Black Caps v Australia
-
-
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v Australia:
Luckily, we've got some reinforcements to call on for the World Cup.
Conway, Ravindra, Williamson, Mitchell, Neesham, Henry, Southee and Tickner!
And boy do we need them.
You can keep Tickner though. -
@Gunner said in Black Caps v Australia:
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v Australia:
Luckily, we've got some reinforcements to call on for the World Cup.
Conway, Ravindra, Williamson, Mitchell, Neesham, Henry, Southee and Tickner!
And boy do we need them.
You can keep Tickner though.Southee as well.
Seems like our selectors don't know how to select a T20 team, no other team in the world selects 4 number 11 batsmen. T20 is max four full time bowlers and at least two of them need to be able to at least do a bit of batting.
-
@LABCAT we need a Doug Bracewell type who can hold a bat.
-
Nah I don't buy that at all. I don't think an extra half a batter makes any difference to this performance. Plus we're possibly chasing 200 plus by taking apart the 5th bowler.
The selection issue is we lacked the Kane/Mitchell role who can score 50 off 35-40 while the big hitters fire around them. That was partly due to the injuries keeping Conway, Rachin, Mitchell out of the side who are they guys who can play that role, as well as Young not having settled into that role yet.
I don't think any line up changes fix this performance anyway, we've gone too hard on a pitch where it's tough to score fast when we should have been looking to just score runs off every ball and try to pressure the bowlers into giving up opportunities to score hunting wickets.
-
-
@Canes4life said in Black Caps v Australia:
@LABCAT we need a Doug Bracewell type who can hold a bat.
……and who has less test 50s than pretty much all of the number 11s discussed above
-
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Australia:
Nah I don't buy that at all. I don't think an extra half a batter makes any difference to this performance. Plus we're possibly chasing 200 plus by taking apart the 5th bowler.
The selection issue is we lacked the Kane/Mitchell role who can score 50 off 35-40 while the big hitters fire around them. That was partly due to the injuries keeping Conway, Rachin, Mitchell out of the side who are they guys who can play that role, as well as Young not having settled into that role yet.
I don't think any line up changes fix this performance anyway, we've gone too hard on a pitch where it's tough to score fast when we should have been looking to just score runs off every ball and try to pressure the bowlers into giving up opportunities to score hunting wickets.
Yeah, your probably right. It wouldn't have made much of an outcome to this match.
I still don't think we need to play four fast bowlers who can't bat, Santner should be at 8 and someone like Neesham at 7. The way Sodhi bowled the other night, I doubt bowling 2 each from Phillips and Ravindra could have been much worse.
Neesham's career economy is slightly higher than Milne's but he offers so much more in the batting department, probably wouldn't helped much last night but I would have kept the TV on for at least one more wicket.
-
@LABCAT said in Black Caps v Australia:
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Australia:
Nah I don't buy that at all. I don't think an extra half a batter makes any difference to this performance. Plus we're possibly chasing 200 plus by taking apart the 5th bowler.
The selection issue is we lacked the Kane/Mitchell role who can score 50 off 35-40 while the big hitters fire around them. That was partly due to the injuries keeping Conway, Rachin, Mitchell out of the side who are they guys who can play that role, as well as Young not having settled into that role yet.
I don't think any line up changes fix this performance anyway, we've gone too hard on a pitch where it's tough to score fast when we should have been looking to just score runs off every ball and try to pressure the bowlers into giving up opportunities to score hunting wickets.
Yeah, your probably right. It wouldn't have made much of an outcome to this match.
I still don't think we need to play four fast bowlers who can't bat, Santner should be at 8 and someone like Neesham at 7. The way Sodhi bowled the other night, I doubt bowling 2 each from Phillips and Ravindra could have been much worse.
Neesham's career economy is slightly higher than Milne's but he offers so much more in the batting department, probably wouldn't helped much last night but I would have kept the TV on for at least one more wicket.
Splitting hairs over a bowler who might offer a bit more with the bat is hardly the main issue when the top order shit the bed as much as they did last night. Phillips getting 42 and TRENT BOULT being second highest scorer with 16 are much bigger things to worry about.
I am a fan of Neesh and his ability to clear the fence (despite the fact he hasn’t passed 50 in 72 T20 internationals ) but his nickname should be Irvine with all the pies he dishes up when he bowls.
-
@KiwiMurph said in Black Caps v Australia:
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v Australia:
and Tickner
Surely you jest
Suggesting Tickner is Ethan Blackadder levels of ridiculousness
-
Obviously. The make-up of the 11 last night was stupidly lop-sided because everyone in the series squad who can hold a bat seemed to be injured.
The 4 specialist seamers is unlikely to ever be an 11 in an ICC tournament for example.
But it has got me pondering on the subject of upcoming young T20 batsmen. Because we are missing here: Kane, Mitchell, Ravindra, M Bracewell, Then Conway injured during match, Plus free-lancers like Neesham & Guptill etc not considered. Now, all of them (except Ravindra) are old.
Now is the era that the upcoming young batsmen have been brought up entirely in the T20 era. So, you'd think they'd be quite good at it? Well, they aren't, they're flipping terrible at it.
So. I'm thinking about players of the Ravindra/Allen age and younger who would have been about 6 or 7 year olds when the first T20 International was played.
It might just be a coincidence, as we have a bit of a batting talent gap in the upcoming generation which look mostly quite mediocre in all formats. But T20 especially.
It seems to me if you are 'good enough' to make your provincial T20 team at 20 years of age, then you are probably doomed. You are either going to have the 'rare' chance of going all to way to IPL-level riches like Allen. Or, playing t20 early will probably be the death knell of your cricket batting career and you are heading back to club cricket by age 25.
-
T20 though has always seemed and old man's game to me. Old pros like a 40 year old Brad Hodge type player always seemed 2 x as effective as a similarly talented 25 year old.
Thought that would change as time passes.
But I reckon a now retired and 50 year old Brad Hodge would probably be better than all T20 batsmen in NZ under 25 years of age.
-
@Rapido said in Black Caps v Australia:
T20 though has always seemed and old man's game to me. Old pros like a 40 year old Brad Hodge type player always seemed 2 x as effective as a similarly talented 25 year old.
Thought that would change as time passes.
But I reckon a now retired and 50 year old Brad Hodge would probably be better than all T20 batsmen in NZ under 25 years of age.
Yeah nah.
Brian Lara’s efforts in the recent Black Clash put this theory to bed.
-
@MN5 said in Black Caps v Australia:
@Rapido said in Black Caps v Australia:
T20 though has always seemed and old man's game to me. Old pros like a 40 year old Brad Hodge type player always seemed 2 x as effective as a similarly talented 25 year old.
Thought that would change as time passes.
But I reckon a now retired and 50 year old Brad Hodge would probably be better than all T20 batsmen in NZ under 25 years of age.
Yeah nah.
Brian Lara’s efforts in the recent Black Clash put this theory to bed.
That game was entertainment first and cricket second, I wouldn't take it as proof of much.
Especially with a couple of speculative rumours about his eyesight under floodlights (contrasted with his daytime Adelaide net earlier that week), and from memory that may have even been his first T20.
-
@Donsteppa said in Black Caps v Australia:
@MN5 said in Black Caps v Australia:
@Rapido said in Black Caps v Australia:
T20 though has always seemed and old man's game to me. Old pros like a 40 year old Brad Hodge type player always seemed 2 x as effective as a similarly talented 25 year old.
Thought that would change as time passes.
But I reckon a now retired and 50 year old Brad Hodge would probably be better than all T20 batsmen in NZ under 25 years of age.
Yeah nah.
Brian Lara’s efforts in the recent Black Clash put this theory to bed.
That game was entertainment first and cricket second, I wouldn't take it as proof of much.
Especially with a couple of speculative rumours about his eyesight under floodlights (contrasted with his daytime Adelaide net earlier that week), and from memory that may have even been his first T20.
Yeah was disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing more out of disappointment that the most untouchable batsman I’ve ever seen play was so poor.
Possibly too many heinies in the corp box beforehand too ?
…..and to be honest I agree. No reason a top spin bowler can’t play 20/20 for years, it’s a maximum of 24 balls for goodness sake
-
@MN5 said in Black Caps v Australia:
@KiwiMurph said in Black Caps v Australia:
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v Australia:
and Tickner
Surely you jest
Suggesting Tickner is Ethan Blackadder levels of ridiculousness
Now I'm lost.
I thought the smiley face after Tickner was enough indication that, to paraphrase Sesame Street, one of those things was not like the others.
Now you're suggesting he should be a certainty?!!
