***Official*** Bangladesh in New Zealand

[Perm]

Risky business of course

Exactly. There's no real point in selecting Southee if it was only to play a game or two, when he'd be far better off in domestic cricket.

 

[Fiery]

Exactly. There's no real point in selecting Southee if it was only to play a game or two, when he'd be far better off in domestic cricket.

willing to take the risk tbh. Always time to send him back to doemestic cricket if we need to

 

[Perm]

willing to take the risk tbh. Always time to send him back to doemestic cricket if we need to

So you'd quite happily possibly ruin a young bowlers career by selecting him for a few games against a minnow ODI side? You're choice I suppose, but I definitely wouldn't be even contemplating it.

 

[Bahnz]

Yes but how many cases are there where cricketers excel because of it. Tendulkar your best example probably. If you're good enough, you're old enough. Vettori's NZ's best example

Yes and because we wound up bowling Vettori into the ground whilst he was still a teenager, he wound up getting a serious stress fracture in his lower back that has seriously limited his wicket taking ability for the greater part of his career. The point I was making, is how many nameless faces do you see drafted in to the Indian team in their teens, for every Tendulkar? I would say, at a conservative estimate, at least a dozen. Tendulkar was a freak, his kind don't come along very often. The rest need to be carefully managed and slowly introduced to harder levels of cricket. Firstly why don't we see how Southee handles a full season of first class cricket. If he handles that OK, then give them a shot on a couple of A tours. To just assume that Tim Southee is gonna be a smash hit at international level right now, on the grounds that we don't know for sure that he won't be is, quite honestly stupid. And I'm not saying that you're stupid Fiery, I have the highest respect for most of your opinions, but this is a ******** (can I say that?) assumption. I suppose there is a chance that he might emerge from a couple of matches against Bangladesh unscathed, but if you admit that he would only be playing against them, then what's the point? Would you really want to risk a potentially excellent player's physical and mental well being, just so we could have a teenager in the team? And it's not exactly as if we're suffering a seam bowling crisis at the moment. Bond and Franklin will be back in a month or so, Mills is in form, Martin is looking good, Adams can't stop taking domestic wickets, Jacob Oram is looking solid and steady and Mason still deserves a run in the side, before you can even begin to consider Southee.

 

[Fiery]

So you'd quite happily possibly ruin a young bowlers career by selecting him for a few games against a minnow ODI side? You're choice I suppose, but I definitely wouldn't be even contemplating it.

If getting hit for a a few runs by Bangladesh ruins his career then he's not worth pursuing tbh. Bowlers getting slapped around is all part of the learning experience. Different story if you are talking about injury problems of course. Just don't think we need to wrap guys in cotton wool the whole time

 

[Fiery]

Yes and because we wound up bowling Vettori into the ground whilst he was still a teenager, he wound up getting a serious stress fracture in his lower back that has seriously limited his wicket taking ability for the greater part of his career. The point I was making, is how many nameless faces do you see drafted in to the Indian team in their teens, for every Tendulkar? I would say, at a conservative estimate, at least a dozen. Tendulkar was a freak, his kind don't come along very often. The rest need to be carefully managed and slowly introduced to harder levels of cricket. Firstly why don't we see how Southee handles a full season of first class cricket. If he handles that OK, then give them a shot on a couple of A tours. To just assume that Tim Southee is gonna be a smash hit at international level right now, on the grounds that we don't know for sure that he won't be is, quite honestly stupid. And I'm not saying that you're stupid Fiery, I have the highest respect for most of your opinions, but this is a ******** (can I say that?) assumption. I suppose there is a chance that he might emerge from a couple of matches against Bangladesh unscathed, but if you admit that he would only be playing against them, then what's the point? Would you really want to risk a potentially excellent player's physical and mental well being, just so we could have a teenager in the team? And it's not exactly as if we're suffering a seam bowling crisis at the moment. Bond and Franklin will be back in a month or so, Mills is in form, Martin is looking good, Adams can't stop taking domestic wickets, Jacob Oram is looking solid and steady and Mason still deserves a run in the side, before you can even begin to consider Southee.

Look I totally understand your view and agree with of it, but it obviously involves a lot of discretion about when to pick players. I will stop arguing this now because I haven't seen enough of Southee to be arguing about him in particular tbh

 

[Bahnz]

If getting hit for a a few runs by Bangladesh ruins his career then he's not worth pursuing tbh. Bowlers getting slapped around is all part of the learning experience. Different story if you are talking about injury problems of course. Just don't think we need to wrap guys in cotton wool the whole time

Plenty of players can have their careers devastated by a horrifying start. Remember Kenny Rutherford? I don't think he ever recovered from his nightmare start against the Windies. Admittedly the Bangla's are a slightly less intimidating proposition than the island pace quartet, but the same idea remains. A bad early experience can stay with a player throughout their careers, and if Southee struggles against Bangladesh, how is he gonna feel about having to step up against vastly superior opposition down the track?

 

[Perm]

If getting hit for a a few runs by Bangladesh ruins his career then he's not worth pursuing tbh. Bowlers getting slapped around is all part of the learning experience. Different story if you are talking about injury problems of course. Just don't think we need to wrap guys in cotton wool the whole time

See, so you'd be willing to write him off if he failed against Bangladesh? It's a double edged sword, as I mentioned in an earlier post. If he does well he'll likely be selected again, and if he fails then the public will write him off. There is no good that can come of his selection against Bangladesh. You don't need to take such a hard-ass approach all the time. Different bowlers can handle a pasting in different ways. There are some who will battle on and eventually take a few wickets, and there are those who will have their confidence severly dented.

 

[Bahnz]

Look I totally understand your view and agree with of it, but it obviously involves a lot of discretion about when to pick players. I will stop arguing this now because I haven't seen enough of Southee to be arguing about him in particular tbh

Fair enough. It's my personal opinion that a moratorium should be placed on the selection of our players until they turn 21, although admittedly that might result in a few players making their debut somewhat under the weather...

 

[Fiery]

There is no good that can come of his selection against Bangladesh. .

Except if he does well and then continues to do so

 

[Perm]

Except if he does well and then continues to do so

Which is very, very unlikely. Then there would the high possibility of him breaking down due to too much cricket.

 

[Flem274*]

Actualy I'm jumping the fence here and agreeing with Bahnz and Perm which is worrying, I hope I'm not going to turn into a poster like those rugby buffoons that ring up the radio about subjects they're clueles on and knee jerk react on all the time.

I'll take the middle ground, when the A team go away at the end of the season if Southee is in reasonable form put him in the A team.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

What guns.

 

[Fiery]

What guns.

go away

 

[NZTailender]

Was impressed a bit by Southee tbh. He was bowling to a plan and though he kept to that plan (short and outside off stump). A few went wide but I thought he was trying something and he easily outbowled O'Brien. He was expensive but I think that was mainly bad luck rather than bad bowling. He was trying to get the batsman to top edge and that happened a couple of times but never went to fielders. You couldn't really ask more of him - indeed, he did exactly what Fleming asked him to.

O'Brien looked deadset awful. I can see how he takes plenty of Domestic wickets, though. He just sort of puts the ball down the other end and relies on the pitch to do the rest.

Mason I thought bowled extremely well. I mean, he started with a wicket maiden in a T20! His control was superb and FWIW I think he should be in the ODI side opening the bowling with Mills as Mason>>>>>Gillespie>>>>>Martin>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>O'Brien.

Jeetan Patel bowled too full I thought. I don't know what exactly he was trying to do but the batsmen found him easy to hit. I don't think the pitch was a turner but he could've surely benefited from pitching the ball down the pitch (away from the batsman) at least.

Styris bowled pretty well with his bits and pieces off cutters. I genuinley think he's just as good as Oram when it comes to ODI bowling options and should do well at home in the series against both Bangladesh and England, if Vettori throws him the ball earlier than usual (sometime around the 20th over just after the power plays and in tandem with Vettori to choke).

How and Fulton looked really at sea versus the Bangladeshi bowlers (who, IMO, bowled really, really superbly. Was impressed by all the quicks and even Ashrafuls bowling). I just shook my head at the shots they came out with - namely the flat bat baseball style swings at balls that cleearly should've been cut in the traditional way.

Ross Taylor again looked to favour the onside too much and really needs to sort this issue out. Also, Ian Smith raised an interesting point about him batting at 3 in ODI's. He's scored both of his centuries there, so why doesn't he bat there anymore? I agree 100%

Fleming looked pretty good, wish he was back in the ODI side. Styris proved capable at moving the ball around, rotating the strike and keeping the scoring rate up. His six down the ground also looked effortless.

I actually thought James Marshall batted pretty well, apart from two awful attempts at reverse sweeping. He just looked to rotate the strike rather than bash it around and did a good job. Still don't think he should be the ODi side, nonetheless.

Wasn't really impressed by Hopkins at all. Don't know why we're even wasting time with him as an experiment when he doesn't have an impressive record, nor does his technique look to flash either. I saw nothing special there to suggest he would ever be a good ODI finisher - or at the very least, any better than McCullum. It's frustrating that McCullum has now been made an opener which robs us of a ODI finisher which is something we've always been able to rely on. A strong top order is required, yes, but robbing us of a superb finisher is not the way to go around it, especially since we're lacking McMillan at 5 or 6. IMO the best side for our 1st ODI given injuries and the like would be:

1. Vincent
2. How
3. Taylor
4. Fulton
5. Styris
6. Oram
7. McCullun
8. Vettori
9. Mills
10. Mason
11. Patel

But given that Vincent has been dropped, the favouritsm towards McCullum opening and playing Hopkins, means we won't see that XI play on Boxing Day.

 

[Fiery]

1. Vincent
2. How
3. Taylor
4. Fulton
5. Styris
6. Oram
7. McCullun
8. Vettori
9. Mills
10. Mason
11. Patel

But given that Vincent has been dropped, the favouritsm towards McCullum opening and playing Hopkins, means we won't see that XI play on Boxing Day.

Good analysis. So we know Vincent wont play. We can assume McCullum will open so you need another player there. Who? Sinclair?

 

[NZTailender]

Good analysis. So we know Vincent wont play. We can assume McCullum will open so you need another player there. Who? Sinclair?

Nah I imagine the side will look something like

McCullum
How
Fulton
Styris
Taylor
Oram
Hopkins
Vettori
Mills
Mason/Gillespie
Martin/Patel

 

[Fiery]

Nah I imagine the side will look something like

McCullum
How
Fulton
Styris
Taylor
Oram
Hopkins
Vettori
Mills
Mason/Gillespie
Martin/Patel

Hopkins was dropped

 

[NZTailender]

Hopkins was dropped

Oh really? Didn't know that - will probably get replaced by Sinclair at 6 then.

 

[Fiery]

Oh really? Didn't know that - will probably get replaced by Sinclair at 6 then.

...