-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* New Zealand in Sri Lanka 2012
- Thread starter Meridio
- Start date
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
Agree Taylor is the main hope. After that first test against India and second test century he's clearly decided he's going to play hyper-aggressively in the subcontinent - perhaps too early in that first innings dismissal. Still, will roll the dice and it could come off. If he scores 130 we might get 250 and set up a 220 run chase. SL would still be big favourites but we'd have a chance.
chaminda_00
Hall of Fame Member
Brillant come back from Mahela and Mathews, would have been nice for some more runs from the lower order. But any lead is good lead. Hearth once again nabs a wicket just when we need it.
Re: Migara and Cribbs from 10 pages back before the all one line dribble, regarding Mathews batting position and Chandimal.
I don't necessary disagree that Mathews would do a good job at opening as he is better against pace then spin and he has the technique to succeed as a opener. So would Jayawardene if that was the main logic required.
Yes it would mean freeing up a middle order spot to get in Chandimal. But this one the reasons innings is why we need him down the order because of his ability to rescue the team if we lose a couple wickets.
Also if he opened the a batting and started to bowl more regularly. He would be injured every five minutes like Watson. His best position for the overall team is 4-6.
Yes Chandimal needs to be in the side someone where, as he is too good to sit on the bench. But that position for time being is as keeper at 7. Yes Prassana has done a brilliant job, but he will never be more then a low 30s keeper. There comes a point when you have to start picking someone that can take your team forward, rather then rely one someone because they have done a decent job.
I know they openers have yet to really show their potential at International level and the previous openers have been poor. So it seems a easy spot to put in a new batsmen or push someone up the order. But if players are scoring runs heavily in a certain position at domestic level, they deserve an extended run. It is not as if we are trying to promote 35 FC average openers like Tharanga, Vandort or Warupura. These guys are averaging in their mid 40s and deserve an extended run. The last opener to average that in domestic cricket was Atapattu. Not saying these guys anywhere near that standard, but surely if your performing at that level, you deserve a chance. Though for Paranavitana that chance may be over after this Test series, unless he scores a hundred soon.
Re: Migara and Cribbs from 10 pages back before the all one line dribble, regarding Mathews batting position and Chandimal.
I don't necessary disagree that Mathews would do a good job at opening as he is better against pace then spin and he has the technique to succeed as a opener. So would Jayawardene if that was the main logic required.
Yes it would mean freeing up a middle order spot to get in Chandimal. But this one the reasons innings is why we need him down the order because of his ability to rescue the team if we lose a couple wickets.
Also if he opened the a batting and started to bowl more regularly. He would be injured every five minutes like Watson. His best position for the overall team is 4-6.
Yes Chandimal needs to be in the side someone where, as he is too good to sit on the bench. But that position for time being is as keeper at 7. Yes Prassana has done a brilliant job, but he will never be more then a low 30s keeper. There comes a point when you have to start picking someone that can take your team forward, rather then rely one someone because they have done a decent job.
I know they openers have yet to really show their potential at International level and the previous openers have been poor. So it seems a easy spot to put in a new batsmen or push someone up the order. But if players are scoring runs heavily in a certain position at domestic level, they deserve an extended run. It is not as if we are trying to promote 35 FC average openers like Tharanga, Vandort or Warupura. These guys are averaging in their mid 40s and deserve an extended run. The last opener to average that in domestic cricket was Atapattu. Not saying these guys anywhere near that standard, but surely if your performing at that level, you deserve a chance. Though for Paranavitana that chance may be over after this Test series, unless he scores a hundred soon.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
re: Taylor's use of Patel:
Patel bowled exactly to the field. The straight line is where you want to be when you have 6 men on the leg side. It's a defensive tactic when there was no need to be defensive - at least early on in the Mathews-Jayawardene partnership. In the second innings Taylor needs to set more men in catching positions on the off side. Then Patel can comfortably toss it up outside off stump and try to get the batsmen playing against the spin. It might turn and bowl him through the gate or it might go straight on and be edged to slip. At least you're giving yourself a chance. As it stands there's no point in even having a slip with that straight line, and around the wicket is really clutching at straws.
He bowled well to pick up those late wickets, but it would've helped to have more conventional off-spinner plans. On the indian tour, all the NZ commentators were complimenting Patel's straight line and ability to keep it tight, while Ganguly was consistently saying that he needs to pitch it wider of off stump. When he did do this is when he looked the most dangerous - the straight one going past the outside edge and the turning delivery taking a bat pad.
re: Guptill
His technique is not good enough. He goes way too hard at the ball even when defending and plays the ball too early. He tries hard with his leaving and defensive mindset which is nice to see, but unless he fixes his technique he'll never be good enough against the swinging ball, especially at 135+km/hr. Centuries against poor attacks on flat wickets will not correct this.
Patel bowled exactly to the field. The straight line is where you want to be when you have 6 men on the leg side. It's a defensive tactic when there was no need to be defensive - at least early on in the Mathews-Jayawardene partnership. In the second innings Taylor needs to set more men in catching positions on the off side. Then Patel can comfortably toss it up outside off stump and try to get the batsmen playing against the spin. It might turn and bowl him through the gate or it might go straight on and be edged to slip. At least you're giving yourself a chance. As it stands there's no point in even having a slip with that straight line, and around the wicket is really clutching at straws.
He bowled well to pick up those late wickets, but it would've helped to have more conventional off-spinner plans. On the indian tour, all the NZ commentators were complimenting Patel's straight line and ability to keep it tight, while Ganguly was consistently saying that he needs to pitch it wider of off stump. When he did do this is when he looked the most dangerous - the straight one going past the outside edge and the turning delivery taking a bat pad.
re: Guptill
His technique is not good enough. He goes way too hard at the ball even when defending and plays the ball too early. He tries hard with his leaving and defensive mindset which is nice to see, but unless he fixes his technique he'll never be good enough against the swinging ball, especially at 135+km/hr. Centuries against poor attacks on flat wickets will not correct this.
Last edited:
Bang on about the line Patel was bowling. We can't hold Jeets in contempt for not looking threatening when his modes of dismissal bowling straight with a packed leg side field are minimal. Look at the three he got - one a misjudged sweep that was just a slight slice of luck, another one top-edged to deep backward square and a pop back to him (which was actually quite well flighted).
He can still get those bowling a line outside off stump. And he can get caught behind in the mix as well and bring stumps into play as well. Similar modes to how he got big wickets in Warwickshire I would suggest. Ross is inexperienced with setting fields/plans for spinners and needs to get up to speed with it.
He can still get those bowling a line outside off stump. And he can get caught behind in the mix as well and bring stumps into play as well. Similar modes to how he got big wickets in Warwickshire I would suggest. Ross is inexperienced with setting fields/plans for spinners and needs to get up to speed with it.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
I think it's the dogma in the NZ camp. Vettori gets a few lbws with the arm ball and generally keeps it tight, so that's what they expect from all the spinners. It's unfortunate because I think Vettori would get a few more wickets by pitching it a bit wider and asking the batsman to drive as well.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
Can't believe I got optimistic about batting out the day. Gupfail
