*Official* New Zealand in India 2010

[Flem274*]

Funniest thing about aussie's team - he put Chris Martin at nine.

missed that. Bennett will be fuming after his epic blockage in Bangladesh.

 

[_Ed_]

At least with that XI Southee would be the world's best #11. That's something to boast about.

 

[Flem274*]

Chris Martin should open the batting in his last test.

 

[Prince EWS]

Chris Martin should open the batting in his last test.

So Chris Martin should've opened the batting 6 months ago?

 

[Flem274*]

So Chris Martin should've opened the batting 6 months ago?

Haha.

 

[Athlai]

I can certainly see Patel being just a bad a Hauritz as well. Patel is just as crap as Hauritz.

Based on what I've seen of them in international cricket, i certainly think McCullum could be a useful option in tests on turners, which will be present in India. The Indian's could smash him too of course, but his all-rounder package could give you some useful runs down the order on occasions. Since with Vettori likely to bat @ # 6, in order to accommodate 5 bowlers, Hopkins an unknown coming @ 7 & none of your bowlers really can bat consistently well (especially if Southee is left out), that's a very long tail you will have, so N McCullum could help to balance that out a bit. Plus I have seen McCullum flight the ball in international cricket & a few domestic T20s in England this year, he certainly has more to his bowling armory than just darts.

McIntosh
Watling/Guptil
B McCullum
Taylor
Ryder
Vettori
Hopkins
N McCullum
Martin
Arnel
Southee/McKay/Bennett

Not sure, how your top-order is going to be structured. So I'm guessing. Picking N McCullum would not have made NZ more likely to win there series or anything, it could have given NZ a slightly better balance for this specific series IMO.

I corrected most of the typos but there was little else I could for this train wreck of a post.

 

[Flem274*]

Scathing.

 

[M0rphin3]

lol aussie.

Jeetan Patel has always been the better bowler between him and Nathan McCullum, whose deliveries never vary from the dart. NcCullum is very much an ODI option only and there will be many spinners ahead of him I would hope.

If NcCullum played tests in India, it would be worse than Hauritz.

AWTA, NcCullum can at best bowl darts and get away unscathed. But can't believe Jeets is the best spinnah NZ has after Dan

BTW who's better with the bat? NcCullum?

 

[Athlai]

Yeah NcCullum is the better bat.

 

[M0rphin3]

Yeah NcCullum is the better bat.

Okay so probably NcCullum would've been a better choice then? It's not as if Jeets is gonna trouble the Indian batsmen

 

[Athlai]

Okay so probably NcCullum would've been a better choice then? It's not as if Jeets is gonna trouble the Indian batsmen

Then why not just play Guptill and let him bowl FFS. Such a negative way to do it.

 

[Hurricane]

Because ODIs=Tests for all NZ international cricketers.

I don't think I would judge Tim Mcintosh or someone with a low SR on their ODI performances. So no not one size fits all.

Look would you have suggested that Kane was ready for a test match if he had got another duck instead of scoring a century.

Would you have said Hopkins should be batting at number 5 in the test team if he had averaged 80 runs in all his ODI innings and been a phenom.

Did you agree initially when they placed Guptil in the test team partly on the back of his ODI performances,

Seems like we are prepared to take positive reviews on players from their ODI performances into account for test selection but not draw negative inferences from ODI performances,

Anyways what are we debating over - whether Hopkins should be a number 7 or a number 8. I think we are ready for the test series to start so we can discuss something more juicy.

Some thoughts about the test series. I think it is make it or break it for Watling he needs to score at least one 50 preferrably two of them out of his six innings. If he fails in all six innings then I think the next opener on the blocks has to be McCullum with someone else coming into the team at number 3.

 

[Athlai]

FFS the guy has a low average hitting out in a position he doesn't usually play in. And has played SFA, there is such a thing as reading too far into it.

 

[M0rphin3]

Then why not just play Guptill and let him bowl FFS. Such a negative way to do it.

Fair nuff.

 

[Hurricane]

FFS the guy has a low average hitting out in a position he doesn't usually play in. And has played SFA, there is such a thing as reading too far into it.

**** it is just Hopkins - this isn't worth the trouble. For the record he has played 10 games since Jan 1 2009 which is two more chances than Ingram has had.

And 22 games overall - however I am not counting the extra 12 games as PEWS pointed out they were before he improved.

I am not going to enter into any more Hopkins debate he is not an important person to my life or my welfare. Part of me knew I shouldn't have responded to Flem. Which is why I said we needed better topics to discuss. Look probably you have been biting your tongue on the 5 previous posts I have made about Hopkins and decided to have your say this time. Fair enough. I look forward to the avatar bet settling things once and for all.

On the NMac debate - if we play 4 bowlers I would play Patel. Don't want to play 5 bowlers full stop.

Thanks

 

[Flem274*]

I don't think I would judge Tim Mcintosh or someone with a low SR on their ODI performances. So no not one size fits all.

Look would you have suggested that Kane was ready for a test match if he had got another duck instead of scoring a century.

Hard one, but I would have wanted him in the squad at least.

Would you have said Hopkins should be batting at number 5 in the test team if he had averaged 80 runs in all his ODI innings and been a phenom.

No, because that's where Ryder bats,

Did you agree initially when they placed Guptil in the test team partly on the back of his ODI performances?

Can't remember what I said, but I hope I said no. Probably pumped for some CD player at the time.

 

[Athlai]

He is a keeper!!!!!!!!

 

[Flem274*]

**** it is just Hopkins - this isn't worth the trouble. For the record he has played 10 games since Jan 1 2009 which is two more chances than Ingram has had.

And 22 games overall - however I am not counting the extra 12 games as PEWS pointed out they were before he improved.

I am not going to enter into any more Hopkins debate he is not an important person to my life or my welfare. Part of me knew I shouldn't have responded to Flem. Which is why I said we needed better topics to discuss. Look probably you have been biting your tongue on the 5 previous posts I have made about Hopkins and decided to have your say this time. Fair enough. I look forward to the avatar bet settling things once and for all.

On the NMac debate - if we play 4 bowlers I would play Patel. Don't want to play 5 bowlers full stop.

Thanks

Wow.

Moving on...

@ the new guy: Nathan McCullum, if he was going to be used to hold up an end, still shouldn't play because we need all the bowling we can get to take 20 wickets.

 

[_Ed_]

I think it's a shame Mills is on the outer as a Test bowler. His record is pretty good by current NZ bowlers' standards. And if you take out his first series, when he was terrible, his Test bowling average is a handy 30.76. Sure, he's probably only good for one wicket-taking spell per innings, but wouldn't some early wickets be handy? And he'll never go for that many runs.

[/bias]

 

[M0rphin3]

Wow.

Moving on...

@ the new guy: Nathan McCullum, if he was going to be used to hold up an end, still shouldn't play because we need all the bowling we can get to take 20 wickets.

Okay, but Jeets? Jeets is poor my haurtiz IMO