• 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.

NZ Contracts 2007

Fiery

Banned
Yeah - Scott's a decent prospect and he adds a little with the bat as well; could possibly be a number 8 or 9. To be honest, I haven't seen much in Domestic Cricket in terms of young quicks who are saying 'pick me'. Richard Sherlock looked good when I last saw him play in 2005, but he spent most of the year injured so I'd imagine he's gone backwards. I think he's only 22/23, but may need to remodel his action as the number of injuries he's sustained to date is pretty rank. Other than him, Tim Southee looks a decent young'un. I haven't seen too much of him, but he can certainly move the ball in the great Kiwi tradition, and is another who can bat a little too. Corey Anderson at Canterbury I hear good things about, but must confess that I haven't seen him in action yet.

Apart from them, you're looking at your Aldridges and Arnels really. O'Brien has been performing admirably in FC cricket for a while now, but like Aldridge, I doubt he's in the selectors thoughts too much.

Robbie Schaw at Centrals looks a decent spinning prospect, but early days yet.
I lost hope with Aldridge when I saw him bowling the last ball of a game, 12 runs needed and they lost...think it was a 20/20
 

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I lost hope with Aldridge when I saw him bowling the last ball of a game, 12 runs needed and they lost...think it was a 20/20
Yes. I saw that. Northerns vs Auckland.

Aldridge to Adams. One ball left, 12 runs needed.

No-ball hit for a four. 6 runs to the total, 6 required off the last ball.

Adams hits the biggest six I'd seen at Eden Park (I think) for a loooong time.

I had to laugh.

Despite Aldridge's lack of pace (comparatively, of course), I think he's a better bowler than many give credit for. He is more reliable than Gillespie, and has better economy of action than Martin. Its a shame that I doubt he'll ever get a chance now. I certainly think he could do a job in ODI cricket.
 

Smudge

Hall of Fame Member
Bradley Scott's a bit slow - would be 120kmh tops, I reckon. Handy all-round cricketer though and bloody nice guy.
 

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Bradley Scott's a bit slow - would be 120kmh tops, I reckon. Handy all-round cricketer though and bloody nice guy.
120 you reckon? I've never seen him on the tv with the speed gun, but to me it looks like he hurries the batsman up a bit more than 120 would suggest. Still, an accurate bowler who can get a bit of movement can still be dangerous at 120; especially in NZ. I doubt he'd trouble any decent international batsman outside of NZ at that pace. Do you reckon there's any chance of knocking it up a notch? 120 puts him in the Hiini/Ryder bracket, and he's certainly a good few notches up the bowling ladder than those two.
 

Smudge

Hall of Fame Member
Nah, I played against him a few years back and he really was military back then, and I don't think he's tapped it up too much more than that looking at him and talking to other guys who have faced him.
 

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Shame. Unlikely to get a game under the Bracers regime I'd say, but given that he can bat and bowl, you never know! He is going on the A team tour though, isn't he? A chance to shine there, but I can't say that the pitches of Queensland will suit his bowling style though.
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nah, I played against him a few years back and he really was military back then, and I don't think he's tapped it up too much more than that looking at him and talking to other guys who have faced him.
You'll know more than I do about Bradley Scott but when I was watching him play in a few Twenty20 games last year, he seemed to be regularly in the 120's, touching 130 at times. Either that or I'm thinking of somebody else.
 

Natman20

International Debutant
Sincliars talking of moving overseas. Shame on NZ cricket who are probably going to lose a class player.
 

_Ed_

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Wouldn't surprise me, although if he was trying to repeat what worked last year he left it a bit too late this time.
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Good on him, he should get out and earn some $$$ and make himself a better player overseas. Supposedly most of the Australian team's have already got contracts sorted, so South Africa or England would be his best bet.
 

Flem274*

123/5
O'Brien could be a good test bowler, I don't have much faith in Martin. Australia 2005 is still painful....

I still don't get all these damn injuries, is there something wrong with the fitness training?

Oh and if you guys don't mind I'd like to write a bit about James Franklin.

This could make you guys laugh, but I reckon there is one hell of an alrounder lying in that lanky body somewhere. Especially in tests.

I'd like to see him;

-Quicken up a bit, he is around the same height as Bond and judging by how far he can hit a ball he has some muscle too. He has a good record when it comes to injuries IIRC. So upping the pace should be OK. Accuracy could be a problem but that can be worked on.

-In ODI's unless it's a green pitch he doesn't open the bowling but uses the old ball. I noticed when Aussie have been whacking us around every game that he actualy does alot better when he bowls inbetween overs 20-40. I suggest he becomes a third seamer. In tests leave as is.

-He looks a better batter than Oram. No.6 could be a good possie for him. True Oram had that great form in the CB series but Franklin for me has been more consistent and seems to have better shot selection. A no.6 batsman that is a real frontline bowler. (By that I mean out an out strike bowler, not your typical allrounder type bowler if you get what I mean) Would be a great asset to the team.
 

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
-Quicken up a bit, he is around the same height as Bond and judging by how far he can hit a ball he has some muscle too. He has a good record when it comes to injuries IIRC. So upping the pace should be OK. Accuracy could be a problem but that can be worked on.
I'm a big, big fan of James Franklin - he's got the sort of personality that's missing in much of world cricket these days (the facial expressions that he strikes are worth the admission money alone sometimes!) but I have to disagree with you in much of what you say.

Yes. It would be great if Jimmy could 'quicken up a bit' and bowl in the 140-150kmph bracket but I think this is wishful thinking rather than anything I'd expect from him. He has remained relatively injury free in his career so far, but remember that we are comparing him to the long list of Kiwi Krocks which seems to go back for years - Bond, O'Connor, Tuffey, Nash, Cairns and even Vettori! Frankly, the fact that Jimmy seems to be able to stay vaguely fit means that we should wrap him up in cotton wool and protect him to allow us some consistancy in our bowling attack before attempting to get another 10km of pace out of him and breaking his back!! Secondly, Jimmy is incredibly inconsistant. He can be unplayable one game and unhittable the next (I think I've said this before). Also, there are neurological question marks over him with seemingly no apparent traceable cause for his migraine problems. This is just the question marks over his bowling.

As for his batting, let's be clear about this - he is NOT a batsman. England are seeing the problems with trying to crowbar such a batsman into the number six position when really the player is a glorified number 7 or 8 who's had a period of sustained form with Andrew Flintoff. Whilst (in my opinion) Franklin is a technically more proficient batsman than the leaden footed Flintoff, he should be batting no higher than 7. We currently have three incumbents suited for number 7 (Franklin, Vettori and McCullum). Franklin could easily bat above Vettori in ODIs where Vettori can be a little one-dimensional with the bat. However, in test matches in particular, Vettori provides a reliability and solidity that I've not witnessed in a number 7/8 batsman in a very long time. Franklin bats where he should bat given, and this is crucial, the other players in our team. Franklin should be a number 7, but he has to bat below Vettori and McCullum in tests and McCullum in ODIs. I'd rather 'waste' Franklin's batting than the others.

One point I do agree on is questioning what the hell NZC do about player fitness and injury prevention. We could have won so many more games over the past 10 years if we'd had our premier bowling line up fit for every game. Given how soft and forgiving the pitches are in NZ compared to, say, Australia, I am amazed that we suffer from (it seems) so many more significant injury problems than our mates across the Tasman.
 

Flem274*

123/5
I'm a big, big fan of James Franklin - he's got the sort of personality that's missing in much of world cricket these days (the facial expressions that he strikes are worth the admission money alone sometimes!) but I have to disagree with you in much of what you say.

Yes. It would be great if Jimmy could 'quicken up a bit' and bowl in the 140-150kmph bracket but I think this is wishful thinking rather than anything I'd expect from him. He has remained relatively injury free in his career so far, but remember that we are comparing him to the long list of Kiwi Krocks which seems to go back for years - Bond, O'Connor, Tuffey, Nash, Cairns and even Vettori! Frankly, the fact that Jimmy seems to be able to stay vaguely fit means that we should wrap him up in cotton wool and protect him to allow us some consistancy in our bowling attack before attempting to get another 10km of pace out of him and breaking his back!! Secondly, Jimmy is incredibly inconsistant. He can be unplayable one game and unhittable the next (I think I've said this before). Also, there are neurological question marks over him with seemingly no apparent traceable cause for his migraine problems. This is just the question marks over his bowling.

As for his batting, let's be clear about this - he is NOT a batsman. England are seeing the problems with trying to crowbar such a batsman into the number six position when really the player is a glorified number 7 or 8 who's had a period of sustained form with Andrew Flintoff. Whilst (in my opinion) Franklin is a technically more proficient batsman than the leaden footed Flintoff, he should be batting no higher than 7. We currently have three incumbents suited for number 7 (Franklin, Vettori and McCullum). Franklin could easily bat above Vettori in ODIs where Vettori can be a little one-dimensional with the bat. However, in test matches in particular, Vettori provides a reliability and solidity that I've not witnessed in a number 7/8 batsman in a very long time. Franklin bats where he should bat given, and this is crucial, the other players in our team. Franklin should be a number 7, but he has to bat below Vettori and McCullum in tests and McCullum in ODIs. I'd rather 'waste' Franklin's batting than the others.

One point I do agree on is questioning what the hell NZC do about player fitness and injury prevention. We could have won so many more games over the past 10 years if we'd had our premier bowling line up fit for every game. Given how soft and forgiving the pitches are in NZ compared to, say, Australia, I am amazed that we suffer from (it seems) so many more significant injury problems than our mates across the Tasman.
True I forgot about those migraines. They're proof he's getting better. As soon as we have a good bowler, he has medical problems. Better hope he doesn't get world class or his head will probably just explode.

I still maintain that he bats better than Oram. McCullum would probably make a better no.6. I expect Franklin to post some big scores in the future though in tests.

Flintoff's main problem is foot movement (lack of it) and the Oram way of whack it every ball. Doesn't work. Franklin better batsman than Flintoff IMO. (I'm going to get crucified by the british posters for that). Franklin IMO should bat up the order, and looking at our injury rates for batters as well he probably will.

The one big change I have noticed in Franklin happens to be those facials. Until a short time ago whenever he got hit for a boundary he looked like he wanted cry. In those last few WC matches his expression clearly read "I'm going to rip your guts out and fry your testicles for that." He's getting some mongrel into him and I like it.:laugh:

Also, whats your opinion on him bowling during the middle in ODI's?
 

HeathDavisSpeed

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Technicallyspeaking I would agree that Franklin is a better batsman than Flintoff. I doubt that he'd end up across his career with a better batting record than Flintoff. Part of the reason for this is that I think that Flintoff might have better hand/eye coordination. My reasoning for this is in the fact that Jimmy has been known to fluff some fairly regulation catches; Freddie doesn't anywhere near as often. Flintoff's current bad form is due to his technical problems being spotted, and once he's worked his way through them, I'd expect him to reach batting peaks that Jimmy won't. Similarly, Jimmy is technically a better batsman than Oram (or probably some of our more flashy top order players, sad to say 8-) ) As for Franklin posting some big scores; he's more than capable of it - that 100 against the Saffers, the double century for Wellington. The way he's going to 'do a Mills' and get promoted up the order is with a successful Night Watchman performance in one of the 3 tests we play in each calendar year. Good luck with those odds Jimmy 8-) !

As for Franklin bowling in the middle overs; i tend to agree based on the fact that 5 times in every 10 he would waste the new ball as he's left his radar at home. Strangely, and this is another reason to agree with you, he does seem capable of stifling the run rate in those middle overs. As a result, I would peg him down as first change rather than 2/3rd change. Vettori & Patel probably have those overs from 20-40 tied down if they play together.
 

Flem274*

123/5
Technicallyspeaking I would agree that Franklin is a better batsman than Flintoff. I doubt that he'd end up across his career with a better batting record than Flintoff. Part of the reason for this is that I think that Flintoff might have better hand/eye coordination. My reasoning for this is in the fact that Jimmy has been known to fluff some fairly regulation catches; Freddie doesn't anywhere near as often. Flintoff's current bad form is due to his technical problems being spotted, and once he's worked his way through them, I'd expect him to reach batting peaks that Jimmy won't. Similarly, Jimmy is technically a better batsman than Oram (or probably some of our more flashy top order players, sad to say 8-) ) As for Franklin posting some big scores; he's more than capable of it - that 100 against the Saffers, the double century for Wellington. The way he's going to 'do a Mills' and get promoted up the order is with a successful Night Watchman performance in one of the 3 tests we play in each calendar year. Good luck with those odds Jimmy 8-) !

As for Franklin bowling in the middle overs; i tend to agree based on the fact that 5 times in every 10 he would waste the new ball as he's left his radar at home. Strangely, and this is another reason to agree with you, he does seem capable of stifling the run rate in those middle overs. As a result, I would peg him down as first change rather than 2/3rd change. Vettori & Patel probably have those overs from 20-40 tied down if they play together.
Well you'd hope he wouldn't be a nigh****chman, he is a lower order batter really. I'd probably pick Bond or Tuffey (if he ever got back into the team). A few years ago when we got hammered he highscored with 13.:laugh:

Actualy in ODI's, Patel really had Ponting in trouble in the WC during the first ten overs. Now I wonder what would happen if we had Patel and Bond open the bowling? Would be unorthodox and the batsman would have to adapt to the different style every over. I like Patel's death bowling too. Back to Franklin, 1st change. Well an ODI first change bowler during powerplays has to be accurate so if he came on say, at over 12 then hmmm not sure. Might as well find out though, we need options with the pre mentioned injury curse.

EDIT; haha it censored night watchman.
 

Top