Black Caps generic thread

[anzac]

I don't know yet if vincent is a odi player, he is capable though, he can run quickly and has shown when in form he can hit big too.
I think him james marshall and craig mcmillan may be competiting for a spot.

I just think back to that ODI v IND at Jade when Bond let rip................from memory Vincent was at the other end & came in at #5 & got 50 n.o. - IMO it was the best ODI innings I've seen him play...............

 

[Arjun]

Franklin definately does have the ability to bat number 8, but why bat him there when you have McCullum, Vettori and Oram 7-9? Who bats 10 out of that lot?

Franklin and Vettori can swap places in every innings. Moreover, you have batting all the way down to 9, giving you the option of a genuine wicketkeeper at 10.

 

[anzac]

The kind of form Fulton's in, he may be picked for the bench, but Styris shouldn't play as a batsman, but as a full-fledged all-rounder, since he is more useful to the team that way. Besides, his batting hasn't been that good of late. Oram may be used as a striker at 7, then Vettori, then a genuine wicketkeeper (not another part-timer), then two bowlers. You then have batting till number 8.

Cumming, J Marshall, H Marshall, Fleming, Astle / Styris, Vincent, Oram, McCullum, Vettori, Franklin, Bond = FC tons all the way thru' from #1 - #12!!!!!!

except when you include C Martin.................

 

[anzac]

Not bad, but on one post on the Official Aus v/s NZ thread, I heard they would be out of action for more than one series. Is the NZ side taking a break? I'd like to know how Styris is doing for his county side.He may be good for the bench, as a reserve middle-order batsman. Better choice than Sinclair and an out-of-form McMillan.

more than 1 series = AUS & SRL................

 

[anzac]

I'd be interested to know, how many people on CW agree with the assertion in the papers recently that Vincent will be "a certainty" in the next full-strength OD side Bracewell picks? Has the 224 and the promise that he's 'new and improved' already overwritten the 62 ODIs of Spearman-like stats?

Given Bracewell has said several times that he sees Hamish's future in a full-strength line-up at #5, where would Vincent most likely bat?

Fleming
Astle
? (J Marshall, Vincent, maybe an experimental choice like Taylor or Fulton in ZIM)
Styris
Hamish
McMillan (or Vincent, or one of the experimental options, or another seamer at #10-11)
Cairns
Oram
McCullum
Vettori
Bond

a couple of problems here .............

firstly Bracewell wanting to drop Hamish - IMO it's a big risk unless he's got someone else capable of holding the top of the innings together....................

2ndly your team selection has a 6-4 split...............from memory they use 5-5 with Cairns as the allrounder at #6.............even when Bond was available..........

they've only used a 6-4 since Oram & Styris have been unavailable.............

 

[psxpro]

Arjun, there isnt as much difference in keeping between hopkins/mccullum as some people make it out to be.
Mccullum has improved his keeping a lot and he is a much better batsman, having another keeper would be a waste of space imo.

 

[Somerset]

I just think back to that ODI v IND at Jade when Bond let rip................from memory Vincent was at the other end & came in at #5 & got 50 n.o. - IMO it was the best ODI innings I've seen him play...............

I thought that was the second Eden Park ODI which India won by one wicket after they were crusing to a comfortable victory? I remember Vincent though, very mature one day innings, not bad from Bond either.

 

[Ming]

Why does James Franklin bat at the bottom three positions in the batting order? He has a good domestic records a batsman (including a century) and even got a 50 against the Lankans, so he can be considered a regular batsman at 7 or 8, particularly when Styris and Oram are out of action.

Man, you seriously talk some rubbish at times. One century doesn't make him a regular batsman in the Test team....what the hell are you on?

McCullum, Vettori deserve to bat ahead of Franklin. McCullum has kept for the majority of his life, and was the keeper batsman in the U21 World Cup where he hit those centuries.

Franklin and Vettori can swap places in every innings. Moreover, you have batting all the way down to 9, giving you the option of a genuine wicketkeeper at 10.

What's the point in swapping Vettori and Franklin in every innings? Just for the sake of changing? McCullum is a genuine wicket-keeper, perhaps you should watch some games sometime, and you will see McCullum hasn't dropped many catches in a while now. He's taken some stunners this summer.

 

[thierry henry]

Please don't ever put Lou Vincent in the ODI team again. I'll cry if he makes it back.

 

[Ming]

Why not? He's found his form again, and would be a handy addition to the middle order if he can maintain his aggressive attitude.

 

[Darrin]

a couple of problems here .............

firstly Bracewell wanting to drop Hamish - IMO it's a big risk unless he's got someone else capable of holding the top of the innings together....................

2ndly your team selection has a 6-4 split...............from memory they use 5-5 with Cairns as the allrounder at #6.............even when Bond was available..........

they've only used a 6-4 since Oram & Styris have been unavailable.............

Firstly new zealand line-up have always been pretty strong in the middle order but weak in the top-order, Lets get hamish up to no#3 to solidify that top-order.

In one-dayers particularly we need a 5-5 split just to give our ourselves options through an innings otherwise we end up limiting ourselves.

 

[_Ed_]

Fleming got 1 in the second innings. So, his season so far: 2 innings, 1 run @ 0.5.

 

[thierry henry]

Why not? He's found his form again, and would be a handy addition to the middle order if he can maintain his aggressive attitude.

What do you mean "again"? He played 62 one-dayers, 62! And he wasn't just bad, he was appalling, he was horrific. He is an incompetent one-day batsman.

 

[Ming]

People thought he was an incompentent Test batsman before his double century too....

Sure he was average in his 62 ODIs, but that shouldn't prevent him from being selected again.

 

[Arjun]

People thought he was an incompentent Test batsman before his double century too....

Sure he was average in his 62 ODIs, but that shouldn't prevent him from being selected again.

But does the team need another batsman? They already have Fleming, Astle, the Marshalls, Styris (given recent strategies don't have him bowling), then McMillan- but have trouble taking 10 wickets in an innings. Vincent is not even an opener, which the team needs.

 

[thierry henry]

People thought he was an incompentent Test batsman before his double century too....

Sure he was average in his 62 ODIs, but that shouldn't prevent him from being selected again.

He was a much worse one-day batsman than he was a test batsman. 62 games and he never scored higher than 60, and he had a strike rate around 60 as well. Also, he played more one-dayers than tests. 62 games constitutes a decent run in the team. If you are consistently shocking in one form of the game for that length of time, you don't deserve another shot EVER, unless you do something really really spectacular at domestic level. Vincent's good form has been in FC cricket, which is his strength.

 

[anzac]

He was a much worse one-day batsman than he was a test batsman. 62 games and he never scored higher than 60, and he had a strike rate around 60 as well. Also, he played more one-dayers than tests. 62 games constitutes a decent run in the team. If you are consistently shocking in one form of the game for that length of time, you don't deserve another shot EVER, unless you do something really really spectacular at domestic level. Vincent's good form has been in FC cricket, which is his strength.

fair point but begs the question as tohow much the stuffing around he got from the selectors affected his confidence & game.................

IMO he never copped a decent break with a chance to settle anywhere except opening.............and his game wasn't suited to the role at the time - not saying that it is now.............

and again I raise the question in Tests regarding partnering Rigor at the top & trying to make the pace - hard enough for a specialist, let alone any makeshift 'newbie'...............

I'd not be looking to get him straight back into the ODI side - get him settled in the Test team first and see that he maintains consistency etc - but it's still good to have further options other than Macca & Sinclair...............

 

[anzac]

Firstly new zealand line-up have always been pretty strong in the middle order but weak in the top-order, Lets get hamish up to no#3 to solidify that top-order.

In one-dayers particularly we need a 5-5 split just to give our ourselves options through an innings otherwise we end up limiting ourselves.

Fleming, Astle, Hamish, Styris, ???????, Cairns, Oram, McCullum, Vettori, Bond, ??????

how are we limiting ourselves in what area - bowling we have 7 options, 8 if Macca goes into #5...............

IMO what we need is another 'strike' bowler to partner Bond;
the right balance to the lineup - particularly to hold together the middle & lower order (so to some extent I agree with Bracewell re the role);
and some consistency to the performance of the players...............

 

[Kippax]

a couple of problems here .............

firstly Bracewell wanting to drop Hamish - IMO it's a big risk unless he's got someone else capable of holding the top of the innings together....................

2ndly your team selection has a 6-4 split...............from memory they use 5-5 with Cairns as the allrounder at #6.............even when Bond was available..........

they've only used a 6-4 since Oram & Styris have been unavailable.............

I did include a "or another seamer at #10-11" caveat next to McMillan's name, but who are you suggesting Bracewell might opt for, Anzac? Mills? Adams? Tuffey?

The way I see it is this - providing Styris or Astle are fit to bowl, even if they batted like Chris Martin I may still prefer them as a dependable segment of 10 overs. Especially on a slowish surface. I seriously doubt I'll ever find myself saying "Bond, Cairns, Oram, Vettori, Astle and Styris is just too thin. If we could bring on Mills it would make all the difference."

 

[Darrin]

Fleming, Astle, Hamish, Styris, ???????, Cairns, Oram, McCullum, Vettori, Bond, ??????

how are we limiting ourselves in what area - bowling we have 7 options, 8 if Macca goes into #5...............

IMO what we need is another 'strike' bowler to partner Bond;
the right balance to the lineup - particularly to hold together the middle & lower order (so to some extent I agree with Bracewell re the role);
and some consistency to the performance of the players...............

And Where is this 'strike' Bowler? I don't see brett lee's waiting on the wings ready for games. Why can't James fill the number 5 slot? He's a similar player? If Macca ever fills the number 5 slot i'll go hee! I stand by my comments we need a strong top-order to enable players further down to function better, i e. cairns, and oram hitting potential.

why are you soo obsessed with a 6-4 versus 5-5 split? There are soo many other issues to be thought through whether its technical, mental, physical, work-load requirements, injuries, selection, positional issues, coaching, captaincy, management styles, etc.