Tri Series Cricket
-
Reality is that if the top four don't do a lot of the batting, then you're rarely going to win.
I think one thing this season has shown is that, if he gets going, de Grandhomme is our most destructive batsman along with Munro. Don't know whether that's because he's in a rich vein of form or his batting really has gone to a new level, but it looks like the latter. Regardless, why wouldn't you use him? I can't see any point in batting him lower than five and I'd float him to four if we don't lose early wickets.
Then you need a few people who can ice the cake and make sure we win unless we've fallen in a heap at the top (if we have the game is gone so we just take our bitter medicine). To me (on an admittedly small sample) - Blundell looks a bit like a nurdler, where I reckon you want someone who can hit powerfully. I'd be inclined to go with the Baron's suggestion of Seifert - who I haven't really seen, but he scored the third most runs in the Super Smash at a rate of 146, so he appears to be able to hold a bat.
Southee at seven, Santner at eight - Sodhi, Boult, Ferguson.
Like NQ I'm completely mystified why Ferguson isn't in the squad and Kitchen is. Last night you just knew that Colin's holding pattern for three overs wasn't going to cut the mustard (in fact, I couldn't see why we didn't follow the McCullum plan of just bowling out your best bowlers and leaving Colin and Munro to bowl the final three).
-
I donât follow cricket as closely as most here probably do but always wish the black caps well,
But it seems to me every time we string a few wins together a lot in Nz particularly the media get ahead of themselves
-
@kiwiinmelb People always get a bit excited - it is after all the Black Caps - so there's been long dry spells and you've got to drink heavily at the well while it's raining!
But, I don't think we're too far ahead of ourselves. We have got a good team - it's just that T20 is a bit of a crapshoot.
Notably, with three T20 losses we've fallen from first to third in the world, while with one win Australia has moved from seventh to fifth equal. In reality it is a joke to think that they would ever be seventh and behind e.g. the Windies.
Pretty much all the rankings are equally flimsy - neither Munro nor Sodhi have retained their number one rankings, while Santner has stolen the number one bowling crown.
I'd tend to think the IPL auction is a better indicator of rankings (albeit slanted towards playing in Indian conditions) and it would be pretty interesting to look at the market cap of the Oz team vs us. Someone like Warner or Lynn is probably going to earn more than all our guys together.
Have to admit, since I don't watch the Big Bash, Stanlake was a revelation to me. Bowling a bit like Mitchell Starc on steriods!
-
@chris-b said in Tri Series Cricket:
Reality is that if the top four don't do a lot of the batting, then you're rarely going to win.
I think one thing this season has shown is that, if he gets going, de Grandhomme is our most destructive batsman along with Munro. Don't know whether that's because he's in a rich vein of form or his batting really has gone to a new level, but it looks like the latter. Regardless, why wouldn't you use him? I can't see any point in batting him lower than five and I'd float him to four if we don't lose early wickets.
Then you need a few people who can ice the cake and make sure we win unless we've fallen in a heap at the top (if we have the game is gone so we just take our bitter medicine). To me (on an admittedly small sample) - Blundell looks a bit like a nurdler, where I reckon you want someone who can hit powerfully. I'd be inclined to go with the Baron's suggestion of Seifert - who I haven't really seen, but he scored the third most runs in the Super Smash at a rate of 146, so he appears to be able to hold a bat.
Southee at seven, Santner at eight - Sodhi, Boult, Ferguson.
Like NQ I'm completely mystified why Ferguson isn't in the squad and Kitchen is. Last night you just knew that Colin's holding pattern for three overs wasn't going to cut the mustard (in fact, I couldn't see why we didn't follow the McCullum plan of just bowling out your best bowlers and leaving Colin and Munro to bowl the final three).
I completely agree with you. I think ideally in a T20, I think you generally want to pick your best five bowlers. We are lucky that all of our top five bowlers can do something with the bat (Boult can hit a fair few sixes). You need one of your top 4 to go big. De Grandhomme should probably be at five right now but I would rather have Anderson do that job long term.
-
@chris-b said in Tri Series Cricket:
@kiwiinmelb People always get a bit excited - it is after all the Black Caps - so there's been long dry spells and you've got to drink heavily at the well while it's raining!
But, I don't think we're too far ahead of ourselves. We have got a good team - it's just that T20 is a bit of a crapshoot.
Notably, with three T20 losses we've fallen from first to third in the world, while with one win Australia has moved from seventh to fifth equal. In reality it is a joke to think that they would ever be seventh and behind e.g. the Windies.
Pretty much all the rankings are equally flimsy - neither Munro nor Sodhi have retained their number one rankings, while Santner has stolen the number one bowling crown.
I'd tend to think the IPL auction is a better indicator of rankings (albeit slanted towards playing in Indian conditions) and it would be pretty interesting to look at the market cap of the Oz team vs us. Someone like Warner or Lynn is probably going to earn more than all our guys together.
Have to admit, since I don't watch the Big Bash, Stanlake was a revelation to me. Bowling a bit like Mitchell Starc on steriods!
The thing people miss is that we play heaps of T20s and a high proportion of them have been at home in our summer. Of course, that is going to inflate our ranking. Australia play 5-6 home tests over a summer and often head off overseas in late March. They just don't have time for ten T20 internationals.
-
@hydro11 said in Tri Series Cricket:
@gunner said in Tri Series Cricket:
@kiwimurph said in Tri Series Cricket:
Why the hell does CDG bat so low
Good question.
If Bruce is just there to be a hitter at 4 (which he is fucking failing at) put CDG there instead as he can hit it but he can also actually bat.
It's easy to be reactionary though. CdG averaged 14 in T20Is before today. Hardly the sign of someone who should be batting at 4.
Genuine question: what is Bruce averaging?
The disappointing thing about that result was with the exception of Bruce (and I'll admit I wouldn't know who to replace him with) I couldn't think of a better XI.
-
@booboo Bruce is averaging 18.83.
Not really good enough when he's had the majority of his innings batting in the top 4.
Corey Anderson has done significantly better batting up the order - more runs and faster.
At present, I'd replace Bruce with Ferguson - change the balance of the team. (As above, I'd also try Seifert ahead of Blundell).
Interesting to see the TAB odds on this series - Oz 2.20; England 2.50; NZ 3.75.
We're significant outsiders now after one loss in a six match series where we get three home games.
Wish I'd looked before it started - anyone know our odds at the start?
-
-
@hydro11 Disappointing, at least.
Those odds seem to be a bit of an indictment of our ranking, given that three wins should be enough to get you into the final and - if we make it - we're guaranteed a home final.
I might make my way down to the TAB and have a bit of a punt on us - if Hesson can guarantee me that he's not going to throw the Kitchen Sink at the Aussies!
-
@chris-b said in Tri Series Cricket:
@booboo Bruce is averaging 18.83.
Not really good enough when he's had the majority of his innings batting in the top 4.
Corey Anderson has done significantly better batting up the order - more runs and faster.
At present, I'd replace Bruce with Ferguson - change the balance of the team. (As above, I'd also try Seifert ahead of Blundell).
Interesting to see the TAB odds on this series - Oz 2.20; England 2.50; NZ 3.75.
We're significant outsiders now after one loss in a six match series where we get three home games.
Wish I'd looked before it started - anyone know our odds at the start?
Nine showed dome Aussie odds last night. Think it was something like 2.25 Aussie, 2.80 each NZ and England. But don't quote me.
-
@chris-b said in Tri Series Cricket:
@hydro11 Disappointing, at least.
Those odds seem to be a bit of an indictment of our ranking, given that three wins should be enough to get you into the final and - if we make it - we're guaranteed a home final.
I might make my way down to the TAB and have a bit of a punt on us - if Hesson can guarantee me that he's not going to throw the Kitchen Sink at the Aussies!
Dad joke perfection in this post if you look hard enough
-
@mn5 said in Tri Series Cricket:
@chris-b said in Tri Series Cricket:
@hydro11 Disappointing, at least.
Those odds seem to be a bit of an indictment of our ranking, given that three wins should be enough to get you into the final and - if we make it - we're guaranteed a home final.
I might make my way down to the TAB and have a bit of a punt on us - if Hesson can guarantee me that he's not going to throw the Kitchen Sink at the Aussies!
Dad joke perfection in this post if you look hard enough
Don't haved to look that hard ...
-
-
@kiwipie said in Tri Series Cricket:
Bruce's technique against good fast bowling appears to be "open up stance and hit them over mid-wicket" (in fact that is his technique against all bowling). Not sure it will ever work consistently above provincial level
Felt like our small grounds caught us as well. Big hitting in NZ is not the same as big hitting at the SCG ... just caught on the boundary.
Not surew hat we can do about that though... the grounds are already built
-
From sportsroom oped from steve deane
T20 cricket: sport's greasy two-piece pack
The Tuesday Morning Quarterback falls in and out of love with T20 cricket in the space of a mis-timed slog to cow corner.
T20 cricket: sportâs greasy two-piece pack
The Tuesday Morning Quarterback falls in and out of love with T20 cricket in the space of a mis-timed slog to cow corner.
Itâs not cricket â and weâre not supposed to care. Every âtrueâ cricket lover implicitly knows that about Twenty-20 or T20 or IT20 or the Big Bash, Smash, Crash Super Duper Premier League or whatever the hell the latest iteration is called.
Itâs nonsense. Patience and boredom are two of the central planks of the great game of cricket. Without them, itâs just men in pyjamas having a lark in the park on a summerâs day.
Thereâs nothing wrong with that. We all have days where we canât be bothered dressing properly â ie in full length creams. But we shouldnât care. And we donât care. Because T20 is a nonsense.
Except. Shheeeet.
âWhy the hell would Martin Guptil play a crazy slog sweep against a leg spinner he canât pick when the dude has one ball left in his spell?
âAnd why I am not laughing at the usually brilliant openerâs brain fart? Why am I angry with him?â
âShit!â
Thirteen years after it first infiltrated the sport in a blaze of brown and beige and teased hair, T20 has finally cut through to the point where we (hard-line cricket purists) do actually give a toss.
The sneaking suspicion on this columnâs part after it leaped out of its laziboy to scream abuse at the unfortunate Guptil that people are starting to care about the meaningless was shockingly confirmed by the ravings of a fellow sporting misanthrope.
Say it ainât so, Marty?
âI know. Hush my mouth. I know. It goes against every honourable principle I did once so vehemently rage... But tonight. I actually care about this T20. Care about winning I mean. Is it bcos itâs Oz? Or worse, bcos Iâve actually grown to care?â tweeted sports talk jock Martin Devlin ahead of Saturday nightâs showdown with Australia.
It is so. And it was always going to be so.
T20 is the unwanted mega-mall that sprung up in your once semi-rural, gentrified back yard. Once the fight at the environment court is lost and the darn thing is built, youâre going to shop there, like it or not.
You canât fight progress. Or kids.
And T20 is custom-made for an ADHD generation being raised by time-poor parents. T20 is the family game, not least because you can take the young whippersnappers along and, no matter how annoyingly they behave, it is always going to be over in three hours.
So even we hardliners pack the stands, gritting our teeth as another thick edge flies over the tiny third man boundary for six. We resist the urge to tell our beaming kids that, âSon, that right there is god-damn terrible shot and you should avert your eyesâ.
First, they came for the leave outside off stump â and we said nothing. Then they came for the forward defensive shot â and still we said nothing. Then Glenn bloody Maxwell reverse-hooked a fast bowler for six â and it was too bloody late.
The curtain had gone up. The Big Show was in town. And he wasnât going anywhere. And now we care.
But what do we care about? For all its razzle dazzle, T20 seldom lives up to its billing. Matches are rarely close, even less often genuinely enthralling.
The Black Caps have played seven IT20s this summer and not one of them has been remotely thrilling.
On Saturday night the Black Caps got to play a coveted, long-awaited match against Australia. It was over as contest inside four overs. Thatâs so often the harsh reality of T20. The game is simply too abbreviated to accommodate gritty, meritorious comebacks.
On Tuesday night the Black Caps play another much-anticipated date, with England. Win or lose, itâs unlikely to be a thriller.
England will smash the Blacks Caps. Or the Black Caps will smash England. They might even smash each other in something resembling a decent contest. But even that best-case scenario will reveal precisely nothing about the two nationsâ respective cricketing prowess.
The match wonât tell us which nation possesses more players of true substance. There will be no bragging rights, because there isnât really anything on the line.
Sure, there will be a result. And we might now even care what it is. But we donât seriously expect to be fulfilled in any meaningful way
T20 cricket might now have a place at the table, but it is still fast food. Like most fast foods, when the initial surge of guilty pleasure fades, the consumer is left feeling hollow, unsated and wondering why they pulled up to the drive-through in the first place.
-
What the fuck is with the ridiculous scheduling of this "tournament"?
We play, then wait 2 weeks before we play again. Aus play us, wait 4 days, play England, then play England again 3 days later. The final is on a fucking Wednesday. In Auckland.
It's 20-over cricket, the could have this whole thing knocked over in 10 days easy.
-
@mariner4life what a travelling cockup it is. Some of these cricket administrators need to be shot into the sun.
Batting records | Twenty20 Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
