New Zealand doom and gloom thread

[Zinzan]

1. Martin Guptill
2. George Worker
3. Kane Williamson
4. Ross Taylor
5. Henry Nicholls/Tom Bruce
6. Jimmy Neesham
7. Tim Seifert

Is the top seven I'd like to see us run with this summer, with Young and Chapman getting the odd game when we rest the likes of Williamson or Taylor (Young) or Neesham for Chapman.

Worker's a hack & looked horrible in the build up games vs. weak attacks.

 

[vandem]

Stray observations (made with the benefit of hindsight):

- picking Broom to replace an unavailable Taylor was a good move, but to keep picking him after Taylor's return was to needlessly delay the introduction of Bruce or Young by a year.

- Kiwi #4 had 148 runs at SR 74 in 3 CT games. Eng #4 had 175 runs SR 113 in 3 games. NZ won none, Eng won 3.

- if 320 is the new 270, we need middle / lower order players that can score 25 (25). We can't rely on someone playing "catch-up" from being 25 (40). So middle order players either need have lower dot ball percentages (Williamson / Young?) or to hit boundaries early in their innings (Neesh / Munro / Bruce).

- if 320 is the new 270, we need mid-innings wicket taking bowlers (Sodhi ahead of Santner?). Preferably bowlers that can hit 20 (20) when needed (Kuggs?).

 

[Howsie]

Worker's a hack & looked horrible in the build up games vs. weak attacks.

Well that's that then, forget all the runs Worker has made in list A cricket, that' he's been the best one day cricketer in domestic cricket the last few years, the fact we have a massive hole where he plays. He looked bad in two games during the winter, go instead with a mid 30's batsman who might average 30 at a 70 SR.

Nice work Mike.

 

[Zinzan]

Well that's that then, forget all the runs Worker has made in list A cricket, that' he's been the best one day cricketer in domestic cricket the last few years, the fact we have a massive hole where he plays. He looked bad in two games during the winter, go instead with a mid 30's batsman who might average 30 at a 70 SR.

Nice work Mike.

I'm not doubting that Worker scores NZ domestic runs, but every time I've seen him he just smacks of a guy who can't make the step up. Hate to say it, but kind of Rob Nicolesque.

 

[cnerd123]

If you Kiwi's poach Chapman I will never forgive you for it

 

[Mike5181]

If you Kiwi's poach Chapman I will never forgive you for it

mine mine mine mine.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Stray observations (made with the benefit of hindsight):

- picking Broom to replace an unavailable Taylor was a good move, but to keep picking him after Taylor's return was to needlessly delay the introduction of Bruce or Young by a year.

- Kiwi #4 had 148 runs at SR 74 in 3 CT games. Eng #4 had 175 runs SR 113 in 3 games. NZ won none, Eng won 3.

- if 320 is the new 270, we need middle / lower order players that can score 25 (25). We can't rely on someone playing "catch-up" from being 25 (40). So middle order players either need have lower dot ball percentages (Williamson / Young?) or to hit boundaries early in their innings (Neesh / Munro / Bruce).

- if 320 is the new 270, we need mid-innings wicket taking bowlers (Sodhi ahead of Santner?). Preferably bowlers that can hit 20 (20) when needed (Kuggs?).

Our whole lower order just seems to me to be completely obsessed with hitting sixes. They're constantly holing out, even into the wind on occasions. I'd like to see them use their brains a lot more ... they'd be better off keeping the ball along the ground unless there's a really obvious six taking option, and focusing on hitting gaps and scrambling 2s and 3s.

 

[straw man]

Lots of good suggestions. Trialling new players aggressively is essential - give each one a fair run i.e. 5 or 6 matches, preferrably against more than one opposition, then cull if not working. A couple more thoughts:

- Goodbye Ronchi, Anderson and Broom. Possibly Neesham too, depending on whether you want an entirely new lower middle order or not. Anderson and Neesham may re-earn spots with domestic/overseas performance.
- New keeper should bat 7, even if it's Phillips. Opening and wicket-keeping a huge role and too big for a debutant (or Latham, it appears) - look no further than how McCullum struggled with that at the very start of his career.
- Other opening batsman is Latham vs Worker. I don't remember loving Worker's batting against South Africa when we toured there ages ago, but he's earned a chance through big runs.
- Nicholls and Munro were both tried last season and didn't succeed and didn't make the CT squad. Like everyone not involved in that debacle, that's a slight blessing for them! I didn't think Nicholls' game was well-suited to ODIs but he then went and scored a lot of List A runs. Not sure what to do with Munro.
- We have a shedload of good ODI bowlers who aren't really good enough to bat 8. And after that 9, 10, 11 only contribute very rarely as well. Even the better batsmen amongst the bowlers i.e. Santner, Milne and Henry don't really contribute enough with the bat.
- Agree we need someone quite proactive to bat at 5, to offset Taylor's inertia. I have liked the look of Bruce from the little I've seen. Wouldn't discount Will Young in ODIs either, after a bad start the latter part of his last season was quite good. Though would he just be another Taylor-lite like Broom was at 5?
- One minor positive of not playing again until November is that the domestic season will have already started. Have noticed current selectors/coach will not consider anyone new at start of season so perhaps domestic form will change that (even if it's domestic FC and we're talking here about ODIs).
- Other players like New Zealander Mark Chapman to be trialled too.

 

[cnerd123]

- Other players like New Zealander Mark Chapman to be trialled too.

you're dead to me

 

[Flem274*]

nicholls iirc was ok in odi cricket even while spudding it in tests. there's a couple of players over the years who have been thrown some odis only to randomly disappear without a trace while ronchi's career marches on

 

[NZTailender]

nicholls iirc was ok in odi cricket even while spudding it in tests. there's a couple of players over the years who have been thrown some odis only to randomly disappear without a trace while ronchi's career marches on

 

[Moss]

Lots of good suggestions. Trialling new players aggressively is essential - give each one a fair run i.e. 5 or 6 matches, preferrably against more than one opposition, then cull if not working. A couple more thoughts:

- Goodbye Ronchi, Anderson and Broom. Possibly Neesham too, depending on whether you want an entirely new lower middle order or not. Anderson and Neesham may re-earn spots with domestic/overseas performance.
Goodbye Ronchi and Broom yes, though I'm not averse to Broom being a stand in for KW or Taylor when they get injured (but no more). Only half-agree on Anderson and Neesham, I think one of them (preferably Neesham) could be a good bet for number 5 going ahead, where they can play themselves in rather than go ape**** from ball one. Worrying they haven't progressed in tests, but that's a different story.

- New keeper should bat 7, even if it's Phillips. Opening and wicket-keeping a huge role and too big for a debutant (or Latham, it appears) - look no further than how McCullum struggled with that at the very start of his career.
New keeper at 7, yes. I'd like both Blundell and Philips to be trialled properly this summer, maybe one in ODI's and the other in T20's. Though given NZ's paucity of upcoming fixtures I fear we are living on borrowed time here.

- Other opening batsman is Latham vs Worker. I don't remember loving Worker's batting against South Africa when we toured there ages ago, but he's earned a chance through big runs.
Latham vs Worker - I'm a big believer in Latham coming good, still feel there's a place for his kind of batting in the modern game (see Amla, though Latham obviously isn't in his class). Haven't liked the look of Worker so far but can't ignore the runs.

- Nicholls and Munro were both tried last season and didn't succeed and didn't make the CT squad. Like everyone not involved in that debacle, that's a slight blessing for them! I didn't think Nicholls' game was well-suited to ODIs but he then went and scored a lot of List A runs. Not sure what to do with Munro.
Nicholls has played a couple of useful innings in his short ODI career, seems better at rotating the strike than Broom for example, but how good is his hitting game? Munro I really don't know what to think. In theory should be the answer to NZ's problems getting quick runs at the latter stages, but whenever I've watched him all I've seen are filthy low percentage slogs. Real Lord Colin please stand up etc.

- We have a shedload of good ODI bowlers who aren't really good enough to bat 8. And after that 9, 10, 11 only contribute very rarely as well. Even the better batsmen amongst the bowlers i.e. Santner, Milne and Henry don't really contribute enough with the bat.
Santner needs to spends some time with the coaching staff and find a way of dealing with short pitched bowling, better batsman than what we've seen of late surely. 9,10 and 11 seem to be write-offs with the bat (again what an idiot Southee is for wasting that batting ability. Improved with the ball for sure)

- Agree we need someone quite proactive to bat at 5, to offset Taylor's inertia. I have liked the look of Bruce from the little I've seen. Wouldn't discount Will Young in ODIs either, after a bad start the latter part of his last season was quite good. Though would he just be another Taylor-lite like Broom was at 5?
Proactive batsman at 5 - Neesham probably? Played well in Australia at 4. Bruce seems like an encouraging option but (need domestic viewers to answer here) will his defensive game stand up to international bowling? Will Young has me interested too as a potential replacement for Taylor in the top 4.

- One minor positive of not playing again until November is that the domestic season will have already started. Have noticed current selectors/coach will not consider anyone new at start of season so perhaps domestic form will change that (even if it's domestic FC and we're talking here about ODIs).
Re: the domestic situation, not having those 'A' tours is hurting big time. Doubt selectors will be easily swayed by 'early' domestic performances.

- Other players like New Zealander Mark Chapman to be trialled too.
How close is Mark Chapman to being considered for internationals?

Thoughts inline

 

[hendrix]

Mark Chapman will be brought into the squad sooner rather than later IMO.

 

[hendrix]

In Bangladesh's current innings against India, so far 3 batsmen have played reverse sweeps. There is currently not a single player in the NZ ODI lineup that plays a reverse sweep. Kane Williamson is not someone who requires a reverse sweep to change opposition bowling plans - he can already hit shots all around the ground and has at least two options wherever the bowler bowls. But pretty much everyone else in the lineup could benefit from having such an option.

I don't think that this is radical thinking. It'd be great if bowlers just dished up half trackers so we could watch Corey Anderson swing them into the stands, but they're not gonna do that unless he forces them to do so.

 

[Kippax]

Bruce seems like an encouraging option but (need domestic viewers to answer here) will his defensive game stand up to international bowling?

Yeah I can vouch for seeing the occasional defensive frailty exposed by his big open stance. You could watch a whole domestic season without really seeing Bruce's defensive game given an airing all that often. Usually the very muscular bottom hand is giving it plenty and he's been getting out stumped to spinners an inordinately high number of times, but the methods never get as boorish or filthy as a true engine room man.

 

[Kippax]

 

[Flem274*]

didnt taylor add the reverse sweep recently?

 

[Kippax]

How close is Mark Chapman to being considered for internationals?

Chapman would be somewhat against the grain of Hesson's affinity for shots off both feet, I suppose. Wellington will never see Munro, Nicholls or Bruce batting with this sort of Asian deference when we try to shorten our lengths, that's for sure. They'd certainly be giving our medium-pacer Matt McEwan a more odious and obnoxious taste of Kiwi -

Speaking of Munro, him getting a test drive as an ODI opener is very much on the cards, according to Hesson in the press last month. So it's safe to say we're still not in one of those paradigms of New Zealand cricket where doors are going to open for Chapman just on the fact he's the private schoolboy, the more articulate and heady candidate, therefore could potentially get us back to mentally manipulating international opponents, like the good old days.

 

[cnerd123]

You know your cricket is in dire straits when you're stealing players from Hong Kong

 

[Flem274*]

*you know your cricket is in dire straits when your players would rather play for someone else