• 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 Domestic Season 2015/16

Athlai

Not Terrible
Substitute in any other opener for 'Raval' and the principle applies; if you're stuck with **** options, work out which **** option soaks up the most balls.
His name was Tim McIntosh and he was a bright flame that burned out too quickly.
 

wellAlbidarned

International Coach
all this talk makes me want to see raval picked. If he does well I taste it but NZ has another decent test opener. If he spuds it then the deniers get to gloat. Win-win.
 
Last edited:

Athlai

Not Terrible
What would your test batting line up be? Hard to see many better options ATM to be fair.
I'd keep it as it is. Guptill recently tonned up against SL and conditions were ridiculously tough against the Australian new ball attack at times.

If he fails in the next series (or 2) I'd then look at the likes of Will Young/ Ben Smith/ Michael Bracewell/ Dean Brownlie/ Daniel Flynn to fight it out for the next spot. I would have Raval behind them all.
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
Will Young/Macewell to open? Wow you must not rate Raval at all.

Who's your 5? Nicholl's?
The 5 question is a fairly new one and before I had to think about it too much Santa became a viable lower order option. I think a 5-7 of Anderson/Neesham Watling Santner is a good long term option if Nicholls doesn't work out. In scenarios where we want to play the extra batsman I'd draw on the 5 bats I named earlier.
 

Kippax

Cricketer Of The Year
Will Young/Macewell to open? Wow you must not rate Raval at all.
Will Young is a name I'd like to see brought into the NZ opener debate a lot more tbh, especially if Hesson's seemingly going to opt for biff more than priss at No. 5.

The Stags will never come to the party on it, but the NZA selectors probably should.

 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'd keep it as it is. Guptill recently tonned up against SL and conditions were ridiculously tough against the Australian new ball attack at times.

If he fails in the next series (or 2) I'd then look at the likes of Will Young/ Ben Smith/ Michael Bracewell/ Dean Brownlie/ Daniel Flynn to fight it out for the next spot. I would have Raval behind them all.
2 further series of failures seems overly generous imho.

FTR I'm not arguing exclusively for Raval either, I've only seen the guy bat a couple of times and what I've seen from Kippax's videos. I just want us to move on from Guptill at the top of the order, even if it means taking a risk that his replacement may also turn out to be as below test standard as he is.

It's not like Guptill's mediocre as a test opener either, he's actually really really bad. Arguably the worst non-minnow opener to get an extended run at the top since Dwayne Smith.

As for the hundred against SL we keep hearing about.... saying that was a below test-standard pace attack is putting it mildly, with only the promising youngest to get excited about. Even Rutherford's scored a hundred against a much better pace attack than what Guptill's ever got close to,
 
Last edited:

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
Will Young is a name I'd like to see brought into the NZ opener debate a lot more tbh, especially if Hesson's seemingly going to opt for biff more than priss at No. 5.

The Stags will never come to the party on it, but the NZA selectors probably should.

Gorgeous batting and bowling in the Henry vs Young challenge there. Havn't seen leaving like that in quite some time. I like a good leaver.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Why is that word banned?
The costs of keeping this website up are, as you can see, subsidised by some Google ads, and Google have tightened up a bit lately on what words are unacceptable to have on pages with their ads present. James had to add some new words to the filter lately to avoid ending up out of pocket.
 

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
The costs of keeping this website up are, as you can see, subsidised by some Google ads, and Google have tightened up a bit lately on what words are unacceptable to have on pages with their ads present. James had to add some new words to the filter lately to avoid ending up out of pocket.
But it is such a useful word :sadface: Thanks for the explanation nonetheless.
 

Top