*Official* New Zealand Domestic Cricket Season 2012/2013

[hendrix]

Great catch from Ryder at first slip to get Worker.

 

[otagoman]

Great catch from Ryder at first slip to get Worker.

Chris Martin's stumping was quite comical

 

[hendrix]

Chris Martin's stumping was quite comical

Haha,

nice little googly that. I think Nethula's allright. Would have been a better choice than Astle IMO.

 

[Bahnz]

I see Ryder got Tastled, for his customary 30-odd off as many deliveries.

Seriously wtf Jesse. You're a fat ****, where's your hunger for runs eh?

Well, this is one situation where Ryder's aggressive approach is probably justified. Wellington might as well go for the win, and if Ryder had come off that would've made a huge dent in noth the chase and the required run rate. Obviously it still doesn't mean that he didn't find a hilariously stupid way to get out.

 

[NZTailender]

Well, this is one situation where Ryder's aggressive approach is probably justified. Wellington might as well go for the win, and if Ryder had come off that would've made a huge dent in noth the chase and the required run rate. Obviously it still doesn't mean that he didn't find a hilariously stupid way to get out.

There's scoring quickly that's appropriate for this situation, then there's how Jesse has been batting. 100 (150) would've been better than what he made (obviously). A little bit of caution would've gone a long way.

 

[straw man]

Close match - Wellington need 87 from 23 overs with 3 wickets in hand - Boam and Gillespie at the crease.

The scorecard is a little odd with Ronchi listed at 10 so not sure what's going on there.

Backing Boam and Gillespie to do it

 

[Kippax]

Ronchi's in Whangarei.

 

[Athlai]

Tragic. Probably would've made it if we had Patel at 10.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Deary me, Nethula's action is horrific. Just such an ungainly open-chested waving of the arms.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

But he got TH out so he must be good

 

[straw man]

So with no Vettori or Ryder and problems with our opening batsmen NZ are potentially looking for another batsman or two, and I for one am more rather than less confused about who it could be as the days go by. So here's the top FC run scores with season sorted by average (qual: 300+ runs)

C Munro (Auck) - 623 @ 124.60 HS: 269*
DR Flynn (ND) - 460 @ 65.71 HS: 182
Craig Cachopa (Auck) - 652 @ 65.20 HS: 166
PG Fulton (Cant) - 563 @ 62.55 HS: 108
L Ronchi (Well) - 494 @ 61.75 HS: 127
MHW Papps (Well) - 581 @ 58.10 HS: 206*
JD Ryder (Well) - 580 @ 58.00 HS: 174
Carl Cachopa (CD) - 735 @ 56.53 HS: 179*
AJ Redmond (Ot) - 708 @ 50.57 HS: 133
CJ Anderson (ND) - 353 @ 50.42 HS: 167
DG Brownlie (Cant,NZA) - 654 @ 46.71 HS: 133
TD Astle (Cant) - 323 @ 46.14 HS: 95
NT Broom (Ot,NZA) - 622 @ 44.42 HS: 146*
HD Rutherford (Ot,NZA) - 708 @ 44.25 HS: 162
SR Wells (Ot,NZA) - 425 @ 42.50 HS: 78
MS Sinclair (CD) - 546 @ 42.00 HS: 143
JA Raval (CD) - 533 @ 41.00 HS: 77

That Munro average is insane.

 

[Bahnz]

Well, let's work by a process of elimination to narrow it down a bit.

Munro is crap. Craichopa is too young and hasn't been making runs for long enough. Papps is a shunt. Ryder is unavailable. Carchopa would get chewed up and spat out by Broad and Finn. Anderson is out with a broken finger. Brownlie is a certain selection. And Sinclair is retired from intl cricket.

That leaves Flynn, Fulton, Ronchi, Redmond, Broom, Rutherford, Wells and Raval.

The battle for the opener's spot (given that it sounds like they're stucking with Guppy...ick) is probably between Flynn, Rutherford and Raval. I reckon the selectors will bank on Flynn, as Rutherford is too loose and Raval hasn't been making quite enough runs. I doubt the selectors will persist with two right handed openers, and Fulton's form has fallen away a touch in the back end of the season, so I reckon he's out of the reckoning.

Other than that the team is pretty much sewn up. Williamson, Taylor, McCullum, Brownlie and Watling are all locks to make it into the XI.

 

[straw man]

Damn, didn't know Anderson had a broken finger - that's bad luck.

I still can't quite bring myself to believe that McCullum is going to move down the order. Still hoping they come to their senses there, which would also mean a lower middle order batting spot is available.

I must admit I'm starting to be won over to the idea of Ronchi as a specialist batsman at 6 or 7, plus four seamers and no spinner (Williamson to chuck a few down).

or just Carl Cachopa. Yeah I sed it. Has 10 wickets at 20 this season too. Short ball be damned.

 

[Immenso]

Doug Bracewell also brought up 1000 FC runs in the same match he got 100 wickets.

His FC batting average has had a bit of a hammering from his test match struggles.

Edit: and Michael Bracewell also brought up 1000 FC runs in the same round.

 

[Bahnz]

Damn, didn't know Anderson had a broken finger - that's bad luck.

I still can't quite bring myself to believe that McCullum is going to move down the order. Still hoping they come to their senses there, which would also mean a lower middle order batting spot is available.

I must admit I'm starting to be won over to the idea of Ronchi as a specialist batsman at 6 or 7, plus four seamers and no spinner (Williamson to chuck a few down).

or just Carl Cachopa. Yeah I sed it. Has 10 wickets at 20 this season too. Short ball be damned.

I still don't trust Williamson enough to rely on him to bowl 10-15 overs a day. But if he keeps bowling well in ODI's maybe he'll improve to the extent where that's a viable option.

Also, is it possible that moving McCullum down the order is actually not that bad a decision? If you cut out his 200 v India, then his record as an opener really isn't that flash, averaging high 20's iirc. That's not much better than the likes of TMac, and probably only 5-10 runs more than the average for our other openers over that period.

Now, immediately before his move up the order to open, McCullum had been averaging in the mid 40's as a wicket-keeper batsman in the middle order. If he could go back to that, then that would represent a big improvement on the status quo (Flynn averaging high 20's). Even if his replacement were to average mid to low 20's as an opener, it would overall still represent a net gain to the side. Of course this is dependent on McCullum being able to make serious runs back in the middle order. But with Ryder unavailable, it might not be that bad a move.

 

[Immenso]

Bahnz. Not sure how you judge Fulton as having dropped off. Since return from SA/injury - he has scored 0, 59, 94, 52

 

[Immenso]

Gillespie brought up 300 FC wickets, Bates 100 wickets, and Butler after about 12 years on the scene got both career best innings return (6-for) and first ever 10-fer in a match.

 

[straw man]

Also, is it possible that moving McCullum down the order is actually not that bad a decision? If you cut out his 200 v India, then his record as an opener really isn't that flash, averaging high 20's iirc. That's not much better than the likes of TMac, and probably only 5-10 runs more than the average for our other openers over that period.

Now, immediately before his move up the order to open, McCullum had been averaging in the mid 40's as a wicket-keeper batsman in the middle order. If he could go back to that, then that would represent a big improvement on the status quo (Flynn averaging high 20's). Even if his replacement were to average mid to low 20's as an opener, it would overall still represent a net gain to the side. Of course this is dependent on McCullum being able to make serious runs back in the middle order. But with Ryder unavailable, it might not be that bad a move.

It's possible I guess, but seems unlikely to me.

I can't see McCullum averaging 45 in the middle order. He's too erratic and just generally vulnerable to good and even average bowling. As pews posted he also has a habit of getting out to left arm spin. Rarely scores centuries either - has 6 in his test career - 3 were against minnows, 2 against India on roads and one against Australia when we'd already lost. Averaging 35-38 against top-8 sides seems more likely. I have no doubt one of our plethora of other middle order options could do that just as well. Taylor exceeds that. Brownlie will too imo. Watling should be able to manage 35-38 while keeping wicket. If there's room for someone else (ie. Watling bats at 7) then that someone else should be able to at least average 30-35 I'd say. The comparison to Flynn is probably not valid since Flynn is unlikely to have a spot in our middle order in the immediate future (and I'd still back him to average 30-35 anyway).

I'd say we're gaining on average 0-5 runs per innings from McCullum in the middle order. Possibly even losing runs depending on who's being kept out of the team (Ronchi?).

And for that we have to give up an opener averaging 31 - I remember this figure from posts from a while ago - runs in last two years and doesn't include the India double. And we get Guptill instead, who we will generously say averages 20 against top-8 sides. Their opening partner is not particularly relevant but will probably average 20-25 as well.

I just can't see it adding up. McCullum would have to absolutely gun it in the middle order to make this work.

 

[hendrix]

Also, is it possible that moving McCullum down the order is actually not that bad a decision? If you cut out his 200 v India, then his record as an opener really isn't that flash, averaging high 20's iirc. That's not much better than the likes of TMac, and probably only 5-10 runs more than the average for our other openers over that period.

If McCullum moves to the middle order, we can't play an allrounder. Not that Franklin or Munro would do anything anyway, but he's not going to displace Williamson, Taylor or Brownlie

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

He either opens, takes back the gloves, or we drop the ****.

Oh wait, he's captain!