Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020
-
@Rapido said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
Here we go:
The last decade, in nz, bowling 2nd change or lower.
But we hardly ever pick 4 genuine quicks, so not really a fair comparison.
-
@hydro11 said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@Rapido said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
Here we go:
The last decade, in nz, bowling 2nd change or lower.
But we hardly ever pick 4 genuine quicks, so not really a fair comparison.
Hardly surprising
-
What was Glenn Phillips bowling the other day that snared him 3-40 in the Ford Trophy final? There's not an opening for him at the moment, and he'd have to be selected as a batsman rather than a keeper-batsman of course, but at some stage his bowling could be of use in all formats.
-
@shark said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
What was Glenn Phillips bowling the other day that snared him 3-40 in the Ford Trophy final? There's not an opening for him at the moment, and he'd have to be selected as a batsman rather than a keeper-batsman of course, but at some stage his bowling could be of use in all formats.
He was bowling little offies
-
@nzzp said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@Rapido did you see the strike rate for Kane? It was decent - 46 balls or so. Everyone wants to see him chuck a few more down (emphasis on the chuck at times regrettably :))
Kane was a great 5th bowling option back when ICC weren't clamping down on chuckers. He's still pretty good when he concentrates on keeping a straight arm. But his bowling stats are flattered by the chucking days.
I'd be happy to play an extra batsman and have Kane bowl if he was fit and confident enough though. But he isn't. If Kane didn't have a shoulder injury .... do you notice him anytime he has to dive in the field?
-
@hydro11 said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@Rapido said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
Here we go:
The last decade, in nz, bowling 2nd change or lower.
But we hardly ever pick 4 genuine quicks, so not really a fair comparison.
They're just the facts, ma'am.
Albeit limited by the criteria that it only records their bowling position of their first spell, but it;s the best we have.You can sort them, filter them, however you like.
Excluding the freak that is Wagner.
Specialist seam bowlers (Tuffey, Bracewell, Southee, CdG, Henry, Arnel, Boult, Franklin, Gillespie) have averaged 69.00 when bowling second change or lower (compared to their collective career average of 37.18).If include the batting allrounder/competent seamers (Anderson, Neesham, Mitchell) in the non-Wagner list. It improves to averaging 51.88
If add Wagner in, it single-handedly becomes excellent: Averaving 26.28
In comparison. Specialist spin bowlers have averaged 46.41. (Specialists plus Kane average 45.08)
If we can find a second Wagner: Then yes, that would be better than a spinner.
A decade of historical stats suggests finding a second Wagner is pretty hard, and a failed second Wagner is actually 50% worse than a spinner. (69 v 46).
Facts.
-
-
@Chris-B said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@Rapido The tactics are very clear.
Boult and Southee open the bowling.
Jamieson first change.
Wagner second change.Under no circumstances does Wags bowl before Jamieson - even if Kyle just bowls one over.
Not bad, But where does CdG fit in?
Is he 3rd change? Would he average less than 45 (the historical average for a spinner last decade in NZ) no longer getting the newish ball to nibble around as first change?
I don't know, but there a tradeoffs.
Or would one of Southee or Boult no longer get that second spell before lunch with a 20 over-old ball? Instead that space is given to CdG and Jamieson?
I'm sure professional coaches have data-scraping programmes working out what is most effective in overs 40-70 when the ball has gotten old and not yet reversing, and selecting a bowling balance to cater for that.
-
@Rapido Hopefully, the stats show we've bowled them out without having to resort to a fifth bowler - since it's apparently largely a waste of time. Otherwise I guess he's the famous "holding seamer".
Notable point from your stats above is that if we go in with CdG and Ajaz - with Wags most likely first change - we're expecting 1/153.
Alternatively, maybe one of the opening bowlers fakes an injury and CdG comes on to finish their over in a sort of Platform 9 3/4ths move?
-
@Chris-B said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@Rapido Hopefully, the stats show we've bowled them out without having to resort to a fifth bowler - since it's apparently largely a waste of time. Otherwise I guess he's the famous "holding seamer".
Notable point from your stats above is that if we go in with CdG and Ajaz - with Wags most likely first change - we're expecting 1/153.
Alternatively, maybe one of the opening bowlers fakes an injury and CdG comes on to finish their over in a sort of Platform 9 3/4ths move?
I don't get the bolded bit.
CdG has bowled 1st change (or opened) in 37 of his 41 innings. Why would he bowl 2nd change or lower with Wagner re-elevated above him? If Ajaz is selected.
-
-
@Chris-B said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@Rapido Has he (Colin)? That surprises me!
Yes, He's pushed poor old Wags to be a totally old ball specialist. As it is judged the best use of collective resources:
- CdG nibbles the ball around, when its newish.
- Wagner bowls Wagnerball with an old ball.
Although Wagner would be perfectly capable of bowling 1st change, as he did for the first half of his test career before CdG. His value to the team is immeasurable.
Here is all seamers from all countries in any venue, in same timeframe, bowling second change or lower:
All 4th seamers in 2010s: -
@Rapido said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@hydro11 said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@Rapido said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
Here we go:
The last decade, in nz, bowling 2nd change or lower.
But we hardly ever pick 4 genuine quicks, so not really a fair comparison.
They're just the facts, ma'am.
Albeit limited by the criteria that it only records their bowling position of their first spell, but it;s the best we have.You can sort them, filter them, however you like.
Excluding the freak that is Wagner.
Specialist seam bowlers (Tuffey, Bracewell, Southee, CdG, Henry, Arnel, Boult, Franklin, Gillespie) have averaged 69.00 when bowling second change or lower (compared to their collective career average of 37.18).If include the batting allrounder/competent seamers (Anderson, Neesham, Mitchell) in the non-Wagner list. It improves to averaging 51.88
If add Wagner in, it single-handedly becomes excellent: Averaving 26.28
In comparison. Specialist spin bowlers have averaged 46.41. (Specialists plus Kane average 45.08)
If we can find a second Wagner: Then yes, that would be better than a spinner.
A decade of historical stats suggests finding a second Wagner is pretty hard, and a failed second Wagner is actually 50% worse than a spinner. (69 v 46).
Facts.
It's a really low sample size though. Take Tuffey's two games - one was a test against Bangladesh where we actually played two spinners and another was a test against Aussie where our collective bowling average was over 100. Or Bracewell/Southee versus South Africa where they actually swapped around the bowling order between innings but both were still in the attack early.
A much smarter analysis would be to look at a bowler's average in overs 40-80 and see what they are. I don't know how to do that.
One simple thing I can do is look at the preceding decade where NZ quicks other than Wagner averaged 35 in New Zealand conditions bowling 2nd change or lower. So if we didn't have Wagner, it's not unlikely that we would pick someone else there and they would offer more than a spinner.
The debate should be around the specific player you want to play instead of your spinner. For instance, is Jamieson likely to do well there? Is he going to get bounce out of the pitch? Making the call based on a stat like that wouldn't make any sense to me.
-
@hydro11 said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
The debate should be around the specific player you want to play instead of your spinner. For instance, is Jamieson likely to do well there? Is he going to get bounce out of the pitch? Making the call based on a stat like that wouldn't make any sense to me.
I'm all good with an attack that looks like Boult-Southee, followed by Kyle (bounce) and Wags (Wagmagic). If you do that, you can play CdG if you need to, or just pick 6 good batsmen. All those bowlers do a bit different things - two left, two right, two swing, one bounce, one Wagner.
Batters then look like Nicholls, Latham, SteadyTheShip, Blundell, Taylor, choose one of CdG or Mitchell, Watling and then 4 bowlers.
-
@nzzp said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@hydro11 said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
The debate should be around the specific player you want to play instead of your spinner. For instance, is Jamieson likely to do well there? Is he going to get bounce out of the pitch? Making the call based on a stat like that wouldn't make any sense to me.
I'm all good with an attack that looks like Boult-Southee, followed by Kyle (bounce) and Wags (Wagmagic). If you do that, you can play CdG if you need to, or just pick 6 good batsmen. All those bowlers do a bit different things - two left, two right, two swing, one bounce, one Wagner.
Batters then look like Nicholls, Latham, SteadyTheShip, Blundell, Taylor, choose one of CdG or Mitchell, Watling and then 4 bowlers.
Jamieson has the potential to give us something we've not had for some time, a tall guy who is reasonably fast and gets a lot of bounce off the track. That makes him a possible strike bowler along with the others, as opposed to a simple holding option. And Colin has a sneaky knack of getting wickets so it's a strong team
-
-
-
@booboo said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
@dogmeat said in Indian Cricket Tour of NZ 2020:
to quote @booboo - we luvz Wags
Loves
Absolutely loves Wags
Loves
Liked and quoted for maximum effect
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
