Immenso
International Vice-Captain
I hadn't noticed Boult swinging the new ball both ways before (I'd seen him reverse the old ball), some of those balls to Compton at Lords swinging the other way were beautiful.
-
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** New Zealand Domestic Season 2013/2014
- Thread starter Kippax
- Start date
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Quite a big deal was made out of it. It happened in the middle of a match and then suddenly he was doing it all the time.
Unfortunately, he got a bit carried away with it and lost a bit of that nagging line and natural variation that had made him so successful. Hopefully Bond explains to him that he needs to settle on a stock ball 75% of the time and use the away swinger only occasionally.
Kippax
Cricketer Of The Year
New Zealand Cricket - Hamilton, Auckland and Wellington to host two matches in ANZ International Series v India
Tons of ODIs and a T20 finals weekend. The last thing a Seifert or his younger equivalents need is more thrilling shorter formats action at Seddon Park tbf.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
Flynn-watch:
Yes and yes - there's always a space at the top of the order for New Zealand.
Cricket | Daniel Flynn plans to lead Knights from... | Stuff.co.nz
Yes and yes - there's always a space at the top of the order for New Zealand.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
He has the perfect temperament (sp?) for it. He was not positive enough as a number three in my book -
He is certainly a gritty cricketer and has the ability to will himself to make a score.
Flem274*
123/5
needs a front foot offside game unless he intends to bat even slower than richardson. rigor cbf risking his wicket much but he could drive off the front foot when he wanted to. with flynn you bowl full to tie him down then something marginally shorter and wider to draw that slash off the back foot when it isn't there to hit.
but its good he's looking to reinvent himself with an eye to the test team, and nice to see he hasn't been given up on by the selectors.
but its good he's looking to reinvent himself with an eye to the test team, and nice to see he hasn't been given up on by the selectors.
Last edited:
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yeah he's a bit like Khawaja in that he's very easy to bowl to a plan to in Test cricket. In fact he's a bit like Khawaja in a lot of ways. Definitely not someone I'd be looking to discard though. A lot of people have had complaints about the A side but I haven't had too much to gripe about it aside from the lack of Flynn; really could've helped him.
Flem274*
123/5
haha i thought you had been quiet on that A team since you're one for ripping into poorly balanced squads. along with the A tour being good for him, his presence would really have helped the balance, especially since he wants to open the batting and they dont appear to want to pick the likes of raval yet.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
"I've got the message that if I go away and score a mountain of runs they'll have to take notice"
Pretty sure that's what they say to everyone.
Kippax
Cricketer Of The Year
Despite NZ success in the past being derived from men who's happily tell you what they're trying to achieve in a match and why (Hadlee, Coney, Crowe, Fleming, etc.), the more downcurrent and vague "he's a trier, multi-skilled, he's actually got some real X factor" hollow man selection policies are in fact as good a road as any these days. Good to know.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Well basically, my thoughts on A-team selection policy are in stark contract to national team selection policy because the team success of the former is irrelevant. If you for some reason think Devcich has what it takes to transfer his skills to the highest level and you want to give additional opportunities to prove that and develop his game then he absolutely should be in the A squad - as long as you don't start saying he should be in the Test squad if he performs well there the minute he does. So I've got absolutely no gripe with only a few of the slots being legitimately performance based; it's not your Second XI.Despite NZ success in the past being derived from men who's happily tell you what they're trying to achieve in a match and why (Hadlee, Coney, Crowe, Fleming, etc.), the more downcurrent and vague "he's a trier, multi-skilled, he's actually got some real X factor" hollow man selection policies are in fact as good a road as any these days. Good to know.
Last edited:
Mike5181
International Captain
That's just common sense. Other than Phlegm's opinion on team success, no one really disagrees with that view. I just can't come up with a logical explanation as to how they came to the conclusion that picking Devcich is going to be more beneficial to NZ cricket than Raval. He'll be on the wrong side of 30 before the selectors could even justify picking him in a test squad and that's assuming he does well in completely different conditions back in NZ where he only averages 25.
Last edited:
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
I think most of us barring Flem are in the same camp as you on this one. There's a reason Bracewell is playing even though he's a regular member of the black caps.
However, there has to be some type of justification for why one player is deemed more likely to succeed than another. In the case of, say Milne, it's very obvious and easily justifiable.
Others though, it's very difficult to see why they're in the A team. Sodhi was picked ahead of better performing spinners - I'd be fine with this if it was solely for his development. But then they picked him in the test squad.
It's just inconsistent. The desire to pick players based on what they could be must be tempered by reality.
Kippax
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah an interesting angle, whether they have Ronchi so high precisely because they want to find out just how bad his play of two new balls can be, or whether it's for stupid "don't lose face to potential rival Siddons!" pissing contest reasons.
I think as Devich showed by repeatedly berating the umpire for his wicket off a no ball the other night ("why didn't you refer the ball before?"), there are certain guys who are so inherently opportunistic and lacking in self-reflection that they'll never learn anything from your good turns tbh. It becomes a lot like giving your lunch money to a bully just this once.
I think everyone here has written Devcich off, but the bloke has taken his oppourtunity, there is presently a vacant opening berth alongside Guptill in the limited over side, with Nicol, Watling, Rutherford, Ronchi & Franklini all being tried with varying success. The fact that he could probably share the 5th bowler duties with Kane is an added bonus.
Obviously Ryder is the natural fit for that role at the World Cup but there is no guarentee that he will be available.
Devcich will probably never play a test for NZ, but they way he is playing this tour at the moment he might have forced his way into the limited overs squad for the Bangers, which I think comes out tomorrow.
Flem274*
123/5
if devcich plays for nz on the back of his first ever good knock after years and years of being dire i will kill a puppy.
and you can still pick a squad of players you like and keep it halfway balanced, even if you want to disagree with me that team success > individual success (though again if you want individual success then team success is needed because teams that lose are full of players who are sucking bar maybe one or two and not giving you any individual success)
there is no excuse for the lack of specialist batsmen, especially openers, in this squad.
and you can still pick a squad of players you like and keep it halfway balanced, even if you want to disagree with me that team success > individual success (though again if you want individual success then team success is needed because teams that lose are full of players who are sucking bar maybe one or two and not giving you any individual success)
there is no excuse for the lack of specialist batsmen, especially openers, in this squad.