Howsie
Cricketer Of The Year
I don't really like it either tbhWatto an interesting call there.

I don't really like it either tbhWatto an interesting call there.
That team is just about perfect. I'm just wondering whether it would be improved by having Damien Martyn instead of Jones. Bevan or Hussey is also a tough, tough pick. I think Hussey will surpass Bevan over the course of his career in most people's minds.Australia
1.Adam Gilchrist
2.Mark Waugh
3.Ricky Ponting
4.Dean Jones
5.Andrew Symonds
6.Michael Bevan
7.Shane Watson
8.Shane Warne
9.Brett Lee
10.Nathan Bracken
11.Glenn McGrath
Yeah more of a statement at where they batted most of the time as opposed to batted at all. And I reiterate that Wright was a gun, looking too deep into the stats and strike rates of the older generation players doesn't have too much value IMO.Wright averaged 26 with a strike rate of 57.
Greatbatch>Wright as an ODI batsman. So is Ryder.
Greatbatch opened
Ryder opens
Jones has batted at 3
Styris has batted at 4
Taylor has batted at 5
Oram has batted at 6
Don't see what you're getting at tbh.
Fair call on Parore, though there is no way he should bat at number three.
Can I know why?I'm just wondering whether it would be improved by having Damien Martyn instead of Jones.
In terms of stats I agree (but just). However Bevan played in a time where scoring was much more difficult and was the first one who really made the role of a finisher (and not just a pinch hitter in death overs, but winning games chasing too). He also seems to hold that legend status at home, which I don't think Hussey has.Bevan or Hussey is also a tough, tough pick. I think Hussey will surpass Bevan over the course of his career in most people's minds.
I agree. But the problem is do you pick purely based on individuals or do you take into account partnerships as well?EDIT : Also, Mark Waugh was awesome and his batting style + bowling, catching/fielding makes him a big favourite but Hayden's partnership with Gilchrist and his superior numbers should not be overlooked.
Has to be someone better than Jones for the 2nd X1 - I grew up watching Jones play and the guy could not turn the strike over. We had a few slow coaches in the team such as him and Jeff Crowe. On paper Jones' SR of 57 might sound ok but he was painful to watch. We tried him opening but then they said we needed faster starts so they tried M Crowe opening instead. Then we stagnated in the middle with Jones coming in - so they dropped Crowe down the order to give us a better middle. In my minds eye what I remember of Jones is that he tried to line up to hit the ball for at least two runs every delivery he got. If he didnt get a ball he could hit for two or four he would defend it. A better batsman is thinking I will take what I can get off each delivery including singles. This memory is from twenty years ago so please don't refute this with an analysis on the number of singles he took!New Zealand's 15 Man Squad
Jones just misses out.
This would give NZ a second XI of something like:
Wright
Jones (Edgar/Vincent unlucky)
Parore (+)
Taylor
Twose
McMillan
Oram
Mills
Larsen
Chatfield
Patel (BUT WHICH ONE)
Mainly because I'm a big fan.Can I know why?
True... but I think it's pretty close.In terms of stats I agree (but just). However Bevan played in a time where scoring was much more difficult and was the first one who really made the role of a finisher (and not just a pinch hitter in death overs, but winning games chasing too). He also seems to hold that legend status at home, which I don't think Hussey has.
Again a close one, shows the extent of Australia's ODI dominance that their 2nd XI would probably give many first XIs a run for their money.I agree. But the problem is do you pick purely based on individuals or do you take into account partnerships as well?
Like the team of 07 already had great catchers and part timers that Waugh's fielding/bowling is really not that important. So if your team is mainly based on players from that time, it is the logical choice to keep them together.
Why would you have him then?Yeah more of a statement at where they batted most of the time as opposed to batted at all. And I reiterate that Wright was a gun, looking too deep into the stats and strike rates of the older generation players doesn't have too much value IMO.
He was a great player.Why would you have him then?
Prove it.He was a great player.
3500 runs opening for NZ is alright by me.Prove it.
He shouldn't be in the team. Tests yes, you have a case, but not the ODI team, or in this case the ODI 2nd XI.
Chris Martin would probably be in our near the 2nd or 3rd XIs of NZ Test team. James Marshall has been picked once.Chris Martin has almost 200 test wickets, but he still has an obsession with bowling round the wicket.
Just because someone gets picked enough, it doesn't change much. James Marshall case in point.
7 Simon O'DONNELL
Far too many ODIs to his (Marshall's) name though.Chris Martin would probably be in our near the 2nd or 3rd XIs of NZ Test team. James Marshall has been picked once.
Marshall scored 160 in his last appearance, get him back in the team IMO.Far too many ODIs to his (Marshall's) name though.
Too many tests as well tbh.![]()
Yeah, don't need Ryder.Marshall scored 160 in his last appearance, get him back in the team IMO.