NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
I'd rather Brownlie over McCullum, tbh.
-
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.
Test NZ XI vs India
- Thread starter jonbrooks
- Start date
I'd go with Brownlie as well. I'd go with anyone scoring some good runs in NZ FC right now.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Look I know it's not an exceptional record, but McCullum averages over 35 in test cricket and has scored lots of runs at the highest level over a long career.
He's far from a complete batsman and he has mind explosions and he's nowhere near Taylor or Ryder's class, but if we're comfortable with the amount of runs Kane Williamson has scored since his debut (and I know he's going to get better blah blah blah) we must be comfortable with McCullum.
32 as an average over the last little while is poor, but he's a better batsman than Guptill, Brownlie, Latham, Rutherford, Fulton, Redmond, Flynn, Anderson or anyone else pushing for a spot in the team who's name is not Jesse Ryder. Anderson is arguably more valuable because of what he adds as a bowler, but he's in no way a better batsman.
He's far from a complete batsman and he has mind explosions and he's nowhere near Taylor or Ryder's class, but if we're comfortable with the amount of runs Kane Williamson has scored since his debut (and I know he's going to get better blah blah blah) we must be comfortable with McCullum.
32 as an average over the last little while is poor, but he's a better batsman than Guptill, Brownlie, Latham, Rutherford, Fulton, Redmond, Flynn, Anderson or anyone else pushing for a spot in the team who's name is not Jesse Ryder. Anderson is arguably more valuable because of what he adds as a bowler, but he's in no way a better batsman.
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
There's being a more talented batsman and there's being a better batsman. Better batsman meaning can stay at the crease, can be relied on not to throw it away, etc, and can be valuable to a teams innings in setting up a win. In that sense, I don't rate McCullum better than most.
I'd rather have someone who stays around longer than McCullum so the other batsmen in the team can bat around him. McCullum comes and then he's gone very quickly. He's adding very little value to the team.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
It's very easy to say that but that's not what his record suggests. Look, I'm not saying he's a great batsman but he scored more runs than the "grafters" who were in the team at the same time as him. I'm talking Flynn, Fulton, Redmond etc. Whether he's got there on talent or hard work, I don't know or care.
And I say that as a huge Daniel Flynn fan.
If you ask me to put the team most likely to win test matches on paper there is not a ****ing doubt that McCullum would be on that sheet. He'd not be my first picked batsman, probably my 4th, 5th or even 6th, but he'd absolutely be there.
And yeah, he has played some grafting innings himself as well. It's not his best role but he has put in the effort.
It's pretty ridiculous to want Guptill there ahead of him.
And I say that as a huge Daniel Flynn fan.
If you ask me to put the team most likely to win test matches on paper there is not a ****ing doubt that McCullum would be on that sheet. He'd not be my first picked batsman, probably my 4th, 5th or even 6th, but he'd absolutely be there.
And yeah, he has played some grafting innings himself as well. It's not his best role but he has put in the effort.
It's pretty ridiculous to want Guptill there ahead of him.
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Tbf being a wicket-keeper and later being made captain probably helped him stay in the team. Then there were times he was legit because he batted okay and all our other options were ****e.
Why is it ridiculous to want Guptill there ahead of him? I truly believe he has the game to be an effective Test #5, and average 40 in that spot. He's five years younger than Brendon, his body is better, he's got a better hunger for it I'd suggest etc. I haven't seen him achieve a single thing at #5 that Gup couldn't. Can anyone see Brendon having a golden period in the next 2-3 years, defying the fact he's regressed in the last 2-3 when his body will continue to make things harder for him etc? Not I.
He may have played a couple of grafting innings but he's also played some absolutely atrocious shots, one in Sri Lanka coming to mind and a couple in this series. We wouldn't miss him and I doubt the balance of our side requires a guy at 5 averaging a tick over 30 who doesn't score hundreds, bowl, keep, or offer anything unrivalled as a skipper.
Mike5181
International Captain
Probably because he played 28 tests against top 8 opposition, and only averaged 24. Tim Southee is only 5-6 points behind that level of performance. He didn't even deserve as many chances as he got in the first place. He's a good ODI batsman, a "hard worker", and a "nice guy" so it's all ok though.
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Tbf those Test failures were as an opener mostly. Guptill as a middle order bat still sounds weird considering Ryder isn't in the team, #5 being his obvious spot.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
It's great that you truly believe it but there's no justification for it. The man failed to an unprecedented degree. 31 tests FFS. That's two fewer than Matthew Sinclair for an inferior average playing against inferior opponents. The man had a leash longer than Mohammed Ashraful.
He's not even that young at 27.
Last edited:
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
I don't support Guptill batting at 5. He is an opener or he is nothing. His scores against top 8 opposition from the 5 position were 30. 6. 4, 58 - that's an average less than 25.
None of those innings were scored at a strike rate over 40. And I want my number 5 to advance the game somewhat. I don't mind if an opener bats slowly though.
Jesse is a far superior option at number 5.
He is scoring his current PS runs from the opening spot as well.
if Guptill wants to come back into the team tell him to score a double like everyone else has to.
None of those innings were scored at a strike rate over 40. And I want my number 5 to advance the game somewhat. I don't mind if an opener bats slowly though.
Jesse is a far superior option at number 5.
He is scoring his current PS runs from the opening spot as well.
if Guptill wants to come back into the team tell him to score a double like everyone else has to.
Athlai
Not Terrible
On current domestic performance Bennett comes in as the next pace bowling option and the opening spots are in contention by Guptill, Papps and Latham. Ryder is the only other player currently making domestic waves beyond these guys and is someone we'd want in the team even if he wasn't IMO.
Largely irrelevant if I'm considering him for the #5 spot, which I am and where he has averaged 68.60 (I am aware this leans on Bangladesh, but also features a 50 v Australia in a small sample size). I'd suggest that his abilities in the shorter form of the game give some relevance, certainly as does his work ethic which you seem to be taking the P out of it. I couldn't care less how he is as company. Although given he stays out of trouble, he might prove to be a longer-term option than the other #5 being mooted.
I don't know how anyone can tell me a guy with his run-making ability is not worth consideration for a spot. Time has proven he's not an opener, and actually if we look closer he averages 35 at #3 in Tests - again a small sample size but worth persisting with. There is no one churning out the sort of runs he is at Plunket, ODI and Twenty20 level - not Ross Taylor, not Kane Williamson, certainly not Brendon McCullum and not Jesse Ryder either.
I'm very interested to know why 'he's an opener or nothing'. If I see a guy who can average 40 or so at 5, I'll take it thanks very much. Is Jesse a superior option? Why? He's scoring the same amount of runs Gup is. And I'm looking at a very lean trot of runs scored at #5 on his Test record.
So to say there's no justification, for a guy who is averaging more than the guy everyone seems to think is the bona fide option to take that #5 spot, seems a touch bemusing to me. 27 is plenty young when you have no real history of chronic injury, in good fitness and can play until your mid 30's - which is around 2020 and plenty long for me.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
Agreed he averages 40 in TEST MATCH cricket. Forget about his qualifications at FC level.
Kippax
Cricketer Of The Year
Kippax
Cricketer Of The Year
It always takes a genuine stage to switch Ryder on tbh, going right back to when he declined A tours on the basis they were just another contrived hoop to jump through, produced sterile cricket with no intensity or followers or atmosphere, and were a waste of everyone's time.
As for Guptill, his cut shot isn't up to it imo, so I wouldn't take away the straighter and fuller lengths he can pound down the ground by batting him at 5. It was good to see him get the pull shot out again against Bennett last month, but once again, he was undone by a prod well out in front of himself to a poorly read length.
Are the domestic bowlers switched on enough or talented enough to keep probing his weaknesses? Not in my viewing, no. They are cricket brains of the Ian Smith, "oh man, I'm bowling to Martin Guptill. Even my grandma would rate Guptill" ilk.
See that's the sort of reasoned argument I'd prefer to see. Not 'this average is my basis, I'm ruling him out altogether forever and I won't reconsider' etc.
For the record, my selection preference for #5 is Jesse ahead of the rest, but history tells me to be a touch weary about his assimilations back into the international fold.
Athlai
Not Terrible
If we drop Sodhi for the Indian tour because we're going for anti-spin pitches then we will get into the uncomfortable position of answering the Jesse Ryder problem without actually solving it. I can very easily see us going 3 seamers + Anderson, Ryder and Williamson after we produce some green pitches.