**Official** England in New Zealand

[Retox]

Stupid Stupid thought here but:

Have Bell + Cummings/Papps open and move How to 3

 

[Flem274*]

Stupid Stupid thought here but:

Have Bell + Cummings/Papps open and move How to 3

Not entirely silly. How looks quite good at number three, protects him from the early swing and LBWs he's a bit vulnerable to but we already have plenty of middle order blokes and **** all openers that are ready for the step up.

 

[Flem274*]

Collingwood the bowler; pitched on middle, would've gone on to hit leg about halfway up. Only possible doubt was an inside edge & there didn't appear to be one.

Without wishing to get all conspiracy theory-ish, I can understand why umpires might be a wee bit reticent to give anything just now after what happened with Bucknor. As an ump you'll get less flack for the not-outs than the outs.

Ah yes I know the one you mean now. I'll take your word with it as i don't remember too much about that one. The Vettori call was shocking though.

 

[Retox]

Not entirely silly. How looks quite good at number three, protects him from the early swing and LBWs he's a bit vulnerable to but we already have plenty of middle order blokes and **** all openers that are ready for the step up.

Bell
Papps
How
Fleming
Fulton
Oram
McCullum
Vettori
Mills
Patel/Mason
Martin

Fix's the problem of having to bring in taylor,sinclair or ryder

 

[slugger]

bang series
MS Sinclair 38.00
PG Fulton 25.50

Why drop sinclair when fulton has had a poor odi series and did poorly against bang..fulton on top of playing in the odi series had an extra inn. against bang with 15* which only already saved his poor ave. plus sinclair has hit to half centuries for CD 69 and 89

fulton HS in the eng series is 8

I dont think he deserve a spot at all..

 

[NZTailender]

1. Fulton was batting out of place, and never had much of a chance to get in form.
2. He's a class batsman and should be considered as part of the future of the middle order in tests. I see him as the long-term replacement for Fleming.
3. You can't pick or drop someone on limited overs form.

 

[slugger]

go tell that to sinclair who was droped from a good odi series in RSA who was sent to replace fulton.. and only batted once against bang while fulton at 3 racked up big scores against the minors..

 

[NZTailender]

What? Sinclair was never going to be a long term ODI option on his recall. He's not a ODI player, full stop.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Not entirely silly. How looks quite good at number three, protects him from the early swing and LBWs he's a bit vulnerable to but we already have plenty of middle order blokes and **** all openers that are ready for the step up.

And Cumming isnt LBW prone?

 

[Prince EWS]

2. He's a class batsman and should be considered as part of the future of the middle order in tests. I see him as the long-term replacement for Fleming.

Let him replace Fleming when he retires then!
Seriously though, I agree with this. However, picking an out of form batsman who has had virtually no success at the level you're picking him at yet is asking for trouble in a way. I have no problem with Fulton playing really as I think he'll have a good test career, but not at the expense of Sinclair. If Ryder is to play, he's going to have to replace the guy who is out of form and has a really poor record - that's Fulton. I'd select Fulton to play in the first Test - I'd leave the middle order unchanged from the Bangladesh series - but I'd put him on notice. The best part of that situation, from my POV, would be the fact that when Fleming retires and the public pressure to replace him with a youngster grows, Ryder will still be in the bank so the selectors won't have to opt for Taylor.

3. You can't pick or drop someone on limited overs form.

Indeed. This is especially evident if said player is a proven failure in limitied overs cricket ie. Mathew Sinclair, but his career followed this recurring loop, time and time again:
* Gets recalled to the test side after other batsmen fail
* Plays okay; looks set to retain his place without doing anything special
* Gets selected in the ODI side on the back of that
* Fails in the ODI series
* Gets dropped from both forms
* Gets recalled to the test side after other batsmen fail etc. etc.

Doing it to Fulton now would be similar in a way, I agree, other than the fact that his limited Test career has been poor so far, and he did very poorly in the last series he played, which was against poor opposition. He doesn't really have anything "in the bank" so to speak as far as his Test career goes and he's quite obviously in poor touch. Sinclair's failings in ODIs were often simply due to the fact that he was crap at them, but Fulton showed the makings of quite a good ODI batsman as well before his form slump and combined with his poor series against Bangladesh, it's really not a coincidence, nor is it a case of him playing a form he shouldn't be playing.

I should note here that I'm not making any judgments on his quality as a potential test batsman based on a few ODIs and a series against Bangladesh as that'd be madness - merely his current form. Selecting a batsman with a poor record with lots of prove when he's in poor form isn't particularly fair to anyone. That said, I'd still do it, because it's the still the best option. Just not ahead of Sinclair.

 

[Richard]

I'm sure he made a visit after the 20/20s because I remember him getting stuck into us. Again.

Yeah, it's his only post in the thread tho UIMM.

 

[Richard]

Christ, this highlights package is depressing the hell out of me. Absolutely superb & very clean hitting from McCullum, but why was Anderson bowling length? He needed to be much fuller.

Probably because he doesn't have the skill to do so. If anyone honestly thinks it's just naivity, when probably the entire Sky audience knows full well what needed to be being bowled, they should be shot.

Every time the England bowlers have looked to be hit recently, they've just bowled shorter and shorter and shorter, and even the Sky coms have picked that up now. It worked against India, because the batsmen did not back away enough, but it will only fail abysmally against good players of the pull-stroke.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Yeah, it's his only post in the thread tho UIMM.

Dicko 366
Flem 107
KN 102
SP 1

 

[Richard]

The Vettori and Ryder ones were out though. Predict Richard to go ballistic with his FCAs.

Ryder's already making a bit of a name for himself as a lucky one. Though if KiWi's right that it pitched outside leg there's nothing in this particular innings.

Vettori let-off made virtually no difference tho.

 

[Richard]

Dicko 366
Phlegm 107
KN 102
SP 1

Reckon I can make the big six-zero-zero before the Tests are out.

You peasants should have a decent crack at 300 too one hopes.

 

[Nate]

How fun was McCullum's batting? So many clean hits.

Not much time for celebration in this thread it seems. All posters moving on to the Test Series. I for one, am stoked with the series win for New Zealand! Awesome ODI series, loved every match. Thank you Kiwis.

 

[Richard]

Not much time for celebration in this thread it seems. All posters moving on to the Test Series.

Well given the fact that New Zealand's fans must be going into transports of delight at the prospect of a 3-Test series and most of our supporters barely care about ODIs, what'd'ya expect?

 

[Shoggz]

As an England fan, call me a pessimist, but I think New Zealand will win the Test series also.

This England side has just become the epitome of mediocrity since the upward trend through 2003/2004 and into 2005.

 

[Richard]

Thing is, though, New Zealand are not World-beaters either. They're certainly not as good as Sri Lanka, India or Australia.

I'd honestly not want to put any money on us winning the series. But nor would I want to put anything on New Zealand winning it. It's a fairly even-money case, IMO.

 

[Shoggz]

No, I agree Richard.

However, what I think New Zealand seem to have generated as the ODI series followed the Twenty20s is a more cohesive team spirit and desire to win.

If they can engender that and carry it through to the (admittedly different scale) of the test arena, I think it will give them a good chance of punching above their weight as they often have in the ODIs.

Of course, the re-introduction of Captain Vaughan may have a galvanising effect on the English.

I, for one, certainly hope so!