NZ Test Match Summer News and Thoughts

[straw man]

When Flynn is fit and Wagner has qualified we should hopefully have 14 players to pick from.

Milne bowlz fasst too.

By the time Wagner qualifies Martin will probably have retired I'd say.

 

[Athlai]

Yeah, we've probably done the shape of the side to death... is there anyone else outside the current set-up who we think might make a contribution by the end of the South Africa series or next winter? A keeper is an obvious one. Wagner, Flynn, anyone else?

Broom would be nearer the Test team too if he didn't play so woefully this season. I suppose Nicol could possibly move in to the next favoured opener but thats slightly less likely.

 

[straw man]

Yeah, we've probably done the shape of the side to death... is there anyone else outside the current set-up who we think might make a contribution by the end of the South Africa series or next winter? A keeper is an obvious one. Wagner, Flynn, anyone else?

Yeah agree this discussion (who to drop for Vettori / 5bowlers vs 6batsmen) does get a little tired when there are no ****ing TESTS ON UNTIL LATE JANUARY. Sigh. Probably a fairly high chance someone from the 12 will get injured and render all discussion redundant anyway.

What do people think would be a decent result vs South Africa?

I'd been thinking the Australia series just gone was vital for raising interest in tests and starting off the season positively (tick) and the tour of the Windies in June(?) would be vital to begin a gradual climb up the rankings. In between we would smash Zimbabwe and get smashed by South Africa.

In other words, my expectations were not very high.... That we compete reasonably well but still lose 2 and perhaps draw 1 with a little rain assistance. Recent success makes me want to be more hopeful and optimistic... but that way lies madness!

 

[Athlai]

South Africa aren't the best touring side and we play better at home. On paper we should get our asses kicked but I reckon we'll sneak one.

 

[straw man]

South Africa aren't the best touring side and we play better at home. On paper we should get our asses kicked but I reckon we'll sneak one.

Heh, I thought on recent form South Africa weren't the best at home either? How long since they won a series at home?

... and yet they have a very good side and should beat us comfortably.

 

[Howsie]

Yeah, we've probably done the shape of the side to death... is there anyone else outside the current set-up who we think might make a contribution by the end of the South Africa series or next winter? A keeper is an obvious one. Wagner, Flynn, anyone else?

Todd Astle perhaps? He's the sort of spinner who could be effective in the Windies.

 

[Flametree]

Todd Astle perhaps? He's the sort of spinner who could be effective in the Windies.

And he can bat at 8, allowing a 6-7-8 of Vettori-Keeper-Astle... I agree, I imagine the selectors have their fingers crossed hoping he has a good a late season as he did last year.

 

[Athlai]

Astle coming good would be pretty gun. Aggressive spinner that can bat.

 

[Bahnz]

Eh, a fully fit Tim Southee is New Zealand's best bowler by a country mile. Regardless of how poor he was in Australia overall (and he was pretty average for the most part) a two test match series on a couple of bowling tracks isn't going to change my opinion on that.

Statiscally he's not even close. And you can go on all you want about how talented he is, and how he was unlucky last season not to get more wickets and whatever. But the simple truth is that if he doesn't start getting more wickets for fewer runs soon then it will become increasingly difficult to justify his place in the side.

 

[BeeGee]

Eh, a fully fit Tim Southee is New Zealand's best bowler by a country mile. Regardless of how poor he was in Australia overall (and he was pretty average for the most part) a two test match series on a couple of bowling tracks isn't going to change my opinion on that.

Tim Southee has a Test bowling average of 42.80.

Dipak Patel has a Test bowling average of 42.05.

Murphy Su'a has a Test bowling average 38.25.

So...

Su'a > Patel > Southee

 

[Hurricane]

All he needs is more experience. He needs an old mans head on his shoulders. He needs to be more canny. I have suggested ways outside test cricket he can acquire this nous - but for now we need to have faith in him.

 

[Flem274*]

Eh, a fully fit Tim Southee is New Zealand's best bowler by a country mile. Regardless of how poor he was in Australia overall (and he was pretty average for the most part) a two test match series on a couple of bowling tracks isn't going to change my opinion on that.

Bahnz said it best.

Right now, I would say Doug Bracewell is our best seamer, followed very closely by Chris Martin. I don't see how failing on two bowling tracks = he's still fine. It is a small sample size, but an interesting logic to say the least.

I think Southee can be a fantastic player, but if we're going to drop a bowler, results wise Southee falls short. He's had more opportunities for few results in his career and had an opportunity to cash in on green tops last series and was the lesser of the four bowlers we used. I rate him highly but he didn't take his chances.

This is assuming we go the "drop a bowler" route of course.

What do people think would be a decent result vs South Africa?

I hope we win, but realistically we're going to get hammered by Steyn, Philander and Morkel. I reckon Martin will continue to make Smith his bitch and I'm tipping him for a nice haul at the Basin, but apart from a few instances where we pull South Africa's pants down (carn Dougeh) this is going to be a one sided series.

It will still be interesting from a kiwi perspective to see who stands up on our team and makes their chances count. I don't want us to fold in a heap like we did in 2007.

 

[Hurricane]

Following on from Flem - if pattinson caused us issues - then we are in tough against arguably (apologies to England) the best bowling side in the world.

 

[Flem274*]

Yes and no. Pattinson bowled bloody well on a responsive wicket, so he would have picked up scalps against any side you cared to put out. England would probably have made 200 and/or bundled them out for something even worse than 136, but on a green top if you bowl well the batsmen will need a bit of fortune to get by.

In saying that, Steyn and co. are a much more daunting proposition and even if our pitches are much more batsman friendly or even flaaaat, Steyn and co. will sort us out bar maybe a couple of innings across the three tests.

 

[BeeGee]

A cautionary tale for any advocate of the five bowler theory :

2nd Test: Australia v New Zealand at Hobart, Nov 26-29, 1993 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Were the selectors drunk when they picked that team??

More seriously, if you give up a batsman to play a bowler you concede 40 runs per test over the long run. Anyone care to look at the margins of our last three victories (Aus, Zim, Pakistan)?

How crap was that team?

I can only assume the five bowlers playing was forced due to injury. I notice Crowe and Cairns played the first Test but not the second.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Because Vettori is a better bowler than batsman?

 

[Howsie]

Statiscally he's not even close. And you can go on all you want about how talented he is, and how he was unlucky last season not to get more wickets and whatever. But the simple truth is that if he doesn't start getting more wickets for fewer runs soon then it will become increasingly difficult to justify his place in the side.

Yep, I wouldn't argue that. He's eventually going to have to start bringing that test bowling average down rather quickly.

Right now, I would say Doug Bracewell is our best seamer, followed very closely by Chris Martin. I don't see how failing on two bowling tracks = he's still fine. It is a small sample size, but an interesting logic to say the least.

I think Southee can be a fantastic player, but if we're going to drop a bowler, results wise Southee falls short. He's had more opportunities for few results in his career and had an opportunity to cash in on green tops last series and was the lesser of the four bowlers we used. I rate him highly but he didn't take his chances.

This is assuming we go the "drop a bowler" route of course.

Urgh, so you're effectively basing all of this on just one game. Trent Boult has four test wickets, so? It means nothing and how you could say he's jumped ahead of Southee beacause of them I have no idea.

Before this series started I thought it was pretty common knowledge that Tim Southee was fairly undercooked, obviously it wasn't though.

 

[Days of Grace]

All this debate on which batsmen to drop in order to accomodate Vettori and four bowlers would have been non-existent if Brownlee didn't succeed like he did in Australia.

 

[Neil Young]

Watching these SA bowlers moving the ball all over the shop v SL, we have got our work cut out against them. Will be a massive test for questionable techniques and temperaments.

 

[_Ed_]

A cautionary tale for any advocate of the five bowler theory :

2nd Test: Australia v New Zealand at Hobart, Nov 26-29, 1993 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Were the selectors drunk when they picked that team??

Morrison at nine!