Read thread title.
Read thread title.
Would he get his chance? Probably
Would he succeed and last a decent amount of time? Nah.
Besides, we want to bat guys who barely average 30 at number three, not someone who averages 38.
He's looked completely at sea in the HRV cup and while it's 20/20, he really has looked bloody awful. Otago would be better off picking their own middle order batsmen.
Who is Chris Nash?
President of SKAS - Kat is King | Proud member of CVAAS - One of the best | LRPLTAS - Rosco rocks!
R.I.P. Fardin & Craig
This based on Cricsim?
Anyway, reckon he could.
Want to be the online Don Bradman or Ian Salisbury?
Then join CW Cricket today. It's what all the cool kids desire.
RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012
RIP Hughesy 1988-2014
He was certainly a poor 2020 signing for Otago, based entirely on one season in England rather than a consistently shown ability at the shortened game. He may have been a better option in four-day cricket. I'm not sure he'd be in the top 6 NZ batsmen (if domestic form matters) but he would have got a shot.
Part of the problem in NZ, I feel, is that from school cricket to the first-class game no-one is prepared to play a really long innings. It's all crash bang wallop. Nash is certainly the sort of player who can bat for long periods. Only McIntosh of the current lot shows the inclination and he is too technically flawed to be consistent at test level.
Somebody has to...
Guptill and McCullum are the only dudes in recent years who have been consistently impatient. The problem up until recently has been a lack of quality more than anything, with only one of our best batsmen playing in the top five.
In the India tour though with Ryder back, McCullum making a decent fist of opening and Kane having a nice start, we had a batting line up that had more than one quality player in the top order.
Yeah, poor T20 player though he can be a useful part timer. His batting is poor though.
Has a decent FC record and, to be frank, IMO he's better than any of your opener bar McCulllum. Definitely better than any you've played in recent times IMO. Watling, Guptill, Redmond, etc
Thought you'd gone to bed Marcuss?
Watling and Guptill arguably shouldn't be near NZ either though. Nash would get his chance in an alternate universe, but when guys who average similarly or even higher than him domestically (and CC and PS are comparable going on Franklin's dominance of both competitions) fail, there's not much hope for Nash.
It's only 20/20, but watching Nash for Otago he doesn't just look cramped for scoring etc, he and that other bloke (Stevens) just don't look up to it atm.
I can't remember which of them it was but against ND one of them played the most pathetic jab that looped up and Brad Hodge had time to run in and catch it. Whoever it was should have been fired after that final straw.
Nah. Of course he wouldn't. He's grown up on English pitches, and he's so far shown little ability to bat on the decks we've put on offer here. Sure, most of the foreign imports have struggled with the bat in this 20:20 (Hodge being the main exception, but even he struggled with timing in his first game) that I'd back a Kiwi with the same average over Nash every time.
Would rather go back to Matthew Bell than plump for Chris Nash.
Fascist Dictator of the Heath Davis Appreciation Society
Supporting Petone's Finest since the very start - Iain O'Brien
Also Supporting the All Time #1 Batsman of All Time Ever - Jacques Kallis and the much maligned Peter Siddle.
Vimes tells it how it is:
Rather have someone like Rob Nicol if you are selecting players from 20/20 games and stuff. Nicol opens in all forms of the game. He averages 32.48 with 800 runs in 20/20 and 35 with 4000 runs in FC and is a much improved batsmen. He IMO would be a much better option but still short of a being a performer at international level.
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
Rejecting 'selection deontology' since Mar '15
'Stats' is not a synonym for 'Career Test Averages'
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Tucker
I'm not saying the gap between the County Championship and the Plunket Shield is actually large (hard to make a real comparison without seeing much of either) but to use the example of one player to suggest it isn't is really flawed. Some players perform better with different amounts of responsibility, in different team environments, in different conditions or are just in different parts of their form cycle - it's not always just about the standard. Sometimes players perform at a similar standard across several different levels as they play to their opposition. There are a thousand and one possible explanations for one player doing well in two competitions other than "the competitions are of a similar standard." Otherwise, English domestic one day cricket >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ODIs thanks to Eion Morgan. In fact, Mahmudullah has shown us that good old Bangladeshi domestic cricket is better than Test cricket, and Naeem Islam's bowling shows it's better than ODIs.
And to cap that off, Franklin's actually performed much better in the Plunket Shield than the County Championship in the last couple of seasons with the bat anyway. Yes, he did a job in the CC, but his PS averages in the last couple of seasons have been 71 and 157 (admittedly small sample sizes; but if you're going to use him to compare competitions that's all you've got) - he averaged 33 in the CC last season. Admittedly he averaged 50 the season before but that was after coming off an average of 157 for Wellington.. he's a quality player and that he's doing well in County Cricket proves little other than that.
Last edited by Prince EWS; 20-12-2010 at 12:10 AM.
Me and Markarse had the original discussion about this on MSN. Somehow it has something to do with Sam Wells, but anyway, he said Nash would make the NZ team and started hating on Guptill being trash in all formats so I brought up Franklin opening in CC List A to wind him up because he was using Guptill as justification for Nash walking into the NZ test side.
And I don't base my opinion on CC being in the same ballpark as the Plunket Shield on Franklin alone. I use other players to get a general guideline, such as Andre Adams, Monty Panesar etc. along with what other posters say.
FTR, I think Div 2 is slightly worse and Div 1 much better than NZ domestics. Before someone brings up player production quality, England obviously have produced better players than us (though they still have their fair share of complete ****). I think that's largely down to a larger player pool and overseas players raising the domestic cricket standard.
Last edited by Flem274*; 20-12-2010 at 12:19 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)