Flem274*
123/5
I said "as of right now" not "over a length of time" in which case, Southee still has underperformace looming over his head. As of right now, the other three seamers are bowling better than Southee. I'm not calling him rubbish, I'm calling him unproductive in the short term. Also, despite Boult only playing one game, he has only one less wicket than Southee in the series.Urgh, so you're effectively basing all of this on just one game. Trent Boult has four test wickets, so? It means nothing and how you could say he's jumped ahead of Southee beacause of them I have no idea.
Before this series started I thought it was pretty common knowledge that Tim Southee was fairly undercooked, obviously it wasn't though.

Southee has been in and out, in and out for some time now, and it probably hasn't done him much good. In saying that, for all the good spells he has bowled since recall, he hasn't gotten himself a big haul. I thought during the recent series he was doing a Hilfenhaus. In 2008 Southee cashed in on a less conducive surface than either pitch in the recent series, and that worries me. Nowadays he doesn't appear to be swing the ball as much as he used to nor using his off cutter as much as he used to.
I appreciate he's had some time off, but his 7fer against Wellington, even if they're the most awfulest team in the history of awfulness (which they're not), indicates to me he was doing something right. It wasn't like Kyle Mills who has been getting a bit of tap on occassion this season. He didn't come into the series completely raw.
I think he is a good bowler, I think all four are bowling well atm, and any of them getting dropped is very harsh, but if we dropped on current performance then statistically and subjectively (watching the four bowl) Southee is fourth and would end up outside the playing eleven for a spell.
If he is underdone, then getting some Plunket Shield overs under his belt won't do him any harm.