thundaboult
International Debutant
any chance all 4 of smith henry jamieson and o'rourke play? ... smith can bat and if santner plays he's another one who can bat ... still sort of a long-ish tail but puts the onus on top 6 to nut up
-
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 tour of Ireland and England 2026
- Thread starter NZTailender
- Start date
Fuller Pilch
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Do you just mean co-ed state schools? Surely single-*** state schools do. Could the ECB support club cricket for teenagers from non-cricketing high schools to increase the player pool?
Pricing sounds terrible.
Fuller Pilch
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Probably all 4 seamers play but Santner misses out for GP
the day can last 8 hours though, compared to 2 hours of a football match.
Silver Silva
International Captain
It is kinda weird that underestimating NZ is even talked about.
England's coach is a Kiwi , the captain is a Kiwi, NZ have won the WTC in England before with a lot of those players still in the NZ squad. So what exactly is there to underestimate lol ?
Articles like that are aimed at casual fans like my dad who watch on average one test a year and always have opinions about 5 years out of date
LangleyburyCCPlayer
International Debutant
I mean, their bowling is better than ours (and that’s not to throw shade on our attack), and I don’t think there’s much in the batting, last time out it was very much the fielding which lost it for New Zealand, I don’t think anything short of a convincing 3-0 win will convince the BazBall doubters, but I’d take any kind of series win
I hope that doesn't apply to my own team...because I said in the Ashes prediction thread that Nathan Lyon would take more wickets in the Ashes than Bashir will in his Ashes career. I feel very confident that's going to be true.
English summers (when the weather plays ball) are the absolute best. I had two belters playing there, just the best memories.
Having a Gay and a Bashir, in a team with Stokes, is wonderful. Throw in a little Baker, a Tongue, a Root, it's all good.
Cricinfo has Gay down as an overseas player in their preview squad. England are used to supplementing their team with shiny things from abroad, but never had to resort to bringing in an Italian O/S import.
Yeah I wouldn't expect that from England. Australian media, yes. They are myopic. But not the Poms. All of our bowling attack has played England, and most of them recently.
Skyliner
International Regular
This is fantastic. Sure to bring a smile, and maybe a tear, to the faces of NZ cricket fans.
‘A memorable afternoon immortalising one of New Zealand's greats. The late Martin Crowe's portrait was unveiled today in The Long Room between Sir Donald Bradman and Sir Viv Richards.’
‘A memorable afternoon immortalising one of New Zealand's greats. The late Martin Crowe's portrait was unveiled today in The Long Room between Sir Donald Bradman and Sir Viv Richards.’
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
Worth remembering re that headline that we've consistently lost to England in the Bazball era, which is pretty annoying as a lot of the individual matches have been quite competitive, and we've often selected and played worse than we should. We're two wins and six losses over the last three series, and of those two wins one was a dead rubber and the other was red-faced 122km/h Wagner winning the match while England played like clowns when they could've just won. England have every right to think they have the wood on us at the moment.
Prior to that we beat England 1-0 in three separate 2-test series 2017-2021, culminating in that comfortable win in the lead up to the WTC final. Those were better days.
Despite those recent results I'm optimistic about this series - bowling attack is mostly fit (for now) and we've moved on from the apparent lethargy of Stead and zombie-Southee (and previously zombie-Wagner), even if Walter seems very cautious too.
Prior to that we beat England 1-0 in three separate 2-test series 2017-2021, culminating in that comfortable win in the lead up to the WTC final. Those were better days.
Despite those recent results I'm optimistic about this series - bowling attack is mostly fit (for now) and we've moved on from the apparent lethargy of Stead and zombie-Southee (and previously zombie-Wagner), even if Walter seems very cautious too.
I'm certain England were still pissed in the Hamilton Test at the end of 24. They played like it.
Skyliner
International Regular
Revisiting that 2024 series, NZ had England 71/4 in the first innings of the first test, then dropped Brook when he hadn’t scored many, dropped him 5 times in his innings in total, Brook scored 171, England scored 499, NZ dropped 8 catches in total in that first innings, and the series was slipping away from the get-go.
In the first Baz-Ball test series when NZ toured England, Mitchell dropped a number of crucial catches and the England batsmen punished NZ for those drops.
Some comments are making out the Bazballers have been consistently way better than us. The seam-heavy make-up of previous attacks was highlighted; apparently we now need to try something different. No matter who your bowlers are, you have to take the chances that come your way against the best teams.
I don’t think England have been head-and-shoulders the better team, we just haven’t been ruthless enough when it mattered.
In the first Baz-Ball test series when NZ toured England, Mitchell dropped a number of crucial catches and the England batsmen punished NZ for those drops.
Some comments are making out the Bazballers have been consistently way better than us. The seam-heavy make-up of previous attacks was highlighted; apparently we now need to try something different. No matter who your bowlers are, you have to take the chances that come your way against the best teams.
I don’t think England have been head-and-shoulders the better team, we just haven’t been ruthless enough when it mattered.
Last edited:
"New Zealand, meanwhile, have a better pace attack than England. McCullum comes from New Zealand and has been living there for the last few months, and should therefore have all the inside knowledge that England’s batsmen will require to play these Kiwi quicks, two of them among the tallest Test bowlers ever. No excuses, therefore, if England do lose this series.
Matt Henry:
Leading the way and setting the tone is Matt Henry, whose Test record is impressive enough: 140 wickets at 27. But look closer: he was ordinary when he was in and out of the side as the occasional replacement for Tim Southee, Trent Boult or Neil Wagner. Since taking over from them, in his last 15 Tests, Henry has 85 wickets at 18.1 each.
Perhaps the biggest bunny – certainly the tallest – that Test cricket has ever seen has been a constant feature in that list of victims, Zak Crawley. In scoring 29 Test runs against Henry’s bowling, Crawley was dismissed eight times. Henry has that unerring length, which drew Crawley forward into that booming drive. He also has the skill to make the new ball deviate one way or another, flicking his outside edge or zipping between bat and pad. He must be the nearest any New Zealander has come to being a replica of Sir Richard Hadlee.
Now the attack leader, without too many miles on his clock, he hits a relentless length and forces the batsman to play.
Kyle Jamieson:
Back after a long lay-off, he has the natural advantage of a very high release point, which no England bowler can begin to match except Robinson. Whenever Jamieson has been able to bowl he has taken wickets: he reached 50 in nine Tests, faster than any other New Zealander.
Jamieson has the enviable record of 80 Test wickets at only 19 each, and the less enviable one of not having played a Test for more than two years. He fell foul of the occupational hazard of a back injury, to which such a tall bowler is even more prone. He has been eased back in white-ball internationals, with a straighter run-up, a more chest-on delivery and a straighter follow-through.
Will O'Rouke:
London-born O’Rourke is the son of a pace bowler who played first-class cricket for Wellington in the 1980s and 1990s. He is quicker than Jamieson and has almost as high a release point. If Jacob Duffy had been available for this tour, O’Rourke might not have got the new ball, but Duffy is waiting at home for the birth of his first child.
O’Rourke introduced himself to England on their last Test tour of New Zealand by means of his height, his pace and his impassive reaction to provocation.
The extreme height comes in the form of Kyle Jamieson, 6ft 8in, and Will O’Rourke, 6ft 4in. Only a couple of Test bowlers have had a higher release-point than Jamieson, and then not for long. Before the steeper bounce of the ball rising from the pitch comes another problem to solve: it is harder to pick up the length on which that ball is going to land. Good luck, Ben Duckett, if he is determined to “go harder” as his coach preaches."
Root goes for 32 - Pace and Swing from O'Rourke
HeathDavisSpeed
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
"London-born O'Rourke". Love the parochialism!
James
Cricket Web Owner
That's what Simon Doull was saying as well on the Sky Sports Podcast with Atherton and Hussain.
ataraxia
Hall of Fame Member
The Dutch cricket team, sponsored by Amstel Nieuw Zeeland, arrive at Lord's.