Black Caps vs Windies Series
-
@mariner4life said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
The 'have to play a spinner no matter what' philosophy hurts Neesham and Anderson's chances.
no more so than Neesham and Anderson's performances.
We seem these days to be stuck in this perpetual limbo where we are good enough to towel up the lower sides, but we're nowhere near good enough to beat the top sides. So a guy like CdG has a test like this, and we are still looking at him as not good enough, because we know if we're playing Aus, Warner is going to put his dribbly mediums in to the crowd, and Starc or Hazlewood are going to knock him over in singe figures.
Yeah true. Without taking away from CDG, Roach was pretty much the only really good bowler he faced and he's hardly Ambrose/Marshall/Holding is he?
-
@no-quarter said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@rapido said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@no-quarter said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
Great start to the summer, both weather wise and cricket wise!
We showed some good form in the shorter formats in India so good to continue that on at home.
Wagner was fucking awesome, and deserved MOTM, he was very much the point of difference between the two teams on what was a pretty flat deck in the end. What a fucking legend that man is.
Jeet and Latham did a great job at the top of the innings. Ideally one of them would kick on but they blunted the new ball and allowed the middle order to cash in which makes me happy as a former opener who used to go out and try and grind opening bowlers into the dust. May not be exciting enough for kids like @mariner4life but this is what test cricket is all about!
Good to see Rosco in the runs, he's a confidence player so hopefully this sets him up for a big summer. Would dearly love to see him get 17 tons to honour his mentor Crowe (RIP). And great to see Blundell hit a ton on debut - any depth we can build behind BJ is a good thing.
CdG and Santner are the main talking points for me. Neither are good enough to be regarded as top 6 batsmen or frontline bowlers at test level. So the balance of the side is a bit out with them there - I don't like the idea of either walking out at only 4 down, and CdG doesn't inspire a lot of fear into the opposition as a first change bowler. No doubt we will persevere with both, especially given CdG's awesome ton and Santners unlimited "potential" that we always hear about, but personally I'd like to see us look at a more traditional balance as those two will not stand up against stronger opposition in the future (not that we have any bloody tests scheduled...).
But overall very happy with the performance - bring on the summer of cricket!
Santner and his 'potential' really grates. Do you think it's cos he looks about 12? I remember Ricky Ponting making his debut in his teens and looking about 30.
What is your alternative solution for this grating potential?
What part grates? His batting or his bowling? or his allrounderness?
Santner is fucking outstanding in T20s and ODIs Economical as hell and can hit a few boundaries in the final 10. But he's not well suited to tests. Right now, we don't have another spinner other than Ish but who knows how well he'd go, and he obviously doesn't bat as well. I can see why he's there, I'd just be leaning towards no spinner if he isn't going to bowl much anyway.
I'm just talking bowling, no argument he isn't good enough to bat 6 in tests.
By "not suited to tests". What if his role is to be an economical spinner to allow our 3rd seamer to be more aggressive?
Is he suited then?Although I'd say any NZ selection panel would gladly take an economical spinner role player even if we didn't have an exceptionally aggressive 3rd seamer.
What factoring do you make for he fact our 3rd seamer spends a lot more energy than a typical 3rd seamer because he is banging in half-trackers for half of his spells?
In this game; he doesn't bowl first innings because the seamers knock them over quickly. Second innings bowls 17 overs taking 1 for 25 on a road. That's pretty much textbook perfect NZ spinner at home role playing.
I agree they haven't got the 6,7,8 batting order correct.
I think it is because they don't want put pressure/expectation on CdG's batting because they don't trust his brain. The compromise is they put the pressure on Santner. CdG is basically a like for like replacement for Neesham and Anderson (but better 4th seamer), just as talented, but the leadership have seen enough of him on the FC circuit that they don't want to overload him with responsibilty.That's whats making the team balance look 'wrong' and setting off MN5's cricket by statsguru alarm bells.
Santner at 8 pretty much no one would blink an eye.
-
@bovidae said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
I assume that CdG was only used as the first change bowler to run into the wind, allowing Henry to replace Boult downwind. If he comes on first change in Hamilton then your point stands and we have got problems.
Even without the Wellington wind, they've often had CdG bowl first change before Wagner. Wagner has a bit of a reputation for wasting the new ball for himself, and scuffing it for they guy at the other end. CdG bowls seam up and is reasonable at getting to to nip around.
But the order is semantics. Wagner is the '3rd seamer' he will out bowl CdG in overs bowled.
-
@cyclops said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@hooroo said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
81 needed just to avoid the follow on with one wicket in hand.
More time for the boys to check out Courtney place tonight.
After the Bowlers take a limo to the top of Mount Vic and have a few drinkies
It's traditionally the wicket keepers call on who is counted as a bowler, so wonder if Kane's one over will be enough to get in the limo or if Blundell will say no to the captain.
The answer is no. Kane isn't in the photo (unless he is taking it)
-
@rapido said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@no-quarter said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@rapido said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@no-quarter said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
Great start to the summer, both weather wise and cricket wise!
We showed some good form in the shorter formats in India so good to continue that on at home.
Wagner was fucking awesome, and deserved MOTM, he was very much the point of difference between the two teams on what was a pretty flat deck in the end. What a fucking legend that man is.
Jeet and Latham did a great job at the top of the innings. Ideally one of them would kick on but they blunted the new ball and allowed the middle order to cash in which makes me happy as a former opener who used to go out and try and grind opening bowlers into the dust. May not be exciting enough for kids like @mariner4life but this is what test cricket is all about!
Good to see Rosco in the runs, he's a confidence player so hopefully this sets him up for a big summer. Would dearly love to see him get 17 tons to honour his mentor Crowe (RIP). And great to see Blundell hit a ton on debut - any depth we can build behind BJ is a good thing.
CdG and Santner are the main talking points for me. Neither are good enough to be regarded as top 6 batsmen or frontline bowlers at test level. So the balance of the side is a bit out with them there - I don't like the idea of either walking out at only 4 down, and CdG doesn't inspire a lot of fear into the opposition as a first change bowler. No doubt we will persevere with both, especially given CdG's awesome ton and Santners unlimited "potential" that we always hear about, but personally I'd like to see us look at a more traditional balance as those two will not stand up against stronger opposition in the future (not that we have any bloody tests scheduled...).
But overall very happy with the performance - bring on the summer of cricket!
Santner and his 'potential' really grates. Do you think it's cos he looks about 12? I remember Ricky Ponting making his debut in his teens and looking about 30.
What is your alternative solution for this grating potential?
What part grates? His batting or his bowling? or his allrounderness?
Santner is fucking outstanding in T20s and ODIs Economical as hell and can hit a few boundaries in the final 10. But he's not well suited to tests. Right now, we don't have another spinner other than Ish but who knows how well he'd go, and he obviously doesn't bat as well. I can see why he's there, I'd just be leaning towards no spinner if he isn't going to bowl much anyway.
I'm just talking bowling, no argument he isn't good enough to bat 6 in tests.
By "not suited to tests". What if his role is to be an economical spinner to allow our 3rd seamer to be more aggressive?
Is he suited then?Although I'd say any NZ selection panel would gladly take an economical spinner role player even if we didn't have an exceptionally aggressive 3rd seamer.
What factoring do you make for he fact our 3rd seamer spends a lot more energy than a typical 3rd seamer because he is banging in half-trackers for half of his spells?
In this game; he doesn't bowl first innings because the seamers knock them over quickly. Second innings bowls 17 overs taking 1 for 25 on a road. That's pretty much textbook perfect NZ spinner at home role playing.
I agree they haven't got the 6,7,8 batting order correct.
I think it is because they don't want put pressure/expectation on CdG's batting because they don't trust his brain. The compromise is they put the pressure on Santner. CdG is basically a like for like replacement for Neesham and Anderson (but better 4th seamer), just as talented, but the leadership have seen enough of him on the FC circuit that they don't want to overload him with responsibilty.That's whats making the team balance look 'wrong' and setting off MN5's cricket by statsguru alarm bells.
Santner at 8 pretty much no one would blink an eye.
All good points, and that may well be his role, but I don't really see the need for a purely economical bowler in tests. He needs to get his average closer to 30 than 40 if he is not going to bat in the top 6 - though we don't have many options in that space at the moment.
I guess at this stage we are either playing both Santner and CdG or neither. If we put a batsmen in at 6, then we only have 3 blokes that will bowl enough overs. If we put Ferguson in for CdG then batting looks very weak with Santner at 6. Personally I'd take a batsmen and Ferguson, but I can see why they like the idea of a spinner that can get through some overs even if he doesn't take many wickets.
-
@mariner4life said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
The 'have to play a spinner no matter what' philosophy hurts Neesham and Anderson's chances.
no more so than Neesham and Anderson's performances.
We seem these days to be stuck in this perpetual limbo where we are good enough to towel up the lower sides, but we're nowhere near good enough to beat the top sides. So a guy like CdG has a test like this, and we are still looking at him as not good enough, because we know if we're playing Aus, Warner is going to put his dribbly mediums in to the crowd, and Starc or Hazlewood are going to knock him over in singe figures.
Harsh reality is that, if you're picking a joint Aus-NZ team, that probably only Kane and Rossco are going to make it. Latham might sneak in to open, BJ might keep, and Boult might edge Cummins, but in actuality probably not. So we're looking at many of our best players trying to edge out their worst.
But then we've always got three or four who are marginal as test players - guys who can perform OK against weak test teams, but they're not up to playing the best teams except occasionally fluking a performance.
-
@chris-b said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mariner4life said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
The 'have to play a spinner no matter what' philosophy hurts Neesham and Anderson's chances.
no more so than Neesham and Anderson's performances.
We seem these days to be stuck in this perpetual limbo where we are good enough to towel up the lower sides, but we're nowhere near good enough to beat the top sides. So a guy like CdG has a test like this, and we are still looking at him as not good enough, because we know if we're playing Aus, Warner is going to put his dribbly mediums in to the crowd, and Starc or Hazlewood are going to knock him over in singe figures.
Harsh reality is that, if you're picking a joint Aus-NZ team, that probably only Kane and Rossco are going to make it. Latham might sneak in to open, BJ might keep, and Boult might edge Cummins, but in actuality probably not. So we're looking at many of our best players trying to edge out their worst.
But then we've always got three or four who are marginal as test players - guys who can perform OK against weak test teams, but they're not up to playing the best teams except occasionally fluking a performance.
Calling that a harsh reality reflects on either the decline of the Australians or the improvement of the black caps because 10 years ago I don't think any black caps would have made it.
-
@cyclops said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@chris-b said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mariner4life said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
The 'have to play a spinner no matter what' philosophy hurts Neesham and Anderson's chances.
no more so than Neesham and Anderson's performances.
We seem these days to be stuck in this perpetual limbo where we are good enough to towel up the lower sides, but we're nowhere near good enough to beat the top sides. So a guy like CdG has a test like this, and we are still looking at him as not good enough, because we know if we're playing Aus, Warner is going to put his dribbly mediums in to the crowd, and Starc or Hazlewood are going to knock him over in singe figures.
Harsh reality is that, if you're picking a joint Aus-NZ team, that probably only Kane and Rossco are going to make it. Latham might sneak in to open, BJ might keep, and Boult might edge Cummins, but in actuality probably not. So we're looking at many of our best players trying to edge out their worst.
But then we've always got three or four who are marginal as test players - guys who can perform OK against weak test teams, but they're not up to playing the best teams except occasionally fluking a performance.
Calling that a harsh reality reflects on either the decline of the Australians or the improvement of the black caps because 10 years ago I don't think any black caps would have made it.
Vettori would have once Warnie was retired. Also depending on injuries Bond was better than any of their pacemen barring McGrath.
-
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@cyclops said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@chris-b said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mariner4life said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
The 'have to play a spinner no matter what' philosophy hurts Neesham and Anderson's chances.
no more so than Neesham and Anderson's performances.
We seem these days to be stuck in this perpetual limbo where we are good enough to towel up the lower sides, but we're nowhere near good enough to beat the top sides. So a guy like CdG has a test like this, and we are still looking at him as not good enough, because we know if we're playing Aus, Warner is going to put his dribbly mediums in to the crowd, and Starc or Hazlewood are going to knock him over in singe figures.
Harsh reality is that, if you're picking a joint Aus-NZ team, that probably only Kane and Rossco are going to make it. Latham might sneak in to open, BJ might keep, and Boult might edge Cummins, but in actuality probably not. So we're looking at many of our best players trying to edge out their worst.
But then we've always got three or four who are marginal as test players - guys who can perform OK against weak test teams, but they're not up to playing the best teams except occasionally fluking a performance.
Calling that a harsh reality reflects on either the decline of the Australians or the improvement of the black caps because 10 years ago I don't think any black caps would have made it.
Vettori would have once Warnie was retired. Also depending on injuries Bond was better than any of their pacemen barring McGrath.
Dare I say it... Cairns?
-
@virgil said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@cyclops said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@chris-b said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mariner4life said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@mn5 said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
The 'have to play a spinner no matter what' philosophy hurts Neesham and Anderson's chances.
no more so than Neesham and Anderson's performances.
We seem these days to be stuck in this perpetual limbo where we are good enough to towel up the lower sides, but we're nowhere near good enough to beat the top sides. So a guy like CdG has a test like this, and we are still looking at him as not good enough, because we know if we're playing Aus, Warner is going to put his dribbly mediums in to the crowd, and Starc or Hazlewood are going to knock him over in singe figures.
Harsh reality is that, if you're picking a joint Aus-NZ team, that probably only Kane and Rossco are going to make it. Latham might sneak in to open, BJ might keep, and Boult might edge Cummins, but in actuality probably not. So we're looking at many of our best players trying to edge out their worst.
But then we've always got three or four who are marginal as test players - guys who can perform OK against weak test teams, but they're not up to playing the best teams except occasionally fluking a performance.
Calling that a harsh reality reflects on either the decline of the Australians or the improvement of the black caps because 10 years ago I don't think any black caps would have made it.
Vettori would have once Warnie was retired. Also depending on injuries Bond was better than any of their pacemen barring McGrath.
Dare I say it... Cairns?
Retired in 2004 but woulda been in with a shot
-
-
-
@virgil said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
And to think they want to move tests to 4 days of 105 overs. If they can’t get through 90 overs how the fuck will they bowl 105?
The rules around rates will be much tougher. They will find a way to magically speed up.
-
@hooroo said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@virgil said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
And to think they want to move tests to 4 days of 105 overs. If they can’t get through 90 overs how the fuck will they bowl 105?
The rules around rates will be much tougher. They will find a way to magically speed up.
Good. They p1ss around so much. Start earlier, get through overs quicker, 4 day tests. Viewers would magically come back.
-
@tewaio said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@hooroo said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
@virgil said in Black Caps vs Windies 1st Test:
And to think they want to move tests to 4 days of 105 overs. If they can’t get through 90 overs how the fuck will they bowl 105?
The rules around rates will be much tougher. They will find a way to magically speed up.
Good. They p1ss around so much. Start earlier, get through overs quicker, 4 day tests. Viewers would magically come back.
Knowing day four is technically day five may take a bit of adjusting to.
What next? Four stumps to bowl at ?
RIP Marty Crowe
-
