**Official** England in New Zealand

[James]

How can you expect Fulton to score runs at number 6?

Completely agree, he's clearly a No 3 for me and should bat there IMO, but then I suppose that pushes How down to No 4 which is a bit of a worry.

Our batting stocks are really limited aren't they

 

[NZTailender]

Our batting stocks are really limited aren't they

Sort of. The selectors seem to be picking the same batsmen over and over though, recalling players for a thousandth time. Ryder and Taylor were correct decisions and a step forward for the NZ side.

However, the likes of James Marshall should be ignored for players like Rob Nicol or Neil Broom.

It also doesn't help that our batting line up is completely ****ed up.

The most effective order would be McCullum, How, Taylor, Fulton, Styris, Ryder, Oram

 

[wpdavid]

Not much from the England fans about the win - perhaps we find it easier to comment on the debacles. tbf if some of the kamikazi running had reaped its just deserts, then we could easily be looking at another loss, but as it is this might just kick-start our tour

I thought some of the earlier comments about Bell were a tad unfair - or, at any rate, damning him with faint praise. afaics most onedayers aren't won by scoring over 350, so having one guy batting like he did today will do absolutely fine. Beyond that, Collingwood was outstanding, KP & Shah did well enough. After the horror shows in the first 2 games, I'm not complaining, even if the openers still aren't convincing.

 

[Somerset]

Firstly credit to England, by far the better team on the night. New Zealand simply didn't score enough runs on a pitch far better than 230 (FYI the same pitch as the Chappell-Hadlee and Bangladesh ODIs during 2007 at Eden Park). England were smarter and bowled well, and Bell, Pietersen and Collingwood summed up the situation to win fairly comfortably.

However:
Why did Jesse Ryder not field for the entire New Zealand innings?
Whats Asad Rauf's new party trick when giving lbws?
What was up with Peter Fulton today?
Was it just a coincidence New Zealand bowled a number of high full tosses/beamers after England did the same to them?

Also I admit I may have been a bit harsh in suggesting that Bell should be dropped, clearly he proved me wrong. My prediction that both Wright and Mascarenhas would play went through even though neither was particularly prominent in England's victory.

As far as New Zealand is concerned, I would only make one change and that would involve Paul Hitchcock who, quite frankly, was terrible tonight. Hes now played two matches after his recall to the side and done very poorly in both. So Patel for Hitchcock at Napier.

 

[Prince EWS]

Ryder did something to his ankle.

 

[Somerset]

Completely agree, he's clearly a No 3 for me and should bat there IMO, but then I suppose that pushes How down to No 4 which is a bit of a worry.

Our batting stocks are really limited aren't they

Problem with pushing Fulton up the order is who to drop back to number 6? Personally I'd have Taylor at three followed by Fulton and Styris. The number six is still a problem there, though it would be an ideal position for Lou Vincent who could play aggressively but without the pressure of opening the innings - obviously not going to happen though.

Agree regarding the back up for the batting, although MS Sinclair is still available, right?

Was just thinking tonight by the way, about if an ex-NZ XI from the past decade played against the current lot in an ODI what the result would be like. A team say of Fleming, Richardson, Astle, McMillan, Cairns, Harris, Parore, Nash, Adams(?), Bond, Drum - most of the players would be fit enough for the match and the skill level would hardly be lacking.

 

[Somerset]

Ryder did something to his ankle.

Cheers for that, there was no announcement made at the ground.

 

[tooextracool]

I know for a while you & TEC have always mentioned Afzaal's name when talking about England's ODI side. Have seen him bat a few times for his county for Sky over the years & honestly never noticed much. So my question simply is why do you reckon he would or could have have made a really good ODI bat for England?

Afzaal's time has probably come and gone. I actually like the look of the current batting card. While neither cook nor mustard are currently ODI class, i find them to be a well complimented pair and they both have age on their side so it would be best to stick with them. At least Mustard provides some well needed impetus at the start of the order.

And i can finally see some substance and experience in a middle order consisting of Bell, Pietersen, Collingwood and Shah. Id like Mascarenhas ahead of Bopara, who IMO is being wasted at 7 anyways. Swann should play depending on the conditions, while Broad and Sidebottom make a decent new ball pair. Anderson, unfortunately given how many years has been invested in him, has simply not lived up to his potential and his place in the side should surely be hanging on by a thread.

 

[Somerset]

I thought some of the earlier comments about Bell were a tad unfair - or, at any rate, damning him with faint praise. afaics most onedayers aren't won by scoring over 350, so having one guy batting like he did today will do absolutely fine. Beyond that, Collingwood was outstanding, KP & Shah did well enough. After the horror shows in the first 2 games, I'm not complaining, even if the openers still aren't convincing.

Mustard was runout (poor England and their running between the wickets) after playing some decent shots and Cook made 50 in the last match so personally I think your opening situation isn't that bad.

As I said above, I was harsh on Bell and hes proven me wrong, good on him for playing an excellent knock tonight. KP's innings was just as well compiled though - with the weather likely to play a factor, even though it was only a minor one in the end, he was constantly keeping an eye on the D/L par score to stay ahead of that. Not a typical KP innings but one that I'm sure frustrated New Zealand and helped his side to victory tonight.

 

[thomasson]

Well played England. Paul Collingwood produced a captain's performance with some fantastic shots in the end. Stuart Broad continues to impress, he's got a fantastic future ahead of him. But on the other hand, it is clear that Phil Mustard is not good enough at this level. His first class average is just 27 and after 8 ODI-s he only managed to score 148 runs(ave:18). He's got some fantastic shots, but like Prior he never looks like getting a big score. Anyway looking forward to the next match, and my money is on a 3-2 series victory to England!

 

[FBU]

Afzaal's time has probably come and gone. I actually like the look of the current batting card. While neither cook nor mustard are currently ODI class, i find them to be a well complimented pair and they both have age on their side so it would be best to stick with them. At least Mustard provides some well needed impetus at the start of the order.

And i can finally see some substance and experience in a middle order consisting of Bell, Pietersen, Collingwood and Shah. Id like Mascarenhas ahead of Bopara, who IMO is being wasted at 7 anyways. Swann should play depending on the conditions, while Broad and Sidebottom make a decent new ball pair. Anderson, unfortunately given how many years has been invested in him, has simply not lived up to his potential and his place in the side should surely be hanging on by a thread.

Limited overs -

Sidebottom (age 30) 148 matches 155 wickets at 29.78 econ 4.25 42.00
Anderson (age 25) 129 matches 184 wickets at 26.79 econ 4.71 s/r 34.00

Anderson will be around for another 10 years.

 

[Richard]

Problem with pushing Fulton up the order is who to drop back to number 6? Personally I'd have Taylor at three followed by Fulton and Styris. The number six is still a problem there, though it would be an ideal position for Lou Vincent who could play aggressively but without the pressure of opening the innings - obviously not going to happen though.

Agree regarding the back up for the batting, although MS Sinclair is still available, right?

Was just thinking tonight by the way, about if an ex-NZ XI from the past decade played against the current lot in an ODI what the result would be like. A team say of Fleming, Richardson, Astle, McMillan, Cairns, Harris, Parore, Nash, Adams(?), Bond, Drum - most of the players would be fit enough for the match and the skill level would hardly be lacking.

Quoting this as the most recent post on the long topic, CBA multi-quoting all 20-odd posts on the subject...

New Zealand's best ODI batting card of my memory was: Horne, Astle, McMillan, Fleming, Twose, Cairns, Parore, Harris. That lined-up last in the 1999 WC, but could conceivably still have been together just 2 or 3 years ago. Right now, I'd probably go for something like...

Ryder, How, Styris, Fulton, Taylor, Oram, McCullum, Vettori. Which aside from the openers, neither of whom I rate much, looks pretty good. Fulton is wasted at six, any fool can see that, and the only way to get him moved up is to put McCullum back at seven for mine.

Why on Earth anyone is considering dropping Fulton, never mind for James Marshall, is totally beyond me. Guess the Kiwis will point to Bracewell again?

 

[Richard]

I rest my case with regards to Hitchcock. They really should have let his international career rest in peace. Now he's just getting ripped to pieces.

Well I certainly hope we never see Hitchcock again, but honestly - I really don't think O'Diren would have done much better.

When you've got 4 bowlers you'd ideally like to pick (Bond, Mason, Franklin, Tuffey) unavailable, you're always likely to struggle. We're reduced to the likes of Plunkett and Bresnan, NZ are reduced to O'Brien and Hitchcock. South Africa are reduced to the likes of Kruger and van der Wath. The list goes on.

 

[Richard]

I know for a while you & TEC have always mentioned Afzaal's name when talking about England's ODI side. Have seen him bat a few times for his county for Sky over the years & honestly never noticed much. So my question simply is why do you reckon he would or could have have made a really good ODI bat for England?

I've seen him play several excellent innings, of a variety of types. What's more, I don't mind even if I haven't, because I know that good innings can be played even if I don't happen to be watching, and by looking at scorecards find-out such. Unlike tec I don't think his time has gone, he could still do a damn sight better job than plenty of others currently, especially Shah.

Read in a way yea, but overall Pothas would be the answer in both forms of the game hands down. Don't see England are running from selecting him.

Pothas' time, however, definately has gone. There's no way he'll be around in WC2011. He might have been a better pick than Nixon in 2007, or Prior in the Tests last summer, but that's it.

Read is the best one-day wicketkeeper-batsman who is likely to be around in 2011 at the current time. Ambrose may yet overtake him.

 

[Richard]

When did Shane Watson change his name to Wright and play for England?

The resemblence between them truly is incredible. Think I posted on it somewhere once, too.

 

[Richard]

Wow, what an over. First off everyone's ready except Rauf, and Oram's decision to smoke him for six over long-on is written off as a dead ball.

Then Taylor falls to a distinctly questionable leg-before shout with a major stride involved.

Bumble's calling it a senior moment on the part of Rauf. I think that's generous.

Since when did a big stride mean a n\o should be given when a ball is missing off, missing leg and hitting middle? The Taylor lbw was plumb, however odd the method of giving it, and however odd the dead-ball earlier was, and however much he should have given Oram out to Sidebottom.

Nonetheless, it was Collingwood at fault. The players have to wait for the Umpires. Collingwood (or Oram) should have spotted Rauf wasn't in position.

 

[superkingdave]

given that Read played in the rebel cricket league in India isn't he pretty much barred from international selection from now on? Or will England have a different outlook to most other countries?

Another question, a bit OT, but are there any England players in line for the IPL or, given the fact it's probably gonna be played during the English domestic season all the time preclude any of our players being involved until they retire? Only players i can see interesting any of the teams are KP and Flintoff tbh anyway

 

[nightprowler10]

Welcome back Ed

Aye, now to put his pic up as my avatar...

 

[Richard]

given that Read played in the rebel cricket league in India isn't he pretty much barred from international selection from now on? Or will England have a different outlook to most other countries?

Another question, a bit OT, but are there any England players in line for the IPL or, given the fact it's probably gonna be played during the English domestic season all the time preclude any of our players being involved until they retire? Only players i can see interesting any of the teams are KP and Flintoff tbh anyway

How many English players have played the ICL? I actually didn't even have a clue Read had done so, as I presume, yes, this means he has thus sacrificed his international career (if there were any prospect of it resuming, which is more than a little doubtful anyway).

Doesn't the IPL calender only intrude, what, 1-and-a-half months into the season? If so, I'd imagine most players would happily sacrifice 1\3 of the season, complete with the small risk of having been dropped in the meantime, to play IPL.

 

[stumpski]

Read, Maddy, Nixon and Solanki signed for the ICL IIRC. Don't really know how they got on as there didn't seem to be much coverage of the matches. No English player has signed for the IPL - yet. I can see the likes of Gough and Ramprakash, maybe even Flintoff, being tempted before long though.