***Official*** Sri Lanka in New Zealand 2015

[Immenso]

Yeah, Slater's a really good example as well. ODI cricket is often a lot more about placement with so many fielders in the ring/on the fence, particularly if you bat in the middle order; it's not just just a more aggressive version of Test batting. I tend to think he'd probably go better opening in one dayers.

H Rutherford at domestic level. Only has 2 shots + a sweeper = H Rutherfords LO record.

 

[BeeGee]

Santner is not Moeen Ali - he's not the best spin bowler in the country afaics. He's a batsman who will do a good (and tight) job for us with the ball when some spin overs are needed. That's great because that's what's required from him. He's not likely to be a real wicket-taker though.

Santner as regular spinner while batting at 6.

I guess we have very different ideas of what Santner's role in the team should be.

We have a number of options for a battling all rounder at six, but SFA test level spin bowlers.

Just out of interest, who do you think is the best spin bowler in the country? I find it strange that you would say he isn't the best spinner and then advocate him as the dedicated spinner.

 

[Bahnz]

I guess we have very different ideas of what Santner's role in the team should be.

Just out of interest, who do you think is the best spin bowler in the country? I find it strange that you would say he isn't the best spinner and then advocate him as the dedicated spinner.

Jeets
Daylight
Tastle
Daylight
N E Auldcant

 

[Howsie]

Santner is a batsmen, a potentially very good one. You want to stunt his growth and ruin what he might be as a test batsman, bat him at 8 and 'make him' our test spinner.

He needs to play at six. What we got out of him in this game is what we need from our spinner, in New Zealand anyway. Being able to play the four quicks was a major reason why we won this game. Why can't we stick the same formula going forward?

 

[straw man]

I guess we have very different ideas of what Santner's role in the team should be.

We have a number of options for a battling all rounder at six, but SFA test level spin bowlers.

Just out of interest, who do you think is the best spin bowler in the country? I find it strange that you would say he isn't the best spinner and then advocate him as the dedicated spinner.

I have no problem with four seamers plus a part-time spinner at home, so the 'dedicated spinner' is a part-timer.

Santner's spin looks handy (there's that word again) and better than averaging 50+ in FC cricket, which is what he does average. Not much better though.

Agree with Bahnz list, though Craig, recent setbacks notwithstanding, is somewhere around there with Astle. Problem is that Patel is not going to be selected and Craig and Astle are both big risks that put pressure on the rest of our attack. Santner complements our attack much better in home conditions anyway.

I also don't think it's a huge loss right now if he's holding Anderson and Neesham out of the side right now - they can go away and perform in domestix for a while.

 

[BeeGee]

If we must talk stats then 13 wickets is a tiny sample size. How about domestix:
Bracewell: 212 wickets at 34.49. 12600 deliveries bowled.
Anderson: 35 wickets at 41.42. 2700 deliveries bowled.

There's no comparison. Anderson simply doesn't have the bulk of FC wickets or even deliveries bowled to be in the conversation as a specialist bowler. Yeah if he got through two seasons uninjured and did a lot of bowling for ND then could reconsider that, however I'd rather he focus on being a batting allrounder.

Bracewell's domestic average is underwhelming but his recent numbers are probably better.

I don't think I'm making my point very well. Let me have one last shot at it...

Bracewell's test bowling performance sets such a low bar that our no. 6 batting all rounder's bowling could easily cover for him. So we could play Anderson at 6 and Santner at 8, have a world class lower order without significantly reducing our bowling strength.

 

[straw man]

I don't think I'm making my point very well. Let me have one last shot at it...

Bracewell's test bowling performance sets such a low bar that our no. 6 batting all rounder's bowling could easily cover for him. So we could play Anderson at 6 and Santner at 8, have a world class lower order without significantly reducing our bowling strength.

Ok. Disagree though

 

[Hurricane]

Santner is a batsmen, a potentially very good one. You want to stunt his growth and ruin what he might be as a test batsman, bat him at 8 and 'make him' our test spinner.

He needs to play at six. What we got out of him in this game is what we need from our spinner, in New Zealand anyway. Being able to play the four quicks was a major reason why we won this game. Why can't we stick the same formula going forward?

This and the other rather minor throwaway point is that Ali has broad to bat with and to a lesser extent Wood can hold up an end for him.

Santner would finish up with a million not outs or worse dismissals due to slogging because he can't trust the tail. With Wagner, Soiuthee, and Boult coming in after him no one will give him a stand - he would be a very frustrated number 8. Doug Bracwell more suited to number 8 in our team. And he seems to have finally figured out the position. He has to play his shots because eventually his defensive system will let him down. Prior to the Australian tour he was too cautious. That six against Siddle was his break out moment. Look for him to improve his average to over 20 where it belongs.

 

[Prince EWS]

Bracewell's test bowling performance sets such a low bar that our no. 6 batting all rounder's bowling could easily cover for him. So we could play Anderson at 6 and Santner at 8, have a world class lower order without significantly reducing our bowling strength.

Bracewell isn't selected to offer what he did in his first stint in the side though; he's picked under the impression that he's improved and will yield better results this time around. To his credit I do think he's bowled a lot better in this stint even though he hasn't got the rewards yet, but if he continues to average 40-odd he'll be dropped (and probably not for Anderson). I think I'd probably like to see the current balance persisted with tbh (with Craig in for a quick if it's a real turner), although I'd swap Watling and Santner in the batting order. Brownlie, Anderson and Craig seem like much better squad reserves to me than Rutherford, Ronchi and Sodhi, so the team is moving forward (or it would be if Brownlie actually got picked ahead of Rutherford )

 

[Prince EWS]

This and the other rather minor throwaway point is that Ali has broad to bat with and to a lesser extent Wood can hold up an end for him.

Santner would finish up with a million not outs or worse dismissals due to slogging because he can't trust the tail. With Wagner, Soiuthee, and Boult coming in after him no one will give him a stand - he would be a very frustrated number 8. Doug Bracwell more suited to number 8 in our team. And he seems to have finally figured out the position. He has to play his shots because eventually his defensive system will let him down. Prior to the Australian tour he was too cautious. That six against Siddle was his break out moment. Look for him to improve his average to over 20 where it belongs.

Yeah I think early-career Bracewell, a bit like early-career Franklin I guess, was under too many illusions about becoming a middle order batsman at Test level one day, and tried to bat too much like a batsman. The first rule of the Engine Room is that you can't let yourself believe you'll ever get out of the Engine Room.

 

[Hurricane]

It pains me to my essence to say this

Great declaration by the captain. One of the better declarations I have seen ever.

That declaration came about because we are used to winning and used to setting targets. The first few targets Baz set were too conservative - this one was quite impressive.

I am sure at least one or two dismissals came about from batsman thinking about winning the game rather than just staying in.

 

[Flem274*]

Nice, a win.

Same team for the next test. Completely disagree with bunting Santa down to #8. If anything I'd consider him for #5 next season if he goes big this summer and the selectors decide Anderson or Neesham are better batsmen than Brownlie, Young, Macewell etc.I don't think he'll be that good that soon though but if he can crack test cricket he's welcome to #6. Balances the team beautifully.

I like that he bowls very straight which means any Asian side that pulls the home pitch stunt (not judging here, they should prepare to their strengths) will bring him into the game whereas with my fave Craig, Jeets, or Tastle there is always the risk they bowl trash anyway. In New Zealand Santa allows us the four quicks since he isn't getting slaughtered (my fear when he was first picked) and he's even contributing wickets which is surprising and good. We knew the Shield conditions hate Craig, Jeets, Tastle sometimes and anyone else who tries to bowl spin properly but I thought Santa's bowling would be a bridge too far.

I don't like the suggestions replacing one of the fast bowlers with Neesham or Anderson, while retaining Santner. Too much of a 3 bowlers plus two part-timers attack. It's possible Neesham could improve his bowling enough to make it work, however doing that and staying fit are big challenges.

While Santner's in the side I think Anderson and Neesham are just going to have to stay fit, perform at domestic level and wait their chance (i.e see if Santner doesn't succeed with the bat)..

yeah this

Will also point out that I'm very happy to taste it re: Santner.

same

Anderson is a better test bowler than Bracewell

nope

If NZ could keep everyone fit and good it would be nice to have a war for two spots between Wagner, Bracewell, Milne, Wheeler, Henry and Nuttall

 

[Bahnz]

"I was hoping someone would ask me about the 100 sixes. It's the only record I actually care about. It's the only record that Kane Williamson or Ross Taylor aren't going to break as well, so I should be able to hold on to that one." - McCullum

 

[Zinzan]

I already think Santner adds more to the Test team than Craig, Anderson or possibly even Neesham (not so sure about him as he's so rarely injury free)...

 

[Athlai]

"I was hoping someone would ask me about the 100 sixes. It's the only record I actually care about. It's the only record that Kane Williamson or Ross Taylor aren't going to break as well, so I should be able to hold on to that one." - McCullum

so gun

 

[wellAlbidarned]

kane's reply - you just watch m8

 

[Hurricane]

"I was hoping someone would ask me about the 100 sixes. It's the only record I actually care about. It's the only record that Kane Williamson or Ross Taylor aren't going to break as well, so I should be able to hold on to that one." - McCullum

Brilliant and endearing. Haha.

 

[viriya]

Impressed by Chandimal. Didn't expect.

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

haha great

re: mccullum

 

[Bahnz]

Well, I'm going to buck the trend and say the jury is still very much out on Santner. Chandimal aside, the Sri Lankans made absolutely no attempt to put his bowling under pressure, and his stay at the crease was too short to really make any judgments. Would still really rather have Anderson back. Will leave it to the end of the summer before I make up my mind about whether he belongs.