*Official** New Zealand in England

[Craig]

He's always done well at The Oval - nice batting wicket, easily the best in the land, and nothing whatsoever offered to Ntini and Pollock.
Both brilliant bowlers when there's movement off the seam but when there isn't, they're not much of a threat. And no taking away from the double-century, it was unbelievable by Trescothick standards, but it was also, I'm quite sure, the sort of innings a batsman plays once in a lifetime.
I don't think Trescothick is good enough to play like that again.

Spekaing of that, they are showing the innings on TV as highlights.

 

[anzac]

You're right, It's unlikely NZ will play 2 spinners in the next while anyway..the only time they would probably do that would be on the sub-continent.

They may pick Martin for the tour of England, so that if Vettori is injured or needs a rest during the mid-week Martin can fill in.

aahh but you are forgetting that Braces was a spin bowler and was outspoken in his criticism that NZ did not play 2 spinners often enough.........

in which case there WILL be 2 spinners in the squad & both are likely to play in a test if the wickets do not look to offer something for the seamers........

the question then becomes will they take 2 lefties no matter how good Martin is, so will they prefer a different type of spin option.......

 

[anzac]

Rubbish. Pace takes nothing out of the equation.
I would have thought the antiquated theory that "pace" bowling is effective on any wicket would have been dispelled by now.
Regardless of the pace you bowl at, you have to move the ball to be effective against decent batsmen. Bond is OK at seam and can swing the white ball, but I've yet to see him swing the red one, conventionally or reverse. Nor am I to see the evidence that he can he bowl the cutters that make good bowlers great ones.
The wickets are unlikely to offer any seam-movement, Bond is unlikely to move the ball, the batsmen are likely to play well, and bowling at 90 mph won't create errors.
See?

genuine pace IS effective on just about any deck when you have the new ball and an opening batsman at the crease at the begining of his innings...........and you can control your line & length

pace ceases to be as much a factor when the batsman is set, the deck is flat and the ball is older - then you need to swing it etc........

 

[Tom Halsey]

He's always done well at The Oval - nice batting wicket, easily the best in the land, and nothing whatsoever offered to Ntini and Pollock.

Why do you always say things like that to fit your ideals? Yes, his weakness is he doesn't move his feet, but his test batting average doesn't lie.

 

[Kent]

Bond is OK at seam and can swing the white ball, but I've yet to see him swing the red one, conventionally or reverse.

So Dravid just missed a straight one at the Basin last season?

 

[iamdavid]

So Dravid just missed a straight one at the Basin last season?

I certainly dont agree that Bond dosent swing the red ball , he swung it early on at Hobart on debut & he's seemed capable of swinging the new ball away from right handers just about everywhere to me.

But I think we should ignore what happened in New Zealand 'last season' as regards to judging a bowlers ability to move the ball / be effective at test level.
Ronnie Irani would've been a handful in those conditions , even after his knee problems.

 

[Kent]

iamdavid - you're right about last season, but it's important to note that Dravid was still applying himself as always, and the ball he missed was a yorker that took middle and off.

12.2 Bond to Dravid, OUT: brillian ball, swining in to off stump, Dravid going for the big drive, adn straight between bat and pad, taking out the off stump

India 31/3, Partnership of 0
R Dravid b Bond 7 (14b 1x4 0x6)
SR Tendulkar 0* (0b) SE Bond 6.2-4-6-2

Lara also missed a "straight" yorker from Bond that he tried to defend, taking his off-stump. This was on a flat wicket.

82.5 Bond to Lara, OUT: brilliantly bowled! a superb yorker, Lara is done all ends up, the stumps are splayed all over the show, and that's the last hurrah now

West Indies 269/9, Partnership of 17
BC Lara b Bond 73 (131b 11x4 1x6)
A Sanford 0* (5b) SE Bond 20.5-7-78-4

 

[Mingster]

Richard, I don't see your points as always.

Bond swings the ball, and if the last time you saw him is in the Hobart Test, you shouldn't be even commenting on him then.

Kent, thanks for those 'evidences'.

 

[Mingster]

Mills isn't a good enough bowler IMO. He's no good at the death and even when not bowling at the death he seems unable to ball a good line and length ball after ball after ball.

And that's the reason for his average being under 27, and having the best RPO in the team of under 4.3?

 

[marc71178]

Ronnie Irani would've been a handful in those conditions , even after his knee problems.

He can't even bowl any more, so I doubt that!

 

[Kent]

Where's Richard gone?

I actually enjoyed his candour about Bond, now I don't know whether he was just playing devil's advocate on stats alone.

The 'Gilchrist-Lara-Dravid' trio of yorkers in '02 pretty much fuelled all the hype about Bond in the first place! It wasn't because he was one of the fastest in the world, it was that he was doing things a lot of faster guys hadn't.

 

[Rik]

Rubbish. Pace takes nothing out of the equation.
I would have thought the antiquated theory that "pace" bowling is effective on any wicket would have been dispelled by now.

An Example of Richard's point:

When Shoiab bowled that 100mph ball to Nick Knight in the WC, Knight played it with surprising ease. The problem is that if the ball doesn't move, you can still hit the ball. I can't see bowlers going much faster than 100mph, and if Knight can play a ball that fast, then I think most top class batsmen can too. I'm hoping that we see the 1st 6 hit off a 100mph ball soon...it will go bloody miles!

 

[anzac]

An Example of Richard's point:

When Shoiab bowled that 100mph ball to Nick Knight in the WC, Knight played it with surprising ease. The problem is that if the ball doesn't move, you can still hit the ball. I can't see bowlers going much faster than 100mph, and if Knight can play a ball that fast, then I think most top class batsmen can too. I'm hoping that we see the 1st 6 hit off a 100mph ball soon...it will go bloody miles!

not having seen it my questions would be what type of delivery & at what stage of the game - was the batsman set & was the bowler in his opening spell etc.........

I still maintain that genuine pace IS effective on any pitch when the ball is new & at the begining of an innings when the batsmen are settling in to the pace of the wicket etc.............

any batsman at the start of his innings is going to be hurried up by a genuine quick delivery with a new ball unless he is a rich vein of form, or the bowler serves up ****e................

on a flat deck any advantage is soon lost & you still have to bowl a good line & length otherwise it becomes wasted..........and that's when you need the other skills to come into play........

 

[anzac]

You're right, It's unlikely NZ will play 2 spinners in the next while anyway..the only time they would probably do that would be on the sub-continent.

They may pick Martin for the tour of England, so that if Vettori is injured or needs a rest during the mid-week Martin can fill in.

the other option of course is to develop a batsman into the part time spin role like M Waugh, Lehmann, Katich, Clarke or Symonds.......

but it must be someone capable of scoring runs in the first instance & so has to be a specialist batsman as opposed to another bloody 'allrounder' - Rob Nichol bowls medium / spin for Auckland doesn't he so he could be a contender....

 

[Tim]

Nicol hasn't exactly been on fire with the bat this season, but I still expect him to be picked for NZ 'A'.

 

[Mingster]

But Rob Nicol's batting isn't too flash at the moment.

Don't forget Mark Richardson, i know i know, but he did manage to dismiss the Pakistani Asim in the tour game with his first over!

But seriously, wasn't Scotty Styris practising his offies?

 

[Craig]

aahh but you are forgetting that Braces was a spin bowler and was outspoken in his criticism that NZ did not play 2 spinners often enough.........

in which case there WILL be 2 spinners in the squad & both are likely to play in a test if the wickets do not look to offer something for the seamers........

the question then becomes will they take 2 lefties no matter how good Martin is, so will they prefer a different type of spin option.......

Who Paul Wiseman?

 

[Craig]

Where's Richard gone?

Thing called a time-zone?

 

[anzac]

Who Paul Wiseman?

well you'd have to say he is the logical choice since he was named in the Test squad for Wellington..........

 

[anzac]

But Rob Nicol's batting isn't too flash at the moment.

Don't forget Mark Richardson, i know i know, but he did manage to dismiss the Pakistani Asim in the tour game with his first over!

But seriously, wasn't Scotty Styris practising his offies?

I don't think anyone in the current squad qualifies as they do not bowl spin on a regular 'part time' basis for their State teams...

but you get my drift that it is another option that could be explored down the track, rather than having to make way for a 2nd specialist spin bowler..........