-
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.
New NZ Test match philosophy & team
- Thread starter anzac
- Start date
With the retirement of Chris Cairns NZ will be missing someone who can destroy the opposition. He's certainly valuable when the bowlers are tired in the 3rd session. Oram won't be taking over his place (batting at no. 7), so there's a disadvantage already.anzac said:so debates about Oram aside..............
back to my original question - does anyone think thie current NZ team has what it takes to be able to execute this strategy to 'accelerate the game' & then win the match?????
Ultimately NZ doesn't have the batting talent to score hundreds consistently, let alone at a quick pace. AUS have Langer/Hayden/Ponting/Martyn/Lehman and NZ can only muster Fleming/Styris/Astle. No disrepsect but Fleming/Astle are not even in the same league as the Aussies - I would consider rating Fleming as high if he continues his good form into 2004/2005. Styris can attack but he gets himself out too often in pathetic circumstances (Trying to smash Shoab through the covers, charging Boje).
If I was Bracewell I would concentrate on developing batsmen who score runs consistently (who average in the 40s). Try and but on 350-400+ in each innings and go from there. The problem with trying to advance the game is that you can loose it in 1 session of poor batting.
Richardson was asking people about a possible career in the media at around the time of Meat's post, so I think the omission can be excused!
Rigger can't have even believed much in himself that he'd score test tons again, seeing he was becoming envious of annoying little sh*ts like Tony Veitch.
Anyway, in regards to the original topic, I think the challenge now is to get a core group of bowlers together, all players who offer something that both the coach and the skipper believe in, and work damn hard on them.
If you followed England's model, by the end of next summer NZ's might be:
1) Bond (Harmison)
2) Oram (Flintoff)
3) Butler (Jones)
4) Sherlock (Anderson)
5) Franklin (Hoggard)
Tuffey, C Martin and Vettori seem to all have humble expectations and fragile abilities, so should probably be the most at risk of having their test careers sacrificed for others to develop.
But for now we can all sit back, log on to see Richard bicker with Marc occasionally, and wait for the Champions Trophy I suppose. It's going to be hard to find much else to add our two cents on, seeing we won't actually be seeing any cricket.
Rigger can't have even believed much in himself that he'd score test tons again, seeing he was becoming envious of annoying little sh*ts like Tony Veitch.
Anyway, in regards to the original topic, I think the challenge now is to get a core group of bowlers together, all players who offer something that both the coach and the skipper believe in, and work damn hard on them.
If you followed England's model, by the end of next summer NZ's might be:
1) Bond (Harmison)
2) Oram (Flintoff)
3) Butler (Jones)
4) Sherlock (Anderson)
5) Franklin (Hoggard)
Tuffey, C Martin and Vettori seem to all have humble expectations and fragile abilities, so should probably be the most at risk of having their test careers sacrificed for others to develop.
But for now we can all sit back, log on to see Richard bicker with Marc occasionally, and wait for the Champions Trophy I suppose. It's going to be hard to find much else to add our two cents on, seeing we won't actually be seeing any cricket.
Last edited:
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
Butler is going to need to show improvement because if Sherlock comes back & plays like he did in his only FC match last season, Butler will be easily overtaken.
The word is that Sherlock touched 150km's at times against Wellington..the fastest i've seen Butler bowl is 148 km's in India.
The word is that Sherlock touched 150km's at times against Wellington..the fastest i've seen Butler bowl is 148 km's in India.
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
I think Auckland will bring in former NZ U19 captain Michael Bates this year.
I faced him at a Auckland U19/U18 indoor trial match & he scared the crap out of me.
My friend then faced him in an Auckland outdoor trial match as an opener & said he didn't really see the ball.
I faced him at a Auckland U19/U18 indoor trial match & he scared the crap out of me.
My friend then faced him in an Auckland outdoor trial match as an opener & said he didn't really see the ball.
after this ENG Tour I'm even more concerned re the make up of the batting lineup so far as this 'advance the game' strategy is concerned - particularly if they persist with Fleming & Richardson as openers..........likewise the batting to follow Fleming IMO still looks too brittle - too many shot makers and no one to graft an innings together.........
while Richardson opens I'm convinced that the 'accelerate the game' strategy can not take place while he is at the crease - his batting style is too limited and is not suitable either individually nor so far as a partnership goes - however this does not mean that I would drop him from the team, just that you need to be more circumspect as to the use of the tactic & the mix in the batting lineup.............
IMO NZL needs a player/s like a Thorpe, Martyn or S Waugh to provide balance to the likes of Styris, Astle & McMillan - I don't think that Oram & McCullum fit that bill as top / middle order batsmen & are more suited to the lower order, although McCullum may be able to play higher as a result of his experience as an opener.......my current favorites for these roles would be the likes of Vincent & Marshall, although Fulton & Sinclair would also be in the mix with Sinclair perhaps the current front runner.........
if Fleming is comfortable enough opening perhaps Papps could be looked at as a #3?????, however it is my impression from this season that he is not really comfortable facing quicks on bouncier pitches (but then who is?) - perhaps it is something to do with his 'forward press' style at the crease which may limit his suitability to slower & lower type pitches as found in NZL ....similar story to Macca????
which ever way they go with Fleming they still have a situation where they are swapping one problem (opener) & creating another at #3.............
with Cairns now gone from the Test arena IMO they should select a specialist batsman to replace him at #6 by introducing one or more of the aforementioned players - alternatively they could look to play McCullum as a specialist batsman & bring in Hopkins as a specialist 'keeper, although this would be my least favoured option but still preferable to another 'allrounder'
however based upon the evidence in ENG re lack of bowling penetration I think they will persist in the selection of 5 primary bowling options........... Oram, McCullum & Vettori at 6,7 & 8, (with Oram & McCullum being interchangeable re availability of the new ball), and then bring in Franklin at #9 as another potential Vettori type 'allrounder', (as opposed to a Styris, Cairns, Oram type 'allrounder'), to be followed by 2 from the likes of Tuffey, Bond, Butler & C Martin, or even another spin bowler such as B Martin or Redmond depending on venue & pitch..........
I'd probably feel more at ease with only 5 batsmen if the selectors acknowledged the limited quality of their resources and adopted a 'horses for cources' philosophy, so as to obtain the best from individual strengths while also shoreing up flaws & weaknesses - this would apply equally to both bowling & batting options in both Test & ODI squads & teams...........
for me the only names I'd have penned for my Test squad would be the likes of Richardson, Fleming, Astle, McCullum, Oram & possibly Vettori (if he can convert his ODI form back into the longer game) - the rest of the squad would be subject to where the series was being played, what the pitches were likely to be like & who the opposition were so far as the likely make up their bowling attack..............
while Richardson opens I'm convinced that the 'accelerate the game' strategy can not take place while he is at the crease - his batting style is too limited and is not suitable either individually nor so far as a partnership goes - however this does not mean that I would drop him from the team, just that you need to be more circumspect as to the use of the tactic & the mix in the batting lineup.............
IMO NZL needs a player/s like a Thorpe, Martyn or S Waugh to provide balance to the likes of Styris, Astle & McMillan - I don't think that Oram & McCullum fit that bill as top / middle order batsmen & are more suited to the lower order, although McCullum may be able to play higher as a result of his experience as an opener.......my current favorites for these roles would be the likes of Vincent & Marshall, although Fulton & Sinclair would also be in the mix with Sinclair perhaps the current front runner.........
if Fleming is comfortable enough opening perhaps Papps could be looked at as a #3?????, however it is my impression from this season that he is not really comfortable facing quicks on bouncier pitches (but then who is?) - perhaps it is something to do with his 'forward press' style at the crease which may limit his suitability to slower & lower type pitches as found in NZL ....similar story to Macca????
which ever way they go with Fleming they still have a situation where they are swapping one problem (opener) & creating another at #3.............
with Cairns now gone from the Test arena IMO they should select a specialist batsman to replace him at #6 by introducing one or more of the aforementioned players - alternatively they could look to play McCullum as a specialist batsman & bring in Hopkins as a specialist 'keeper, although this would be my least favoured option but still preferable to another 'allrounder'
however based upon the evidence in ENG re lack of bowling penetration I think they will persist in the selection of 5 primary bowling options........... Oram, McCullum & Vettori at 6,7 & 8, (with Oram & McCullum being interchangeable re availability of the new ball), and then bring in Franklin at #9 as another potential Vettori type 'allrounder', (as opposed to a Styris, Cairns, Oram type 'allrounder'), to be followed by 2 from the likes of Tuffey, Bond, Butler & C Martin, or even another spin bowler such as B Martin or Redmond depending on venue & pitch..........
I'd probably feel more at ease with only 5 batsmen if the selectors acknowledged the limited quality of their resources and adopted a 'horses for cources' philosophy, so as to obtain the best from individual strengths while also shoreing up flaws & weaknesses - this would apply equally to both bowling & batting options in both Test & ODI squads & teams...........
for me the only names I'd have penned for my Test squad would be the likes of Richardson, Fleming, Astle, McCullum, Oram & possibly Vettori (if he can convert his ODI form back into the longer game) - the rest of the squad would be subject to where the series was being played, what the pitches were likely to be like & who the opposition were so far as the likely make up their bowling attack..............
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
You said there is no-one to graft an innings, but then you said Richardson's batting style was too limited!
And why to you continually repeat the words "Advance the Game"?
I think New Zealand are in good shape as a side.
THE BATTING OPTION
1. Mark Richardson
2. Michael Papps
3. Stephen Fleming
4. Nathan Astle
5. Scott Styris
6. Craig McMillan
7. Brendan McCullum
8. Jacob Oram
9. Daniel Vettori
10. Darryl Tuffey
11. James Franklin
or
THE BOWLING OPTION
1. Mark Richardson
2. Stephen Fleming
3. Nathan Astle
4. Scott Styris
5. Craig McMillan
6. Brendan McCullum
7. Jacob Oram
8. Daniel Vettori
9. Darryl Tuffey
10. James Franklin
11. Chris Martin
with Sinclair and Butler as backup.
I hope that will be enough to 'Advance the game'.
And why to you continually repeat the words "Advance the Game"?
I think New Zealand are in good shape as a side.
THE BATTING OPTION
1. Mark Richardson
2. Michael Papps
3. Stephen Fleming
4. Nathan Astle
5. Scott Styris
6. Craig McMillan
7. Brendan McCullum
8. Jacob Oram
9. Daniel Vettori
10. Darryl Tuffey
11. James Franklin
or
THE BOWLING OPTION
1. Mark Richardson
2. Stephen Fleming
3. Nathan Astle
4. Scott Styris
5. Craig McMillan
6. Brendan McCullum
7. Jacob Oram
8. Daniel Vettori
9. Darryl Tuffey
10. James Franklin
11. Chris Martin
with Sinclair and Butler as backup.
I hope that will be enough to 'Advance the game'.
Mingster
State Regular
Surely Ian Butler should be ahead of Chris Martin in the Test side for now anyway, on the back of the promise shown in the Test matches?
McCullum and Oram will be the key for our middle/lower-order for many years to come, but should they come in at 6 and 7 or 7 and 8? Like Prince mentioned, batting them one position higher would free up another bowler or spinner if it is neccessary.
McCullum and Oram will be the key for our middle/lower-order for many years to come, but should they come in at 6 and 7 or 7 and 8? Like Prince mentioned, batting them one position higher would free up another bowler or spinner if it is neccessary.