*Official* New Zealand in Pakistan - Page 2

Mr Mxyzptlk · 29-11-2003, 07:03 AM

Sadly that might have been New Zealand's best chance of victory given the nature of their team.

V Reddy · 29-11-2003, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tim
That was Cairns at his absolute best...probably one of the best innings i've seen him play.

47.2 Danish Kaneria to Cairns, SIX, short in length, tossed up a bit,
Cairns goes back and clouts the ball over mid wicket for a huge
six
47.3 Danish Kaneria to Cairns, SIX, What-a-shot! Down the track, good
use of the feet, gets to the pitch of the ball and smack, sends
the ball high in the air and a big six over long off
47.4 Danish Kaneria to Cairns, SIX, another one! heaved away to mid
wicket for the third consective six of the over

I wish i had seen this great match. In India , Ten Sports were supposed to show it live but for some reason didn't show it

Tim · 29-11-2003, 01:37 PM

Yeah the in-experience of the bowlers really showed up at the end of the innings.

That type of loss will really sink the players, but I think they can be proud of their effort considering there were 6 debutants in the side.

Tim · 29-11-2003, 01:41 PM

Oh come on Neil, you know just as well that those players were up against it considering they haven't even started the domestic season yet.

Walmsley is probably not going to play for NZ again after this tour, i'd say he went because he wanted to go & so NZ picked him because there were others who were concerned.

Sure 65 off 4.5 overs is almost ridiculous but have a look at what NZ did in their innings, it was basically an identical situation..maybe Pakistan should get some death bowlers too.

Tim · 29-11-2003, 01:43 PM

Vish, we had the same problem down here with coverage. But I can't find out anywhere why we didn't see the cricket.

Neil Pickup · 29-11-2003, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tim
Sure 65 off 4.5 overs is almost ridiculous but have a look at what NZ did in their innings, it was basically an identical situation..maybe Pakistan should get some death bowlers too.

63 off 4.3 - 63 off 27 balls - that's 14 an over!

It was a very poor performance - and it was Mohammad Sami!

The point is, there is no way they should have let that go from there - and why did Oram only bowl 8 overs?

Tim · 29-11-2003, 01:51 PM

Oram is apparently very sick at the moment, he lost 10kg over the last 2 weeks due to an illness he picked up in India. But it seems he might be over it more or less.

In the last 4 overs of NZ's innings, we scored 64 runs against a more established Pakistani attack.

I agree that NZ shouldn't have let it slip away but I think you're being too harsh as its a steep learning curve.

Neil Pickup · 29-11-2003, 01:57 PM

You also scored the runs with proper batsman, not wildly swining bowlers and bowling allrounders!

Probably am being harsh, but it was so clear that it was going to happen even from 15 overs out watching on Cricinfo (ask Liam) it was painful.

Tim · 29-11-2003, 02:03 PM

Razzaq can be just as explosive as Cairns at times, but NZ probably should not have let Sami hit 2 sixes.

But as I said I don't think Walmsley would be in this side & Cairns is no way near what he used to be as a bowler.
In the end it came down to in-experience which which was pretty much predicted before this tour started.

Neil Pickup · 29-11-2003, 02:06 PM

Is Hitchcock injured or didn't he want to go?

Tim · 29-11-2003, 02:16 PM

I think Hitchcock only just passed a fitness test before they left NZ, so he may well only play 1 or 2 games in the series.

I was interested to see that NZ didn't play Tuffey...if the batting holds up & we can bring in Tuffey & Hitchcock I think we could win a few matches.

I was impressed with the batting though...Hamish Marshall has extremely poor FC records, but you can't complain about this debuts in Test & ODI cricket. A 40* against South Africa in tests & now 55 on debut against Pakistan..he might well be playing Vincent out of the ODI team.

Sinclair batted with maturity & although the openers only managed 49..it was at a good clip coming off 9.5 overs.

Tim · 29-11-2003, 02:35 PM

I've defended Brendon McCullum over the last few months for some of his keeping errors, but its now starting to become a very big problem.

McCullum dropped a skied shot off Razzaq when Pakistan were on 258 & that could well have won the match for NZ.
He's got to fix this problem because arguably he's cost NZ 3 important matches..i'd say its starting to weigh on his mind alot now & so somebody needs to help him out quickly.

marc71178 · 29-11-2003, 03:50 PM

Inexperience cannot be the only excuse here IMO.

Yes there's some inexperienced players in there at the highest level, but it's not as if they're all 20 or 21.

Should never have lost from there against a hit or out merchant and a tailender needing that many runs in such a short time.

Tim · 29-11-2003, 04:06 PM

Yeah well had England fielded 6 debutants im sure you would have been on defence Marc...it's all very well to say that from your position.

Mr Mxyzptlk · 29-11-2003, 04:24 PM

But how many of those 6 debutants bowled in the last few overs? Last 10 overs:

Cairns 171 ODI's : 2-0-19-0
Vettori 118 ODI's : 1-0-10-0
Oram 47 ODI's : 2-0-16-1
Walmsley (debutant) : 2-0-22-1
Mason (debutant) : 1-0-18-0

Debutants bowled 3-0-40-1. The experienced bowled 7-0-45-1. That does sort of make the theory of inexperience seem valid.

29-11-2003, 07:03 AM	#16 (permalink)
Mr Mxyzptlk Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: May 2002 Location: Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad) Posts: 36,795	Sadly that might have been New Zealand's best chance of victory given the nature of their team. __________________ Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend." The Blog The Portfolio The...er...Twitter

29-11-2003, 03:50 PM	#28 (permalink)
marc71178 Eyes not spreadsheets Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: England Posts: 56,334	Inexperience cannot be the only excuse here IMO. Yes there's some inexperienced players in there at the highest level, but it's not as if they're all 20 or 21. Should never have lost from there against a hit or out merchant and a tailender needing that many runs in such a short time. __________________ marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good! Anyone want to join the Society? Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

29-11-2003, 01:37 PM	#18 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Auckland Posts: 7,888	Yeah the in-experience of the bowlers really showed up at the end of the innings. That type of loss will really sink the players, but I think they can be proud of their effort considering there were 6 debutants in the side.

29-11-2003, 01:41 PM	#19 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Auckland Posts: 7,888	Oh come on Neil, you know just as well that those players were up against it considering they haven't even started the domestic season yet. Walmsley is probably not going to play for NZ again after this tour, i'd say he went because he wanted to go & so NZ picked him because there were others who were concerned. Sure 65 off 4.5 overs is almost ridiculous but have a look at what NZ did in their innings, it was basically an identical situation..maybe Pakistan should get some death bowlers too.

29-11-2003, 01:43 PM	#20 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Auckland Posts: 7,888	Vish, we had the same problem down here with coverage. But I can't find out anywhere why we didn't see the cricket.

29-11-2003, 01:51 PM	#22 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Auckland Posts: 7,888	Oram is apparently very sick at the moment, he lost 10kg over the last 2 weeks due to an illness he picked up in India. But it seems he might be over it more or less. In the last 4 overs of NZ's innings, we scored 64 runs against a more established Pakistani attack. I agree that NZ shouldn't have let it slip away but I think you're being too harsh as its a steep learning curve.

29-11-2003, 01:57 PM	#23 (permalink)
Neil Pickup Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Oxford, England Posts: 26,361	You also scored the runs with proper batsman, not wildly swining bowlers and bowling allrounders! Probably am being harsh, but it was so clear that it was going to happen even from 15 overs out watching on Cricinfo (ask Liam) it was painful.

29-11-2003, 02:03 PM	#24 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Auckland Posts: 7,888	Razzaq can be just as explosive as Cairns at times, but NZ probably should not have let Sami hit 2 sixes. But as I said I don't think Walmsley would be in this side & Cairns is no way near what he used to be as a bowler. In the end it came down to in-experience which which was pretty much predicted before this tour started.

29-11-2003, 02:06 PM	#25 (permalink)
Neil Pickup Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Oxford, England Posts: 26,361	Is Hitchcock injured or didn't he want to go?

29-11-2003, 02:16 PM	#26 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Auckland Posts: 7,888	I think Hitchcock only just passed a fitness test before they left NZ, so he may well only play 1 or 2 games in the series. I was interested to see that NZ didn't play Tuffey...if the batting holds up & we can bring in Tuffey & Hitchcock I think we could win a few matches. I was impressed with the batting though...Hamish Marshall has extremely poor FC records, but you can't complain about this debuts in Test & ODI cricket. A 40* against South Africa in tests & now 55 on debut against Pakistan..he might well be playing Vincent out of the ODI team. Sinclair batted with maturity & although the openers only managed 49..it was at a good clip coming off 9.5 overs.

29-11-2003, 02:35 PM	#27 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Auckland Posts: 7,888	I've defended Brendon McCullum over the last few months for some of his keeping errors, but its now starting to become a very big problem. McCullum dropped a skied shot off Razzaq when Pakistan were on 258 & that could well have won the match for NZ. He's got to fix this problem because arguably he's cost NZ 3 important matches..i'd say its starting to weigh on his mind alot now & so somebody needs to help him out quickly.

29-11-2003, 04:06 PM	#29 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Auckland Posts: 7,888	Yeah well had England fielded 6 debutants im sure you would have been on defence Marc...it's all very well to say that from your position.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

29-11-2003, 04:24 PM	#30 (permalink)
Mr Mxyzptlk Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: May 2002 Location: Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad) Posts: 36,795	But how many of those 6 debutants bowled in the last few overs? Last 10 overs: Cairns 171 ODI's : 2-0-19-0 Vettori 118 ODI's : 1-0-10-0 Oram 47 ODI's : 2-0-16-1 Walmsley (debutant) : 2-0-22-1 Mason (debutant) : 1-0-18-0 Debutants bowled 3-0-40-1. The experienced bowled 7-0-45-1. That does sort of make the theory of inexperience seem valid.