**Official** England in New Zealand

[_Ed_]

Flynn played an ODI too in the England series. Didn't look ready for international cricket yet to me.

Definitely a talent though.

 

[Jamee999]

A conversation between myself and Pickup yesterday afternoon:

Jamee but can you drop him [Andrew Strauss] if he bats all day?
Neil thats not going to happen

 

[Spitfires_Fan]

Gutted about Strauss tbh, because even if the runs do need to be scored, he has scored them on a flat track against an average bowling attack, and as a result will keep on keeping Shah out of the side. Would much rather have seen his runs get scored by Collingwood/Ambrose today.

 

[Leslie1]

Fair to say if Strauss fails in the next 3 tests versus NZ on home deck he's a goner?

 

[gettingbetter]

I wish Strauss failed, but I thought he was due for a score. He was on 71 when I left for work and I was hoping for him not to reach 3 figures, but now he may reach 200 and that would atleast pencil him in for a series or two.

Funny thing is that by all accounts, Shah should have played in the 1st game as he scored 96 in the warm-up game, and if I remember correctly, the 2nd warm-up game, where it really should of been a heads up battle between Strauss and Shah, Shah was left out.

 

[BoyBrumby]

With today's blob Strauss is down to 39.52, so (assuming he's dismissed) would need to score 80 or more in the 2nd to push him back into the 40s. If I were a bookie I'd offer long odds personally...

& that's why I'm a pauper.

I'm personally pleased for him, comes across as a nice bloke who works hard at his game. Clearly not in prime nick still, his slowest ever test ton according to Sky, but he's grafted & that's what you want from an opener. Yeah, it was a benign pitch & a second-string attack (Elliott must be one of the worst first-change test bowlers I've seen for a looong time), but he was under a huge amount of personal pressure.

Great day for England all told. Just one thing tho: Ambrose was clearly gone on the Sinclair run-out. Why bother with referrals if we're still going to get them wrong?

 

[Richard]

I sort of said this regarding Strauss in the other thread, but will reiterate it.

I would never have believed Strauss capable of playing this knock yesterday evening (or the evening before). That he has done doesn't really tell us anything we didn't already know - I still feel that in his current state decent bowling is likely to sort him out. But full credit to him - you don't very often see someone playing a career-saving knock (and I don't think it's hyperbole to suggest it was at all) even in such easy circumstances. He's earnt another chance - it's now up to him to take it. I just hope if he gets sorted-out again it happens quickly, or better still he makes the sort of improvements pretty much everyone on here seems to realise he needs to.

Likewise, with Bell this is exactly the sort of knock we've seen from him before, ramming the advantage home against average bowling on a flat deck. But given his shocking stroke in the first-innings, it's good to be reassured he can at least still do that. As I've said a million times, I have always believed him well capable of playing the more knuckle-down knocks he hasn't yet really played in his Test career.

And hopefully we bat on for another hour\session tomorrow, get 600 ahead, then declare, and Bell, Fleming and Sinclair all score plenty without remotely suggesting they can save the game. Bell I hope will get 70 or so because I don't think he's quite as bad as his non-Bangladesh career so far makes him look; Fleming I want to score 162* or 202 for his average's sake (don't care about his official career average, just about his average against Test-class teams in the middle-order); and Sinclair I want to score 70-odd because I know how devastated Rob Cribb will be if he's dropped. Would actually also like Elliott to make 30 or 40-odd to prove he can actually bat... a bit. In what should hopefully, for NZ's sake, be his only Test.

How, Taylor and McCullum can all afford to fail. And we can afford all these batsmen to score if we've got 600 to play with, so I could enjoy it without worrying about us losing.

 

[GIMH]

Strauss now the leading run-scorer in the series mad

Been Sidebottom's series, and he has earned the MOTS that he will receive, possibly around 4am

 

[Richard]

Wouldn't want to stick anything on the series finishing today TBH. It might do, undoubtedly, but we should bat on (and I hope we will for at least an hour or so) I certainly hope New Zealand (ideally in the form I detailed above) can put-up something of a fight and take it to the last day.

Also, there's the odd shower forecast IIRR.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Quite an interesting decision for man of the match, potentially. Sid looked nailed on after NZ's first innings, but if Strauss finishes on an unbeaten double ton...?

 

[aussie]

Given that at his free-scoring best he was still largely useless I dont see why his return to form is supposed to mean anything.

You refering to this free scoring period?

What is the point of returning to form when the same technical frailities when driving still remain even after scoring 160 odd?

Thats true, but as he showed between lord's 04 to the Oval 06 that when he is batitng well that flaw isn't that great of a hinderance to his game. It was first really exposed in the 2005 Ashes but he still managed 2 centutries. Look at Sehwag he has a great flaw that he has a huge gap between bat & pad when driving but in form he still manages to score big runs.

I'd rather have Strauss opening because at least he has managed to score runs @ this level over someone like Key who even though has smashed county attacks of late i personally was never impressed in matches i saw him in.

 

[Richard]

Quite an interesting decision for man of the match, potentially. Sid looked nailed on after NZ's first innings, but if Strauss finishes on an unbeaten double ton...?

Sidebottom surely needs just another 3 wickets (which you'd be mad to bet against him getting) to have a far more notable feat, however, no?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Sidebottom surely needs just another 3 wickets (which you'd be mad to bet against him getting) to have a far more notable feat, however, no?

Dunno how unbeaten double tons stack up against ten-fors, actually. Both pretty special. I don't know which is rarer.

 

[GIMH]

Interestingly, one more wicket gives Sidebottom 24 for the series, which works out at 8 a match, equivalent to Warne's 40 in the 05 Ashes. Obviously I am not saying he has bowled THAT well, and the greater consistency required for such a haul over 5 games compared to 3 shouldn't be understated, but at the same time, what a performance in the series.

Interested to see some stats for 3-match series with regards to wickets taken. Wonder if the fancy filters on cricinfo can help me.

 

[Bahnz]

Quite an interesting decision for man of the match, potentially. Sid looked nailed on after NZ's first innings, but if Strauss finishes on an unbeaten double ton...?

Sidebottom for sure. Napier is a road, and people make massive scores there all the time. If Strauss had fallen early, I'm sure somone else would've stepped in to score his runs. But without Sidebottom's seven for, there is no way that England could've won this match, and may even have lost it.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, it could be said that Strauss owes Sidebottom quite a lot actually. After all, if he hadn't bowled so well, there could have been a lot more pressue on Strauss in terms of the match, whereas he could afford to go out and bat for himself due to the amount of time left and the 1st innings lead.

 

[aussie]

Interestingly, one more wicket gives Sidebottom 24 for the series, which works out at 8 a match, equivalent to Warne's 40 in the 05 Ashes. Obviously I am not saying he has bowled THAT well, and the greater consistency required for such a haul over 5 games compared to 3 shouldn't be understated, but at the same time, what a performance in the series.

Interested to see some stats for 3-match series with regards to wickets taken. Wonder if the fancy filters on cricinfo can help me.

Well of my head i can remember Harbhajan in 2001, Warne vs PAK in 2002 & i would presume Murali would have had a few big series hauls in many 3 test series SRI would have played at home over the years.

 

[Leslie1]

Cloudy this morning guys, so if England decides to bowl, expect the same kind of swing they got on day 2.

 

[GIMH]

Oh for sure I don't expect it to be near the top, just wondering how good a haul he has made in context. Could finish with about 27 or 28 here.

 

[Richard]

Dunno how unbeaten double tons stack up against ten-fors, actually. Both pretty special. I don't know which is rarer.

Given the surface, I think the 10-for is the better achievement. Of course, justice to be done, Sidebottom could and should get 12 or 13.

EDIT: oh... yeah... as Ben said

Sidebottom for sure. Napier is a road, and people make massive scores there all the time. If Strauss had fallen early, I'm sure somone else would've stepped in to score his runs. But without Sidebottom's seven for, there is no way that England could've won this match, and may even have lost it.