NZ v Australia Test #1
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="559107" data-time="1455667149">
<div>
<p>I think if Boult and Southee were both on form, it would be a no-brainer to pick Wagner. However, given that they haven't been in such great form suggests that it makes sense to pick a 3rd strike bowler in Henry. Henry's case for selection is bolstered by the fact that the pitch should be a bit green and it is his home turf. The conundrum does make you tempted to just pick all 4 quick bowlers and drop Craig.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>The more I reflect on it the more I agree. People seemed to be angry at the batsman and saying if you are bowled out on the first day for 180 you can't expect to win etc.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>However this is demonstrably not true if you bowl the other team out for about the same or less. Our bowling had opportunities-opened the door and peaked through but couldn't kick it open and march through. Having Australia 2 down for 5 then Bracewell and Craig (and McCullum) in the space of one spell allowing them to hit so many soft boundaries to get themselves out of trouble. Then dropping Steve Smith. Allowing someone like Siddle to score 49 when we where trying to save the game. Allowing their batting lineup to score 562 on that pitch when the par score for the second or third innings was about 350 was really poor.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Our bowling was shithouse and lost us our game. Anyone expecting any drastic improvement in our batting with that lineup is going to be disappointed as our openers probably did better than normal. If the wicket is green in Christchurch and we lose the toss 180 could be the high tide mark. We need to improve our bowling effort and ensure we don't allow them to score over 350 again. Bracewell and Anderson should be replaced by Henry and Wagner. Move Watling up to six and Craig (who seems to get better results than Anderson and Bracewell even if his technique is not textbook can bat at 7.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Long tail but if Williamson doesn't score at least a century we are screwed anyway so no point stacking the tail with medicore batsman who are also medicore bowlers. 3 sloggers (Southee, Boult, and Henry) so one is guaranteed to hit a few 6s and a quickfire 30 which is probably better than what Anderson will score on a greentop.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="tubbyj" data-cid="559117" data-time="1455672084">
<div>
<p>The more I reflect on it the more I agree. People seemed to be angry at the batsman and saying if you are bowled out on the first day for 180 you can't expect to win etc.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>However this is demonstrably not true if you bowl the other team out for about the same or less. Our bowling had opportunities-opened the door and peaked through but couldn't kick it open and march through. Having Australia 2 down for 5 then Bracewell and Craig (and McCullum) in the space of one spell allowing them to hit so many soft boundaries to get themselves out of trouble. Then dropping Steve Smith. Allowing someone like Siddle to score 49 when we where trying to save the game. Allowing their batting lineup to score 562 on that pitch when the par score for the second or third innings was about 350 was really poor.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Our bowling was shithouse and lost us our game. Anyone expecting any drastic improvement in our batting with that lineup is going to be disappointed as our openers probably did better than normal. If the wicket is green in Christchurch and we lose the toss 180 could be the high tide mark. We need to improve our bowling effort and ensure we don't allow them to score over 350 again. Bracewell and Anderson should be replaced by Henry and Wagner. Move Watling up to six and Craig (who seems to get better results than Anderson and Bracewell even if his technique is not textbook can bat at 7.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Long tail but if Williamson doesn't score at least a century we are screwed anyway so no point stacking the tail with medicore batsman who are also medicore bowlers. 3 sloggers (Southee, Boult, and Henry) so one is guaranteed to hit a few 6s and a quickfire 30 which is probably better than what Anderson will score on a greentop.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>This is what I've said a few times this week... Henry is our only real seam bowler, if it's gonna be a green top then get him in there.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Wagner has been unfairly treated and should start also.</p> -
<p>If Taylor was fit I would definitely go with Tubby's suggestion. Picking 4 quicks and a spinner gives us a good chance of leveling the series. It's McCullum's last test and we are 1-0 down in the series. We will be playing for the win here. Taylor not being fit makes me think twice about it buy it may be a gamble worth taking.</p>
-
<p>Southee conceded 2.8 runs an over</p>
<p>Boult 3.06</p>
<p> </p>
<p>For 2 wickets a piece that is not bad. Compares ok with Hazelwood who was the best bowler in the game.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Bracewell 3.84</p>
<p>Anderson 4.38</p>
<p>Craig 4.33</p>
<p> </p>
<p>for 2 wickets apiece is too expensive. Craig gets pillored but Anderson bowled worse and contributed less with the bat.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Craig should keep his place ironically for his batting cause there are not many other options and whole sale changes reeks of panic (I don't think Munro and Elliot are even in the country, Brownlie is an opening batsman now) and must win test against Aus is not the time to give someone a debut or out of left field recall. Craig should not be allowed to bowl except on the last 2 days if the pitch is offering alot of assistance.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Wagner replaces Bracewell for injury.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Henry replaces Anderson because the latter is a mediocre bowler and doesn't seem capable of contributing with the bat against the better bowling attacks.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="tubbyj" data-cid="559120" data-time="1455672712">
<div>
<p>Henry replaces Anderson because the former is a mediocre bowler and doesn't seem capable of contributing with the bat against the better bowling attacks.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Anderson has got in, got set and then got out so often this summer. Intensely frustrating. He oozes potential, but just does not seem to deliver at the moment.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="tubbyj" data-cid="559120" data-time="1455672712">
<div>
<p>Southee conceded 2.8 runs an over</p>
<p>Boult 3.06</p>
<p> </p>
<p>For 2 wickets a piece that is not bad. Compares ok with Hazelwood who was the best bowler in the game.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Bracewell 3.84</p>
<p>Anderson 4.38</p>
<p>Craig 4.33</p>
<p> </p>
<p>for 2 wickets apiece is too expensive. <strong>Craig gets pillored but Anderson bowled worse and contributed less with the bat.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Craig should keep his place ironically for his batting cause there are not many other options and whole sale changes reeks of panic (I don't think Munro and Elliot are even in the country, Brownlie is an opening batsman now) and must win test against Aus is not the time to give someone a debut or out of left field recall. Craig should not be allowed to bowl except on the last 2 days if the pitch is offering alot of assistance.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Wagner replaces Bracewell for injury.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Henry replaces Anderson because the former is a mediocre bowler and doesn't seem capable of contributing with the bat against the better bowling attacks.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>It's perception though, you can't compare a 4th seamer with a frontline spinner.</p> -
<p>I think he just did....</p>
-
<p>The more I see of Colin Munros stats the more I wonder why he is not already batting 6 for NZ.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I went looking for a bowler who could bat but also bowl a few overs tightly in the 50-80 mark to save our strike bowlers.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Colin Munro who averages 48.20 from 40 matches also is a right arm medium fast bowler who has</p>
<p>45 wickets @ 29.66 but most importantly has an economy rate of 2.85 runs per over.</p>
<p>In his one test he bowled 18 overs 2 for 40. Economy rate of 2.22 runs per over.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Compare Corey Andersons 1st class stats</p>
<p>1st Class Batting average of 35.30</p>
<p>Bowling 37 wickets @ 41.32 economy rate of 3.21</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Jimmy Neesham</p>
<p>1st class Batting average 34.61</p>
<p>Bowling 76 wickets @ 32.75 economy rate of 3.52</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Grant Elliot</p>
<p>1st class Batting average 30.57</p>
<p>Bowling 92 wickets @ 36.71 economy rate 2.80.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So why has Colin Munro only been given one test in the sucide tour to SA with the team in chaos? Why have Anderson, Neesham and Elliot all been given a shot at the problem 6 position when they all have vastlty inferior first class stats?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Why wasn't Munro given a shot in the ODI's after looking to have got his head around playing international 20/20s? The guy is 28 and we look to be squandering his talent. He should be in the thick of our test team, ODI and 20/20 side not a bit part 20/20 player. He should have been persevered with after the SA tour and batted 6 behind Williamson, Taylor and McCullum.</p> -
<p style="margin-left:40px;">I once compared an apple to an orange, it worked, I knew they were both round, both grew on trees, both grow in my garden and I like to eat them both!</p>
-
<p>Munro in his one test got scores of 0 and 15. Not very impressive until you look further up the scorecard and see NZ's already best batsman ever got scores of 4 and 11. Both scored 15 runs in 2 innings against a meanacing SA attack at home in career best form.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So hardly justification for dropping him especially as he was NZ's best bowler in SA's one innings preforming better than Boult, Wagner, Bracewell and English 1st class champion Patel taking 2 for 40 from 18 at 2.22 runs per over.</p> -
<p>Anderson is a frontline batsman who is a part time bowler. Craig is a frontline bowler who happened to get a couple of good scores with the bat. DC might secure a couple of good turnovers and Richie might have an off night in that department but if DC made bad decisions, missed tackles, missed goal kicks etc then he might be in danger of being dropped. Get my drift ?</p>
-
<p>Cricket isn't like rugby because DC is smaller and would get ragdolled n the forwards. Cricket isn't so dependant of physical attributes as rugby it is more just a case of mental constructs.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Cricket is full of examples of people who defy these like Andrew Jones, Steve Smith and Mark Richardson.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="559148" data-time="1455677870">
<div>
<p>I think it is because Munro gives no indication that he can actually guts out an innings. He basically slogs at domestic level which translates to a very good T20 player but maybe not a great test number 6.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Unlike Anderson, Neesham and Elliot you mean who were given chances based on gutsing out what innings?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anderson and Neesham have scored centuries at test level but I don't recall that being in backs to the walls gutsing out situations against quality opponents or is my recollection wrong.</p> -
<p>No it's not.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Explained simpler. Craig was in as a frontline spinner, he sucked, his batting was a bonus but in itself shouldn't be enough to keep him in the team.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anderson was a batsman with more claims to be an "all rounder" than Craig. One ok score and a duck but should be given another chance and his bowling was ok under the circumstances.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="tubbyj" data-cid="559150" data-time="1455678114">
<div>
<p>Unlike Anderson, Neesham and Elliot you mean who were given chances based on gutsing out what innings?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anderson and Neesham have scored centuries at test level but I don't recall that being in backs to the walls gutsing out situations against quality opponents or is my recollection wrong.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Anderson has a FC SR of 58, Neesham's is 75 while Munro's is in the 90's. I think there is a feeling with Munro that quality bowling will undo him. Neesham's century against India was crucial, that was in the test where B Mac got his 300.</p>
