Me too. Thought I was the only one feeling this way. I hope I'm wrong, but I can see Australia really picking on Southee & they'll be nowhere to hide.Yeah Mills for Southee would ideal, been very average since the England game, hope I am wrong but I also have a feeling he will go for plenty.
We dropped Mills tbf.You don't drop class, we should have learned that by now.
ummmm....Trolling because it'll never happen, serious because it'd be a pretty good thing.
I will be stoked if Southee goes for less than 6RPO.
Yeah dropping Southee for Mills would've been a fair call, but it's a tough to unsettle the side so late into it. I know we've had this argument before but I think Hesson and the selectors understand the mental influence of keeping an unchanged lineup (apart from Milne obvs).ummmm....
After the England game Southee was completely awful. It's almost inconceivable that Mills could have been any worse.
I never expected it to happen and Southee was always in my first XI leading into the WC but I'm really just making the point that his position as the unquestioned leader of the attack doesn't really make sense in ODI cricket. It's not like Southee has an outstanding record in the format. If anyone deserves that tag in this format it's Mills. If you're gonna say stuff like "you don't drop class" or "Southee is a proven performer" then the same applies even more so to Mills, but (inexplicably imo) he just doesn't get given that sacred-cow status.Yeah dropping Southee for Mills would've been a fair call, but it's a tough to unsettle the side so late into it. I know we've had this argument before but I think Hesson and the selectors understand the mental influence of keeping an unchanged lineup (apart from Milne obvs).
ODI attack of Henry/Boult/Milne also looks pretty tasty going forward (hate that term btw)Anyway, onwards and upwards and I'm hoping for 8-10 years of Boult/Southee dominating the world in all formats.
I think we definitely saw Southee crack under pressure. His dominant test form has possibly diminished his ability to cope with batsmen not letting him settle, which would explain his success against England, who were the most passive batting lineup in the competition. In hindsight Mills would've been a better option from the start of the tournament, but I don't think backing Southee was the wrong call either. It just didn't pay off.I never expected it to happen and Southee was always in my first XI leading into the WC but I'm really just making the point that his position as the unquestioned leader of the attack doesn't really make sense in ODI cricket. It's not like Southee has an outstanding record in the format. If anyone deserves that tag in this format it's Mills. If you're gonna say stuff like "you don't drop class" or "Southee is a proven performer" then the same applies even more so to Mills, but (inexplicably imo) he just doesn't get given that sacred-cow status.
I also reckon there's this perception that Mills' bowling style is "old-fashioned" and this was a WC where "average bowling got smashed". I think what we've seen is that when Southee is not on top of his game his 135kph out-swingers can start to look very gentle too.
Anyway, onwards and upwards and I'm hoping for 8-10 years of Boult/Southee dominating the world in all formats.
Agree..would be 'the' attack next time we play an ODI in Australia.ODI attack of Henry/Boult/Milne also looks pretty tasty going forward (hate that term btw)
He probably did better at the last world cup and bowled more yorkers IIRC. His test form subsequently fell away though.I think we definitely saw Southee crack under pressure. His dominant test form has possibly diminished his ability to cope with batsmen not letting him settle, which would explain his success against England, who were the most passive batting lineup in the competition. In hindsight Mills would've been a better option from the start of the tournament, but I don't think backing Southee was the wrong call either. It just didn't pay off.