CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand
-
When both openers go for 13 you know things aren’t going to go right.
Ah well, semis yet again, pretty damn respectable.
Everyone has had a go at the bowlers but is it time to have a rethink about Tom Latham in the shorter form of the game ? His form fell off a cliff.
-
Lots of talk of criticism of our bowlers, but I think if you take scoreboard pressure out of it we would have got 350-370.
Given all the advantages India had, that’s not far off so perhaps this criticism is slightly unfair. Indian bowling line up is pretty awesome.
-
-
The bowling performance was a repeat of the South African,Pakistani and Australia games resulting in the same results.
Time to move on and development a new breed of bowlers to support what is a very good batting group, the strongest man for man we have had in a long while our top 4 are all big performers and our middle to lower order do a good job.35 year old one trick ponies are not going to help us compete against the top sides our batting can.
-
@dogmeat said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@ACT-Crusader said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Damo said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Canes4life said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
Going to be a very long innings me thinks.
We've set 400 so we can chase it. No issues there.
The issue will be whether we can chase the 430 that we will need.
I don’t think we can chase 400 against this Indian bowling lineup. 350 possibly but even then.
Other than Mitchell and Kane I worry about our guys against Bumrah and the spin
Remarkably prescient apart from which Indian would shatter our hopes.
Yeah Shami was on fire.
Bumrah and Siraj put us under pressure early by getting the ball to move and Shami did his thing.
Mitchell played very well. Got a bit of luck but he was aggressive. Kane got set and then started to play his shots. He was very disappointed with his dismissal because even though he didn’t middle it, he got a decent shot on it.
-
@NTA said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@MajorRage said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
Given all the advantages India had
Does this account belong to Stuff?
-
-
@Rapido said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
Who gives a sh!t about the pitch. C'mon. It's an ODI. It's a pitch full of runs that is easy to bat on. Broadly like every other ODI pitch for the last 30 years.
Kind of agree?
The issue seems to be that the BCCI rather than the ICC selected the pitch. Home advantage in major sporting tournaments isn't 'meant' to extend that far. As I said above, the indians are good enough they don't need to do that (well, their administrators - but you get the idea)
-
@Chris said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
The bowling performance was a repeat of the South African,Pakistani and Australia games resulting in the same results.
Time to move on and development a new breed of bowlers to support what is a very good batting group, the strongest man for man we have had in a long while our top 4 are all big performers and our middle to lower order do a good job.35 year old one trick ponies are not going to help us compete against the top sides our batting can.
Unfortunately, that's a lot easier said than done.
I'd hoped Big Kyle would be leading our attack now, but he hasn't kicked on in the last couple of years and seems injury prone.
The next line is Duffy and Tickner, so I hope we've got some young guys bubbling under.
-
@Chris-B said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
The bowling performance was a repeat of the South African,Pakistani and Australia games resulting in the same results.
Time to move on and development a new breed of bowlers to support what is a very good batting group, the strongest man for man we have had in a long while our top 4 are all big performers and our middle to lower order do a good job.35 year old one trick ponies are not going to help us compete against the top sides our batting can.
Unfortunately, that's a lot easier said than done.
I'd hoped Big Kyle would be leading our attack now, but he hasn't kicked on in the last couple of years and seems injury prone.
The next line is Duffy and Tickner, so I hope we've got some young guys bubbling under.
It needs to be done, hard or not what is the alternative ? keep the bowling attack we have getting the same results for another 5 years until they are 40/41 years old.
No make the break now,take some bowling pain which is happening now anyway for hopefully greater reward in a couple of years.
If we have the it's to hard attitude to do then someone like Ravindra never would have gone to the WC.
As his domestic record or previous international performances did not point to what he achieved at the WC. -
@Chris said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
If we have the it's to hard attitude to do then someone like Ravindra never would have gone to the WC.
He was only in the squad due to Bracewell's injury. Good luck rather than good management/planning.
The majority of NZ team is over 30 years, so the pace bowling group needs a refresh anyway.
-
@Bovidae said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
If we have the it's to hard attitude to do then someone like Ravindra never would have gone to the WC.
He was only in the squad due to Bracewell's injury. Good luck rather than good management/planning.
The majority of NZ team is over 30 years, so the pace bowling group needs a refresh anyway.
That is why I have my doubts we will see a refresh.
The time is now. -
@Chris It's happening anyway.
They haven't picked Wagner to go to Bangladesh and Boult has removed himself from the equation.
I presume they'll have to find a replacement for Matt Henry - but, he's still in his prime and should pretty much be the first bowler picked.
I'm inclined to think that you pick the best you have available unless there's very small margins between the old and the young. I've seen nothing to suggest we've got anyone else as good as the guys who were at this CWC. And none of the next line of bowlers - Duffy, Tickner, Kuggelijn, Bracewell, Milne - are spring chickens.
I don't think it's at all hard for a young gun fast bowler to come through in NZ. In my lifetime, mainly the cupboard has been pretty bare.
-
@Chris-B said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris It's happening anyway.
They haven't picked Wagner to go to Bangladesh and Boult has removed himself from the equation.
I presume they'll have to find a replacement for Matt Henry - but, he's still in his prime and should pretty much be the first bowler picked.
I'm inclined to think that you pick the best you have available unless there's very small margins between the old and the young. I've seen nothing to suggest we've got anyone else as good as the guys who were at this CWC. And none of the next line of bowlers - Duffy, Tickner, Kuggelijn, Bracewell, Milne - are spring chickens.
I don't think it's at all hard for a young gun fast bowler to come through in NZ. In my lifetime, mainly the cupboard has been pretty bare.
Look you don't develop players at international level by not selecting them.
so no I do not adhere to those selection policies probably because I am involved in Qld state development programs succession is the key to success, risks need to be taken for greater reward not recycling the same rubbish for same rubbish performances.
-
-
@Chris-B said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris Yeah - but who?
You can't just throw in some kid who struggles in the Plunket Shield.
That would be like picking Taha Kemara for the All Blacks - because he's young.
Ok how are you going to develop them to international standard if your domestic comps are weak and the jump is to great.
The development programs are poor as you have just said the players underneath the non preforming players are not good enough because Why ? the systems are shit.Afganistain did exactly that 2 years ago threw a couple of quicks in raw and after 2 years have a look at their WC performances they were great why did they do that because their domestic comps and development programs are weak.
How do you get the youngsters up to standard.HOPE ?
-
@Chris said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris-B said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris Yeah - but who?
You can't just throw in some kid who struggles in the Plunket Shield.
That would be like picking Taha Kemara for the All Blacks - because he's young.
Ok how are you going to develop them to international standard if your domestic comps are weak and the jump is to great.
The development programs are poor as you have just said the players underneath the non preforming players are not good enough because Why ? the systems are shit.How do you get the youngsters up to standard.HOPE ?
Somehow, we've managed to develop the current golden generation of players - batsmen and bowlers - so our systems can't be too awful.
The young guys have got to demonstrate they have potential at provincial level - and then you send them on A tours.
But, you can't just sack our current bowlers (who got us to the World Cup semi-finals) and bring in our under-19 attack, because they're young.
You've got to have guys who have a degree of credibility and I don't know who they are, because top of the tree in Plunket Shield at present is Scott Kuggelijn and India would have made 600 if we'd bowled him at them! (and he's old)!
-
@Chris-B said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris-B said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris Yeah - but who?
You can't just throw in some kid who struggles in the Plunket Shield.
That would be like picking Taha Kemara for the All Blacks - because he's young.
Ok how are you going to develop them to international standard if your domestic comps are weak and the jump is to great.
The development programs are poor as you have just said the players underneath the non preforming players are not good enough because Why ? the systems are shit.How do you get the youngsters up to standard.HOPE ?
Somehow, we've managed to develop the current golden generation of players - batsmen and bowlers - so our systems can't be too awful.
The young guys have got to demonstrate they have potential at provincial level - and then you send them on A tours.
But, you can't just sack our current bowlers (who got us to the World Cup semi-finals) and bring in our under-19 attack, because they're young.
You've got to have guys who have a degree of credibility and I don't know who they are, because top of the tree in Plunket Shield at present is Scott Kuggelijn and India would have made 600 if we'd bowled him at them! (and he's old)!
look we beg to differ here the thinking in NZ to some of the rest of the world is behind the development thinking of other nations.
What you are suggesting is we keep under performing 35/36 year olds play them until they are 45 and hope some one comes along if not you are back where you started that is not forward thinking.
-
it is worth noting that while our attack hasn't been awesome, India's amazing attack in the best of their own conditions gave up 327
And what i would consider a great attack in Australia's has given up 306, 291, 383, 305, and 311 in this tournament alone.
Not a great tournament to be a bowler (unless you are Indian right up to last night). -
@Chris said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris-B said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris-B said in CWC Semi-final 1: India v New Zealand:
@Chris Yeah - but who?
You can't just throw in some kid who struggles in the Plunket Shield.
That would be like picking Taha Kemara for the All Blacks - because he's young.
Ok how are you going to develop them to international standard if your domestic comps are weak and the jump is to great.
The development programs are poor as you have just said the players underneath the non preforming players are not good enough because Why ? the systems are shit.How do you get the youngsters up to standard.HOPE ?
Somehow, we've managed to develop the current golden generation of players - batsmen and bowlers - so our systems can't be too awful.
The young guys have got to demonstrate they have potential at provincial level - and then you send them on A tours.
But, you can't just sack our current bowlers (who got us to the World Cup semi-finals) and bring in our under-19 attack, because they're young.
You've got to have guys who have a degree of credibility and I don't know who they are, because top of the tree in Plunket Shield at present is Scott Kuggelijn and India would have made 600 if we'd bowled him at them! (and he's old)!
What you are suggesting is we keep under performing 35/36 year olds play them until they are 45 and hope some one comes along if not you are back where you started that is not forward thinking.
That's not really what I'm suggesting.
I'm suggesting you can't just pick a bunch of kids and hope they'll come right - especially if they're not even particularly promising to begin with.
For all of Australia's forward thinking their team at this World Cup is pretty much as old as ours.
