NZ v Australia Test #1
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="dingo" data-cid="557675" data-time="1455060324">
<div>
<p>Anderson was either bowling noticeably quicker in the ODIs (quicker balls at mid 130s, with occasional higher 130s) or the radar gun was buggered. He would be a much more useful 4th seamer than in the past.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Yep, he cracked 140kmh on a couple of occasions too. I'm reasonably comfortable having him as a fourth seamer.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I'm far less comfortable with Mark Craig playing. He's just not good enough to be effective on any wickets that aren't super-assistive to his spin. I don't give a fuck if he's eked out a test batting average of nearly 37 - he's primarily there to take wickets and in that facet he's been found wanting. If the selectors think Sodhi isn't suited to test cricket and Santner is out, then don't pick someone just for the sake of having a spin option. Williamson can throw down a few overs if conditions suddenly become conducive to spin, but we're better off picking either an extra batsman (not possible as we don't have a spare on this squad) or an all-seam attack and I'd go for Bracewell, Henry, Southee and Boult, in that batting order. That makes Anderson a fifth seamer.</p> -
<p>I just don't see the point in Anderson playing if he is your 5th seamer. If Anderson really one of the six best batsmen in the country? I get that the squad has been picked and you have to do the best with what you have but Anderson's batting isn't good enough to be picked just for that.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If I was picking the quicks I would go for Boult, Henry and Wagner. I like Wagner bowling into the wind. Southee would get the nod if he was fit and if he had performed domestically. I think Bracewell did bowl better in Aussie than his figures suggested but Wagner out performed him in the Sri Lankan series.</p> -
Bloody hell, innocently clicked on a Herald article and the bloody thing was written by Ratpoo. <br><br>
Only read the first paragraph, but he's basically just gone and fucked our chances of winning this series by banging on about how the BCs are in the box seat, blah blah blah.<br><br>
Fuckin sneaky Herald, not having the author of the article with the headline. -
<p>I think they'll play Craig because he did OK in the 2nd innings vs Sri Lanka in the last test at the Basin. As others have said, Anderson to replace Santner in the batting lineup and only select 3 quicks (Boult, Southee and Henry/Bracewell). Anderson's workload as the 4th seamer would have to be monitored as well, looking ahead to the T20 WC. The problem is that Craig can't even be used confidently as a stock bowler into the wind as he leaks runs.</p>
-
<p>It's maybe a bit niggly but Bracewell has yet to score a test 50 but if he plays he always bats ahead of Craig, Southee and even Boult who has one. He scored a good 47 against Sri Lanka but when is he gonna start delivering on the talent he has ? Those guys are all there for their bowling, I get that but I'd be pissed off if I was one of the aforementioned latter guys. I may rip the shit out of Craig on here as a bowler but he is an extremely decent low order batsman so if he has to play at least he brings that to the table.</p>
-
Doug's batting has been good since his return to the side. I think he's worked out his method now.<br><br>
Get the feeling Santner's injury costs Doug a starting place. -
<p>I agree if Taylor and Santner were fit he probably would play ahead of Anderson.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>However his batting was shit in the ODI when he had time/overs to bat and build an innings. Only one innings sure but the nature of his dismissal - beaten all ends up bowled - didn't suggest he could provide dependability or stick-ability in the lower order you need in a test match. Plus he was the one to advise Milne not to review his LBW.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>He may still beat out Henry though as McCullum and Hesson both made comments about his bowling being better than his figures suggest.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="557928" data-time="1455144672">
<div>
<p>So all this being said looks like poor old Wagner is definitely gonna miss out ? pretty rough but that's the price you pay for having depth I guess.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I would like to see Bracewell, Henry, Southee and Boult.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Bit it will likely be Craig, Wagner, Southee and Boult.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="557930" data-time="1455145298">
<div>
<p>I would like to see Bracewell, Henry, Southee and Boult.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Bit it will likely be Craig, Wagner, Southee and Boult.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't think Wagner will get in much as I'm a fan of his workhorse nature.</p> -
<p>how does Craig keep getting picked? He's dreadfully ordinary</p>
-
<p>I guess he has provided valuable runs in our previous test wins and done the job (taken wickets) when a spinner needs to in the 4th innning when there has been assistance and a big lead (which alot of our other spinners inculuding Vettori have not always done). When he hasn't been effective or expensive our pace bowlers have usually been able to take 10 wickets anyway.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The only time he has been terrible was the latest series in Oz but Lyons who is considered one of the best around didn't do much better on those roads.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So given Santners injury he has earned another chance. I guess he will be highly motivated.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I personally would prefer Sodhi but it has been a hallmark of Hesson that he is loyal to people who have got the job done for him in the past and whose attitude he likes.</p> -
Long range weather forecast has improved and suggests there will now be no weather interruptions<br><br>Northerly throughout and only really fresh on Sunday so the need for a workhorse diminishes.<br><br>I really like Wagners attitude and he's never let us down. However Henry appeals more as a wicket taking option and I think to beat Oz we need to consistently get them out cheaply because I think the balance of our batting is deeply affected by our injury absences.<br><br>Fascinating test in prospect.<br><br>Who will we pick<br><br>Will Boult be Lightning or Listless<br>Is Southee over his injury - and even if he is will he turn up<br>Is the Kane train on track<br>Please be fit BJ - and back in form<br><br>and that's before you even start to consider the opposition.<br><br>BRING IT ON!
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="mariner4life" data-cid="557936" data-time="1455146781">
<div>
<p>how does Craig keep getting picked? He's dreadfully ordinary</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Cos the NZ selectors have it in their heads they need a spinner so a decent quick misses out to an ordinary spinner every time.</p> -
Craig has alternated between bloody marvellous and bloody awful. The issue isn't that Craig is useless, it's that he's terribly inconsistent. Not just between games, but inconsistent between days or spells.<br><br>
Craig is the least of our concerns though. This is the weakest we've looked for about 3 years.<br><br>
Taylor out and Baz no longer the 2014 version, and Corey looking scratchy. This is our weakest middle order since Cape Town.<br><br>
Boult and Southee both having listless injury disrupted seasons.<br><br>
4. Nicholls<br>
5. McCullum<br>
6. Anderdon<br>
Is powder puff soft. God help us if Ronchi is at 7.<br><br>
Likely team<br>
Latham<br>
Guptill<br>
Williamson<br>
Nicholls<br>
McCullum <br>
Anderson <br>
Watling <br>
Craig<br>
Wagner<br>
Southee<br>
Boult -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="557943" data-time="1455149238"><p>
Cos the NZ selectors have it in their heads they need a spinner so a decent quick misses out to an ordinary spinner every time.</p></blockquote>
Because tests last (potentially)5 days, and tosses (are theoretically) 50/50. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Immenso Rapido" data-cid="557946" data-time="1455149756">
<div>
<p>Because tests last (potentially)5 days, and tosses (are theoretically) 50/50.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>So he doesn't take wickets and leaks runs but it's ok cos he provides "variation" huh ?</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="557947" data-time="1455150554"><p>
So he doesn't take wickets and leaks runs but it's ok cos he provides "variation" huh ?</p></blockquote>He does take wickets. He's taken plenty of 3rd/4th innings wickets. And produced 3 match winning performances in his 15 odd tests.
