Black Caps v Australia
-
@barbarian said in Black Caps v Australia:
So take this as the compliment it's meant to be - you choked that. Hard. You are a way better side than that
'You are a way better side than that'
No they aren't.
Southee is on fumes and SK ain't a test player.
That's two fifths of the attack.
-
@KiwiMurph said in Black Caps v Australia:
That's two fifths of the attack.
It's half our attack - we just got lucky with GP turning into a proper spinner for a while
-
@KiwiMurph said in Black Caps v Australia:
@barbarian said in Black Caps v Australia:
So take this as the compliment it's meant to be - you choked that. Hard. You are a way better side than that
'You are a way better side than that'
No they aren't.
Southee is on fumes and SK ain't a test player.
That's two fifths of the attack.
SK bowled THREE overs ?!?!?
Fucken hell that is ridiculously embarrassing for a frontline seamer
-
-
@NTA said in Black Caps v Australia:
@1kiwi said in Black Caps v Australia:
Fancy Daryl Mitchell saying after the match that "we won't be defined by our results'
WTF of course the team is defined by their resultsThat's some real Bazball thinking
4-1 in India but I’m sure they played some entertaining cricket
-
@KiwiMurph said in Black Caps v Australia:
@barbarian said in Black Caps v Australia:
So take this as the compliment it's meant to be - you choked that. Hard. You are a way better side than that
'You are a way better side than that'
No they aren't.
Southee is on fumes and SK ain't a test player.
That's two fifths of the attack.
This is still roughly the same team that won the World Test Championship. By the standards of test cricket you'd only have them behind India and Australia. That may say more about the standard of test cricket than the Black Caps, but still...
-
@KiwiMurph said in Black Caps v Australia:
@barbarian said in Black Caps v Australia:
So take this as the compliment it's meant to be - you choked that. Hard. You are a way better side than that
'You are a way better side than that'
No they aren't.
Southee is on fumes and SK ain't a test player.
That's two fifths of the attack.
nah, they choked. 9 dropped catches. Even with tweedle dee and tweedle dum they still could have won. Yes, those two handicapped the team further but we still found a way to lose.
-
@barbarian said in Black Caps v Australia:
@KiwiMurph said in Black Caps v Australia:
@barbarian said in Black Caps v Australia:
So take this as the compliment it's meant to be - you choked that. Hard. You are a way better side than that
'You are a way better side than that'
No they aren't.
Southee is on fumes and SK ain't a test player.
That's two fifths of the attack.
This is still roughly the same team that won the World Test Championship. By the standards of test cricket you'd only have them behind India and Australia. That may say more about the standard of test cricket than the Black Caps, but still...
Southee has declined and Boult, Wags and Jamieson aren’t there.
Taylor, CDGH and Watling have retired, Conway is injured.
I think you’re delirious with victory celebrations…..
-
@barbarian said in Black Caps v Australia:
@KiwiMurph said in Black Caps v Australia:
@barbarian said in Black Caps v Australia:
So take this as the compliment it's meant to be - you choked that. Hard. You are a way better side than that
'You are a way better side than that'
No they aren't.
Southee is on fumes and SK ain't a test player.
That's two fifths of the attack.
This is still roughly the same team that won the World Test Championship. By the standards of test cricket you'd only have them behind India and Australia. That may say more about the standard of test cricket than the Black Caps, but still...
pfft ahahaha you're waaaaay off base there
did they have the same crest on their shirts? yes. is it the same team? absolutely not.
-
@MN5 said in Black Caps v Australia:
@NTA said in Black Caps v Australia:
@1kiwi said in Black Caps v Australia:
Fancy Daryl Mitchell saying after the match that "we won't be defined by our results'
WTF of course the team is defined by their resultsThat's some real Bazball thinking
4-1 in India but I’m sure they played some entertaining cricket
I'll fight you bastards on this one.
Won the first test.
Competitive to having an advantage in two of the next three.
Pumped in the last test.
They did very well for a team touring India. Toughest place in the world to tour.
-
@nzzp said in Black Caps v Australia:
@MN5 said in Black Caps v Australia:
@NTA said in Black Caps v Australia:
@1kiwi said in Black Caps v Australia:
Fancy Daryl Mitchell saying after the match that "we won't be defined by our results'
WTF of course the team is defined by their resultsThat's some real Bazball thinking
4-1 in India but I’m sure they played some entertaining cricket
I'll fight you bastards on this one.
Won the first test.
Competitive to having an advantage in two of the next three.
Pumped in the last test.
They did very well for a team touring India. Toughest place in the world to tour.
onya Stokesy (or is it michael vaughan?) keep fighting the good fight mate
-
@nzzp said in Black Caps v Australia:
@MN5 said in Black Caps v Australia:
@NTA said in Black Caps v Australia:
@1kiwi said in Black Caps v Australia:
Fancy Daryl Mitchell saying after the match that "we won't be defined by our results'
WTF of course the team is defined by their resultsThat's some real Bazball thinking
4-1 in India but I’m sure they played some entertaining cricket
I'll fight you bastards on this one.
Won the first test.
Competitive to having an advantage in two of the next three.
Pumped in the last test.
They did very well for a team touring India. Toughest place in the world to tour.
They were pumped in the last three tests.
How is losing by 434 runs not a pumping ? Good god man.
The whole Bazball ethos of having a go, entertaining ( and in this case completely fucking things up ) and not worrying about results is the very reason I’ll cheer any team ( even India ) over England at the moment. The fact Daryl Mitchell is echoing this nonsense in radio interviews is deeply offensive too.
Look, I don’t want to go back to the days of Geoffrey Boycott/Chris Tavare but teams have to play to conditions and it sounds like England emphatically didn’t.
-
@barbarian we have one decent bowler, a rookie and two trundlers in a sport that you have to take 20 wickets. It’s called being realistic.
And yes the comparison with the Wallabies isn’t a bad one because it reminds me of the Wallaby backline in 2016 when they hung their hat on an aging Giteau, had an unspectacular Foley at 1st 5, a rookie in Haylett-Petty, Kurindrani and centre who had barely fired a shot against the ABs but was okay against lesser teams, but hey we only won by 30, not 40…
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Black Caps v Australia:
@__barbarian we have one decent bowler, a rookie and two trundlers in a sport that you have to take 20 wickets. It’s called being realistic.__
And yes the comparison with the Wallabies isn’t a bad one because it reminds me of the Wallaby backline in 2016 when they hung their hat on an aging Giteau, had an unspectacular Foley at 1st 5, a rookie in Haylett-Petty, Kurindrani and centre who had barely fired a shot against the ABs but was okay against lesser teams, but hey we only won by 30, not 40…
We have a good spinner too…..
But I’d argue the terrific pace attack we used to have is the main reason for our decline here.
I think @virgil said this series was a couple of years late. What we’d have given for a fit and firing combo of Boult, Southee, Jamieson and Wags. You just get the feeling they’d have more than made up for the top order misfiring.
-
Our bowling attack still could have got the twenty wickets though, bascially our batsmen let us down the whole series. If just one of the batters who got a 50 in that second innings stuck arround to get a score like Green did, the we have an extra 100 runs and probably win the game.
-
@mariner4life @MN5 I watched a lot of that series. Good fun. I don't love England, but they competed hard and it took some very good play to beat them.
-
@LABCAT said in Black Caps v Australia:
Our bowling attack still could have got the twenty wickets though, bascially our batsmen let us down the whole series. If just one of the batters who got a 50 in that second innings stuck arround to get a score like Green did, the we have an extra 100 runs and probably win the game.
Nope that's way too simplistic. 4 of the top 5 had to battle to make 50s with the ball regularly beating the bat and with Hazlewood and Cummins constantly probing. Eventually there is a ball with your name on it and you get a nick. We should have won that game from 5 down today - I wasn't able to watch much of it but from what I saw runs were being leaked away to low risk shots. With a target that size you need to make the opposition sweat for every run not bowl 1-2 an over at the leg stump to be tucked away.
-
@nzzp said in Black Caps v Australia:
@mariner4life @MN5 I watched a lot of that series. Good fun. I don't love England, but they competed hard and it took some very good play to beat them.
I’m usually a big fan of your posts which makes me think maybe you’ve been hacked.
How is losing tests by 434 runs, 5 wickets and an innings and 64 runs “competing” ?
-
@MN5 said in Black Caps v Australia:
@nzzp said in Black Caps v Australia:
@mariner4life @MN5 I watched a lot of that series. Good fun. I don't love England, but they competed hard and it took some very good play to beat them.
I’m usually a big fan of your posts which makes me think maybe you’ve been hacked.
How is losing tests by 434 runs, 5 wickets and an innings and 64 runs “competing” ?
now you're making me doubt myself. I'll have a look tomorrow, see if I've misremembered this shit
