**Official** England in New Zealand

[silentstriker]

Great job for England.

 

[Richard]

England's best Test victory since the Wankhede Stadium 2005\06, must be, surely.

 

[Richard]

NZ just hit and giggle now IMO.

What, you reckon the pitch at McLean Park will be that good?!

 

[Scaly piscine]

Knew the mandatory Panesar average booster was coming.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Well done England.
If only NZ had got a decent score in the first innings, it could have been a real thriller. Comfortable win really. Shame McCullum couldnt salvage a century.

Down to Napier then.

 

[Goughy]

Picking your fielders isn't that unusual, though, is it?

Maybe not at village cricket where you can take on the 65 yr old or even in Tests where a guy like Gower has had shoulder surgery.

But for him to be so much worse than the rest is embarrassing.

Anyway, congrats to England. Decent performance and a good result. Good to bounce back.

 

[Bahnz]

Ah well. It was evident from early on that that Collingwood-Ambrose partnership in the first innings was going to be the difference between the two sides, and so it proved. Bad luck for McCullum, still searching for that hundred against a true test quality attack.

 

[Richard]

Maybe not at village cricket where you can take on the 65 yr old or even in Tests where a guy like Gower has had shoulder surgery.

But for him to be so much worse than the rest is embarrassing.

Oh, I don't disagree at all. MSP has been even worse than usual this game and it's plain unsatisfactory. So little as can be done, though - no-one's ever doubted his work-ethic.

TBH, though, I've seen plenty of sides take-on weak arms before, in top-level cricket and even occasionally international. Maybe not actually shout "it's <name>" to their partner, but it's obvious that, say, Rhodes wouldn't be taken on where Elworthy would.

 

[Richard]

Knew the mandatory Panesar average booster was coming.

Doesn't really matter as long as you have the sense to look at things other than averages. 1-55 is a poor game same as 0-55.

Don't imagine you were complaining much on the many occasions Harmison got the old average-booster wicket or 2, of course.

 

[grecian]

Well done England. Fielding really a problem all round tbh, catching was poor, and only the most churlish would begrudge Monty a wicket after the KP drop and the ambrose mis-stumping.

All needs to be sorted out really, if Napier is like the ODI pitch we won't be getting that many chances. We may be made to pay for such profligacy.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Surprisingly comfortable win in the end. Vettori getting that blob meant it was all uphill (well, more so) for NZ.

Hats off to Sid, another five-for & finally getting the luck his bowling has deserved. Does make one wonder why he was deemed surplus to requirements for quite so long, but hopefully he's got a few good years left in him.

Ambrose MOM, fair enough for the ton I suppose. Not quite so offensive an accent as one might've imagined either, slight 'strine twang still, but it's getting there.

 

[Goughy]

profligacy

ooooooooh

 

[Richard]

Hats of to Sid, another five-for & finally getting the luck his bowling has deserved. Does make one wonder why he was deemed surplus to requirements for quite so long

Don't remember you demanding his selection in the meantime TBH. Open to you showing me some posts where you did mind.

TBF, nor was I, and after 2005 - why would I have been?

Ambrose gets a deserved MOTM, BTW.

 

[grecian]

Surprisingly comfortable win in the end. Vettori getting that blob meant it was all uphill (well, more so) for NZ.

Hats off to Sid, another five-for & finally getting the luck his bowling has deserved. Does make one wonder why he was deemed surplus to requirements for quite so long, but hopefully he's got a few good years left in him.

Ambrose MOM, fair enough for the ton I suppose. Not quite so offensive an accent as one might've imagined either, slight 'strine twang still, but it's getting there.

Would of awarded it to Colly myself, scored more runs and took 3 wickets.

 

[Richard]

All needs to be sorted out really, if Napier is like the ODI pitch we won't be getting that many chances. We may be made to pay for such profligacy.

If it's the same as the ODI pitch (Napier uses drop-ins UIMM tho, so who knows) then it's highly unlikely there'll be a result even if every chance given is held.

This was a vital win.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Don't remember you demanding his selection in the meantime TBH. Open to you showing me some posts where you did mind.

*Coughs loudly.*

 

[Richard]

Hmm, fair noof I suppose, but only a couple of months before he was actually picked ITBT.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Paul Franks

 

[BoyBrumby]

Hmm, fair noof I suppose, but only a couple of months before he was actually picked ITBT.

Maybe, but I don't remember too many other posters advocating the curly-haired one's recall even as recently as then tho, so I'm giving myself a pat on the back.

 

[Richard]

Oh, certainly (I wasn't, FWIW - even as the Plunketts and Mahmoods were inexplicably finding their ways to the Test team), you did better than many, but as I say - I don't think there was any case for him playing again until 2006 at the very earliest. So "where's he been all these years" isn't, IMO, an entirely fair suggestion to make. And I don't really like his chances in Australia in 2006\07 too much either TBH. Reckon he came back at the best time he could have.