogmeatD Offline
    dogmeat
    wrote on last edited by
    #1321

    @Snowy @barbarian Re DRS the 1/2 ball thing for me is the key. Which makes the "it's there to eliminate the shockers argument" a bit of a sham IMO. The technology isn't perfect so to have it show the ball barely clipping a stump to me should mean the decision is not out.

    This isn't really sour grapes. Our batsmen were shite and the Aussie bowling attack, Cummins in particular, were far too good - but globally umpiring standards are pretty fucking woeful and anything that improves them has to be to the benefit of the game.

    In terms of the series - well we certainly had more than our fair share of bad luck with injuries, illness, lack of preparation etc but that doesn't come even close to excusing a woeful performance. I'm the most disappointed by a NZ side I ever have been and I've been watching 50 years.

    Yes the Aussie attack was intimidating and relentless. Yes we probably could have rolled them 12 months ago, but yes we were bereft of ideas on how to adjust and showed a serious lack of commitment.

    I'm very wary of being a keyboard warrior criticising someone for a lack of fight facing thunderbolts from the safety of my sofa, but I have seen far more limited players over the years stick around for a lot longer simply because they were determined to sell their wicket dearly. This lot seemed to mentally give up way too soon. A bit more of Chatfield's "its the only way he was going to get me out" attitude against Peter Lever would have gone a long way towards making the losses more palatable.

    SnowyS 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • R Offline
    R Offline
    Richie8-7
    replied to canefan on last edited by
    #1322

    @canefan said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12298419

    "The former seamer"??? I know he rolled his arm over but he did a few other things too..."the only NZ captain to win a series in Australia" might be better

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • DonsteppaD Offline
    DonsteppaD Offline
    Donsteppa
    wrote on last edited by Donsteppa
    #1323

    So can we stop pretending this was somehow the best on paper Black Cap side to tour Oz since the 80s?

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/cricket/news/article.cfm?c_id=29&objectid=12298447

    CyclopsC 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • CyclopsC Offline
    CyclopsC Offline
    Cyclops
    replied to Donsteppa on last edited by
    #1324

    @Donsteppa said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    So can we stop pretending this was somehow the best on paper Black Cap side to tour Oz since the 80s?

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/cricket/news/article.cfm?c_id=29&objectid=12298447

    Just because they performed abysmally doesn't change their paper strength.

    Latham, Williamson, Taylor, Watling, Boult and Wagner are all-time black cap test team contenders (or a lock in the case of Kane).

    Southee, Nicholls and de Grandhomme have all proven themselves to be competent test cricketers.

    Raval's lack of form and Santner's lack of threat were the only areas where we had concerns with our squad.

    This was a nightmare tour where things kept going wrong and we never managed to pull up.

    DonsteppaD 1 Reply Last reply
    5
  • PaekakboyzP Offline
    PaekakboyzP Offline
    Paekakboyz
    wrote on last edited by Paekakboyz
    #1325

    I know some of our top 6 have good averages against the top 3-4 teams, but pretty much everyone folded during this series. There is a harsh but kind of fair article by an Indian writer about us being a shadow #2 as we built that off lower tier wins.
    But we can only play what's in front of us so that's a bit of a meh argument. However the point stands that we got to #2 without playing the big 4 (much). Unless we get more tests against Oz, India, Eng and SA we aren't going to be able to build on that body of work. If we'd had some decent warm up games I think we'd have seen at least a 50% improvement on what we delivered (sweet fuck all really), but that Oz attack is going to take any batting top order to task imo - especially at home.

    I actually think I am sadder about this capitulation than our RWC exit. But in both cases you could say we were outclassed, with the difference being we expect the AB's to do that to others!!

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • DonsteppaD Offline
    DonsteppaD Offline
    Donsteppa
    replied to Cyclops on last edited by
    #1326

    @Cyclops I worded it poorly, but I’ll stand by a sentiment that their notional paper strength going into the series makes their capitulation even more abysmal.

    I’m also in the camp of feeling more disappointed in this performance than the RWC for some reason.

    CyclopsC 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.C Offline
    Chris B.
    replied to westcoastie on last edited by
    #1327

    @westcoastie said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @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 didn't say we have to drop a bunch of players - now we know our weaknesses - we need to correct them. Can't handle pace - sort it. Develop some capable spin bowlers. Build our next gen. of pace bowlers. Find a bottle of mental fortitude and drink that stuff!

    Sounds like we need Harry Potter on the job! 🙂

    I think there are probably a few things we could have done better in terms of preparation - playing a couple of warm up games on fast, bouncy pitches, not agreeing to start with a pink ball test in Perth, preparing more lively decks in NZ - though that will disadvantage us at home - but, the improvements we can make to our players are pretty marginal IMO. It's a bit like saying the All Blacks need another Ma'a Nonu or Jerome Kaino - it would be bloody handy, but we can't just whip down to the shop and buy one.

    1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • CyclopsC Offline
    CyclopsC Offline
    Cyclops
    replied to Donsteppa on last edited by
    #1328

    @Donsteppa said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @Cyclops I worded it poorly, but I’ll stand by a sentiment that their notional paper strength going into the series makes their capitulation even more abysmal.

    I’m also in the camp of feeling more disappointed in this performance than the RWC for some reason.

    I agree on both counts there. I can't remember when I was last this gutted by a BC performance. This hurts more than both the CWC finals for me too.

    I don't think I expected us to win the series, but I thought it would be a hard fought 1-1 or 2-1 for Aussie, with a chance for us to win if things go well.

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • SnowyS Offline
    SnowyS Offline
    Snowy
    replied to Siam on last edited by
    #1329

    @Siam said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:

    @Snowy (whispering)...i don't think there's actually any official mention of benefit of the doubt in any binding laws or documents...

    There's not, which is why I called a "tenet":
    "a principle or belief, especially one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy" in this case a sport.

    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.

    Yes. So that it had to clear and obvious that a batsman was out. You are removing a player from the contest, so you really need to be sure, not guessing, that it would hit the stumps for an LBW.

    Sorry snowy. But I did get umpired by Aleem once....didn't trust him all game mate🤔

    Integrity of an umpire doesn't change the flaw in the system, that the guy with the least information gets the final say with "umpires call".

    1 Reply Last reply
    1

Cricket: NZ vs Aus
Sports Talk
cricket
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.