Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022
-
@chris said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@dogmeat said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@kiwibloke said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
Anyway, it was a no-brainer before the test 11 was selected that Patel should've played at 7 ahead of Ravindra
How many wickets has Patel taken in NZ?
Oh - that's right ZIP, ZERO, NADA, NONE.
No brainer
I guess it must be his batting that would have you picking him - after all he averages 6 in NZ (& 10 overall)
Take the Indian outlier away and despite playing the majority of his career in spin friendly countries he has 29 wickets @32.48. Very respectable for a Kiwi spinner but hardly a performance that demands inclusion in home conditions.
I have to agree Nothing about those stats warrants selection as a bat at 7 thats for sure.
Before the test I Couldn't see one of the quicks getting dropped for Patel.
Would not of made any difference to this result.Just playing devils advocate for a bit, even the comms were saying the pitch was not playing like a traditional NZ pitch, therefore you could argue the home stats were a little irrelevant.
What was the correct team to play?, I don't know and given so many who would be playing regardless (both with bat and ball) were below par, it may not have made a difference regardless, however he may altered the outcome. As for Patels batting, true he isn't going score a lot, but at least he showed in India he could defend which was something our current middle/lower order failed to apply.
-
@bayimports said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@chris said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@dogmeat said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@kiwibloke said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
Anyway, it was a no-brainer before the test 11 was selected that Patel should've played at 7 ahead of Ravindra
How many wickets has Patel taken in NZ?
Oh - that's right ZIP, ZERO, NADA, NONE.
No brainer
I guess it must be his batting that would have you picking him - after all he averages 6 in NZ (& 10 overall)
Take the Indian outlier away and despite playing the majority of his career in spin friendly countries he has 29 wickets @32.48. Very respectable for a Kiwi spinner but hardly a performance that demands inclusion in home conditions.
I have to agree Nothing about those stats warrants selection as a bat at 7 thats for sure.
Before the test I Couldn't see one of the quicks getting dropped for Patel.
Would not of made any difference to this result.Just playing devils advocate for a bit, even the comms were saying the pitch was not playing like a traditional NZ pitch, therefore you could argue the home stats were a little irrelevant.
What was the correct team to play?, I don't know and given so many who would be playing regardless (both with bat and ball) were below par, it may not have made a difference regardless, however he may altered the outcome. As for Patels batting, true he isn't going score a lot, but at least he showed in India he could defend which was something our current middle/lower order failed to apply.
Change the tactics for the quicks was the answer. Bangladesh showed us how.
Use the variable bounce by hitting the pitch harder and bowl at the stumps.Cross seam as well to stand the ball up more harder to hit on the top of the bounce than half volleys outside off stump which is what we mainly dished up.
Patel would not have won the game, Ravinda did the same really as Patel would have he bowled well, without wkts he got good turn and was economical.
The main wkt takers for Bangladesh were their quicks not their spinners they didn't run through us it was the quicks with right tactics.
Team was selected correctly,Tactics,Intensity and commitment were lacking.
Edit .
Blundel has to go weak WK, and technically deficient with the bat -
@chris said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@bayimports said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@chris said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@dogmeat said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@kiwibloke said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
Anyway, it was a no-brainer before the test 11 was selected that Patel should've played at 7 ahead of Ravindra
How many wickets has Patel taken in NZ?
Oh - that's right ZIP, ZERO, NADA, NONE.
No brainer
I guess it must be his batting that would have you picking him - after all he averages 6 in NZ (& 10 overall)
Take the Indian outlier away and despite playing the majority of his career in spin friendly countries he has 29 wickets @32.48. Very respectable for a Kiwi spinner but hardly a performance that demands inclusion in home conditions.
I have to agree Nothing about those stats warrants selection as a bat at 7 thats for sure.
Before the test I Couldn't see one of the quicks getting dropped for Patel.
Would not of made any difference to this result.Just playing devils advocate for a bit, even the comms were saying the pitch was not playing like a traditional NZ pitch, therefore you could argue the home stats were a little irrelevant.
What was the correct team to play?, I don't know and given so many who would be playing regardless (both with bat and ball) were below par, it may not have made a difference regardless, however he may altered the outcome. As for Patels batting, true he isn't going score a lot, but at least he showed in India he could defend which was something our current middle/lower order failed to apply.
Change the tactics for the quicks was the answer. Bangladesh showed us how.
Use the variable bounce by hitting the pitch harder and bowl at the stumps.Cross seam as well to stand the ball up more harder to hit on the top of the bounce than half volleys outside off stump which is what we mainly dished up.
Patel would not have won the game, Ravinda did the same really as Patel would have he bowled well, without wkts he got good turn and was economical.
The main wkt takers for Bangladesh were their quicks not their spinners they didn't run through us it was the quicks with right tactics.
Team was selected correctly,Tactics,Intensity and commitment were lacking.
Edit .
Blundel has to go weak WK, and technically deficient with the batI think I agree with almost everything you have mentioned, although I believe if Ravindra was the swap he may have got more wickets or put more pressure on from that end, as he is a better spinner than Ravindra. However it is a moot point even for me as he would not have changed what others lacked which I agree with you tactics, intensity and commitment was well below par.
Also agree on Blundel, will be interesting to see if Stead has it in him to make the call
-
I think the side would always have been what it was. I was surprised that Patel wasn't at least an option in the wider squad though, and while he was always unlikely to have been selected in the final XI because recent history of pitches... the spin taken in both T20 matches at Bay Oval on the 23rd was a good reminder not to take NZ pitches as a given.
-
@donsteppa said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
I think the side would always have been what it was. I was surprised that Patel wasn't at least an option in the wider squad though, and while he was always unlikely to have been selected in the final XI because recent history of pitches... the spin taken in both T20 matches at Bay Oval on the 23rd was a good reminder not to take NZ pitches as a given.
Did we not bother consulting with the groundsman? There was nothing wrong with the pitch, the Bangles seamers did just fine
-
@bayimports said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@chris said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@bayimports said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@chris said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@dogmeat said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@kiwibloke said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
Anyway, it was a no-brainer before the test 11 was selected that Patel should've played at 7 ahead of Ravindra
How many wickets has Patel taken in NZ?
Oh - that's right ZIP, ZERO, NADA, NONE.
No brainer
I guess it must be his batting that would have you picking him - after all he averages 6 in NZ (& 10 overall)
Take the Indian outlier away and despite playing the majority of his career in spin friendly countries he has 29 wickets @32.48. Very respectable for a Kiwi spinner but hardly a performance that demands inclusion in home conditions.
I have to agree Nothing about those stats warrants selection as a bat at 7 thats for sure.
Before the test I Couldn't see one of the quicks getting dropped for Patel.
Would not of made any difference to this result.Just playing devils advocate for a bit, even the comms were saying the pitch was not playing like a traditional NZ pitch, therefore you could argue the home stats were a little irrelevant.
What was the correct team to play?, I don't know and given so many who would be playing regardless (both with bat and ball) were below par, it may not have made a difference regardless, however he may altered the outcome. As for Patels batting, true he isn't going score a lot, but at least he showed in India he could defend which was something our current middle/lower order failed to apply.
Change the tactics for the quicks was the answer. Bangladesh showed us how.
Use the variable bounce by hitting the pitch harder and bowl at the stumps.Cross seam as well to stand the ball up more harder to hit on the top of the bounce than half volleys outside off stump which is what we mainly dished up.
Patel would not have won the game, Ravinda did the same really as Patel would have he bowled well, without wkts he got good turn and was economical.
The main wkt takers for Bangladesh were their quicks not their spinners they didn't run through us it was the quicks with right tactics.
Team was selected correctly,Tactics,Intensity and commitment were lacking.
Edit .
Blundel has to go weak WK, and technically deficient with the batI think I agree with almost everything you have mentioned, although I believe if Ravindra was the swap he may have got more wickets or put more pressure on from that end, as he is a better spinner than Ravindra. However it is a moot point even for me as he would not have changed what others lacked which I agree with you tactics, intensity and commitment was well below par.
Also agree on Blundel, will be interesting to see if Stead has it in him to make the call
I hope so , But I reckon same 11 for ChCh is what they will do.
-
I think Mitchell is a chance if the Hagley Oval pitch is indeed the outfield with a couple of passes of the heavy roller, but the TAB odds would be on unchanged.
Unless the Stuff reporter had good inside oil with that Day Four article speculating on seam bowling rotation with Henry.
-
@chris how exactly do you 'hit the pitch harder' without bowling short? It was always one of those phrases I never quite understood, especially when when an opener who has never tried bowling fast in his life is yelling it to me from the slips. It's a bit like 'bend your back son'.
-
@crazy-horse said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@chris how exactly do you 'hit the pitch harder' without bowling short? It was always one of those phrases I never quite understood, especially when when an opener who has never tried bowling fast in his life is yelling it to me from the slips. It's a bit like 'bend your back son'.
The velocity of the ball at impact with the pitch?
-
@canefan said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@crazy-horse said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@chris how exactly do you 'hit the pitch harder' without bowling short? It was always one of those phrases I never quite understood, especially when when an opener who has never tried bowling fast in his life is yelling it to me from the slips. It's a bit like 'bend your back son'.
The velocity of the ball at impact with the pitch?
Try yelling that at a fast bowler from the slips when he's already pissed off.
-
@crazy-horse said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@chris how exactly do you 'hit the pitch harder' without bowling short? It was always one of those phrases I never quite understood, especially when when an opener who has never tried bowling fast in his life is yelling it to me from the slips. It's a bit like 'bend your back son'.
Shorten your length to 8 metres instead of 6 m to hit too of off stump.
Bowl from your full height and not just roll your arm over to kiss the surface.
Hard to explain on a forum but easier to coach.If you watch an over from Taskin compared to watching one from Southee you will see what I mean .
It is the difference between bowling along the pitch to hit half way up of the stumps to shorten your length to hit top off stump:
-
@chris said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
Shorten your length to 8 metres instead of 6 m to hit too of off stump.
Bowl from your full height and not just roll your arm over to kiss the surface.
Hard to explain on a forum but easier to coach.Yep now I am a Grumpy Old Man I understand it, but as a Grumpy young man it would piss me off no end hearing 'hit the pitch harder!' A simple ' Hey Crazy you are dropping your front shoulder' would have helped more than the cliches we often got thrown our way.
It sounds like coaching has improved since my day. Back then it was almost non existent below first class level.
-
@crazy-horse said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@canefan said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@crazy-horse said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@chris how exactly do you 'hit the pitch harder' without bowling short? It was always one of those phrases I never quite understood, especially when when an opener who has never tried bowling fast in his life is yelling it to me from the slips. It's a bit like 'bend your back son'.
The velocity of the ball at impact with the pitch?
Try yelling that at a fast bowler from the slips when he's already pissed off.
Making him madder? Isn't that the point?
-
@crazy-horse said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@chris said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
Shorten your length to 8 metres instead of 6 m to hit too of off stump.
Bowl from your full height and not just roll your arm over to kiss the surface.
Hard to explain on a forum but easier to coach.Yep now I am a Grumpy Old Man I understand it, but as a Grumpy young man it would piss me off no end hearing 'hit the pitch harder!' A simple ' Hey Crazy you are dropping your front shoulder' would have helped more than the cliches we often got thrown our way.
It sounds like coaching has improved since my day. Back then it was almost non existent below first class level.
To go a bit further - it's about trajectories and speed.
If you watch the speed guns - bouncers often appear to be quite slow deliveries because the ball has to travel more distance to get to the batsman.
But, if you're a bowler who is getting tired, you can release the ball a bit earlier - parallel to the pitch and let gravity do its work - the ball will kiss the pitch (as Chris says) and you won't get any sort of steepling bounce, but the speed guns probably won't really register much that you've not bowled an effort ball.
Comparatively, you don't have to shorten your length by much to hit the pitch much harder, get quite a bit more bounce, but not get to the batsman much quicker if at all.
Wagner - hits the pitch hard!
-
The Chris's have explained it well, it does mean you have to bend your back more but it is a really good tactic on dead, slower wickets. It's why Wags is effective regardless of the pitch as he's not afraid to bowl himself into the ground by hitting the deck hard if the pitch is not offering anything.
As @Chris has said already, it would have allowed us to exploit the variable bounce as some would sit up while others would keep lower and come onto the batsmen quicker.
I think they just expected the Bangladeshi batsmen to make mistakes if they bowled fuller regardless of the pitch. Latham and Stead should have been in the Bowlers ears demanding a lot more.
-
@no-quarter said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
The Chris's have explained it well, it does mean you have to bend your back more but it is a really good tactic on dead, slower wickets. It's why Wags is effective regardless of the pitch as he's not afraid to bowl himself into the ground by hitting the deck hard if the pitch is not offering anything.
As @Chris has said already, it would have allowed us to exploit the variable bounce as some would sit up while others would keep lower and come onto the batsmen quicker.
I think they just expected the Bangladeshi batsmen to make mistakes if they bowled fuller regardless of the pitch. Latham and Stead should have been in the Bowlers ears demanding a lot more.
And it's not like they didn't have enough time to sit down and change their plan when it became clear it wasn't working
-
@canefan said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@no-quarter said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
The Chris's have explained it well, it does mean you have to bend your back more but it is a really good tactic on dead, slower wickets. It's why Wags is effective regardless of the pitch as he's not afraid to bowl himself into the ground by hitting the deck hard if the pitch is not offering anything.
As @Chris has said already, it would have allowed us to exploit the variable bounce as some would sit up while others would keep lower and come onto the batsmen quicker.
I think they just expected the Bangladeshi batsmen to make mistakes if they bowled fuller regardless of the pitch. Latham and Stead should have been in the Bowlers ears demanding a lot more.
And it's not like they didn't have enough time to sit down and change their plan when it became clear it wasn't working
Only 170 overs, can't be expected to reassess your plan in that time
-
@canefan said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
@no-quarter said in Black Caps v Bangladesh 2022:
The Chris's have explained it well, it does mean you have to bend your back more but it is a really good tactic on dead, slower wickets. It's why Wags is effective regardless of the pitch as he's not afraid to bowl himself into the ground by hitting the deck hard if the pitch is not offering anything.
As @Chris has said already, it would have allowed us to exploit the variable bounce as some would sit up while others would keep lower and come onto the batsmen quicker.
I think they just expected the Bangladeshi batsmen to make mistakes if they bowled fuller regardless of the pitch. Latham and Stead should have been in the Bowlers ears demanding a lot more.
And it's not like they didn't have enough time to sit down and change their plan when it became clear it wasn't working
Exactly, so the problems were probably a bit deeper. There is a hell of a lot of experience in the Black Caps nowadays, you would expect them to make changes if things weren't working.
The past few years we have seen the Caps lose a session or a day, but they would normally bounce back and win a session or two of their own. For some reason it didn't happen in this game. I kept waiting, but no.
-
Our attack works best when the ball is swinging. When it isn't the bounce of Wagner is the go to. Not much swing in the dry heat at Bay Oval. I thought they might consider swapping Ajaz for Ravindra and Mitchell for Jamieson or maybe Southee in next one. Just looked at Dane Cleaver first class record. Even better than Cam Fletcher. I sense Tom Blundell could need a spell at first class level to rebuild his confidence.
