-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
***Official*** South Africa in New Zealand 2017
- Thread starter Blocky
- Start date
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Can't say I agree. Seemed to me like he was going for runs pretty hard at the end.
thierry henry
International Coach
Seems to be a lot of criticism of Taylor and praise for Neesham given that they scored 51 off the last 5 overs scoring at pretty similar strike rates and in a situation where Neesham would be the assumed aggressor?
If anything it looks like Ross slowed down between the 35th-40th overs before accelerating respectably towards the end.
289/4 is a somewhat odd score in 2017 but understandable given our fragile middle/lower order and the reality that Kane and Ross are not super-aggressive batsman by current standards. They set a sensible platform at a decent run rate and then we accelerated at the end, albeit not quite as spectacularly as would've been ideal. Perversely, it would probably look better in terms of #intent if we were 289/8 instead. I'm happy enough with controlled acceleration and the theory that getting out at the death and expecting inferior batsmen to do the hitting isn't really a better option.
If anything it looks like Ross slowed down between the 35th-40th overs before accelerating respectably towards the end.
289/4 is a somewhat odd score in 2017 but understandable given our fragile middle/lower order and the reality that Kane and Ross are not super-aggressive batsman by current standards. They set a sensible platform at a decent run rate and then we accelerated at the end, albeit not quite as spectacularly as would've been ideal. Perversely, it would probably look better in terms of #intent if we were 289/8 instead. I'm happy enough with controlled acceleration and the theory that getting out at the death and expecting inferior batsmen to do the hitting isn't really a better option.
_Ed_
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yep, and we needed someone to stay steady through the middle overs considering how hit-and-miss the likes of Neesham, Santner and CdG are. If Taylor had smacked a few boundaries and then got out, the rest of those guys could have all followed him pretty quickly.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah ideally Taylor would have picked up another 10 or 11 around in that period (and a little either side), giving us 300. So it was a little sub-optimal in that particular period but not a lot, and not worthy of too much criticism. It's still a 102 (110), which is good in most circumstances.
Peoples' views will probably shift depending on how well SA chase this as well.
thierry henry
International Coach
We were 166/4 after 33 overs with Neesham new at the crease. They've put on 123 in 17 overs. I think it's an above-par effort from that point on. The reality is with our current line-up, once we get to 4 down with Taylor or Williamson out and time left to bat, we are staring down the barrel.
Athlai
Not Terrible
I reckon we should have a little more faith in Neesham at the moment. Has been solid for a while.
Guptill
-
Williamson
Taylor
-
Neesham
-
Santner
Southee
Sodhi /McClenenenen / Bennett
Boult
Fix those holes and we have a shot at the Champions Trophy
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
310-320 considering their batting line-up for mine.
Scoring just 39 in the 10 overs between 32nd & 41st is where we missed out on the extra 15-20 runs that would have got us around that 310 mark.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Sorry but how the hell is Southee even close to a lock?
Athlai
Not Terrible
Isn't bowling all that badly and we have no quicks knocking the door down. I guess he has Henry to thank really.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't mind the thought of him being there or thereabouts, just not a lock like those others names. If Milne can remain fit for more than 5 minutes, I'd have him ahead of Southee.Isn't bowling all that badly and we have no quicks knocking the door down. I guess he has Henry to thank really.
That said, Southee does tend to bowl better with the Duke ball which I'm assuming they'll be using in England.
Athlai
Not Terrible
Does anyone else think that the balls may be behind the lack of swing we've been seeing in NZ in the last year or two?
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Taylor has a thing about 2nd games in a series; averaging 62 in those matches, compared to 52 in a first up, and 40 in a third.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
Wicketkeeper is a bit of a problem and who you choose affects the balance you look for in the other spots. CT is in England where it may swing, so they may lean towards retaining Latham at the top as a test-like opener.
Still I really wish they'd give someone who isn't Ronchi some games - despite Howsie not rating him, Blundell has done the most to deserve a chance. Probably too early for Phillips to keep wicket for NZ.
