• 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.

Unusual result in Aus v NZ test

thierry henry

International Captain
I just thought it was pretty strange that both teams scored over 400 in the first innings, yet the game didn't even reach the 5th day. Has this ever happened before?
 

Tim

Cricketer Of The Year
It seems to be a regular occurance when NZ are involved.

An interesting stat was produced a couple of days ago on TV when Martin Crowe said NZ average (in their last 12 or so tests) a very respectable 450 in their 1st innings..yet average a poor 220 odd in their 2nd innings.

If that stat doesn't tell you where NZ are going wrong in their test cricket at the moment..then I don't know lol.
 

thierry henry

International Captain
....I'm not sure that in any of those games, both teams scored 400+ and the game didn't reach the last day...fair point though :p
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
thierry henry said:
....I'm not sure that in any of those games, both teams scored 400+ and the game didn't reach the last day...fair point though :p
Didn't it happen in Brisbane just recently? New Zealand made a big score, Australia made a bigger score, New Zealand fell apart in the second dig. It might have just made the fifth day though, not sure.
 

shaka

International Regular
I noticed in the first innings set, there were about 7hundreds scored by bowlers and batsman combined. That must be unusual, 3 of the bowlers are world class (Mcgrath, Warne, Vettori, and errrrrr Martin)
 

LongHopCassidy

International Captain
FaaipDeOiad said:
Didn't it happen in Brisbane just recently? New Zealand made a big score, Australia made a bigger score, New Zealand fell apart in the second dig. It might have just made the fifth day though, not sure.
Nyet. McGrath and Gillespie both got their fifties early on the fourth day and New Zealand were bowled out in just over a session.
 

Will Scarlet

U19 Debutant
Definitely a common occurence for NZ. Combine this with their inability to bowl fourth and defend a total and you have the reason for their demise in the last two years. It's as though they think the work is done after two completed innings.
 

shaka

International Regular
If NZ had a competitive score for the opposition, I would give NZ a good chance. Have not seen it recently though.
 

hindsy

Cricket Spectator
Yea, NZ have the potential to push Australia - they just gotta try to play for the full 5 days at max. effort and not just give up after a few.
 

thierry henry

International Captain
FaaipDeOiad said:
Didn't it happen in Brisbane just recently? New Zealand made a big score, Australia made a bigger score, New Zealand fell apart in the second dig. It might have just made the fifth day though, not sure.
No. New Zealand made less than 400 in the first innings.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
shaka said:
I noticed in the first innings set, there were about 7hundreds scored by bowlers and batsman combined. That must be unusual, 3 of the bowlers are world class (Mcgrath, Warne, Vettori, and errrrrr Martin)
Vettori is not world class either.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
New Zealand are terrible in third-innings ATM.
Not exactly like that's any secret.
Started when they came about as close to losing an unloseable match as anyone ever has (vs Pak, First Test, 2003\04), and happened so often over here it was untrue.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Blaze said:
Yes he is.
Hmm.
You'd have to have a pretty loose definition of World-class (but then again we do, don't we - which is why I hate the phrase so much).
Vettori is good, beyond doubt, he's better than just about all other fingerspinners, but he's not a bowler who you can back to run through batting-line-ups regularly.
That, for me, is the best definition of World-class.
 

telsor

U19 12th Man
Richard said:
Hmm.
You'd have to have a pretty loose definition of World-class (but then again we do, don't we - which is why I hate the phrase so much).
Vettori is good, beyond doubt, he's better than just about all other fingerspinners, but he's not a bowler who you can back to run through batting-line-ups regularly.
That, for me, is the best definition of World-class.
I can't think of anyone I'd back to 'regularly run through batting line ups'

So, just who would you define that way?

McGrath is currently the number 1 bolwer int he world and I wouldn't expect him to 'regularly' run through batting line ups.

Is *anyone* world class by the Richard scale?


I'd rate Vettori 'world class' on the basis that if I'd be picking 2 world teams to play each other, he would be definately be in the mix for selection.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
telsor said:
I can't think of anyone I'd back to 'regularly run through batting line ups'

So, just who would you define that way?

McGrath is currently the number 1 bolwer int he world and I wouldn't expect him to 'regularly' run through batting line ups.

Is *anyone* world class by the Richard scale?


I'd rate Vettori 'world class' on the basis that if I'd be picking 2 world teams to play each other, he would be definately be in the mix for selection.
By "regularly" I don't mean taking 7-80 every innings.
I mean taking 4-80 or so at least once every 4 innings.
 

Top