bring back butler!!

[Right arm fast]

after watching the first test i saw that nzs attack lacked only one thing---pace
so ian butler being nzs quickest bowler now that bonds been ruled out should be called into nzs team

 

[marc71178]

I see Bond is out of the 2nd, and probably the 3rd as well, so they need to do something!

14 man squad - saves money, but loses games!

 

[luckyeddie]

I agree. It's ages since I've seen those old 'On The Buses' classics with Reg Varney.

"I 'ate that Butler..."

 

[Loony BoB]

Before you scream "Butler" at us, justify why he of all bowlers in NZ should be selected. He had a terrible domestic season, and his bowling average in tests is unacceptable. Has he done something on an 'A' tour that has created a stir, or is everyone just saying "Butler" for no more reason than that he's played for NZ and he's fast?

 

[Right arm fast]

Before you scream "Butler" at us, justify why he of all bowlers in NZ should be selected. He had a terrible domestic season, and his bowling average in tests is unacceptable. Has he done something on an 'A' tour that has created a stir, or is everyone just saying "Butler" for no more reason than that he's played for NZ and he's fast?

i suppose your right in saying that but no 1 in new zealand has the pace of butler. and in my mind he preforms better on the internstional stage than ate domestic level

 

[Kent]

Like Butler has done a lot in the past, Andy Blignaut also bowls short of a length in the high 130's. Should we offer him a nice apartment in Queenstown and ask the ICC to waive his stand-down period?

Seriously, rather than rush Butler (fresh from a string of injuries and with no recent match practice) in as a poor man's Bond (just like we did against England last time), I'd rather we found out a few things about the attack we saw at Lord's. Like why Chris Martin has suddenly fallen into the 120's. Or why Tuffey, Bracewell's "spearhead" for the whole series, is labouring through his spells.

 

[Loony BoB]

Speed is not everything - he is, quite bluntly, a poor bowler. There are at least a dozen more deserving bowlers in New Zealand at the moment, including even Chris Harris, who has had a wonderful domestic season - although I'd personally prefer someone like Mason, Adams (I had to say it), Franklin or even this new Thompson chap, who had the highest strike rate of the NZ specialist bowlers this domestic season and also the second highest average. In other words, he gets wickets fast and for few runs (in comparison with other NZ'ers right now). Jeff Wilson is right behind him. Franklin has the most wickets. Where is Butler in all of this? Nowhere. He didn't even make the cut for specialist bowlers, let alone part time bowlers.

It's a shame that the NZ selectors are still likely to go for him, according to Cricinfo, because it shows that we don't recognise talent in our domestic field. If the NZ selectors do take Butler, I will view them in the same way I would view a rugby fan who reads a little bit about cricket once a month or so. Why would he take Butler? "Because, oh, you know... didn't he play for NZ before? He sounds familiar, I'll take him. I hear he's fast." Yeah, that's really showing the world! We have a fast bowler! I bet Chris Harris could bowl faster than him if he didn't give a crap about keeping a decent average. Maybe even Fleming. Maybe Fleming should bowl. He might be fast if he puts in enough effort.

EDIT: Wait, no, I stand corrected. He does not perform better at test level than in first class games. His first class average is 28.72 (not good enough for a specialist bowler) and his test average is 35.08 (even worse). His ODI average (53.85) is also worse than his First Class A record (41.40). I'm sorry, why did he ever get picked in the first place? I'm confused. Oh, and over the last domestic season, his average was 43.16 (specialist bowler? kill me now). There is good news, though - with a high score of 52* in his four innings (his other three totalled 2 runs), his batting average was boosted to 54 - 6th in the country.

 

[tooextracool]

there must be someone in new zealand who has been effective in domestic cricket this season and yet can bowl faster than 80mph??!

 

[Loony BoB]

I can only hope.

We've only got 4 million people in NZ, and cricket is only now becoming a leading sport in the country, and I think it's only just becoming a professional sport, too. Even Bond is known for being on the police force. That's why Bond is considered such a gold mine to NZ - bowlers of his talent just don't come along everyday for us, let alone every year, let alone every three years.

 

[luckyeddie]

there must be someone in new zealand who has been effective in domestic cricket this season and yet can bowl faster than 80mph??!

Perhaps they'd like to borrow the Kiwi with the FA Cup ears? We don't need him any more.

 

[_Ed_]

I'm not so sure about Butler being the quickest apart from Bond, in the matches in NZ this season Chris Martin has been bowling at around the same pace as Butler (although he seemed to be bowling a bit slower at Lord's).

 

[Neil Pickup]

Loony Bob, I'm not sure that you really seem to appreciate that the differences between the county/domestic game and the International sphere are huge.

Attributes that will gain success in one won't necessarily do so in another, and while 80mph seamers may be devastating on green-tops against India, on less friendly pitches against batsmen who've seen that sort of bowling since they were 10, it's not going to make as much difference.

See the whole Harmison debate that's gone on for the last year and a half - poor domestic record, talent and attributes (height, pace, bounce) there for coaches to see, International success - the same story goes on with a lot of International players.

Butler, as well as having pace, also has more height a la Harmison and so will add an extra dimension to a fairly similar Kiwi attack.. but it's not like it's really going to make any difference, is it?

 

[luckyeddie]

Attributes that will gain success in one won't necessarily do so in another, and while 80mph seamers may be devastating on green-tops against India, on less friendly pitches against batsmen who've seen that sort of bowling since they were 10, it's not going to make as much difference.

*cough*Corky*cough*

 

[Loony BoB]

Loony Bob, I'm not sure that you really seem to appreciate that the differences between the county/domestic game and the International sphere are huge.

Attributes that will gain success in one won't necessarily do so in another, and while 80mph seamers may be devastating on green-tops against India, on less friendly pitches against batsmen who've seen that sort of bowling since they were 10, it's not going to make as much difference.

See the whole Harmison debate that's gone on for the last year and a half - poor domestic record, talent and attributes (height, pace, bounce) there for coaches to see, International success - the same story goes on with a lot of International players.

Butler, as well as having pace, also has more height a la Harmison and so will add an extra dimension to a fairly similar Kiwi attack.. but it's not like it's really going to make any difference, is it?

I can understand that well and all, but Butler has been tried and tested, and he didn't impress me in any way. If he gets recalled and does well, I'll be happy and admit I was wrong about him. But if he gets recalled and fails, well, you know.

Maybe another 80mph person isn't what NZ needs, but at the same time we don't need someone who doesn't perform well at the international level, either, and is picked purely for pace. Butler didn't make an ounce of an impact at domestic level - you do have to take that into consideration.

He was 48th in the bowling average rankings at domestic level, took only 6 wickets in four matches (yes, 6 in 4, as in 6 in 8 innings, as in 0.75 wickets an innings), and was 45th in strike rates. He was more useful as a batsman than a bowler, and for someone with those kind of stats to even be considered at test level to me is an offence to the rest of the New Zealand bowlers - or at least around 40 of them.

 

[cbuts]

5reasons why butler should be in

1. he cant do any worse
2. he is the quickest bowler we have got, he is around the 150 mark
3. showed very promising signs in the test matches against pakistan, including a 6/46 that should of set up a series win
4.tuffey clearly is strugling with injuries, martin has had one lucky game and everyuone thinks he is the best thing since bond
5. you say he had a terriable first class season, i wouldnt call it terriable, its wasnt great but it was interupted at several points by injury

at the end of the day anyone who can rip through pakistan with sheer pace is a quick bowler. he is the quickest weve got, and as i said he cant do any worse, we need some variety. butlers bowling aginst pakistan in both tests, was very very impressive, he showed the benifit of a winter of coaching.

BRING BACK BUTLER

 

[Loony BoB]

He ripped through them. The lower order - 5/6 of those wickets were in the second half of Pakistan's XI men.

As for the other innings he played in that series? 2/113, 1/100. Against India? 1/116, 0/12. Against the Windies in 2002? 3/26 - not bad, on his first test that gave him his "place in the squad" - and then 1/58, 1/83. Oops? Against England, 2001/2 season - not bad, but not great, with 2/59 (not bad), 3/137 (not good), 4/60 (good) and 0/32.

I just think that someone who is showing form should be placed in the squad, rather than someone who has either been very, very unlucky or else just plain can't get an average for the past year that's below 35 in either national or international cricket. He needs to improve. Keep in mind that most New Zealand domestic batsmen should have trouble against a 147kph bowler as they're a very rare thing in NZ. So he should be doing BETTER than the dime-a-dozen medium-fast bowlers in NZ. But he does a lot worse.

He just needs to prove himself. He hasn't.

EDIT: Harsh words on Martin, by the way, considering you're supporting a player who averages one good innings a series at international level.

 

[cbuts]

his figures wernt great aginst india, but did u watch the game? he was the pick of your bowlers, he cuased them great diffuculty all round. butler ahad a rough start to the test level, but the last two series he has played in he has shown that he does belong at that level. as i said his domestci season was affected heavily by injury

 

[Kent]

Well, Butler hasn't been put on standby for Bond after all. I've heard Michael Mason has been chosen instead. Butler would've been just another punt on a recently injured player with no form to speak of, yet going back to Mason seems like Bracewell is clutching at straws, just hoping for a green pitch we can get first use of.

http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/default.asp?id=39838

Perhaps we should just concede that underneath Bond, we don't really have any right to look better than a county attack. If we were in fact an English county, we'd be happy to have one or two bowlers with the raw materials to play internationally.

As a much wealthier nation with about 60 million more people, they were always a good chance to leave us behind at some stage. Just like England's rugby team, they're now a lot more serious and professional than we like to admit.

 

[_Ed_]

Oh dear. Mason didn't look quite test standard to me in his debut. I hope he can improve though.

I was hoping it would be Franklin.

 

[Craig]

Perhaps they'd like to borrow the Kiwi with the FA Cup ears? We don't need him any more.

Yes please.