***Official*** South Africa in New Zealand 2017

[vandem]

... If there was a World T20 next week, my side would be Gup Kane Ross Corey Neesham *insertkeeperhere* de Grandhomme Santner Boult Sodhi Southee. And I'd be so tempted to drop Southee for Wheeler, but I find it pointless to suggest as it's never going to happen. Bruce unlucky, but I like the extra bowling option in Jimmy (although needs big work and apparently is doing so)

Southee is not always an automatic Hesson pick. Note that at the World T20 last season, McClenaghan and Milne were the seamers, Boult and Southee were in the squad but didn't get a game. Was in the subcontinent so 2-3 spinners, and Anderson / Elliott as 5th bowler.

 

[Zinzan]

Southee is not always an automatic Hesson pick. Note that at the World T20 last season, McClenaghan and Milne were the seamers, Boult and Southee were in the squad but didn't get a game. Was in the subcontinent so 2-3 spinners, and Anderson / Elliott as 5th bowler.

That was almost the one exception to the rule... Boult didn't play a game either IIRC

 

[straw man]

That was apparently with the T20 lineup we had the other day, but the ODI side has enough cake-like players in Latham, KW, Broom & Taylor to carry Munro assuming he comes off like McCullum did which was once every 2-3 knocks... sadly he's been below that of late.

I had some level of hope that Munro would solve a middle order problem for us in T20s and ODIs, after performing for so long in domestic cricket. Hasn't happened, though don't think this is the last time we see him get a chance either.

 

[Zinzan]

I don't mind us losing the toss and batting tbh.... especially with Sodhi in the side, even if it is reduced.

 

[Zinzan]

I had some level of hope that Munro would solve a middle order problem for us in T20s and ODIs, after performing for so long in domestic cricket. Hasn't happened, though don't think this is the last time we see him get a chance either.

Had a great white ball season last year, but was woeful against Australia which is worrying..

 

[StephenZA]

Yay no Parnell... lets see how Shamsi bowls.

 

[Zinzan]

I can only think Southee's living off the fumes of that 7-fer he took 2 years ago to still make the 50 over side, can't think of any other reason for it.

Meanwhile, Brownlie making Chris Morris look like Malcolm Marshall here

 

[straw man]

Brownlie just does not get forward at all does he. Picks up the length late and is miles away from anything full outside off. That said, nothing wrong with some plays and misses and can be perfectly effective if he just waits until the bowler bowls at him like that pull shot.

 

[StephenZA]

Good very late review there...

 

[straw man]

I love Latham as a test batsman but that was a horrible ODI innings. Could see Worker later in the series? But then would need another keeper too.

 

[hendrix]

...the numbers are nearly identical. The "record" is nearly identical. Characterizing Taylor as terrible simply isn't true. Terrible players don't end up playing 73 times for New Zealand. If you are going to claim Taylor is "not good" at t20 then make the case with something objective. I'm not inclined to trust your opinion. Every New Zealand batsman has been "figured out". Developing "new shots" is not a pre-requisite to being a great batsman.



The history of Hesson "poorly communicating" with Taylor when Taylor was captain. It was that process of marginalization that eventually lead to the captaincy debacle. To ignore that is to ignore the facts.



Strawman. Did I claim that the coach shouldn't pick his captain?



Whats with the question mark? If you don't understand what I meant, please feel free to ask for clarification.



Of course it isn't a conscription. I want to see Ross Taylor playing in New Zealand colours for as long as he is in form and scoring runs. But if we don't see that because of the short-sightedness of the coach and the selection panel I'm entitled to feel p*ssed off at that coach. New Zealand didn't gain anything by leaving Taylor out of this side. If anything we lost quite a bit: we lost momentum, we lost the match.

I'll humour you: let's do facts

1. T20I record:
- Kane Williamson: Average 36.29 SR 122.81
- Ross Taylor: Average 24.15 SR 120.07

errr, identical?

2. If we're gonna play this game "playing 73 times for NZ" also doesn't mean anything. And judging by the record, I can well and truly call it terrible in comparison with his test and ODI record.

3. Hesson "poorly communicating" with Taylor is bad, but it doesn't mean marginialisation, which implies intent. The on-record reasoning for Taylor's removal? That he himself was a poor communicator.

Look, I'm not defending Hesson over this issue but it's getting into the realms of Lizard-Folk to claim that Taylor has been systematically marginalised.

I've also criticised Hesson and the selectors over a number of issues and will continue to do so. But dropping Taylor from t20Is? Totally justifiable IMO.

 

[Dick Rockett]

Not convinced about Latham in the ODI side. When Guppy comes back, keep Brownlie and drop Latham imo.

 

[_Ed_]

I know it's only a small sample size, but Latham's ODI average of 8.33 when keeping is a concern.

 

[Zinzan]

Not convinced about Latham in the ODI side. When Guppy comes back, keep Brownlie and drop Latham imo.

Disagree, while he can look ordinary like he did today, in the last 2 years he's averaging 37 @ 84, which is a prefect foil when you have Guptill at the other end, saying nothing about the fact that he's also our keeper. Swapping with Brownlie means you have to rope in a keeper as well which screws with our balance.

Latham does have an issue falling over to the legside though, must be said. Needs some work.

 

[NUFAN]

Good very late review there...

I've watched the replay on this and if you count the 15 seconds from when the umpire said not out (which is correct FTR) it was pretty much exactly 15 seconds.

 

[Zinzan]

In 34 overs I'd say 255 @ 7.5 is a good score, based on 9s an being so in T20s and 6s in 50 overs.

 

[banquetbear]

I'll humour you: let's do facts

1. T20I record:
- Kane Williamson: Average 36.29 SR 122.81
- Ross Taylor: Average 24.15 SR 120.07

errr, identical?

...I've already conceded I got the number wrong. So no need for the "err, identical" snarkiness. My point still stands. You haven't made a case that Taylor is terrible at T20. You have simply asserted that he is, citing "he hasn't learnt new shots" and "bowlers have figured him out."

2. If we're gonna play this game "playing 73 times for NZ" also doesn't mean anything. And judging by the record, I can well and truly call it terrible in comparison with his test and ODI record.

Of course it "doesn't mean anything." "Terrible" is a subjective statement. I don't think he is a terrible t20 player at all. I most certainly would have picked him ahead of Phillips for the last game: even if they had to shuffle the order. Most people here seem to think that Taylor should come back to the t20 team. If he was as terrible as you imply he wouldn't even be in the frame for re-selection.

3. Hesson "poorly communicating" with Taylor is bad, but it doesn't mean marginialisation, which implies intent. The on-record reasoning for Taylor's removal? That he himself was a poor communicator.

I believe there was intent to remove Taylor from the captaincy and give it to McCullum. Which was why Taylor was marginalised in the first place. And it worked.

Look, I'm not defending Hesson over this issue but it's getting into the realms of Lizard-Folk to claim that Taylor has been systematically marginalised.

You are free to believe what you like.

I've also criticised Hesson and the selectors over a number of issues and will continue to do so. But dropping Taylor from t20Is? Totally justifiable IMO.

I'm not debating with the decision to drop him with you. I'm stating that characterizing Taylor as a terrible t20 play is a gross distortion of reality. He isn't a terrible t20 player. He isn't the best t20 player. But he most certainly isn't terrible.

 

[Dick Rockett]

Disagree, while he can look ordinary like he did today, in the last 2 years he's averaging 37 @ 84, which is a prefect foil when you have Guptill at the other end, saying nothing about the fact that he's also our keeper. Swapping with Brownlie means you have to rope in a keeper as well which screws with our balance.

A couple of 100s against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh inflate those numbers somewhat. I'd also argue that having 3 bits and pieces allrounders in our middle order does more harm to our balance than a specialist keeper lower down. Would like to see a young specialist like Blundell given a go. Ronchi's had his day I reckon.

 

[Zinzan]

A couple of 100s against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh inflate those numbers somewhat. I'd also argue that having 3 bits and pieces allrounders in our middle order does more harm to our balance than a specialist keeper lower down. Would like to see a young specialist like Blundell given a go. Ronchi's had his day I reckon.

Sure, but even excluding Zim & Bang he's averaging 31 @ 80 in the last 2 years, which is perfectly acceptable when you have Guptill 57 @ 102 at that time at the other end along with the benefit of the left/right combo.

Don't get me wrong if we have a spectacularly promising & ready batter/keeper playing domestic cricket, by all means, but I'm not sure we do right now.

 

[_Ed_]

Damn, Brownlie was looking good until that.