**Official** England in New Zealand

[Natman20]

Highlights of the 3rd ODI.

Sorry about the poor clip. I had technical difficulties and it took much longer than it normally would and without any chance to really make much of the footage.

 

[Prince EWS]

No (and I know what Richard's reply to this will be). He bowled well against Bangladesh in a test match at the Basin Reserve. Better than 'Dire' at international level, but not by much.

Nah, he's dire at international.level. Horrible action, little accuracy and no consistent movement that I've seen either. He can take as many wickets as he likes for Wellington but he's dire as far as international cricket goes.

 

[Flem274*]

No (and I know what Richard's reply to this will be). He bowled well against Bangladesh in a test match at the Basin Reserve. Better than 'Dire' at international level, but not by much.

He and Mason have disappointed me actualy, they have pretty good FC records and don't prey on greentops unlike certain bowlers...would have thought O'Brien would have done better at international level.

 

[Flem274*]

I would not pick Tuffey in a month of Sundays. Not these days anyway. He's not been the same player since his last injury. I would personally have Bond, Franklin and two out of Mason, Mills, Martin and Southee; depending on the situation. Ideally, Mason wouldn't ever be required and Martin has improved out of sight over the last 12 months, and appears to be a bit more injury resistant than your average Kiwi bowler. And I have NO doubts that O'BRIEN would have done better than Hitchcock.

Maybe until you are a better player than O'Brien you might want to consider stopping calling an excellent First Class bowler 'O'Diren'. Not only does it include the cliquey-ass 'Dire' but puts down an excellent servant to Wellington cricket; totally uncalled for.

Mason>Martin in ODIs. I can't believe the way Martin has been overhyped. Sure in tests he's improved but what has he done exactly to prove he's "our best one day seam bowler" as most of the media and public describe him? Mills kicks his skinny hide to Mars by a long way for a start. I'd pick Mason every time.

Not attacking you Heathster, just letting off some steam after the suggestion you'd prefer Martin over Mason.

Iain O'Brien has served Wellington cricket very well and IIRC his FC record is excellent, not sure why he has been so bad.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

Highlights of the 3rd ODI.

Sorry about the poor clip. I had technical difficulties and it took much longer than it normally would and without any chance to really make much of the footage.

Thanks heaps it was great anyway

 

[Richard]

He bowled well against Bangladesh in a test match at the Basin Reserve. Better than 'Dire' at international level, but not by much.

Bangladesh are not Test-class. Bowling well against them means no more than bowling well against Central Districts - who knows, maybe even less.

 

[Richard]

4. Ross Taylor Number three

TBH, I much prefer the idea of Taylor at five. That's where Roger Twose batted, and Taylor (like Twose) is that rare thing, a Kiwi batsman who appears top-class at the ODI game, or at least has the potential to be.

I'd have Fulton ahead of him in the order without hesitation - I'd also have had Fleming ahead of him until recently.

Taylor five, Oram six, McCullum seven has a very powerful look to it indeed.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Taylor five, Oram six, McCullum seven has a very powerful look to it indeed.

I think McCullum will stay at opener for a while.

 

[Richard]

Oh, yeah, me too. But TBH, I don't really want him to succeed as an opener, as I think he's far more use down the order. There's precious few others around who can bat effectively in that number-seven slot.

Right now, too, with Ryder and How, there are two viable opening options. Though I don't know if there's anyone else if, as I suspect, those two's booms are short-lived.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

No (and I know what Richard's reply to this will be). He bowled well against Bangladesh in a test match at the Basin Reserve. Better than 'Dire' at international level, but not by much.

Bangladesh are not Test-class. Bowling well against them means no more than bowling well against Central Districts - who knows, maybe even less.

Ha! I knew it!

Nah, he's dire at international.level. Horrible action, little accuracy and no consistent movement that I've seen either. He can take as many wickets as he likes for Wellington but he's dire as far as international cricket goes.

Anyway, my point about the match at the Basin Reserve versus Bangladesh wasn't just that he was taking wickets (at what actually is - whether you like it or not - international level) but the way he bowled. Including bloody good accuracy and a decent amount of away movement. Ashwell and Paul Ricard seem to have written him off so much that they've blinkered themselves to the fact that an average international cricketer can still have some bloody good days. I will dispute till the cows come home that he's 'dire' though just using that word in my post gives me a sick feeling to my stomach.

Mason>Martin in ODIs. I can't believe the way Martin has been overhyped. Sure in tests he's improved but what has he done exactly to prove he's "our best one day seam bowler" as most of the media and public describe him? Mills kicks his skinny hide to Mars by a long way for a start. I'd pick Mason every time.

Not attacking you Heathster, just letting off some steam after the suggestion you'd prefer Martin over Mason.

I'd prefer Mason if he could keep bowling like he did in Hamilton. Sadly, I don't think he's as consistant as Martin (and he's got injury problems that could see him break down mid-game)

 

[Natman20]

There is so much criticism of MArtin this tour. He bowled quite well and was influential in the first ODIs and yet when he gets slogged a little bit he gets torn down. In the last ODI he was smacked but he came back with a second spell that was much better. Agreed he is not a great bowler but who else can fill his spot? There is no-one of international class around and the only other one with experience is an injured Mason (very limited at ODI level). Southee may be good enough but that is unproven because of only bowling in 2 T20s. Mills is hardly having a good series which is dissapointing and he seems like cannon fodder for the batsmen. On the other hand Oram has looked very good with the ball (and bat) and seems to be doing his job well. Patel would be my best pick to replace hitchcock.

 

[grecian]

Yes we ****ing well know you don't think bangas are int level, lets move on rolleyes

Meh, can't be arsed to get it to work. The general gist is Stuart Broad is quite good.

Interesting article, but I think they're underplaying Stuarts ability with the bat. I'm not one for hyperbole but I really feel this kid is the real deal in every way.

 

[BoyBrumby]

broad

Interesting article, but I think they're underplaying Stuarts ability with the bat. I'm not one for hyperbole but I really feel this kid is the real deal in every way.

Link's not working for me...

Incidentally, after all the discussion in the thread I hope O'Brien does get picked at some point during our tour as I'm now quite keen to see him in action. I've probably actually seen him play before, but, rather like the proliferation of quite-good-but-not-great Spanish & Argentinian tennis players who all seem to play in exactly the same way & whose own mothers would struggle to pick out in identity parades, I'd never noted anything about him to set him apart from other journeymen NZ seamers. Gillespie/Mason/O'Brien seemed largely interchangable to this casual observer.

Can't believe he's anything like as awful as Hitchcock tho; that poor bloke really appears really out of his depth at this level. Looks very ordinary.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Link's not working for me...

Get rid of the http:// off the end of the URL.

 

[grecian]

Get rid of the http:// off the end of the URL.

hey i'm pissed, don't judge me

 

[Flem274*]

TBH, I much prefer the idea of Taylor at five. That's where Roger Twose batted, and Taylor (like Twose) is that rare thing, a Kiwi batsman who appears top-class at the ODI game, or at least has the potential to be.

I'd have Fulton ahead of him in the order without hesitation - I'd also have had Fleming ahead of him until recently.

Taylor five, Oram six, McCullum seven has a very powerful look to it indeed.

Nah look, Taylor is a number three or number four. At five he seems to get **** all time to get in because apart from one game our top order has been quite good at batting so he has to hit from ball one and he always chooses midwicket. Like Jacob Oram he likes a bit of time to get in first.

EDIT: And Central Districts would flay Bangladesh if they ever played them. I'd love to see them bowl to Sinclair and Hay.

 

[Flem274*]

Oh, yeah, me too. But TBH, I don't really want him to succeed as an opener, as I think he's far more use down the order. There's precious few others around who can bat effectively in that number-seven slot.

Right now, too, with Ryder and How, there are two viable opening options. Though I don't know if there's anyone else if, as I suspect, those two's booms are short-lived.

There is a big hole down the order and I reckon Lou Vincent would have been worth a shot there if he was in a fit state to play.

WRT Ryder I reckon he'll get found out as an opener and play tests only until Styris retires then Ryder will slot in at 5.

As for How he is improving alot lately, as I said I think Martin Guptill and BJ Watling will put huge pressure on his spot in a couple of years when they're ready for the big step up.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

As for How he is improving alot lately, as I said I think Martin Guptill and BJ Watling will put huge pressure on his spot in a couple of years when they're ready for the big step up.

I've seen nothing in BJ Watling to suggest he'll ever be an international success. Especially in ODIs. There's plenty of talent ahead of him - not saying he can't improve though, just he's got a long way to go to challenge for international honours.

 

[Somerset]

Nah look, Taylor is a number three or number four. At five he seems to get **** all time to get in because apart from one game our top order has been quite good at batting so he has to hit from ball one and he always chooses midwicket. Like Jacob Oram he likes a bit of time to get in first.

EDIT: And Central Districts would flay Bangladesh if they ever played them. I'd love to see them bowl to Sinclair and Hay.

I agree - I see Taylor playing a more productive role up the order. Astle, other opener, Fleming, Twose, McMillan was always my ideal order and sticking Roger at five never made a lot of sense.

Also as I think Ian Smith pointed out, all of his centuries have come batting at number three which either:
a) means that first drop is clearly his best position or
b) it has no correlation remembering that Matthew Sinclair scored both his ODI centuries opening the batting

 

[Somerset]

I've seen nothing in BJ Watling to suggest he'll ever be an international success. Especially in ODIs. There's plenty of talent ahead of him - not saying he can't improve though, just he's got a long way to go to challenge for international honours.

Not sure why Watling has got such a profile given his rather average record. Guptill would be a better candidate but even he needs more experience at first class and A-team level.