Black Caps generic thread

[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...............

Yeah but macca is a VERY part-timer and if he contributes he won't be bowling much if at all.

I agree with you we do need consistency of performance.

 

[anzac]

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."

oh I agree with you in principal.................
the point I'm trying to make is as follows;
* our main weakness is lack of 'stike' power to partner Bond (nothing new there).........
* our main tactic as a consequence is to then 'strangle' the middle overs & force a rash shot to gain wickets...........
* with 7 - 8 bowling options we don't need 'more options' so far as bowling goes - just look to develop more 'specialist' options

I am concerned that we lack 'specialist' batsmen - much like the middle order in the Test side.................similar look of potential brittleness - Astle, Styris, Macca, Cairns, Oram, McCullum, Vettori..........

if we can get our 'strike' partner for Bond, then we can look at a 6-4 split because of the 5th bowling options from Astle & Styris........

and so far as Bracewell's thinking goes - we know he likes Mills, Tuffey has the rep, and he has stated that Macca is still in his 'thinking'................so I guess we don't need to look outside that trio for the remaining 2 positions.................

a couple of other names that have come up this past domestic season include the likes of Hamilton & Wilson (both of whom should get another shot simply because IMO you should not judge a debutant on their performance in a single series v the best team in the world), and then the likes of Scott & J McMillan as wildcards...............

 

[anzac]

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.

I have no real ideas regarding the 'strike' partner until we see more of the likes of Davis & Sherlock in Limited Overs cricket...............but I have some other names in a reply above........

If Hamish is to stay at #3 then I agree that we need someone like James or Vincent lower in the middle...............

as for the Oram & Cairns hitting potential - yeah it looks real good so long as it contributes on a consistant level.............same as the rest of the order.........

 

[Darrin]

oh I agree with you in principal.................
the point I'm trying to make is as follows;
* our main weakness is lack of 'stike' power to partner Bond (nothing new there).........
* our main tactic as a consequence is to then 'strangle' the middle overs & force a rash shot to gain wickets...........
* with 7 - 8 bowling options we don't need 'more options' so far as bowling goes - just look to develop more 'specialist' options

I am concerned that we lack 'specialist' batsmen - much like the middle order in the Test side.................similar look of potential brittleness - Astle, Styris, Macca, Cairns, Oram, McCullum, Vettori..........

if we can get our 'strike' partner for Bond, then we can look at a 6-4 split because of the 5th bowling options from Astle & Styris........

and so far as Bracewell's thinking goes - we know he likes Mills, Tuffey has the rep, and he has stated that Macca is still in his 'thinking'................so I guess we don't need to look outside that trio for the remaining 2 positions.................

a couple of other names that have come up this past domestic season include the likes of Hamilton & Wilson (both of whom should get another shot simply because IMO you should not judge a debutant on their performance in a single series v the best team in the world), and then the likes of Scott & J McMillan as wildcards...............

I agree we need more strike support for Bond.
Im currently happy with the balance of the one-day side as it is.
The problem with a 6-4 split as i have always seen it and has been born to be true by experience is it means we have effectively 2 or 3 main bowlers- Bond,Oram and Vettori. Lets take the case of vettori going with a 6-4 split means we end up using vettori for about 50 overs in 1 innings. He effectively gets bowled into the ground. The result? Long-term back injuries. Going in with a 5-5 split with a consistent top-order and successful, gives us the chance to play oram at number 6.

The main trouble with all this is we have some talented cricketers but they just don't produce consistently enough. They may look good against sri Lanka. But where were they against the aussies? Only a few really stood up CONSISTENTLY.

 

[anzac]

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.

primarily because IMO a 5-5 split shortens you batting depth, limits your options tactically, and makes your balance critical..........it's little secret that I prefer a 6-4 at Test level..........

to my knowledge a 5-5 split is preferred in LO cricket for the simple reason that you need 5 bowlers to fulfill your bowling requirements.................be they 'specialists' or part timers.......

my concern with the current OD side is the same as that for the Test side - if we thought that the Astle, Styris, Macca, Cairns, Oram, McCullum & Vettori sequence was brittle in Test mode - why should it be any different in LO cricket???????????

IMO the ODI side has 7-8 bowling options - Bond, Vettori, Cairns & Oram are all 10 over bowlers, with Astle, Styris & Macca to make up another 10..............if we add another 'specialist' to the tail we then have 3 'specialists', 2 'allrounders', and 3 part timers........

bottom line IMO with so many 'part time' options we do not need another ' specialist' bowler, and thus can strengthen the batting ...........even if we add 2 batsmen to the lineup (replacing Macca) we still have enough options with the ball in 6................and have a 6-4 split...............

just to really set the cat amongst the pigeons - IMO when we find 2 'strike' bowlers I'd be looking at changing the batting further - or at least putting more pressure upon them.........
I realise that they are in different roles but IMO Astle & Styris (&Macca) are the same sort of player, as are Cairns & Oram (we do not need 2 same type 'allrounders')........too many same type players in the side - esp if we maintain a 5-5 split.........

and don't start me speculating on changing the batting order...............

 

[anzac]

Yeah but macca is a VERY part-timer and if he contributes he won't be bowling much if at all.

I agree with you we do need consistency of performance.

he did a bit more bowling v AUS - & Bracewell still has him in his plans.........

 

[anzac]

I agree we need more strike support for Bond.
Im currently happy with the balance of the one-day side as it is.
The problem with a 6-4 split as i have always seen it and has been born to be true by experience is it means we have effectively 2 or 3 main bowlers- Bond,Oram and Vettori. Lets take the case of vettori going with a 6-4 split means we end up using vettori for about 50 overs in 1 innings. He effectively gets bowled into the ground. The result? Long-term back injuries. Going in with a 5-5 split with a consistent top-order and successful, gives us the chance to play oram at number 6.

The main trouble with all this is we have some talented cricketers but they just don't produce consistently enough. They may look good against sri Lanka. But where were they against the aussies? Only a few really stood up CONSISTENTLY.

I take it from your Vettori scenario we are now talking Test cricket as opposed to ODIs.........

atm I'd not select Oram as a bowler (4th seamer only) and play him as a specialist bat........my specialist bowlers would be Bond, Vettori, C Martin & Franklin, with Astle, Styris & Oram as potential backups........Styris goes head to head with Astle in competition for 1 spot in the lineup as both bat & bowl in similar mode - as I posted earlier I want to see Styris develop his spin bowling as a primary option, thus giving back up & relief to Vettori..........

similarly with a 6-4 split you can blood players out of position down the order - Fulton, Ryder & How all provide part time bowling options, with How being part time spin.........

the theory with part time bowlers is that they provide a containment option to spell your spin bowler - hence my preference for part time spin as opposed to the current slow/med swing..........

in regards to the lack of consistency - 5-5 with the wrong balance can do that for you, whereas 6-4 gives a better chance at getting the balance right & having a rear guard rescue act..............again I use the example of Gilchrist & Martyn/Katich

 

[anzac]

The main trouble with all this is we have some talented cricketers but they just don't produce consistently enough. They may look good against sri Lanka. But where were they against the aussies? Only a few really stood up CONSISTENTLY.

the AUS series should not be taken as any indicator without taking into consideration the mitigating circumstances................
*1st series for the summer
* injuries etc
* new split
* new faces
* lack of experience
* loss of form

likewise the SRL series had those same players trying to secure their squad spots for ZIM/RSA.............but I'd expext a bit more from them in the future

however I'd also expect some changes when the full squad is available, and some changes to the batting lineup & tactics........

 

[_Ed_]

I see Styris has now started his season with Middlesex. Only managed 5 though.

So, NZ batsmen in County Cricket this season: 3 innings, 6 runs @ 2.00

 

[anzac]

I see Styris has now started his season with Middlesex. Only managed 5 though.

So, NZ batsmen in County Cricket this season: 3 innings, 6 runs @ 2.00

not a particularly auspicious start to the off season.................anything yet from the bowlers?????

 

[_Ed_]

Yeah actually, Andre Adams (not required to bat, rain affected match so early declarations) took 3-52 in the first innings from 15 overs.

 

[anzac]

Yeah actually, Andre Adams (not required to bat, rain affected match so early declarations) took 3-52 in the first innings from 15 overs.

nice to get some wickets - but at over 3.5 per over???????
and here I was worried that the early ENG season pitches would be bowler friendly like in NZL - or he was bowling meat pies.....................

 

[Jamee999]

When do they think Bond will be back?

 

[marc71178]

nice to get some wickets - but at over 3.5 per over???????
and here I was worried that the early ENG season pitches would be bowler friendly like in NZL - or he was bowling meat pies.....................

Without looking at the scorecard (because I'm too lazy to ) I would imagine it's something to do with it being a run chase.

 

[Right arm fast]

When do they think Bond will be back?

he was aiming to be back for the zimbabwe series

 

[bradman2005]

he was aiming to be back for the zimbabwe series

i fell sorry for Zimbabwe

 

[Blaze]

When do they think Bond will be back?

He is fit to play now.. he could have played against AUS but they didn't want to risk him

 

[Macka]

He is fit to play now.. he could have played against AUS but they didn't want to risk him

I believe Bond actually decided he wasn't ready himself. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Blaze]

I believe Bond actually decided he wasn't ready himself. Correct me if I'm wrong.

No ur correct

 

[_Ed_]

Good County round for NZ:

Styris 53 off 47 balls.

Fleming 111

Adams 2-52 and then 4-67 with a hattrick (Burns, Jayasuriya, Hildreth out c. Foster, lbw, lbw)