*Official* South Africa in New Zealand

[tooextracool]

Well it is better then India's, some of them are hardly Test standard (AA [not accurate], Zaheer, Nehra etc.).

i dont support india so i dont care.....but i will say that yes they are a better bowling side than india but to say that greame smith hadnt been tested until he went to nz to face their star attack of tuffey,martin,oram and cairns would be ludicrous

 

[Salamuddin]

Well it is better then India's, some of them are hardly Test standard (AA [not accurate], Zaheer, Nehra etc.).

NZ's attack is definitely overrated.
Bond is the only bowler in their side who would be a threat just about anywhere.
The rest of them are good on their greentops at home but lack penetration on truer wickets.
The Kiwis failed to win a test on the subcontinent on their last
3 trips to India, SL, Pakistan or on their last trips to Australia and RSA.
That suggests their attack isn't as good as it is made out to be.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

NZ's attack is definitely overrated.
Bond is the only bowler in their side who would be a threat just about anywhere.
The rest of them are good on their greentops at home but lack penetration on truer wickets.
The Kiwis failed to win a test on the subcontinent on their last
3 trips to India, SL, Pakistan or on their last trips to Australia and RSA.
That suggests their attack isn't as good as it is made out to be.

It's still better than India's though. New Zealand may not have won many Tests on the subcontinent, but last time around, they did compete and drew the series I believe.

 

[Salamuddin]

It's still better than India's though. New Zealand may not have won many Tests on the subcontinent, but last time around, they did compete and drew the series I believe.

Maybe but I don't think there is as much in it as people think.

NZ failed to defend 270 odd against Pakistan and then 230 odd against RSA -- both at home.
And Pakistan are not exactly the strongest batting lineup around.
Both RSA and Pakistan achieved those totals with relative ease -- so maybe people need to reassess how good NZ's attack really is.

 

[Loony BoB]

An amazing bowling attack? From New Zealanders? Come now, not in this decade. It's not always about how fast you bowl and whatnot, though, it's how you bowl and when you choose to bowl what ball. Just because we don't have as much amazing potential as our Aussie counterparts doesn't mean we don't know how to use our bowlers. And hey, it's not like every country in the world has more than one outstanding bowler. I admit we don't have an incredible bowling attack, but aren't we currently third in the world, or something? We got there by batting and bowling. Not just one or the other. To win matches, you don't get away with doing just one or the other. Are you trying to say that our batsmen have a bigger advantage over your bowlers than yours do ours? I thought Australians were wonderful batsmen! You can argue all you like about us winning most of our matches at home on our turf, but it's not our fault other teams can't.

 

[Salamuddin]

An amazing bowling attack? From New Zealanders? Come now, not in this decade. It's not always about how fast you bowl and whatnot, though, it's how you bowl and when you choose to bowl what ball. Just because we don't have as much amazing potential as our Aussie counterparts doesn't mean we don't know how to use our bowlers. And hey, it's not like every country in the world has more than one outstanding bowler. I admit we don't have an incredible bowling attack, but aren't we currently third in the world, or something? We got there by batting and bowling. Not just one or the other. To win matches, you don't get away with doing just one or the other. Are you trying to say that our batsmen have a bigger advantage over your bowlers than yours do ours? I thought Australians were wonderful batsmen! You can argue all you like about us winning most of our matches at home on our turf, but it's not our fault other teams can't.

errr... I don't think NZ are third anymore mate, not in tests anyway.

 

[Loony BoB]

Yeah, I wasn't too sure on that one... I can't find a link to the active rankings, cricinfo only gave me a bunch of stats that hadn't updated in donkey years.

 

[luckyeddie]

errr... I don't think NZ are third anymore mate, not in tests anyway.

I was sure I saw such a table on Sky News yesterday - a point ahead of India, 2 ahead of England and Pakistan, all very close, all very er, open to interpretation.

 

[tooextracool]

An amazing bowling attack? From New Zealanders? Come now, not in this decade. It's not always about how fast you bowl and whatnot, though, it's how you bowl and when you choose to bowl what ball. Just because we don't have as much amazing potential as our Aussie counterparts doesn't mean we don't know how to use our bowlers. And hey, it's not like every country in the world has more than one outstanding bowler. I admit we don't have an incredible bowling attack, but aren't we currently third in the world, or something? We got there by batting and bowling. Not just one or the other. To win matches, you don't get away with doing just one or the other. Are you trying to say that our batsmen have a bigger advantage over your bowlers than yours do ours? I thought Australians were wonderful batsmen! You can argue all you like about us winning most of our matches at home on our turf, but it's not our fault other teams can't.

now thats what u call an ambivalent post!
i dont think anybody said that u need to bowl fast to be a good bowler. AFAIC u guys are making a really big deal of chris martin when all hes done is bowl well against SA at home. he also had a great series against SA in 2000/01 in SA where he averaged like 26 and its amazing what else he did after that!.
oram and tuffey have really not done anything outside of those green top pitches that they get at home ,cairns is only half the bowler that he was and styris is complete and utter rubbish.IMO the only world class bowler that uve got is shane bond and hes on the sidelines with constant injuries. if bond doesnt go to england i must say that this nz bowling lineup would not even be as good as the one that made it in 99...nash,cairns and vettori at their peaks was definetly one of their better attacks.

 

[Loony BoB]

Hadlee, Morrison and Patel at their peaks, that was fun too, but I don't expect it to happen again any old year. xD

All I'm saying is that although it's not incredible, not many other countries can do much better. Is England better? Maybe I'm just ignorant, though. I honestly wouldn't be surprised - I don't keep up with English cricket much.

 

[Salamuddin]

I was sure I saw such a table on Sky News yesterday - a point ahead of India, 2 ahead of England and Pakistan, all very close, all very er, open to interpretation.

No I'm pretty sure Pakistan are 3rd on the ICC table.

They would be pretty annoyed if they weren't ahead of NZ -- given they beat them in a test series in NZ.

 

[marc71178]

They are 3rd - for now...

 

[Loony BoB]

Ah, found the rankings. NZ just recently hit fourth in the ICC Test Championship, behind Aussie, SA and Pakistan, and before England, India, Sri Lanka, Windies, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. The ongoing series could both change that, though. God, I'm a geek for stats. D=!

 

[anzac]

I think people are missing the point about why the NZ bowling attack is well thought of..........

it's NOT because they are a bunch of world class bowlers capable of taking a batting lineup apart - in fact it's because it is about the opposite...........

for decades now NZ bowling has been about having perhaps 1 class bowler in the attack, and a support cast of medium pacers / spinners that are very good at their roles of containment and pressure...............what has been more amazing has been the injury toll on NZ bowlers since the tour of RSA & the subsequent tour to OZ, & the virtual rebuilding of the NZ bowling attack twice over................not bad going when you consider the limited resources & the run of results................

Cairns was the last true world class seam bowler we had prior to his run of injuries in the last series v RSA, now Bond has the potential and the pace (????) to be a very effective strike bowler........

the main reason why I am excited by C Martin's efforts v RSA is that he appears to be a valid strike bowler in his own right & then NZ would have 2 genuine strike seamers together for the first time in a very very long time.................

One important point about Martin's performances v RSA - in those matches as a strike bowler he outbowled the RSA seam attack on what were batter friendly wickets & in no way can you compare the last 2 tests to the pitches played on by IND & PAK..........

Tuffey, Oram & Styris are all primarily about containment and tying down an end - as has become Vettori...........apart from Vettori none of them has ever been put forward as a wicket taking bowler, although both Tuffey & Oram are usually good for a couple per match in either Tests or ODIs...........

Cairns' bowling has only started to look anything like international standard since he got his 200th wicket - if he does decide to go to England then I think he will do quite well & should go ahead in leaps & bounds - perhaps not quite to the performances of his heyday, but still very effective as a 3rd strike seamer..............

 

[spofta]

with nz competing so well with sa i would have to say that sri lanka is the number 2 test team in the world. and i think bangledesh should be in 5th or 6th as they are much better than teams such as zimbabwe, india,pakistan and england. maybe we should give kenya test status they are just that good

 

[Craig]

with nz competing so well with sa i would have to say that sri lanka is the number 2 test team in the world. and i think bangledesh should be in 5th or 6th as they are much better than teams such as zimbabwe, india,pakistan and england. maybe we should give kenya test status they are just that good

*scratches head in confusion and disbelief*

It isnt proper for me to have a go at you. Your entitled to your opinion, but it is a damn funny one.

 

[anzac]

with nz competing so well with sa i would have to say that sri lanka is the number 2 test team in the world. and i think bangledesh should be in 5th or 6th as they are much better than teams such as zimbabwe, india,pakistan and england. maybe we should give kenya test status they are just that good

:O :O :duh: :ticking:

 

[aussiefan]

with nz competing so well with sa i would have to say that sri lanka is the number 2 test team in the world. and i think bangledesh should be in 5th or 6th as they are much better than teams such as zimbabwe, india,pakistan and england. maybe we should give kenya test status they are just that good

shoulld i laugh or cry :wow:

 

[Umair316]

I personally think the recent success for New Zealand is because of the self belief, they actually think they can win matches.

The way they fought hard in the ODI series against Pakistan, came back from almost losing scenarios and won matches.

The first ODI at Eden Park was the perfect example, in the manner Scott Styris led his fightback.

It is good times for New Zealand these days.

They have beaten 2 top class teams, and performance are coming from all parts of the team.

I can not wait for the return of Shane Bond and Nathan Astle to further strengthen the team.

They will definitly challenge Australia in the coming years.