*Unofficial* New Zealand Black Caps Thread

[The Hutt Rec]

For me, I'd want more info about the opposition they played, and I'd be favouring E/R rates against top opposition over wickets. Someone has to bowl the death - was Henry bowling the death against those opposition, and who was he playing? Because iirc rightly or wrongly Southee has been favoured over Henry against the big teams (especially those at full strength). And I don't want inexperience bowling at the death against top teams, but that's just me.

Well you're free to go look up any stats or records you want. Maybe you'll find what you're looking for.

Here's the averages against the other top four sides in that post World Cup period (number of games in brackets):

Southee:
Aus: 75 (5)
England: 63 (10)
India: 35 (8)
South Africa: 56 (5)

Henry:
Aus: 32 (5)
England: 50 (4)
India: 35 (2)
South Africa: No matches

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Well you're free to go look up any stats or records you want. Maybe you'll find what you're looking for.

Here's the averages against the other top four sides in that post World Cup period (number of games in brackets):

Southee:
Aus: 75 (5)
England: 63 (10)
India: 35 (8)
South Africa: 56 (5)

Henry:
Aus: 32 (5)
England: 50 (4)
India: 35 (2)
South Africa: No matches

Heya. I'm still here. Like I said before, and I mean politely and not with hostility, what was their E/R?

Are you including Henry before the last WC - because with all due respect, that is far too long ago to be relevant in my view, but if merely in India last year - I'd include that. The year before that - I'm indifferent on at best.

To me limited overs games are won without a single wicket being taken. Again, I may be against the grain, and I understand the value of wickets. But if biased between the 2, I favour a cheaper E/R as you don't need a single wicket to win a ODi game. And as such and accordingly, death overs mean moore than the rest of the overs.

 

[Mike5181]

4000+ ODIs have been played and unless my statsguru-fu is rinsed, not a single game has been won without taking a wicket.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

4000+ ODIs have been played and unless my statsguru-fu is rinsed, not a single game has been won without taking a wicket.

I hear you dawg. Wickets are important in odi.


Oh - you mean without taking a wicket at all- not losing a wicket right?

But who cares really? Chase what you gotta chase.Or fail. All out or zero wickets down is still a losss right if the opposition score more right? Lose a wicket or 3 - no dramas if you get the score required?

None of the above stops the possibility of the chasing team from successfully chasing a score 0 wickets down that the posting team made 0 wicket s down. So with all respect to your historical knowledge of odi cricket, it does not defeat absolutely the conceptual reasoning I gave. Like I said previously - I understand the value of taking wickets, but we can all agree, no side side needs to be bowl the opposition out to win an odi game. And taking less wickets does not result in a loss. With all due respect :-)

Feel free to split hairs, but unless the chasing side is entirely bowled out early, E/R is more determinitive of the winning team than bowling average and taking wickets in limited overs, always. ALWAYS (besides messrs Duckworth Lewis trying to strike a balance between the 2 on a sliding scale). Which was my point. My apologies for not clarifying to the point of being sufficiently explicit.

Now I agree that losing wickets more than correlates, but is actually a common factor of posting a lower cricket score in odi cricket, but not a single wicket need fall to determine the winner in a cricket game. Not even in test cricket - hint declarations.

So with all respect, I will still value E/R over wicket average in limited overs cricket unless the average per wicket is sufficiently amazing and yes I differentiate between middle over and death overs bowling. I'd even agree middle overs bowlers who don't take wickets hurt the E/R of death bowlers. But that was never my point. I was comparing death bowlers, and tbh with you, I don't care if they get wickets at the death besides it being a dot ball and hopefully get into some weaker batting UNLESS they bowl the opposition out significantly short of 50 overs, which is rarer against top opposition. That was my intended meaning without ever attempting to split hairs. It doesn't matter if the chasing team scored more runs for the loss of more wickets. The only issue is - besides rain and adjustments like Duckworth Lewis- did they score more runs?

I'm even happy to assume that Henry and Southee get the same amount of wickets up top against top opposition. For me, death bowling support for Boult is a primary bowling problem to solve.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Heya. I'm still here. Like I said before, and I mean politely and not with hostility, what was their E/R?

Are you including Henry before the last WC - because with all due respect, that is far too long ago to be relevant in my view, but if merely in India last year - I'd include that. The year before that - I'm indifferent on at best.

To me limited overs games are won without a single wicket being taken. Again, I may be against the grain, and I understand the value of wickets. But if biased between the 2, I favour a cheaper E/R as you don't need a single wicket to win a ODi game. And as such and accordingly, death overs mean moore than the rest of the overs.

All those stats were post the last World Cup only. Statsguru has the rpo, Henry was a bit higher against those sides from memory, but I didn’t look closely. Average and wickets are the main thing for me, unless RPO is way out of control, which it’s not.

 

[Athlai]

Henry is a total liability at the death IMO, Southee at least bowls some good overs amidst the dross.

#teamSouthee

 

[straw man]

Southee will make the squad but I'd like a lot more wickets from him prior to the tournament to prove he deserves his spot in the XI. He's bowled some better death overs recently but personally, I'm always going to favour incisiveness up-front over damage limitation at the end.

Henry should play nearly every ODI between now and the CT to get a better idea of what he would offer - he's simply played far too little cricket to see how his game has progressed and for us to base this discussion on evidence. I don't think he will suddenly develop into a good death bowler - he doesn't seem set up to provide good variations, but that's a problem only if we play just two seamers anyway. In England this whole discussion is probably moot because we'll play all three and just one spinner, rather than two and two like we've done recently (and which I do like, at home).

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Southee will make the squad but I'd like a lot more wickets from him prior to the tournament to prove he deserves his spot in the XI. He's bowled some better death overs recently but personally, I'm always going to favour incisiveness up-front over damage limitation at the end.

Henry should play nearly every ODI between now and the CT to get a better idea of what he would offer - he's simply played far too little cricket to see how his game has progressed and for us to base this discussion on evidence. I don't think he will suddenly develop into a good death bowler - he doesn't seem set up to provide good variations, but that's a problem only if we play just two seamers anyway. In England this whole discussion is probably moot because we'll play all three and just one spinner, rather than two and two like we've done recently (and which I do like, at home).

Yeah I think you make an excellent point about Henry playing too little cricket. All his 12th Man duties mean he's not even playing a lot of domestic. I see he is being a total menace in County cricket right now.

And I agree, Henry needs to be given more chances, does Lockie still need his or will NZC just cross him off the list?

Not so sure about your 2 seamers point, as overs 40 to 50 typically see at least 4 if not 5 bowlers used.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Honestly pretty much every bowler on the planet is liable to get smashed to all parts in the final ten off there’s wickets in hand. It’s happened to Southee plenty of times as well ... I specifically remember a lot of complaining that he’d lost his death bowling skills prior to last home season.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

Honestly pretty much every bowler on the planet is liable to get smashed to all parts in the final ten off there’s wickets in hand.

Not so sure about this, I think that the emergence of death bowling specialists with their arsenal of slower balls and yorkers, the likes of AJ Tye, Bumrah, DJ Bravo, Mustafizur are becoming a thing cos not all bowlers get smashed the same.

Bumrah has made a massive difference to the Indian 50 over team winning more games in my opinion. Just massive. Whether he's defending a chase, or limiting the opposition posting - he is such a huge asset. Even if Shami or Yadav are more likely to get an early wicket than he is. Bumrah's a death specialist bowler, and he is going for 4.64 runs an over career E/R and we all know how many roads India plays on. He has absolutely and regularly choked the life out of NZ, SA, Aus and SL batsmen.

It’s happened to Southee plenty of times as well ... I specifically remember a lot of complaining that he’d lost his death bowling skills prior to last home season.

You're 100% right. He went off the boil for a long time, but he seems to be getting his groove back more late in the innings now. So I just hope he continues on the up and up.

 

[_Ed_]

[url="https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/103792728/basin-reserves-museum-stand-saved-from-demolition-at-a-cost-of-77-million]Basin Reserve's Museum Stand saved from demolition at a cost of $7.7 million[/url]

Hmm, don't know if this was the best option.

 

[Bahnz]

Yeah, I know it's somewhat iconic, but I always thought the Museum stand was scungy and in dire need of an upgrade. Would probably have preferred it if they'd bowled the old stand and replaced it with some new terraced seating.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Disappointing, but at least they’ve made a decision after six years. Maybe the upgrade will breathe some life into it. If they can remove those two pillars that keep the roof up and block the view then that’ll be a start.

 

[SteveNZ]

Not so sure about this, I think that the emergence of death bowling specialists with their arsenal of slower balls and yorkers, the likes of AJ Tye, Bumrah, DJ Bravo, Mustafizur are becoming a thing cos not all bowlers get smashed the same.

Bumrah has made a massive difference to the Indian 50 over team winning more games in my opinion. Just massive. Whether he's defending a chase, or limiting the opposition posting - he is such a huge asset. Even if Shami or Yadav are more likely to get an early wicket than he is. Bumrah's a death specialist bowler, and he is going for 4.64 runs an over career E/R and we all know how many roads India plays on. He has absolutely and regularly choked the life out of NZ, SA, Aus and SL batsmen.



You're 100% right. He went off the boil for a long time, but he seems to be getting his groove back more late in the innings now. So I just hope he continues on the up and up.

I wish I had the article, it was a really interesting one on yorkers on cricinfo I think? Mentioned the ratio of yorkers that Bumrah/Archer are able to hit and shows why they are such impressive death bowlers (obviously they have changes of pace as well)

There's no reason Southee can't be a similar bowler. He's not an into the pitch guy, nor is he as flat as Bumrah but we've seen him at times spear yorkers in with accuracy and choke batsmen in the death overs - no better example than the bowlout win (?) over Australia around 2010 sort of time? If memory serves. But I'd question whether he works hard enough on it. It's still the best strategy, no keyboard-bound analyst or clever clog can tell me otherwise. Then yeah, because he's an OK bowler front-up (yes he's been **** recently, but he is capable) his much better skills at the death potentially make him a better selection than Henry. The Dukes in England in May could suit him as well (although it would Henry as well, who is bowling his arse off with the same ball now).

 

[Mr Miyagi]

I wish I had the article, it was a really interesting one on yorkers on cricinfo I think? Mentioned the ratio of yorkers that Bumrah/Archer are able to hit and shows why they are such impressive death bowlers (obviously they have changes of pace as well)

There's no reason Southee can't be a similar bowler. He's not an into the pitch guy, nor is he as flat as Bumrah but we've seen him at times spear yorkers in with accuracy and choke batsmen in the death overs - no better example than the bowlout win (?) over Australia around 2010 sort of time? If memory serves. But I'd question whether he works hard enough on it. It's still the best strategy, no keyboard-bound analyst or clever clog can tell me otherwise. Then yeah, because he's an OK bowler front-up (yes he's been **** recently, but he is capable) his much better skills at the death potentially make him a better selection than Henry. The Dukes in England in May could suit him as well (although it would Henry as well, who is bowling his arse off with the same ball now).

Pretty sure at present it is a white Kookie in England and will remain so for the World Cup. And they use a Red/Pink Duke.

England likes flat ODI pitches and everything typically geared for the batsman's favour in posting big scores and have done so since at least 2015.

 

[SteveNZ]

Pretty sure at present it is a white Kookie in England and will remain so for the World Cup. And they use a Red/Pink Duke.

England likes flat ODI pitches and everything typically geared for the batsman's favour in posting big scores and have done so since at least 2015.

No kidding, wasn't aware it was a Kookie. Stink, the 1999 World Cup ball was awesome. The betting agencies had to pay out **** tonnes of millions on the line for wides in the tournament because it bended round corners.

I could still be living in 2004 when I last played there, true. Hell, we played with a Slazenger ball in club cricket. What a ****ing pig of a thing that was.

 

[_Ed_]

the 1999 World Cup ball was awesome. The betting agencies had to pay out **** tonnes of millions on the line for wides in the tournament because it bended round corners.

A big part of the reason why 1999 was and still is my favourite World Cup. Loved it.

 

[Mr Miyagi]

A big part of the reason why 1999 was and still is my favourite World Cup. Loved it.

As a Kiwi - 1991/92 still remains my favourite, even if NZ performed better in 2015, until NZC win it, I think Crowe's WC against the odds and form guide for not only NZL but Pak and SA (despite their heartbreak at the end), and the magnificent top team only schedule will remain my favourite. 1996 was my favourite WC final, though.

1999 was an excellent World Cup, not only for NZ with Twose and Allott, but those legendary Aus vs SA matches. The World Cups of the 2000's have less glimmer or fame to them for me. Where is the Viv 100, the Dev catch, the Gatting reverse sweep, the rain at Sydney causing SA heartbreak or an Akram inswinger; a Gilly squash ball and a Dhoni stealing Gambhir and Yuvraj's glory coupled with Haddin's sledging I am less sold on.

But if NZC ever win a Cup, that will of course be the best ever World Cup.

 

[_Ed_]

As a Kiwi - 1991/92 still remains my favourite, even if NZ performed better in 2015, until NZC win it, I think Crowe's WC against the odds and form guide for not only NZL but Pak and SA (despite their heartbreak at the end), and the magnificent top team only schedule will remain my favourite. 1996 was my favourite WC final, though.

Fair enough! I was only 5, so didn't appreciate that one at the time. But I've really enjoyed the videos I've seen online.

I only have clear memories of 1996 onwards.

 

[straw man]

And I agree, Henry needs to be given more chances, does Lockie still need his or will NZC just cross him off the list?

Ferguson has had a couple of ODI chances without being great, though is a good prospect and is not undeserving of more chances. IMO Henry should be ahead of him in ODIs though.

Test cricket would be a different matter - if Southee/Boult/Wagner was injured before a test I'd likely want Ferguson to make his debut ahead of Henry. Really feel that genuine fast bowlers (who can stay fit) like him come along so infrequently in NZ that it would be a waste not to try him out sooner rather than later.