Chappell-Hadlee
-
That innings was really something else. Had never heard of the guy beforehand and his domestic stats aren't that amazing. The way he protected Hazelwood was incredible.
Genuinely gutted for him. He's certainly no Brad Haddin.
One of those games where it coulda easily been a loss a from that perspective the BCs really pulled finger although fuck me dead there was some appalling bowling there ( not taking anything away from Stoinis )
-
@Donsteppa said in Chappell-Hadlee:
Big questions for the Black Caps on the last hour and a half.
"Black Caps: Putting the Pyrrhic in Victory since about 1930."
-
I'm actually gutted for Stoinis. That innings deserved to win a game, just amazing for a guy batting at 7 to score a quarter of the game's runs. It was 5-54 when he came out, he heads back at all out 280. Incredible.
Massive questions need to be asked about Kane as a captain, and the selectors assuming Neesham and Munro were a viable 5th bowler.
This game sort of showed our serious weakness. We have guys that can bat. And we have guys that can bowl. But we don't have guys that can do both to the required standard. Our side is always going to be unbalanced. We needed every batsman today, but that lack of the 5th bowler nearly lost us an unloseable game
-
I'd love to know what Kane had planned for the final 2 overs if it got to that....
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Chappell-Hadlee:
I'd love to know what Kane had planned for the final 2 overs if it got to that....
I'm not sure he plans much
-
@mariner4life said in Chappell-Hadlee:
I'm actually gutted for Stoinis. That innings deserved to win a game, just amazing for a guy batting at 7 to score a quarter of the game's runs. It was 5-54 when he came out, he heads back at all out 280. Incredible.
Massive questions need to be asked about Kane as a captain, and the selectors assuming Neesham and Munro were a viable 5th bowler.
This game sort of showed our serious weakness. We have guys that can bat. And we have guys that can bowl. But we don't have guys that can do both to the required standard. Our side is always going to be unbalanced. We needed every batsman today, but that lack of the 5th bowler nearly lost us an unloseable game
Every cricketer has bad days at the office but Neesham was pretty awful. Other options should have been used more.
Our batting always looks vulnerable if KW or Taylor don't score big as well ( both got frustrating starts and didnt go on )
-
@mariner4life said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@ACT-Crusader said in Chappell-Hadlee:
I'd love to know what Kane had planned for the final 2 overs if it got to that....
I'm not sure he plans much
I think cricket ( well any sport really ) needs to realise that the best player isn't always best choice for captain. However in this BCs line up there's nil to fuck all other options given that Hesson would probably saw his own nuts off rather than ask Ross Taylor.
-
@MN5 said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@mariner4life said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@ACT-Crusader said in Chappell-Hadlee:
I'd love to know what Kane had planned for the final 2 overs if it got to that....
I'm not sure he plans much
I think cricket ( well any sport really ) needs to realise that the best player isn't always best choice for captain. However in this BCs line up there's nil to fuck all other options given that Hesson would probably saw his own nuts off rather than ask Ross Taylor.
I don't think Taylor would be any better, and a captain is only as good as his cattle.
-
Fuck off with disappointed /unhappy we won shit. @Mokey @Hooroo and @anyoneelse ...
It's Straya.
We gave them a sniff. They thought they had it and we whipped it from under their noses. And partly due to their own fuck up by the sounds. Ha fucking ha. Makes it sweeter.
Do you think they'd be gutted for us?
Two words: Haddin and Brad.
-
In the old days Halewood would get an absolute fucking roasting in the sheds. Wonder if that still happens - prolly not
We would have lost that game but for Hazelwoods help. Nearly got Stones run out, turned down an easy 2 and then gave up the last wicket when he would have been better served just sitting down at long off.
but what a brilliant innings that was from Stoinis.
Hope the win doesn't paper over the cracks, but for a long part of that game Kane and his boys did enough to warrant a victory.
Latham was excellent behind the stumps. We lost Ranchi setting the fielding standards in Oz. BJ was too quiet and too sloppy with returns and tidying up (something that Luke does very well. Latham today was vocal and energetic and took all the half volleys and those are the little things that non cricket people (like MN5
) don't seer understand - a wee bit like the value of an opensider running the right lines - perhaps not obvious but bloody important for the team to gel in the field. One of the reasons Luke kept getting the job despite his runs or lack thereofLatham was very good today, I was a little surprised and very impressed, well done that man
edit - fuck off Apple predictive text - I knoe what I watn too rite!
-
The thing to love most about @booboo's Kiwi bitterness, is how well its been honed in Queensland aka victim country.
@taniwharugby said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@Donsteppa ah I thought there was another ball.
No, you play the same 6-ball overs as the rest of the world.
Its your rugby 7s team that has an extra count
-
@MN5 Not sure I'd be completely harsh on Kane's captaincy in this one - I can understand what he was trying to do - to just completely shut the gate by getting Stoinis (and Cummins) out before the 40th over.
It's out of the BMac playbook.
I wouldn't have done it, though, because after 35 overs Neesham/Munro still had four overs to bowl and Santner had two. That's too many.
Give himself one over and give Munro, who was going OK, one more and suddenly you've got quite a lot of bowling insurance - there's a chance you'll get a cheap wicket and there's probably still too many overs for them to really go to town on you..
Of course, he wasn't to know that none of Southee/Boult or Neesham would be able to land a yorker and the go to delivery would be half track shit that could be flat-batted for six. Well, maybe he was...
And he could have helped himself by catching Stoinis or running him out earlier.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Chappell-Hadlee:
I'd love to know what Kane had planned for the final 2 overs if it got to that....
He definitely made the right choices though. He bowled his best bowlers out. It would be unforgivable if he bowled Munro and 20 were plastered from his over and Australia won with Boult and Southee having an over to spare.
-
@Siam said in Chappell-Hadlee:
In the old days Halewood would get an absolute fucking roasting in the sheds. Wonder if that still happens - prolly not
We would have lost that game but for Hazelwoods help. Nearly got Stones run out, turned down an easy 2 and then gave up the last wicket when he would have been better served just sitting down at long off.
but what a brilliant innings that was from Stoinis.
Hope the win doesn't paper over the cracks, but for a long part of that game Kane and his boys did enough to warrant a victory.
Latham was excellent behind the stumps. We lost Ranchi setting the fielding standards in Oz. BJ was too quiet and too sloppy with returns and tidying up (something that Luke does very well. Latham today was vocal and energetic and took all the half volleys and those are the little things that non cricket people (like MN5
) don't seer understand - a wee bit like the value of an opensider running the right lines - perhaps not obvious but bloody important for the team to gel in the field. One of the reasons Luke kept getting the job despite his runs or lack thereofLatham was very good today, I was a little surprised and very impressed, well done that man
edit - fuck off Apple predictive text - I knoe what I watn too rite!
I've never had issued with Ronchis keeping its his batting which has sucked and like it or not the days of Smithy like keepers are dead and buried.
-
@MN5 said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@Siam said in Chappell-Hadlee:
In the old days Halewood would get an absolute fucking roasting in the sheds. Wonder if that still happens - prolly not
We would have lost that game but for Hazelwoods help. Nearly got Stones run out, turned down an easy 2 and then gave up the last wicket when he would have been better served just sitting down at long off.
but what a brilliant innings that was from Stoinis.
Hope the win doesn't paper over the cracks, but for a long part of that game Kane and his boys did enough to warrant a victory.
Latham was excellent behind the stumps. We lost Ranchi setting the fielding standards in Oz. BJ was too quiet and too sloppy with returns and tidying up (something that Luke does very well. Latham today was vocal and energetic and took all the half volleys and those are the little things that non cricket people (like MN5
) don't seer understand - a wee bit like the value of an opensider running the right lines - perhaps not obvious but bloody important for the team to gel in the field. One of the reasons Luke kept getting the job despite his runs or lack thereofLatham was very good today, I was a little surprised and very impressed, well done that man
edit - fuck off Apple predictive text - I knoe what I watn too rite!
I've never had issued with Ronchis keeping its his batting which has sucked and like it or not the days of Smithy like keepers are dead and buried.
Oh no MN5, please don't misunderstand me, it's your knowledge of all cricket, not just wicket keeping
-
@Siam said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@MN5 said in Chappell-Hadlee:
@Siam said in Chappell-Hadlee:
In the old days Halewood would get an absolute fucking roasting in the sheds. Wonder if that still happens - prolly not
We would have lost that game but for Hazelwoods help. Nearly got Stones run out, turned down an easy 2 and then gave up the last wicket when he would have been better served just sitting down at long off.
but what a brilliant innings that was from Stoinis.
Hope the win doesn't paper over the cracks, but for a long part of that game Kane and his boys did enough to warrant a victory.
Latham was excellent behind the stumps. We lost Ranchi setting the fielding standards in Oz. BJ was too quiet and too sloppy with returns and tidying up (something that Luke does very well. Latham today was vocal and energetic and took all the half volleys and those are the little things that non cricket people (like MN5
) don't seer understand - a wee bit like the value of an opensider running the right lines - perhaps not obvious but bloody important for the team to gel in the field. One of the reasons Luke kept getting the job despite his runs or lack thereofLatham was very good today, I was a little surprised and very impressed, well done that man
edit - fuck off Apple predictive text - I knoe what I watn too rite!
I've never had issued with Ronchis keeping its his batting which has sucked and like it or not the days of Smithy like keepers are dead and buried.
Oh no MN5, please don't misunderstand me, it's your knowledge of all cricket, not just wicket keeping
I've predicted every single BC result correctly so far this year. You should be treating me like a God.
-
