Flem274*
123/5
Yup. Only gave one chance for dismissal IIRC which I'm sure certain analysts will parrot around.
-
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*** Bangladesh in New Zealand
- Thread starter NZTailender
- Start date
sportychic33
State 12th Man
Agree with that. Maybe O'Brien is one of those Special types a la Hamish Marshall.
Though it is great to see the Selectors have some sense in not selecting Adams although I think I would rather see Adams in the test team than O'Brien to hopefully stop Adams bleating.
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
O'Brien to be 12th man, surely. Gillespies injured so I guess thats why he's out (to drop him after taking a 5fer on debut would be insane even for Bracewell).
Good to see both Fulton and Sinclair in the fold. Bell too - deserves it after the domestic form he's had. Mills into the bowling = gun. I'm so glad I'll be going to day 1 of this test.
Good to see both Fulton and Sinclair in the fold. Bell too - deserves it after the domestic form he's had. Mills into the bowling = gun. I'm so glad I'll be going to day 1 of this test.
sportychic33
State 12th Man
Oops forgot about that.
What do you think about Taylor being omitted?
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
He's not in the top 6 FC batsman in the country so he shouldn't play just yet. When Fleming retires though, it'll be a good time to bring him back in.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Gun decision. He's not a test batsman's backside - not at this stage of his career, anyway.
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
****ing good time to go and play golf wasn't it Zac? Worst person.
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I just can't stand the guy. Was probably an uncalled for comment.
sportychic33
State 12th Man
However, wouldn't it be beneficial to give him a run against Bangladesh then work him up to playing against England? Or is it more beneficial to let him go back to CD and get some great form against domestic players in the one-day game for the English ODI tour?
I guess the later must be the NZ selectors decision. But however he won't get better in Test matches if he doesn't play any.
Smudge
Hall of Fame Member
That's an understatement. Pissed I missed the innings too - and my punting's going like rubbish as well...
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
In comparison to other bowlers, which is a fair comment. I've heard numerous commentators and reporters refer to him as a 'strike bowler' when it's clearly not the case. Fantastic ODI bowler, no doubt, but there is no way in hell he can be considered a 'strike bowler', particularly in Test cricket.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
It'd be better to pick your best team in every test you play. He will get better in test matches by developing his game at first class level.
Furthermore, I don't really think you should bend time and space to make sure Taylor becomes a good test batsman. He's not good enough now, and he may never be good enough. It's not his god-given right to become one - he has to work on his game and get better rather than being babied by selectors in their hope that he'll improve.
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Something that needs to be taken into consideration, for sure. Just have a look at how inexperieced they are, yet still occasionally able to upset cricketing giants. Things are only going to get better when these youngsters become more mentally experienced.
sideshowtim
Banned
It's a shame...Bangladesh seem to take one step forward and then two steps back...I was really expecting them to do better against the Kiwis here.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
He looked absolutely dreadful in South Africa. If the ball bounces above his waiste, he seems all at sea. Styris used to be one of my favourite players so it pains me to say this, but he is passed it now as a test batsman IMO. He's still good on front foot so he can continue his ODI career for perhaps a while yet, but unless Oram's starts taking a stack of wickets, I can't see a place for Styris in the test team.
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
He had a poor series. So did Papps, Cumming (with the exception of one knock), Taylor, Oram, McCullum and Vincent. Styris had the second highest score in the 2nd innings of the 2nd Test, a sign he may have worked himself into form. His subsequent ODI knocks against South Africa, Australia and now Bangladesh mean he should be in the Test side.
EDIT: I'm not against the inclusion of Fulton or Sinclair, because both are quality batsman, but I think it's harsh to drop Styris on the back of three poor innings in South Africa when he's still putting international runs on the board. Different formats, but still enough to show he's in good form.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
ODI knocks != test knocks. Of those listed, Papps got dropped, Taylor got dropped, Oram is picked partly for his bowling, McCullum is picked partly for his wicket keeping and Vincent got dropped. Cumming scored *some* runs as he's also an opener of which there are less to choose from.
It wasn't so much the fact that Styris didn't score any runs, but how he got out. It was disgraceful and much deserved of a dropping. I'd still have him around the test setup, but I definitely think Fleming, Sinclair and Fulton are better batsmen.
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I'm not saying that ODI knocks mean the same as Test knocks. What I'm saying is that Styris worked himself into a little bit of form with his 29, then was able to convert that to ODI success and is clearly an in-form batsman as shown by his knocks (ODIs, yes, but still runs under the belt).
I think all three of the batsmen you listed have the potential to be better too, no doubt in my mind. I just don't approve of dropping one of New Zealand's premier performers on the back of a poor series. As Phlegm said earlier, it strikes me as the 'put pressure on senior players tactic', rather than showing some faith and allowing them to get Test runs under their belt.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I don't think his poor run in South Africa had anything to do with form, though. It was a degeneration of his technique. He could be in superb form and I'd still rate Fleming, Sinclair and Fulton as batter batsmen than he. New Zealand weren't really in a position to back incumbancy after that tour of South Africa - it was absolutely abysmal and a team picked from fresh was required. I don't really view him as dropped.. more unselected. It wasn't about whether to drop Styris or not, but who the best #3-5 batsmen are, and Styris isn't one of them, IMO.