New Zealand A Tour of India and Sri Lanka

[hendrix]

Disagree with this. Yes, Williamson's average of 31 is still disappointing, but we need to remember that that's partly a result of him having played a disproportionate number of matches away from home. If Williamson had the same ratio of home to away matches as Pujara has, he'd be averaging 40, and an average in the mid-30's would probably be a fairer representation of where he's at imo, and I fully expect him to start pushing his average in that direction over the course of the coming summer.

Also disagree that Fulton and Rutherford are unlikely to score runs against good bowling attacks given that they did just that last summer. FFS, stop making me defend the ability of our players!

Yeah I knew I'd have to clarify this bit. England are a good bowling attack, but as much as I hate the "3rd gear" type comments, Broad and Finn were bowling like utter piss, Anderson wasn't much better and then they had Panesar instead of Swann.

It's still not a bad attack on paper, but they bowled poorly on very, very flat decks. Neither Fulton nor Rutherford looked like scoring any runs in the return series.

 

[Mike5181]

The FTP says we're hosting the West Indies in December. Is that tour still on?

EDIT:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/new-zealand-v-west-indies-2013-14/content/series/661629.html

 

[Flem274*]

wouldnt want to get in a circular argument over the bowling, except i will say finn is piss. our batting did benefit from roads, but you can just as easily apply the quote in someone's sig about bradman to this situation: "you don't allow fulton to hit two tons in a test, fulton hits two tons in a test because you couldn't control his scoring"

the fact is our batting was too good for the english at times in the series down here, just as in the series over there our batting wasn't good enough to withstand the english. we played better, then they played better. all this talk of 3rd gear and complacency is a mixture of excuses and thinking too hard.

when someone plays well someone else looks bad.

 

[straw man]

The FTP says we're hosting the West Indies in December. Is that tour still on?

Yes. New Zealand Cricket - West Indies Tour. Thankfully three tests this time after the last two series between us and WI were ****ty 2-test series.

but first we have to play them (India) on their own pitches this summer iirc and they should quite rightly prepare the dustiest dustbowls that ever dustbowled to completely expose batsmen like brownlie, mccullum, rutherford and guptill. they should be looking to rip through us for less than 100 every innings barring taylor, williamson or watling rearguards provided they prepare the appropriate pitches.

News to me if we're playing India in India again soon. They're touring us (New Zealand Cricket - India Tour) and I'm all for the pitches you propose, but don't think we're going to India between now and then.

 

[Flem274*]

ah damn, fair enough.

we didnt play well enough to deserve three tests on our last tour there. afaic while the 2 test minimum is terrible for cricket, it is the way it is and you have to show you're good enough to play longer series. after our last limp showing i see three tests against the windies as a bonus and i expect us to play to the standard a team playing a 3 test series is expected to play.

and since we almost beat england in our own backyard over 3 tests i expect us to beat the windies. too far? maybe, but being happy with a competitive team who lose or draw respectably shouldn't be our forte.

 

[hendrix]

when someone plays well someone else looks bad.

I agree with this mantra 99.999999% of the time. And also agree that Finn is piss. But really, even with all the KY in the world you can't make a slippery slope out of a Fulton-Bradman argument. They bowled way too short. It wasn't complacency, it was just **** plans and even worse execution.

I could easily see Fulton/Rutherford cashing in against average bowling lineups so it's not all bad. But we're nowhere near finding an opener who'll average 40.

 

[Flem274*]

we should be aiming to produce openers who average 50, because then you have the best openers in the world.

98% of the batsmen who have long FC careers have the natural ability to be good test batsmen. i can't think of the last batsman i saw where it was simply a case of him being unable to see it. maybe nicol or james marshall perhaps. batsmen fail initially for two reasons: poor technique or a poor mental game, and they continue to fail because they either can't or refuse to change.

change is hard and takes time, and as we've seen with the likes of hughes, doing it at test level is excruciating. but it can be done. hayden changed. richardson changed. hadlee changed. ryan harris changed. ross taylor changed.

fulton has shown he is willing but he is running out of time and has had his bad habits all his career, which is nearly over. rutherford is still young and adaptable, so we shall see how willing he is to adapt. both can/could have been good test openers if they learned (or had they learned) the right methods earlier.

edit: gee i went on a tangent. im going to agree to disagree with the rest of your post because i cbf with a circular argument. you can't agree with the mantra i posted then write what you did. its a massive contradiction.

 

[Bahnz]

ah damn, fair enough.

we didnt play well enough to deserve three tests on our last tour there. afaic while the 2 test minimum is terrible for cricket, it is the way it is and you have to show you're good enough to play longer series. after our last limp showing i see three tests against the windies as a bonus and i expect us to play to the standard a team playing a 3 test series is expected to play.

and since we almost beat england in our own backyard over 3 tests i expect us to beat the windies. too far? maybe, but being happy with a competitive team who lose or draw respectably shouldn't be our forte.

It's tough to predict. If the Windies are able to cobble together a full strength side with Gayle, Samuels, Chanderpaul, Roach, Narine and Bravo I think they should have too much for us. In early season conditions their extra batting strength should be crucial. Having said that, if Southee and Boult are fit and can get the ball on target then you never know. The Windies batting has shown a vulnerability to the swinging ball in recent times (especially on their last few tours of England), and besides Roach they don't have a tremendous amount of fast bowling depth.

 

[straw man]

ah damn, fair enough.

we didnt play well enough to deserve three tests on our last tour there. afaic while the 2 test minimum is terrible for cricket, it is the way it is and you have to show you're good enough to play longer series. after our last limp showing i see three tests against the windies as a bonus and i expect us to play to the standard a team playing a 3 test series is expected to play.

I was going to say nah we're close enough to West Indies that 3 tests minimum at home should be expected (though not away). However a sizeable gap has opened up between us and them in the ICC rankings since we last toured there; they're now 20 points ahead of us (and only 2 shy of Australia).

Home advantage is huge though, and there's also the chance that the Windies will bring the cool cbf attitude they have on a few previous tours (though that's perhaps less likely with Sammy in charge). I expect it to be a close series and if we want to start crawling our way off the bottom of the rankings this home series is one we must win. (and obv not lose to Bangladesh next month either).

 

[hendrix]

I think WI have the type of bowling attack that our batsmen could score runs against. Plenty of pressure-relievers.

I'm also thinking that Boult and Southee will run through their batting lineup.

I'm more confident about the WI series than Bangladesh, tbh.

 

[RxGM]

It's tough to predict. If the Windies are able to cobble together a full strength side with Gayle, Samuels, Chanderpaul, Roach, Narine and Bravo I think they should have too much for us. In early season conditions their extra batting strength should be crucial. Having said that, if Southee and Boult are fit and can get the ball on target then you never know. The Windies batting has shown a vulnerability to the swinging ball in recent times (especially on their last few tours of England), and besides Roach they don't have a tremendous amount of fast bowling depth.

Shiv has had a poor season for derby, maybe at the tender age of 39 his star is on the decline. Is Sammy still test captain or is he got the boot. I think on paper we should have them especially as we are sending them to Dunedin first, though maybe we can arrange a stop over in Queenstown as well, seamed to work for the Poms.

 

[Mike5181]

we should be aiming to produce openers who average 50, because then you have the best openers in the world.

98% of the batsmen who have long FC careers have the natural ability to be good test batsmen. i can't think of the last batsman i saw where it was simply a case of him being unable to see it. maybe nicol or james marshall perhaps. batsmen fail initially for two reasons: poor technique or a poor mental game, and they continue to fail because they either can't or refuse to change.

change is hard and takes time, and as we've seen with the likes of hughes, doing it at test level is excruciating. but it can be done. hayden changed. richardson changed. hadlee changed. ryan harris changed. ross taylor changed.

fulton has shown he is willing but he is running out of time and has had his bad habits all his career, which is nearly over. rutherford is still young and adaptable, so we shall see how willing he is to adapt. both can/could have been good test openers if they learned (or had they learned) the right methods earlier.

edit: gee i went on a tangent. im going to agree to disagree with the rest of your post because i cbf with a circular argument. you can't agree with the mantra i posted then write what you did. its a massive contradiction.

Maybe we're being a bit dismissive of Latham's chances of succeeding up the top. He's an organised player, and there's probably a bit more to him than any of our reserves. He needs to open regularly for Canterbury though. He can't continue playing with the gloves down at number 5/6 and then go off and open on A tours/fill in for Rutherford/Fulton in the test team (not that he should've been picked anyway). It's not ideal.

 

[Flem274*]

awta. nzc and canterbury need to be on the same page regarding what they want latham to be and latham himself needs to be cool with it so then latham can get on with it.

i think it was howsie who said latham had the tools to be a good 3 or 4, and along with being the only decent ND fan on the internet he has a good eye for a horse.

 

[straw man]

And in the NZ A game Latham gets run out for 18.

82/3 after 20 with Munro just starting off against spin - should be interesting. A few useful thrashes from Ronchi early from the looks of things before missing a straight one. Carlchopa as the anchor and the bowlers will probably need to contribute runs to get up to 250 like last time.

 

[straw man]

Munro's go-to method vs spin works:

21.2
Menaria to Munro, FOUR, dancing down the track and whacked it straight, one bounce and into the fence

Munro's go-to method vs spin fails:

21.3
Menaria to Munro, OUT, gone this time!! what a flying catch by Sandeep!! down the track and tried to repeat the same shot, not enough bat on that and Sandeep at mid-off flies to his left and takes a handsome looking catch
C Munro c Sandeep Sharma b Menaria 4 (5b 1x4 0x6) SR: 80.00

 

[Flem274*]

need mitchell heroics again. i still think he and munro should be swapped in the order.

 

[Kippax]

This side is playing so much like ND it's a ****ing joke. Indian commentators reluctantly sticking the knife in to the crass and brazen retardation now.

 

[straw man]

I'm more confident about the WI series than Bangladesh, tbh.

Fair comment - our batsmen really are that bad away from home.

Conversely I'm moderately confident about the India tests at home - that we will either dish up flat pitches like against England and draw the series, or if there's seam movement we're a chance of winning (and losing of course).

 

[Flem274*]

havent followed the whole game and hard to tell from cricinfo commentary anyway. care to let rip?

 

[Bahnz]

Wow, not a lot of batting to come. These two are going to have to work hard to get through the next 15 overs if we're going to have any chance of making a decent score.