Who would win a test series between NZ and West Indies if play started tomorrow?

[Richard]

Wasn't referring to the home game TBH but the Third Test in Napier. Where Anderson bowled as big a heap of crap as he ever has.

 

[GIMH]

Ah, I was talking about the innings win at Trent Bridge. Was napier by an innings as well?

 

[Richard]

No, Strauss and Bell both saved their careers in the second-innings. 'Twas a massive, massive, crushing victory though - easily the most convincing of the 4.

 

[roseboy64]

Edwards in fact averages 25 in his last 6 matches.

Still, don't see it lasting TBH. Edwards has just never struck me as all that good. Averaged 50 in his previous 25.

He was picked with less than 10 FC wickets and matches to his name. 5 even IIRC so Test class batsmen taking him to the cleaners would obviously make his figures awful. Can't be compared to someone like Mitchell Johnson who had years of FC cricket.

 

[Richard]

Edwards? He had 1 First-Class game, UIMM. Lara just picked him in 2003 because he'd bowled well in the nets. Someone else did something of the same to Taylor just a game or so earlier too.

Johnson, incidentally, hadn't played a particularly great deal of First-Class cricket, less still done well in it. Nonetheless, Edwards wasn't poor just in that first year or two (in fact his debut was a good game indeed), but all the way up to 2007/08. That's a looooooong time, and in my experience bowlers who are that bad for that long (as I say, we're talking about an average of 50 or all but here) don't tend to become Test-class.

 

[aussie]

Edawrds has been very impressive since the SA tour in late 07 though.

 

[Richard]

I presume you mean after that tour (he was anything but impressive in the series in question), and yes, as I pointed-out just a few posts back, he has. However, that amounts to not-very-many games and I can't foresee anything other than a reversion to type before long.

If not, I'll give Edwards full credit.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Despite being uniformly rubbish they were still able to beat NZl and Wi pretty easily and as for Pak they will play15 away tests in next 2 years years so even if there is no home cricket it still provides then enough cricket to keep themselves busy and the current ODI series against WI showed the talent class and depth is on a completley different level to WI and NZ.

Not sure what series you were following, but that Pak-WI ODI series could have easily gone the other way.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I presume you mean after that tour (he was anything but impressive in the series in question), and yes, as I pointed-out just a few posts back, he has. However, that amounts to not-very-many games and I can't foresee anything other than a reversion to type before long.

If not, I'll give Edwards full credit.

I admit that I share a similar reservation. However, it's not inconceivable that he is close to becoming a Test class bowler. Considering that he basically started his first-class career at Test level.

 

[_Ed_]

He was absolutely outstanding at Napier. Should've had eight wickets in the innings.

 

[Fiji-Bati]

I think Edwards is a great bowler

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Let's all get carried away.

 

[roseboy64]

Edwards? He had 1 First-Class game, UIMM. Lara just picked him in 2003 because he'd bowled well in the nets. Someone else did something of the same to Taylor just a game or so earlier too.

Johnson, incidentally, hadn't played a particularly great deal of First-Class cricket, less still done well in it. Nonetheless, Edwards wasn't poor just in that first year or two (in fact his debut was a good game indeed), but all the way up to 2007/08. That's a looooooong time, and in my experience bowlers who are that bad for that long (as I say, we're talking about an average of 50 or all but here) don't tend to become Test-class.

This is not a situation similar to most bowlers though. Someone who learns their cricket at the highest level will surely be inconsistent and thus have poor figures. If he'd played even a full season of FC cricket before playing Tests his figures would be much better.

 

[_Ed_]

True, but some can do pretty well right away - Vettori played his first Test after only 1 FC game.

 

[Richard]

This is not a situation similar to most bowlers though. Someone who learns their cricket at the highest level will surely be inconsistent and thus have poor figures. If he'd played even a full season of FC cricket before playing Tests his figures would be much better.

Of course it's a huge disadvantage to be pitched into Test cricket without playing any domestic FC stuff at all, and not playing all that much after you get into Tests either. But nonetheless, if you've got the ability, you've got a chance. I just don't think Edwards has enough ability TBH. I think that even with the disadvantage of having played no domestic cricket prior to coming into Tests, he should've done better than he had up to 2007/08. An average of 50 in 25 Tests is just shockingly poor.

 

[roseboy64]

Completely illogical argument TBH. It would take either luck or genius for him to be any much better than he was. HIs main problem TBH is his inaccuracy. That stuff gets taken to the cleaners at Test level. He probably never had anyone try to correct him before playing for the West Indies. Similar to Jermaine Lawson. His action was questionable when he was progressing but it never got fixed. His continued selection is similar to picking a League Two defender and chucking them straight into the Champions League after only a couple games. Will maybe have a few good outings but will generally be absolutely dire.

 

[Xuhaib]

Not sure what series you were following, but that Pak-WI ODI series could have easily gone the other way.

but who won the crucial moments?

 

[Richard]

Completely illogical argument TBH. It would take either luck or genius for him to be any much better than he was. HIs main problem TBH is his inaccuracy. That stuff gets taken to the cleaners at Test level. He probably never had anyone try to correct him before playing for the West Indies. Similar to Jermaine Lawson. His action was questionable when he was progressing but it never got fixed. His continued selection is similar to picking a League Two defender and chucking them straight into the Champions League after only a couple games. Will maybe have a few good outings but will generally be absolutely dire.

I don't really think it is - generally in football, Prem players (ie, those who're going to play European stuff) are on the books of Prem teams from a very early age. It's nowhere near so common to see a player moving up the leagues gradually. Mostly, if you're playing League Two that's about the best you can hope to be playing all career, and you'll always be out-of-depth in European football.

As for Edwards, his inaccuracy was always sufficiently bad - it wasn't like he had good days and bad days, he was simply all over the place in all bar a tiny number of games - for me to think he didn't have too much hope of getting sufficiently better. Accuracy isn't something you need someone to correct - unless you're completely brainless, you know that bowling good lines and lengths is the way to go and bowling generous Half-Volleys and leg-side deliveries isn't. Accuracy is solely down to the ability of the bowler. If you're going to, at some point, be accurate enough to be Test-standard, you're almost certainly never going to have had a point where you were as wayward as Edwards always has been. There are exceptions, but they're precious few. Mostly, those who are as wayward as Edwards has been all career aren't ever going to get better enough to be Test-class. And that's nothing to do with how little cricket you played before getting to Test level, it's just due to inherant ability.

 

[Craig]

Just thinking about this, and I would believe it would end in a drawn series. They have a stronger batting line up, especially the openers. We're (when Windie reads this, I live in Australia but support NZ, the country I was born in) stronger with spin, and I have no idea how the NZ bowling will be like now that Bond and O'Brien have quit Tests () and probably say that the WI are stronger. But I would back NZ in Vettori in that as captain, he has saved our arses a lot, and without him, Bangladesh would of beaten us in a Test series (or "Test series") FFS. And we're more likely to play as a team then the WI will.

McCullum > Ramdin, although that doesn't say much IMO.

I believe NZ would smash WI in ODIs though.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Just thinking about this, and I would believe it would end in a drawn series. They have a stronger batting line up, especially the openers. We're (when Windie reads this, I live in Australia but support NZ, the country I was born in) stronger with spin, and I have no idea how the NZ bowling will be like now that Bond and O'Brien have quit Tests () and probably say that the WI are stronger. But I would back NZ in Vettori in that as captain, he has saved our arses a lot, and without him, Bangladesh would of beaten us in a Test series (or "Test series") FFS. And we're more likely to play as a team then the WI will.

McCullum > Ramdin, although that doesn't say much IMO.

I believe NZ would smash WI in ODIs though.

I guess you already know who i think would win Craig!! , looking at the last tests we played against your lot it was close and although Vettori and Patel caused problems it still wasn't enough to win you the series on your own turf, lets look at our starting line-up in those tests..

Gayle
Chattergoon
Sarwan
Marshall
Chanderpaul
Nash
Ramdin
Taylor
Edwards
Powell
Baker


When you look at that side in the cold light of day apart from the obvious big names half the side looks very poor, the one's in bold are not likely to play for WI anytime soon, but surprisingly since then we've gone on to beat England and push Australia close by getting a draw and just losing the last test with a depleted team, you talk about spin but arguebly are best player of spin (Sarwan) was missing against Zim and in Deonarine we seem to have found a gem at playing spin too, obviously we've got a long road ahead of us but i believe on our day we can beat ANY side in a test match and i'd certainly be confident of beating NZ with our strongest side right now, especially at home.