Black Caps v Australia
-
@LABCAT said in Black Caps v Australia:
Our bowling attack still could have got the twenty wickets though, bascially our batsmen let us down the whole series. If just one of the batters who got a 50 in that second innings stuck arround to get a score like Green did, the we have an extra 100 runs and probably win the game.
Nope that's way too simplistic. 4 of the top 5 had to battle to make 50s with the ball regularly beating the bat and with Hazlewood and Cummins constantly probing. Eventually there is a ball with your name on it and you get a nick. We should have won that game from 5 down today - I wasn't able to watch much of it but from what I saw runs were being leaked away to low risk shots. With a target that size you need to make the opposition sweat for every run not bowl 1-2 an over at the leg stump to be tucked away.
-
@nzzp said in Black Caps v Australia:
@mariner4life @MN5 I watched a lot of that series. Good fun. I don't love England, but they competed hard and it took some very good play to beat them.
I’m usually a big fan of your posts which makes me think maybe you’ve been hacked.
How is losing tests by 434 runs, 5 wickets and an innings and 64 runs “competing” ?
-
@MN5 said in Black Caps v Australia:
@nzzp said in Black Caps v Australia:
@mariner4life @MN5 I watched a lot of that series. Good fun. I don't love England, but they competed hard and it took some very good play to beat them.
I’m usually a big fan of your posts which makes me think maybe you’ve been hacked.
How is losing tests by 434 runs, 5 wickets and an innings and 64 runs “competing” ?
now you're making me doubt myself. I'll have a look tomorrow, see if I've misremembered this shit
-
@nzzp said in Black Caps v Australia:
@MN5 said in Black Caps v Australia:
@nzzp said in Black Caps v Australia:
@mariner4life @MN5 I watched a lot of that series. Good fun. I don't love England, but they competed hard and it took some very good play to beat them.
I’m usually a big fan of your posts which makes me think maybe you’ve been hacked.
How is losing tests by 434 runs, 5 wickets and an innings and 64 runs “competing” ?
now you're making me doubt myself. I'll have a look tomorrow, see if I've misremembered this shit
Admittedly I haven’t seen a single moment and am just going off the numbers but I’m fascinated to read your views, were you drinking
? -
Wallabies?
Make me think of an alternate timeline where Grizz Wylie tried to take the 91 All Blacks through to about 1994.
Same players, sane coach, same uniform. But about 20% extra shortcuts. 80% of the hunger.
It's been clear since they got beat by Sarel Erwee (who?) Just 2 tests after
gettingmissing a wake up call by Ebadot, that the senior players in this team had all but clocked out. That was 2 seasons ago.Stead been reappointed since, unopposed? Or unadvertised? Certainly was virtually unreported. It would actually be a quite attractive coaching job now, where as was very unattractive 2 years ago. Can get rid of Southee now, most of the other deadwood has been cleared, and move forward.
-
@KiwiPie said in Black Caps v Australia:
@LABCAT said in Black Caps v Australia:
Our bowling attack still could have got the twenty wickets though, bascially our batsmen let us down the whole series. If just one of the batters who got a 50 in that second innings stuck arround to get a score like Green did, the we have an extra 100 runs and probably win the game.
Nope that's way too simplistic. 4 of the top 5 had to battle to make 50s with the ball regularly beating the bat and with Hazlewood and Cummins constantly probing. Eventually there is a ball with your name on it and you get a nick. We should have won that game from 5 down today - I wasn't able to watch much of it but from what I saw runs were being leaked away to low risk shots. With a target that size you need to make the opposition sweat for every run not bowl 1-2 an over at the leg stump to be tucked away.
Yeah at times we were bowling like we were defending 100 runs less; getting way too straight searching for wickets. We needed to stick to our strengths, bowl good lines and lengths and force them to work.
I was really hopeful that Southee would be a better captain. Williamson was solid but tended to be a bit conservative. Southee is a pretty canny bowler and I hoped he'd bring that tactical nous to how he managed his bowlers and bowling plans. Instead we too often look bereft of ideas, can never resist a review and bowl Southee too often. Worse than Kane ever was.
Who are the other genuine candidates? Latham, but he's struggling for form a bit so would the added burden make that worse? Mitchell, Conway and Henry are probably the only other guys that are automatic selections with sufficient experience, and none of them really seem to stand out as big time leaders, but that can be hard to judge from the outside.
-
Test cricket is the best. Fine margins to a very good NZ test side. WOR, Henry, Sears and one other to find could be decent. Blundell is a good player going through a lean patch. KW, Latham, RR, DM are all very good players. GP could be mega. Keep the faith.
-
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Australia:
@KiwiPie said in Black Caps v Australia:
@LABCAT said in Black Caps v Australia:
Our bowling attack still could have got the twenty wickets though, bascially our batsmen let us down the whole series. If just one of the batters who got a 50 in that second innings stuck arround to get a score like Green did, the we have an extra 100 runs and probably win the game.
Nope that's way too simplistic. 4 of the top 5 had to battle to make 50s with the ball regularly beating the bat and with Hazlewood and Cummins constantly probing. Eventually there is a ball with your name on it and you get a nick. We should have won that game from 5 down today - I wasn't able to watch much of it but from what I saw runs were being leaked away to low risk shots. With a target that size you need to make the opposition sweat for every run not bowl 1-2 an over at the leg stump to be tucked away.
Yeah at times we were bowling like we were defending 100 runs less; getting way too straight searching for wickets. We needed to stick to our strengths, bowl good lines and lengths and force them to work.
I was really hopeful that Southee would be a better captain. Williamson was solid but tended to be a bit conservative. Southee is a pretty canny bowler and I hoped he'd bring that tactical nous to how he managed his bowlers and bowling plans. Instead we too often look bereft of ideas, can never resist a review and bowl Southee too often. Worse than Kane ever was.
Who are the other genuine candidates? Latham, but he's struggling for form a bit so would the added burden make that worse? Mitchell, Conway and Henry are probably the only other guys that are automatic selections with sufficient experience, and none of them really seem to stand out as big time leaders, but that can be hard to judge from the outside.
Good question. I don't mind the Mitchell option. He is aggressive in his attitude, although played the team "trust the process" card, but I suspect that is towing the line.
-
@bayimports said in Black Caps v Australia:
@Cyclops said in Black Caps v Australia:
@KiwiPie said in Black Caps v Australia:
@LABCAT said in Black Caps v Australia:
Our bowling attack still could have got the twenty wickets though, bascially our batsmen let us down the whole series. If just one of the batters who got a 50 in that second innings stuck arround to get a score like Green did, the we have an extra 100 runs and probably win the game.
Nope that's way too simplistic. 4 of the top 5 had to battle to make 50s with the ball regularly beating the bat and with Hazlewood and Cummins constantly probing. Eventually there is a ball with your name on it and you get a nick. We should have won that game from 5 down today - I wasn't able to watch much of it but from what I saw runs were being leaked away to low risk shots. With a target that size you need to make the opposition sweat for every run not bowl 1-2 an over at the leg stump to be tucked away.
Yeah at times we were bowling like we were defending 100 runs less; getting way too straight searching for wickets. We needed to stick to our strengths, bowl good lines and lengths and force them to work.
I was really hopeful that Southee would be a better captain. Williamson was solid but tended to be a bit conservative. Southee is a pretty canny bowler and I hoped he'd bring that tactical nous to how he managed his bowlers and bowling plans. Instead we too often look bereft of ideas, can never resist a review and bowl Southee too often. Worse than Kane ever was.
Who are the other genuine candidates? Latham, but he's struggling for form a bit so would the added burden make that worse? Mitchell, Conway and Henry are probably the only other guys that are automatic selections with sufficient experience, and none of them really seem to stand out as big time leaders, but that can be hard to judge from the outside.
Good question. I don't mind the Mitchell option. He is aggressive in his attitude, although played the team "trust the process" card, but I suspect that is toeing the line.
I suppose Conway is back to being an automatic selection given how Young went.
-
We thought Kyle would be a big loss before the series, and that proved to be the case. Too many injuries and not enough experience in the bowling department in the end. That Aus trio is very tough to match at the best of times.
-
It was really a lack of a killer instanct in the bowling department that runined this series for us. We seemed to be able to make inroads in their top order but on two very noticale occasions we couldn't finish off the tail.
Pluses are that Ravindra continues to grow and Sears is a good find. Unfortunately we probably need 2 more good bowling finds to shore up the attack.
-
Every new young (or youngish) player who has come into the test team this year have performed, and out-performed the stale WTC guys who have been cruising, and improved the team. Ravindra, Phillips, O'Rourke, Sears.
I'm not saying there's an endless supply. But there are heaps of options better than Southee.
There aren't any ready-made openers, though. Although green shoots are starting to sprout. So, hard to put pressure on Latham and Conway.
Blundell. Is rocks or daimonds. So, I'm not saying he's shot. But he could be replaced without much risk IMO (by Fletcher now). Or wait a further year and Hay or Chu might be putting the pressure on (but not yet).
-
-
-
I hope this isn't coming across as a "waaaaah, we lost, sack em all" post.
It's more an excitement at what looks like a an opportunity is arising to freshen things up (the end of Southee). I must admit, Southee, does bring out bad parts of me. For reasons I can't always finger exactly. Some of it is admittedly assumption. I guess I've seen him as a bit of a cruiser most of his career. And captaincy of a team of old guys on decline is the worst possible fit for a cruiser captain and a powerless coach.
A lot of our players have wasted the last quarter of their peak years in this environment. Should have got more out of them before they got to this stage.
-
Also not a: 'Southee made the team bad!' post.
The final summer under King Kane's captaincy was appalling.
Which is why I made the 1991 All backs comparison. It's the 'team of stale legends' problem. How do you fix that? It's almost impossible. Put up with it for 3 years (and counting). The NZC and Stead approach.
Or rip it up (and go to far). The NZRU and Mains approach.
-
Good to see Daryl Mitchell's comments rightly get taken apart:
-
@Donsteppa He's on a journey - just like his Dad
