New Zealand doom and gloom thread

[wellAlbidarned]

I don't think any of our batsmen deserve to be cut any slack based on their overall performances, whether Yadav was fired up or not. The delivery to McCullum was decent, but not unplayable from what I remember.

[Pup Clarke]

And deliveries need to be unplayable to get wickets? Those are the ones that inevitably beat the edge.

[wellAlbidarned]

I meant it was a delivery that he could've easily been left. When a guy like Yadav gets on a rhythym, it only takes a couple of overs of playing it safe for him to get frustrated.

[Hurricane]

Disagree with you Welabidarned - It was in the channel of uncertainty.
. Most leg cutters bowled in the perfect channel will either get you or beat you unless you are on 60 runs and then somehow you go with the seam movement and hit it anyway.

[Bahnz]

Just a gentle bump for this.

A few rays of sunshine for our bowling. Southee really may be showing signs of finally turning his undeniable talent into consistent performances, and in Boult, and co. he has decent support. Our batting, on the other hand, is at it's weakest since the 1960's.

[Flem274*]

Too much credit being given to the class of 1995 imo.

[Flem274*]

Originally Posted by Flem274*

But srsly I think some people in influential places buy into this somewhat. You hear it in interviews with players and management all the time. "If we play our best we will compete" and the like when we're playing teams with similar rankings to ours, let alone higher ups.

And we will never win with the above attitude. Ever. Considering NZ successes in sports of similar sizes with much, much, much less funding behind them, there is no excuse for the second largest sport in NZ to hide behind mummys legs.

Originally Posted by Flem274*

If you want to look at the participation to performance ratio, the only sport in New Zealand that could come close to crickets level of underachievement is football, which is a much, much bigger sport globally.

Stand by this.

I'll add that the exaggerated intent of our batsmen bemuses me. If they get told to bat positively they try to hit everything out of the park, followed by padding half volleys back down the pitch when they get told to value their wickets. Coaching them must be like coaching 10 year olds on ponies - they're either galloping or dribbling. It betrays an alarming lack of experience and training. They should have this out of their systems by now.

Originally Posted by SteveNZ

My fingers will hardly allow me to type this out but van Wyk showed me enough in the last Test...argg....to suggest....yuck...that he deserves...geez...to stay.

post of the thread.

[Bahnz]

Originally Posted by Flem274*

Too much credit being given to the class of 1995 imo.

Maybe, but it's a close run thing either way. Both teams had one good batsman (Crowe and Taylor) one talented youngster (Fleming and Williamson) one massive under achiever (Rutherford and McCullum). Parore a better batsman than Kruger, Young and Guptill pretty similar talent-wise, Thompson and Franklin both way out of their depth. It's close, it really is.

[Woodster]

Originally Posted by Bahnz

Just a gentle bump for this.

A few rays of sunshine for our bowling. Southee really may be showing signs of finally turning his undeniable talent into consistent performances, and in Boult, and co. he has decent support. Our batting, on the other hand, is at it's weakest since the 1960's.

Really hope Southee finds that consistency, especially when the baqll isn't swinging round corners. Like Jimmy Anderson, we know Southee is a real handful when the ball is curving, but hopefully he can find a way to be effective when there is no swing around, like Anderson has developed, a plan B.

I'm also a fan of Doug Bracewell, though he appears to be having a tough time at present. Seems to have struggled on the sub-continent pitches and is leaking too many runs. But hopefully he's learning all the time, still only 22, so I'm sure he can come through this phase of his career a better player.

[Flem274*]

I've thought of a back handed positive.

If someone can actually ton up against CD, ND or Wellington we know they're a good player.

The negative: Brownlie and Ryder are about the only ones who have, and we already know they're decent.

[Himannv]

Originally Posted by Woodster

Really hope Southee finds that consistency, especially when the baqll isn't swinging round corners. Like Jimmy Anderson, we know Southee is a real handful when the ball is curving, but hopefully he can find a way to be effective when there is no swing around, like Anderson has developed, a plan B.

I'm also a fan of Doug Bracewell, though he appears to be having a tough time at present. Seems to have struggled on the sub-continent pitches and is leaking too many runs. But hopefully he's learning all the time, still only 22, so I'm sure he can come through this phase of his career a better player.

I've been quite impressed with Southee and Boult from what I've seen of them here. They both looked exceptional with the new ball but probably found it a bit harder later on. On the whole they look like a new ball pairing that will last for a while if they can stay fit together.

Bracewell, on the other hand, hasn't done anything special at all in this test. He doesn't really swing the ball much, nor does he seem to bowl in particularly good areas. I remember he did well against Australia(?) but I didn't watch that game. What are his strengths?

[Flem274*]

Originally Posted by Himannv

Bracewell, on the other hand, hasn't done anything special at all in this test. He doesn't really swing the ball much, nor does he seem to bowl in particularly good areas. I remember he did well against Australia(?) but I didn't watch that game. What are his strengths?

Bowling in good areas and swinging the ball away from the right hander.

[hendrix]

I know Williamson is good.
I know Taylor is good.
I know Ryder is good.

I also knew all that about McCullum. Are they all going to underperform? End with mid-30s averages and the occasional flashes of brilliance just to tease us and remind us what could've been?

I know this team has enough good players to win tests. I know that we need to be patient.

I can't see a test win happening for a good 2 years.

Pain.

[Bahnz]

I reckon we could win a test between now and then. We've got the bowling to take 20 wickets, especially if conditions suit us, and we know from past performances that our batsmen are at least capable of making runs. If everything clicks at once we could definitely win a test. But it would be a flash in the pan, like Hobart, and not the beginning of a sustained upward trend in the sides performances'

[SteveNZ]

What's our record since Hobart? Off the top of my head it would be played 9, lost 8, draw one - thanks to Kane. All the talk in the wake of Hobart was making sure it wasn't a once-off and regaining the good faith of the public. Ha.

And if Ross says '*insert reason for failure here* is something we need to work on quickly ahead of the next game' one more time, I will..not enjoy it. Sick of it.