The Sol Bar: New Zealand Cricket Randomness

[Hurricane]

I used to be a member of canucks.com and you get a telling off if you make a silly trade suggestion because they truly fear that the GM might be reading and they only want to give him good ideas.

On a serious note after PEWS told me that cricinfo regularly steals story ideas from CW (e.g. did you notice they picked up perhaps the West Indies should be split back into their islands) I did try to make serious and thought provoking suggestions for a good six months. That was when I was fresh.
Nothing came of it so I now I stick to hammering out my regulation thoughts I have while at Countdown or at the video store.

One proviso I will add to this however SkyLiner and I do not have a tin foil hat. A number of interested parties read this site. NZ Cricket had a public relations consultancy, I am convinced the consultancy reads this site to see what Joe Public thinks. Sometimes I have heard a bit of corporate speak that sounds like a PR agency would have written it that relates back to a concern we have raised here.
I have no proof for that other than knowing for sure they have hired the PR firm. And they definitely read social media for news and views and the vibe of the community.

The plunket players are also informed if they get an extended mention on this web site by their friends. Young Clarkson, and the young bucks may even have googled their own name.

 

[Zinzan]

yeah he pretty much has to average 50+, get to the bowling equivalent of a #8 batsman, and then to clearly surpass Hadlee his captaincy and fielding will have to be good (he's got the fielding. such a valuable catcher).

Probably could/should factor fielding and captaincy, but fair cop, we don't.

 

[Zinzan]

KW already has 13 tons, and he's only been good for a few years. So he'll need more than 25 to be comparable to Hadlee. Hadlee had 36 5-fors so maybe 35-40 Test tons is where KW has to get to. If he manages this his average will be excellent anyway so there's no need to quantify it.

I'm never comfortable with the old 100s = 5-fers theory. I mean there's been some decidedly average and easy test 100s scored in test history, but not as many as there's been utter **** 5-fers taken.

 

[Flem274*]

Even cricsim got read by domestic cricketers back when it had an active thread there and was more than just skype daddy fiery v the yobbos.

they're reading this.

CW isn't joe public though. joe public is radiosport etc that has a much wider audience

 

[Flem274*]

Probably could/should factor fielding and captaincy, but fair cop, we don't.

it would just be the main way he can differentiate himself really, otherwise the hypothetical arguments about whether 54.27 batting and 180 wickets at 35.43 is the batting allrounder superior to hadlee's bowling allrounder would never end.

 

[Hurricane]

I'm never comfortable with the old 100s = 5-fers theory. I mean there's been some decidedly average and easy test 100s scored in test history, but not as many as there's been utter **** 5-fers taken.

agreed, harder to get a 5fer in test cricket. Last **** easy one was Finn when he started in Australia

 

[morgieb]

Even cricsim got read by domestic cricketers back when it had an active thread there and was more than just skype daddy fiery v the yobbos.

they're reading this.

CW isn't joe public though. joe public is radiosport etc that has a much wider audience

Siro?

 

[Hurricane]

Even cricsim got read by domestic cricketers back when it had an active thread there and was more than just skype daddy fiery v the yobbos.

they're reading this.

CW isn't joe public though. joe public is radiosport etc that has a much wider audience

We are what the avid fan thinks as opposed to Joe Public you are right.

However, only extraverts phone radio sport and they are not a good representation of the public. Except during RossGate then everyone phoned. Introvert/extrovert and your Aunt Nelly.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

I'm never comfortable with the old 100s = 5-fers theory. I mean there's been some decidedly average and easy test 100s scored in test history, but not as many as there's been utter **** 5-fers taken.

Sure, it's a pretty rough benchmark if anything. I still think KW will need more than 25 tons to rival Hadlee though, considering he's more than halfway to that already and he's been good for three years at the very most.

I think bowling relies more on luck and therefore statistical variation than batting. Hadlee once took 9 wickets in an innings, but we'll never see KW score 90% of the runs in an innings.

 

[NZTailender]

How many 5fers does Tim have anyway? 4? Hadlee had 36!

Tbf Southee is competing with just-as-good Trent Boult. Hadlee's best competitors for wickets was Chatfield and Cairns. They were good but not near Boult's potency.

I think we'll see Southee taking truckloads of 4fers with occasional brute Broad style hauls whilst he has decent bowling partners to back him up.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

agreed, harder to get a 5fer in test cricket. Last **** easy one was Finn when he started in Australia

If you're saying that it's harder to get a 5-for in Test cricket, and Hadlee got 36 5-fors, then Williamson will need well more than 36 tons to equal Hadlee. Perhaps even 50.

For what it's worth I think Williamson will not only transcend batting and get compared to Hadlee instead of Crowe but will transcend cricket and get compared to McCaw, Carter et al.

 

[Zinzan]

it would just be the main way he can differentiate himself really, otherwise the hypothetical arguments about whether 54.27 batting and 180 wickets at 35.43 is the batting allrounder superior to hadlee's bowling allrounder would never end.

Holy ***. If KW seriously averaged 54 with bat and got 180 wickets @ 35 then he'd be up with Hadlee, even if he was an average fielder. He'd need to take those extra 140 wickets at about 32 to achieve that. I almost forgot about his bowling tbh, but I suppose it's not crazy to think he could get 100 test wickets by the end.

 

[Hurricane]

Tbf Southee is competing with just-as-good Trent Boult. Hadlee's best competitors for wickets was Chatfield and Cairns. They were good but not near Boult's potency.

I think we'll see Southee taking truckloads of 4fers with occasional brute Broad style hauls whilst he has decent bowling partners to back him up.

Well MCgrath had to compete and he had 29 5fers even if he did finish with way more tests than Tim will. Southee has a ways to go before he comes into contention for a knighthood upon retirement.

 

[Hurricane]

Holy ***. If KW seriously averaged 54 with bat and got 180 wickets @ 35 then he'd be up with Hadlee, even if he was an average fielder. He'd need to take those extra 140 wickets at about 32 to achieve that. I almost forgot about his bowling tbh, but I suppose it's not crazy to think he could get 100 test wickets by the end.

Don't get Flem started about Kane's bowling, I think it is a red herring, How many wickets did Kane take in Aussie? I alsp think he still chucks and will get called again if he starts bowling more.

 

[TheJediBrah]

agreed, harder to get a 5fer in test cricket. Last **** easy one was Finn when he started in Australia

Am I reading this wrong, but you say "agreed", then state the exact opposite of what you agreed too?

 

[Skyliner]

KW already has 13 tons, and he's only been good for a few years. So he'll need more than 25 to be comparable to Hadlee. Hadlee had 36 5-fors so maybe 35-40 Test tons is where KW has to get to. If he manages this his average will be excellent anyway so there's no need to quantify it.

I remember Coney writing in the Playing Mantis book about those 5fers, and whether or not they should equate to 100's.
i.e. Paddles was always keen to get on and bowl against the tail, how much should be credited to Chats keeping things tight at the other end and creating pressure, why is the bowler credited with the wicket when the fielder is often the biggest factor through a brilliant bit of catching etc.

Authors note: Paddles is peerless as a bowler as far as I'm concerned, and Coney's antipathy towards Hadlee come through in the book.

I think 30 test hundreds and an average of 55 or thereabouts would mean Kane had reached the kind of territory that the modern greats have reached, and gone a lot lot further than any previous NZ batsman has. Hadlee did that, he exceeded the feats of other NZ bowlers by a breath-taking margin.

 

[Hurricane]

Am I reading this wrong, but you say "agreed", then state the exact opposite of what you agreed too?

No I am willing to stand corrected but my post is linear. I agreed with Zinzan there have been some downhill skiing 100s and said it is harder to get a 5fer (than a century)

 

[Zinzan]

Am I reading this wrong, but you say "agreed", then state the exact opposite of what you agreed too?

Yeah, we're in disagreement on that point. I was suggesting that as hard as some 5-fers can be to come by, that there's still more ***-ass 5-fers than ***-ass hundreds.

 

[Zinzan]

No I am willing to stand corrected but my post is linear. I agreed with Zinzan there have been some downhill skiing 100s and said it is harder to get a 5fer (than a century)

Nah, as my post above. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough prior.

 

[TheJediBrah]

No I am willing to stand corrected but my post is linear. I agreed with Zinzan there have been some downhill skiing 100s and said it is harder to get a 5fer (than a century)

but isn't that the opposite of what he said