-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Matthew Walker quits Wellington
- Thread starter Tim
- Start date
Mingster
State Regular
I agree we need specialists for Tests and ODIs. But Walker and Canning would have come into calculations as a medium pace bowler on the slow tracks.
Apart from Harris, who is our 2nd slow/medium pace bowler? Or do we use Styris and Astle during the middle stages of the innings to bowl with Vettori on the slow pitches?
Apart from Harris, who is our 2nd slow/medium pace bowler? Or do we use Styris and Astle during the middle stages of the innings to bowl with Vettori on the slow pitches?
bryce
International Regular
the all round players are good in one-day internationals but are of no real benefit in test matches and the traditional team make-up of 6 specialist batsman(maybe one part-time bowler), a keeper and 4 specialist bolwers is very effective in test cricket which australia and to a lesser extent england have shown and i think new zealand(aswell as other countries) should adopt so players can focuse more on their roles in a test side.
Cairns was a quality test player, there is no doubting that. He would even be a huge lift to if he played against the Aussies. However I don't think Walker/Harris/Canning are even close to being of Cairns' quality. Slow-medium bowlers don't generally perform on the international stage. New Zealand *needs* specialists. We already ahve plenty of guys who can 'bowl a bit and bat a bit'.
Cairns was mainly a fast bowler, these other guys are slow-medium (maybe medium) bowlers who gain success in NZ from the wickets they play on. Walker and Canning got hit around against Pakistan on their flat pitches, and only got wickets when the Pakistanis were trying to smash them out of the park in the last few overs.
Cairns was mainly a fast bowler, these other guys are slow-medium (maybe medium) bowlers who gain success in NZ from the wickets they play on. Walker and Canning got hit around against Pakistan on their flat pitches, and only got wickets when the Pakistanis were trying to smash them out of the park in the last few overs.
Mingster said:
esp when the conditions are condusive to swing................
not saying that Canning & Walker fit that bill as I have no idea if they swing the ball or not, just that a decent slow swing bowler is an advantage in heavy conditions on any sort of pitch, even moreso if they can hold a bat...........
back to my horses for courses approach...........
Tim said:
From memory we have been down this road b4.................IMO
AUS uses 6-4 split although with Gilchrist you could say he is their allrounder at #7, although I expect more variation to this as McGrath & Warne become less dominant........
ENG usually 5-5 with Flintoff as the allrounder at #6.........
NZL = 5-5 with both Cairns & Oram as allrounders in ENG, and now with an extra bowler to replace Cairns since reitrement........
IND mainly go with 6-4..............
PAK = 6-4, but seem to have recently used 5-5 with Razzaq / Malik as allrounders.........
RSA = 6-4..............or 5-5 depending on how much bowling Kallis is up to.........and with Pollock / Kallis as allrounders.........
SRL = 6-4 with Sangakarra / Jayasuriya as allrounders.........
WIN = I would have said 6-4 with Gayle as the allrounder...........but
I'm not sure exactly what their current lineup is...............
ZIM & BAN = irrelevant IMO atm..............
If this thumbnail is close, then the thing of note is that in most cases the teams emphasise batting over bowling..............
only ENG, RSA & NZL seem to use 5-5 as a rule, with both NZL & RSA using 2 allrounders, however RSA has Kallis as a batting allrounder, whereas Cairns & Oram are primarily bowling allrounders...........furthermore in Styris NZL is using a converted ODI bowling allrounder as a specialist bastman.......
It seems to me that the NZL lineup has for years been dominated by selections with a bowling background, which would seem to fly in the face of everyone else - and this IMO puts too much emphasis on the lower order & tail to contribute runs on a regular basis.............
While this may lend the perception that NZL bats further down the order than most other teams, the reality is that the averages of the specialist batsmen are generally lower than their intnl counterparts, and those of the lower order & tail are no better than their counterparts, or at least not significantly so, while most of those players with an average approaching 40 odd are relatively new to the scene & have yet to perhaps establish the consistency to go with their average............
While the likes of Styris, Oram, McCullum & Vettori are seemingly improving their contributions / averages, my concern has been that the majority of the side are too free in their approach to batting, and lack the batting background / technique to have the necessary discipline required in certain circumstances let alone in building partnerships.............
Too often there has been a perception of brittleness from #4 down due to a lack of consistancy and this has contributed to a number of dramatic collapses & losses that may otherwise have been avoided - IMO the PAK, RSA & ENG series results could have been different had the batting been stronger, not just in selection ratio but also so far as technique / background goes and mix of styles of batsmen..........
McCullum may be an exception to this, but is only a recent addition to the side and batting at #7 the damage has usually been done prior to his arrival at the crease as too often the Top & Middle orders fail to contribute as a unit.........
Whilst it may be true that you need to take 20 wickets to win a match, firstly you must be able to post a total large enough to enable you to have the time to do so. How much time you need is largely determined by the strength of your bowling attack - genuine wicket taking bowlers as opposed to containment / attrition type bowlers.
Fleming's 'advance the game' strategy was an acknowledgement that the NZL bowling lacks genuine penetration & thus requires more time in order to bowl sides out. Where it 'failed' IMO was in the makeup of the batting in order to be able to execute the strategy - both in genuine batting depth & player mix.
IMO NZL need to bite the bullet & overhaul the side from top to bottom. For me I would like to see:
*a 6-4 ratio, with Oram 1 of the 4 bowling options as opposed to being an 'allrounder', as IMO he does not have the consistency as yet to carry that tag;
*McCullum would still bat at #7, but would be able to work with the batting lineup as most other intnl 'keepers do;
*A selection policy for the batting lineup based upon roles in the lineup, primarily with the view of being able to build partnerships from the top of the order - esp the ability to rotate the strike;
*A selection policy for the bowling attack to be able to provide variation to the standard RMF both in pace & line of attack, and persistance with selections;
*An acknowledgement the NZL does not have the resources available to other sides &;
*That domestic pitch conditions are primarily foreign to overseas conditions regarding pace, bounce & turn & as such are less than what is experienced overseas, &;
*Consequently a somewhat of a 'horses for courses' selection regarding both bowlers and batsmen so as to select side better suited to those conditions to be faced;
*A better utilisation of 'A' tours when considering prospective player selection for upcoming senior tours re the above;
*A strong push to have a side in the AUS domestic comps, as opposed to having players go the ENG in the off season.
Appolgies for the rant.............
While this may lend the perception that NZL bats further down the order than most other teams, the reality is that the averages of the specialist batsmen are generally lower than their intnl counterparts, and those of the lower order & tail are no better than their counterparts, or at least not significantly so, while most of those players with an average approaching 40 odd are relatively new to the scene & have yet to perhaps establish the consistency to go with their average............
While the likes of Styris, Oram, McCullum & Vettori are seemingly improving their contributions / averages, my concern has been that the majority of the side are too free in their approach to batting, and lack the batting background / technique to have the necessary discipline required in certain circumstances let alone in building partnerships.............
Too often there has been a perception of brittleness from #4 down due to a lack of consistancy and this has contributed to a number of dramatic collapses & losses that may otherwise have been avoided - IMO the PAK, RSA & ENG series results could have been different had the batting been stronger, not just in selection ratio but also so far as technique / background goes and mix of styles of batsmen..........
McCullum may be an exception to this, but is only a recent addition to the side and batting at #7 the damage has usually been done prior to his arrival at the crease as too often the Top & Middle orders fail to contribute as a unit.........
Whilst it may be true that you need to take 20 wickets to win a match, firstly you must be able to post a total large enough to enable you to have the time to do so. How much time you need is largely determined by the strength of your bowling attack - genuine wicket taking bowlers as opposed to containment / attrition type bowlers.
Fleming's 'advance the game' strategy was an acknowledgement that the NZL bowling lacks genuine penetration & thus requires more time in order to bowl sides out. Where it 'failed' IMO was in the makeup of the batting in order to be able to execute the strategy - both in genuine batting depth & player mix.
IMO NZL need to bite the bullet & overhaul the side from top to bottom. For me I would like to see:
*a 6-4 ratio, with Oram 1 of the 4 bowling options as opposed to being an 'allrounder', as IMO he does not have the consistency as yet to carry that tag;
*McCullum would still bat at #7, but would be able to work with the batting lineup as most other intnl 'keepers do;
*A selection policy for the batting lineup based upon roles in the lineup, primarily with the view of being able to build partnerships from the top of the order - esp the ability to rotate the strike;
*A selection policy for the bowling attack to be able to provide variation to the standard RMF both in pace & line of attack, and persistance with selections;
*An acknowledgement the NZL does not have the resources available to other sides &;
*That domestic pitch conditions are primarily foreign to overseas conditions regarding pace, bounce & turn & as such are less than what is experienced overseas, &;
*Consequently a somewhat of a 'horses for courses' selection regarding both bowlers and batsmen so as to select side better suited to those conditions to be faced;
*A better utilisation of 'A' tours when considering prospective player selection for upcoming senior tours re the above;
*A strong push to have a side in the AUS domestic comps, as opposed to having players go the ENG in the off season.
Appolgies for the rant.............
Mingster
State Regular
Good post and rant Anzac.anzac said:
Oram is definitely the senior bowler in both forms of cricket at the moment. He isn't an opening bowler, and is better suited to first-change, but is still making a good fist of spearheading the attack. His batting has been very good in Tests (still average of 40), but I agree, he isn't a Test 6, and neither is McCullum. We need a specialist bat at 6, whether it be McMillan, Fulton or Marshall.
I'd include Vincent in that mix as well & would actually prefer him ahead of McMillan atm, as I don't think McMillan has the right mental approach required....he hasn't shown it todate with 5 batsmen, so there's nothing to suggest he'd improve with 6 - still too cavalier!!!!!!!Mingster said:
I just wonder how far Braces is prepared to go "for the good of the team as opposed to the individual" to get things back on track.........