Cricket Player Manager
Page 4 of 239 FirstFirst ... 234561454104 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 3585

Thread: **Official** New Zealand v Australia

  1. #46
    International Regular Kippax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Central Districts
    Posts
    3,793
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze
    They will replace Oram with Wilson
    So I guess that would mean McCullum bats at 6 in the tests, followed by Wiseman, Wilson and three more bowlers (any of Tuffey, Franklin, Mills, Butler, Martin etc.).

    I do rate McCullum but I'd still be very nervous about that line-up, considering the best partnerships we've had against AUS in recent years tend to be for the 6th-8th wicket when we've finally worn them down.

    As if they need it, the Aussie attack may well be buoyed by thinking..."f***, these openers and Styris/McMillan shouldn't be too difficult, so we're only Fleming and Astle away from the tail."

  2. #47
    International Regular bryce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Hamilton,NZ
    Posts
    3,370
    Quote Originally Posted by Kippax
    So I guess that would mean McCullum bats at 6 in the tests, followed by Wiseman, Wilson and three more bowlers (any of Tuffey, Franklin, Mills, Butler, Martin etc.).
    why play five bowlers? i would just play 4 seamers out of tuffey, franklin, butler, martin and wilson - i think that would be the right team balance for the test series, we can't afford to have the batting even weaker and a fifth bowler(including wiseman) isn't likely to make much of a difference
    ODI XI to match the best
    1.Ryder
    2.McCullum+
    3.Guptill
    4.Taylor
    5.Broom
    6.Oram
    7.Elliott
    8.Vettori*
    9.Mills
    10.Southee
    11.Bond
    ringaz_ride@hotmail.com
    To answer your question, yes
    Thanks?
    METEORIC RISE ?

  3. #48
    Tim
    Tim is offline
    Cricketer Of The Year Tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    7,888
    Jeez, I can see the sh*t starting to hit the fan already in this thread.

    Australia to win the test series comfortably...NZ to win the ODI series 3-2...I reckon Australia are very beatable in that form of the game at the moment.

  4. #49
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,901
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCap_Fan
    Did you see the Mcullum dismissal?
    Oh yes, because needed 100 runs from 77 balls with 3 wickets left (1 of which was an injured player) is such a simple thing that it was obvious that NZ were going to win from there
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.


  5. #50
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,901
    Quote Originally Posted by zinzan12
    Simply because clearly they don't
    In the same way that NZ is clearly not a better ODI side than Australia.

  6. #51
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,901
    Quote Originally Posted by zinzan12
    If you don't think winning percentages matter...What about the fact NZ have beaten Aust in 4 out of the last 6 ODI's against Aust in Australia?
    Relevance of games a long time ago to current teams?

  7. #52
    International Regular bryce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Hamilton,NZ
    Posts
    3,370
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim
    Jeez, I can see the sh*t starting to hit the fan already in this thread.
    yeah the series can't start soon enough

  8. #53
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,105
    Quote Originally Posted by zinzan12
    If you don't think winning percentages matter...What about the fact NZ have beaten Aust in 4 out of the last 6 ODI's against Aust in Australia?
    Four of which were years ago. In the last 12 months they have met three times and Australia won twice. And the winning percentages against different opposition is irrelevant because... well... the opposition is different. It's not a valid point of comparison.

    England are not a better test side because they won more tests last year playing the West Indies, New Zealand and South Africa than Australia did playing India and Sri Lanka at home, because the opposition is not comparable. And, New Zealand have not shown themselves to be in Australia's league by beating different opposition or by winning one out of three ODIs against them. If New Zealand pound Australia in the coming ODI series you may have a basis for the argument, but to suggest now that Australia and New Zealand are equal (or even close) is ludicrous.

  9. #54
    International Coach Zinzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    cover point
    Posts
    11,553
    Quote Originally Posted by marc71178
    In the same way that NZ is clearly not a better ODI side than Australia.

    There is a difference. Anyone who saw the recent 2 match series in Aust ( with their home advantage) will surely suggest they were pretty even teams going toe to toe. Either team could have won either game.

    As opposed to Aust and Eng in tests. When was the last time Eng won the Ashes?? 87-88 to remind you.

    I know you'll reply with the fact they haven't played for a couple of years. So i'll ask you the question. Do you really believe England will win the up and coming ashes?? Frankly I don't. I don't even think it will be close.

    I do however believe NZ have a great chance of beating or at least going damn close to beating Aust in the up and coming ODI series.

    I don't really think you can compare the Gulf. I'd concede that Australia are marginally stronger than NZ in One day cricket (but not by much). But are miles stronger than England in test cricket.

  10. #55
    International Coach Zinzan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    cover point
    Posts
    11,553
    Quote Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad
    Four of which were years ago. In the last 12 months they have met three times and Australia won twice. And the winning percentages against different opposition is irrelevant because... well... the opposition is different. It's not a valid point of comparison.

    England are not a better test side because they won more tests last year playing the West Indies, New Zealand and South Africa than Australia did playing India and Sri Lanka at home, because the opposition is not comparable. And, New Zealand have not shown themselves to be in Australia's league by beating different opposition or by winning one out of three ODIs against them. If New Zealand pound Australia in the coming ODI series you may have a basis for the argument, but to suggest now that Australia and New Zealand are equal (or even close) is ludicrous.
    Assuming you saw the 1-1 odi series in between Aust and NZ recently, I'd suggest that stating the two sides are not even close is ludicrous. Both games could have been won by either side. It wasn't just one game it was both. As a NZer, I was gutted that Fatty Parker gave that Dodgy decision and even more gutted when NZ just needed a run a ball 17 off 17 (from memory)
    and Vettori had a brain explosion ran himself out. It was a missed opportunity to win 2-0.

    Why did Ponting state after the game that NZ were the 1 oneday side in the world at the moment that they fear the most and he also made the point that they have closed the gap and he didn't feel that there was much between the two sides? Thats not the sort of comment Ponting would make for the sake of it.

  11. #56
    International Captain Deja moo's Avatar
    Hexxagon Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Navi Mumbai , India
    Posts
    5,974
    Quote Originally Posted by zinzan12
    Assuming you saw the 1-1 odi series in between Aust and NZ recently, I'd suggest that stating the two sides are not even close is ludicrous. Both games could have been won by either side. It wasn't just one game it was both. As a NZer, I was gutted that Fatty Parker gave that Dodgy decision and even more gutted when NZ just needed a run a ball 17 off 17 (from memory)
    and Vettori had a brain explosion ran himself out. It was a missed opportunity to win 2-0.
    Missed opportunities mean nothing.

    India had the opportunity to be 3-1 up on the Aussies last VB series after the group stage if it wasnt for Bangar running out Ganguly in the first ODI, and Lee managing to get in that sixer in the last over of the 3rd game.

    India could then claim to be the closest to Australias level, couldnt they ?
    Millhouse: you know when your dog ate my goldfish bart and you told me i never had a goldfish, then why did i have the bowl bart! why did i have the bowl!!!!
    Karthik_moo@hotmail.com
    Member of the MSC and the AAAS
    Wanna Search ?
    Waughney : We are well taken care of here at the Rehab centre.

  12. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,912
    Quote Originally Posted by zinzan12

    Why did Ponting state after the game that NZ were the 1 oneday side in the world at the moment that they fear the most and he also made the point that they have closed the gap and he didn't feel that there was much between the two sides? Thats not the sort of comment Ponting would make for the sake of it.
    Ponting also said this,

    "England have obviously played some great cricket lately, won a lot of Test matches, and are a good side."
    "It's going to be a huge series," Ponting said. "It's going to be the biggest that's been played for some time. All of our guys are talking about it in that way."

  13. #58
    State Vice-Captain Sir Redman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,406
    I wouldnt be that surprised if Aus took out both series comfortably. While I agree that NZ are much closer to Aus in ODIs than tests, I still dont have confidence that we could outplay them in 3 out of the 5 ODIs. Theres still a fragility about our middle order and if Fleming and Astle dont score it leaves everything to McCullum and Vettori to get a respectable total, and as they are not always going to score I can see us getting some low totals.
    As for the tests...NZ to win 3-0. *oh look a flying pig*
    Hopefully we can somehow win one test and squeeze out a draw (through rain or otherwis)
    The ODIs could easily be 2-2 with one rained out

  14. #59
    First Class Debutant cric_manic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South of Heaven
    Posts
    831
    Quote Originally Posted by Deja moo
    Missed opportunities mean nothing.

    India had the opportunity to be 3-1 up on the Aussies last VB series after the group stage if it wasnt for Bangar running out Ganguly in the first ODI, and Lee managing to get in that sixer in the last over of the 3rd game.

    India could then claim to be the closest to Australias level, couldnt they ?
    NO nz are the closest to Australia in odi cricket,i belive nz are on par with australia

    india are a good test side but are no where as good as nz in odi

  15. #60
    International Captain Deja moo's Avatar
    Hexxagon Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Navi Mumbai , India
    Posts
    5,974
    Quote Originally Posted by cric_manic
    NO nz are the closest to Australia in odi cricket,i belive nz are on par with australia

    india are a good test side but are no where as good as nz in odi
    And you have what, iffy situations to back that up ?

Page 4 of 239 FirstFirst ... 234561454104 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •