• 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.

New Zealand- #1 ranked test side for the first time ever

Athlai

Not Terrible
You can't give them a point for Bracewell when if he played against our current XI in NZ he'd go 0/120
 

Flem274*

123/5
turner didn't play much in the 80s iirc otherwise obviously yea he strolls in.

andrew jones is miles ahead of latham. filter out the sub-plunket shield standard attacks of world cricket and watch that average collapse into a black hole. jones also scored runs in australia, currently a pipe dream for batsmen not called kane or ross.

im not picking bracewell to play against our current team on modern decks, im picking him to play for a combined side around the world. he clearly plays.
 

Immenso

International Debutant
Andrew Jones is not better than Latham. Good player. But 6 centuries, all draws. 3 against 90/91 Sri Lanka attack of Rumesh Ratnayke, Labrooy, Ramanayke and Asoka de Silva's nude legspin. Rumesh was handy, though. But that was sub-plunket.

Even his hundred in Australia was on a flat deck at Adelaide where Aus moved to 2 spinners, Peter Sleep and Tim May, Aus effectively 1 seamer as Bruce Reid lasted only an hour of the match. Crowe also got a hundred, Border got a double. Pitch was full of runs.

I cant remember his other 2 hundreds off top of my head.

I cant remember other 2 off top of my head. (I can't remember Latham's either, but that cause I'm no longer young ...)
 
Last edited:

Moss

International Debutant
Bracewell won NZ a test in Bombay with a ten wicket haul I think. Good shout (much as I despised him as a coach, set NZ back a good 5-10 years almost).

Agree with the Jones selection in theory; if the constraint was to pick a specialist opener, wondering whether people who have watched both of them would pick Edgar over Latham. No doubt Edgar has worse numbers but I believe there was a major dropoff towards the end of his career.
 

Flem274*

123/5
Andrew Jones is not better than Latham. Good player. But 6 centuries, all draws. 3 against 90/91 Sri Lanka attack of Rumesh Ratnayke, Labrooy, Ramanayke and Asoka de Silva's nude legspin. Rumesh was handy, though. But that was sub-plunket.

Even his hundred in Australia was on a flat deck at Adelaide where Aus moved to 2 spinners, Peter Sleep and Tim May, Crowe also got a hundred, Border got a double. Pitch was full of runs.

I cant remember his other 2 hundreds off top of my head.

I cant remember other 2 off top of my head. (I can't remember Latham's either, but that cause I'm no longer young ...)
that's fair, but latham's good opening tons are restricted to overseas turning decks. i know we play on greenies at home but his sri lanka/windies/bangers/zim average compared to his average against the rest is quite something.
 

Moss

International Debutant
Andrew Jones is not better than Latham. Good player. But 6 centuries, all draws. 3 against 90/91 Sri Lanka attack of Rumesh Ratnayke, Labrooy, Ramanayke and Asoka de Silva's nude legspin. Rumesh was handy, though. But that was sub-plunket.

Even his hundred in Australia was on a flat deck at Adelaide where Aus moved to 2 spinners, Peter Sleep and Tim May, Crowe also got a hundred, Border got a double. Pitch was full of runs.

I cant remember his other 2 hundreds off top of my head.

I cant remember other 2 off top of my head. (I can't remember Latham's either, but that cause I'm no longer young ...)
There was a century in Perth in 1993/94, the tour went downhill from there once Crowe got injured but Jones had some good battles with Warne IIRC.

His batting against the W&W when Pakistan visited in 1993/94 was quite outstanding in the absence of Crowe again, got run out twice in his final test and they said it looked the only way they would dislodge him. (He was unfortunately bought back for 2 more tests during that centenary season the following year vs Ambrose and co., the average took a beating. Remember news reports criticizing Crowe for not making himself available for that series while Jones answered the call - don't know the story in full but those were depressing times overall.)
 

Immenso

International Debutant
Looked up Jones's others, actually he got 7 not 6 tons.
his other 3.

170* v India 89/90. That was a mediocre attack. Kapil sleep walked through that tour. Maybe only the 4th or 5th best innings in that test. Hadlee and Smith counter attacked on a day 1 green top with 2 extraordinary innings of 80ish and 173. Then Azhar flayed us with 190 odd. Settled into a road and Crowe and Jones got 3rd innings tons. Only 9 wickets fell in last 3 days.

His 143 v England in 92 was a match saver, with Wright. Excellent knock.

Also got 143 in Perth in 1993. I never saw this.

Obviously way worse player of spin than Latham.

Good player, a favorite of mine, but not good enough to move out of position to dislodge one of our best ever specialists. Also feasted on Plunket level attacks when they crossed his path.
 
Last edited:

Moss

International Debutant
Looked up Jones's others, actually he got 7 not 6 tons.
his other 3.

170* v India 89/90. That was a mediocre attack. Kapil sleep walked through that tour. Maybe only the 4th or 5th best innings in that test. Hadlee and Smith counter attacked on a day 1 green top with 2 extraordinary innings of 80ish and 173. Then Azhar flayed us with 190 odd. Settled into a road and Crowe and Jones got 3rd innings tons. Only 9 wickets fell in last 3 days.

His 143 v England in 92 was a match saver, with Wright. Excellent knock.

Also got 143 in Perth in 1993. I never saw this.

Obviously way worse player of spin than Latham.
I hear you, but this seems a bit like making a judgment on Mark Richardson based on the hundreds he made ("only 4 test hundreds, one of which was against Bangladesh, one was against a disinterested Pakistan attack sans Akram, one was on a road in India which even Vincent and Styris got hundreds..only the Lord's one was actually a great effort") - this obviously does not do justice in any way to Richardson's value to the side, and I wonder whether we may be undervaluing Jones the same way?

I started watching cricket in 1992, so of course it's possible that my estimation of Jones is coloured by those series against Australia and Pakistan where in the absence of Crowe he was the only guy to front up regularly against most of the world's best bowlers.
 

The Hutt Rec

International Debutant
This reminds me of that cricinfo article saying Ross Taylor was a total fail if you took all his hundreds away from his record.

Reckon Andrew Jones is totally underrated and forgotten these days. Would definitely have him opening over Latham.
 

TheJediBrah

Hall of Fame Member
Unbeaten since 2017 at home. Anything else?
Ok? I was just pointing they haven't "steamrolled everyone at home". The last time they played Aus at home they got smashed. If you want to retroactively put the starting date of 2017 to your post then great I agree I guess.
 

stephen

Hall of Fame Member
How good would Australiasia be right now if they were a Test team instead of individual countries, like the West Indies. Or if we just let NZ be our 7th state.

Warner
Labuschagne
Williamson
Smith
Taylor (he's still good right?)
Green
Watling
Cummins
Lyon
Hazlewood
Wagner
NZ can still become the 7th state. It's in the Australian constitution that they're welcome to join us if they'd like.
 

stephen

Hall of Fame Member
Congratulations to all Kiwis. It's been a long time coming. I remember New Zealand touring as a kid and talking to dad about them and his opinion at the time was that they were a side that always had one or two top class players but didn't have a side that could ever seriously challenge because they simply didn't have the depth.

I'm really glad to see that New Zealand finally has the depth to earn the number 1 spot. Well done.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ok? I was just pointing they haven't "steamrolled everyone at home". The last time they played Aus at home they got smashed. If you want to retroactively put the starting date of 2017 to your post then great I agree I guess.
They have in the period that matters for the ranking though, so he doesn't really need to amend his statement. What is the criteria, two years? I know I'm being pedantic here but it's not their fault they don't play as much or as long series as the Big 3.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Ok? I was just pointing they haven't "steamrolled everyone at home". The last time they played Aus at home they got smashed. If you want to retroactively put the starting date of 2017 to your post then great I agree I guess.
The rankings reward recent form more. And honestly, being unbeaten at home from 2017 is indeed an impressive achievement. Aus maybe NZ's kryptonite but it does not mean they are not Supermen.
 

Fuller Pilch

International Captain
Good calls on Jones and Bracewell. We are susceptible to pace knocking us over and Jones would be fine opening. If playing in the subcontinent, I'd pick Latham though. And John Bracewell (crazy coach I know) was a fine off spinner. He won us tests vs Australia in Auckland (absolute peach to get Allan Border) and vs India in India.
 

Fuller Pilch

International Captain
Ok? I was just pointing they haven't "steamrolled everyone at home". The last time they played Aus at home they got smashed. If you want to retroactively put the starting date of 2017 to your post then great I agree I guess.
That was the last time Australia won a series outside Aus. It has been a long time between drinks.
 

Top