**Official** England in New Zealand

[Zinzan]

Yes, but the threat of the bowlers is totally wiped away by our poor batting.

The last two tests have showed: whatever England make, they will bowl us out for 50-100 less.

First innings batting performances are a BIG worry for us.

Exactly, not to mention our 2nd innings collapses, which NZ has been famous for in the last 4-5 years now

 

[Richard]

Well this is interesting, Elliott brought back for Patel, and seemingly getting a little bit of reverse-swing back in at Bell.

EDIT: and then swings two in a row nicely in, straight onto Bell's pads, both of which go for boundaries. Bell onto 49*.

 

[James]

What's interesting too is that Vettori has been the worst of the spin bowlers during the tour.

Patel has 7 wickets, Panasar 5, and Vettori 4.

Sidebottom is clearly the main difference between the two sides in this series. What NZ wouldn't give for a bowler of his quality.

 

[Zinzan]

TBH, I reckon another 80 or 90 and in my head I think we're in an almost impregnable position. But anything less than 400 and I'll feel far from safe-and-assured in my heart.

.

I wouldn't worry, I honestly couldn't see NZ getting anymore than 270 batting last, especially with the way Sidebottom has owned them recently.

 

[Richard]

Bell on to 53* with an edged four just between McCullum and Fleming.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

WD Ian Bell.

Yes it's interesting the spin bowler comparision, especially seeing I thought Patel bowled really well in Hamilton for not too much reward.

Patel > Vettori?

 

[JJJ]

What's interesting too is that Vettori has been the worst of the spin bowlers during the tour.

Patel has 7 wickets, Panasar 5, and Vettori 4.

Sidebottom is clearly the main difference between the two sides in this series. What NZ wouldn't give for a bowler of his quality.

I'd be careful with your words James

Worst maybe in terms of wicket taking, but personally I feel he's bowled much better than Panesar in the series. Panesar bowled well in the second innings at Hamilton, but other than that he's been pretty average.

Patel on the other hand has been superb in the two matches he has played. Though England are playing him very well in this innings.

 

[Richard]

Still reckon if you put these 3 bowlers on a pitch that really turned properly Vettori would come-out with the best figures almost every time TBH.

 

[Zinzan]

What's interesting too is that Vettori has been the worst of the spin bowlers during the tour.

Patel has 7 wickets, Panasar 5, and Vettori 4.

Sidebottom is clearly the main difference between the two sides in this series. What NZ wouldn't give for a bowler of his quality.

Thats no suprise about Vettori. Whilst he is an outstanding ODI bowler, he rarely looks that dangerous in test cricket and hasn't for the last 7-8 years for mine. To me Patel and Panasar both look more likely to get wickets.

On Sidebottom, I agree he has been the star of the series, But I wouldn't neccesarily say he's been the difference. I still believe England are the stronger test side and would have won this series, even without Sidebottom.

 

[Shaggy Alfresco]

Grant Elliot has looked dire. Would Ryder be playing if he wasn't injured?

 

[James]

I'd be careful with your words James

Worst maybe in terms of wicket taking, but personally I feel he's bowled much better than Panesar in the series. Panesar bowled well in the second innings at Hamilton, but other than that he's been pretty average.

Patel on the other hand has been superb in the two matches he has played. Though England are playing him very well in this innings.

I've always said right from a few years ago that Patel is a better spin bowler than Vettori and I still stand by that.

Vettori's batting is what has saved him over the years from not being dropped IMO in that we've always wanted a good lower order batting wise.

 

[Richard]

On Sidebottom, I agree he has been the star of the series, But I wouldn't neccesarily say he's been the difference. I still believe England are the stronger test side and would have won this series, even without Sidebottom.

Hmm, I'd not be tremendously confident TBH. Our awful batting in the first-innings of this Test was only bailed-out by Sidebottom. We'd probably still have won at Basin Reserve if he'd missed that game, but I honestly think NZ could've forged well ahead and still be batting now had Harmison played instead of Sidebottom this game.

 

[JBH001]

What's interesting too is that Vettori has been the worst of the spin bowlers during the tour.

Patel has 7 wickets, Panasar 5, and Vettori 4.

Vettori has not been a good test spin bowler for a few years now.

At one time he was as good as he was cracked up to be, but thats a long way gone now.

(although tbf, injuries have not helped him, but that can also be said to be neither here no there)

 

[Richard]

Grant Elliot has looked dire.

He's obviously not a front-line bowler. Hope no-one was expecting him to be TBH.

Would Ryder be playing if he wasn't injured?

You'd imagine so.

 

[Zinzan]

Still reckon if you put these 3 bowlers on a pitch that really turned properly Vettori would come-out with the best figures almost every time TBH.

Not sure I agree with this. In fact if anything Vettori is the one spinner who doesn't seem to be any more or less effective whether the pitch is spinning or not. This is beacuse he beats batsmen in the air as opposed to off the pitch.

Of the 3 of them, I'd say Patel would be the most dangerous if the pitch was really turning.

 

[Richard]

Bloody hell, Bell is looking several million dollars here. Good to see him prove he can still pummel innocuous bowling, I was beginning to worry a little.

 

[Richard]

Not sure I agree with this. In fact if anything Vettori is the one spinner who doesn't seem to be any more or less effective whether the pitch is spinning or not. This is beacuse he beats batsmen in the air as opposed to off the pitch.

Of the 3 of them, I'd say Patel would be the most dangerous if the pitch was really turning.

Vettori will turn the ball if the pitch offers him enough, though. And he's a better flight bowler than MSP and Patel, that's undoubted. Patel would probably turn it more than him, but Vettori's flight >>> Patel's, while Patel's turn merely > Vettori's.

Seriously, has everyone forgotten? It was only 5 Tests ago that Vettori took 10-183 on a nice turner (well, not so nice for his team as it was him against Murali). He also took 7-80 in 2002.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Goldfish and their 7 seconds memories.

 

[Richard]

100 partnership. Strauss nearing his own century. Can Bell (66 as of this post) beat him to it?

 

[Richard]

Presuming Strauss gets this century, these celebrations are going to be worth seeing.

New-ball now available. And taken.