-
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** England in New Zealand
- Thread starter James
- Start date
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
"In general" isn't really something I like to talk about too often. For me, to be a collective disgraceful performance, there has to be a common theme of batsmen throwing their wickets away. Which there simply wasn't. The first-innings was a semi-decent effort, disappointing as it was to see several batsmen again give it away when set, and the second-innings was a result of a bit of poor batting, a bit of poor Umpiring and several excellent pieces of bowling, especially the Strauss and Ambrose wickets.
Frankly, though, when you have 4 players at eight, nine, ten and eleven who, for all intents and purposes, have negligable in the way of batting skill, there's going to be an amount of "disgraceful" collapses from them. But the top-order were nothing more than pretty poor. I've seen many, many worse batting efforts - some of which resulted in higher totals, too.
Frankly, though, when you have 4 players at eight, nine, ten and eleven who, for all intents and purposes, have negligable in the way of batting skill, there's going to be an amount of "disgraceful" collapses from them. But the top-order were nothing more than pretty poor. I've seen many, many worse batting efforts - some of which resulted in higher totals, too.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Now that really is an exaggeration. A side of international standard? At least give me that. Bangladesh and, recently, Zimbabwe have put-up countless infinitely worse shows. And I can think of a large number at the very least as bad in the not-so-distant past from West Indies and Pakistan. And I assure you, this was not even remotely a patch on South Africa's performance at The Wanderers against Australia in 2001\02. Have you forgotten already some of the magnificent catching we saw this game?
I don't know how regularly you endure performances, but I do know that lots of people have gone very, very OTT after this Test. And I'll tell you why it is too: it's because of their own wrong-headed expectations. Too many people have taken New Zealand too lightly, and now are throwing this "disgraceful" label around because New Zealand had the nerve to actually put in a damn good performance.
Sheeysh, if England spectators are supposed to overreact to triumph, they certainly know how to overreact to disappointment and make it out to be disaster.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Oh... yeah...
Apart from Harmison, who do you have in mind there?
Flem274*
123/5
Says it all really. People looked down the respective team sheets, saw people they haven't heard/seen much of (How, Mills,, Taylor, Patel) and guys they haven't seen in years (Bell, McCullum, Martin) who have improved and thought "we'll own them, we have Pietersen, Hoggard, Vaughan and Harmison" they forget Pietersens current rut, or thought he'd own our new bowling attack, thought Harmison could get back in form by smashing our unknown therefore presumed weak batting line up (bar Fleming and Sinclair) and Hoggard performed poorly whilst Vaughan couldn't kick on. Add to that that Strauss is awful ATM and it was alwayd going to be closer than expected.
I thought England would win, and If this had been a closer game ending in a draw I would have backed them at the basin with the Hoggard, Sidebottom factor (only How and Fleming in this side have the tools to keep out real high quality almost unfair first morning swing bowling) but I'm not sure now. Alot depends on their confidence. If they can lift for the next test they're in with a shot, if they're down in the doldrums then their batting order will struggle against Martin and Mills, heck even Oram gets movement at the basin and Martin IIRC seem to always pick up a good bag of wickets there.
The basin test will be down to Martin, Mills, Oram, Gillespie/O'Brien/Elliot vs Hoggard, Sidebottom, Harmison/Broad.
The top orders will also be key, How, Bell, Fleming vs Cook, Vaughan, Strauss will be interesting. Matt Bell is at home so perhaps his form will improve. Cook I imagine will be the toughest to get rid of. Its no coincidence that our top three fired and Englands relatively didn't and we had the major advantage.
Can't wait TBH, How to play a semi stonewalling hundy
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
I'd almost consider bringing in Elliott for Sinclair in the Wellington test. It's Elliott's home ground so he should know the conditions well and he's also coming off a good century. He says he's a batsman who bowls, so let's see what he can do at #5.
How
Bell
Fleming
Taylor
Elliott
Oram
McCullum
Vettori
Mills
Patel
Martin
How
Bell
Fleming
Taylor
Elliott
Oram
McCullum
Vettori
Mills
Patel
Martin
Roger Whitlock
Banned
Yes, "poor umpiring" played such a huge role.
1 LBW on Peitersen which could have gone either way, was by no means a "poor" decision. A poor decision is if it's clearly sailing over, not actually...you know, hitting.
So an umpire dared go against Kevin Peitersen in what was one 50-50 call out of 10 dismissals. How significant, maybe next time he'll use the bat in his hand and do himself a favor.
Speaking of him and LBW's. I remember him trying to stare down the umpire for giving him to a ball which was virtually hitting middle half way up during the ODI series. I've noticed before that the guy seems to think he has a divine right to be immune to LBW's. He came off looking rather foolish after it was clearly shown to be plumb enough on replay to the naked eye, let alone Hawk-eye.
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
Well it means NZ get the extra seam-bowling option as well as being able to keep Patel in the team.
Sinclair ain't scoring runs anyway so if Elliott is able to do any better with the bat then it's a bonus.
So we'd have Mills, Martin, Oram, Elliott, Vettori and Patel to bowl the overs.
Sinclair ain't scoring runs anyway so if Elliott is able to do any better with the bat then it's a bonus.
So we'd have Mills, Martin, Oram, Elliott, Vettori and Patel to bowl the overs.
Mixmasterreece
U19 Debutant
I think Sinclair should be given another shot.... then, and only then, if he fails let's look at Elliot or Fulton... and perhaps Greg Hay on the tour to England.
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
I assume NZ will have a squad of 15 for their tour to England.
For the tests, i'd say these players would be locked in so far:
Vettori, Mills, Martin, McCullum, Oram, Patel, How, Bell, Taylor
That leaves six places up for grabs.
The competing players will be (most likely): Fulton, Elliott, Sinclair, Hopkins, Hay, O'Brien, Gillespie, Franklin, Cumming, Papps, Nicol, James Marshall, Southee..anyone i'm missing?
For the tests, i'd say these players would be locked in so far:
Vettori, Mills, Martin, McCullum, Oram, Patel, How, Bell, Taylor
That leaves six places up for grabs.
The competing players will be (most likely): Fulton, Elliott, Sinclair, Hopkins, Hay, O'Brien, Gillespie, Franklin, Cumming, Papps, Nicol, James Marshall, Southee..anyone i'm missing?
Mixmasterreece
U19 Debutant
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
Hopkins has been in pretty good form. I reckon he'll definately be in there as back-up keeper to McCullum so he can take a break during some of the warm-up games.
The six I think they'd take: (not my personal preference)
Fulton, Hopkins, Gillespie, Elliott, Southee and Sinclair
The six I think they'd take: (not my personal preference)
Fulton, Hopkins, Gillespie, Elliott, Southee and Sinclair
Mixmasterreece
U19 Debutant
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
Hay will be held back for an 'A' tour I reckon. Nicol's been on a couple, but I'd say he needs further convincing. The likes of Greg Todd and Neil Broom probably need further 'A' tours as well. Im not sure what the rules state, but I wouldn't be surprised if Johann Myburgh got selected too for NZ 'A'.
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
He's running out of time to be fit if you ask me. Gillespie and O'Brien are at least bowling overs right now where as Franklin could turn up completely undercooked like Hoggard and Harmison have for this series.
Also, I don't know why you've got Ryder in that team when he'll definately be out.
Also, I don't know why you've got Ryder in that team when he'll definately be out.
Mixmasterreece
U19 Debutant
Franklin? Only on the fact that I dont think he will be ready in time.
So looking at that squad you wouldn't take Southee over for a run against a few county teams?
And Ryder will struggle to even make it back from injury for the ODIs.....