**Official** England in New Zealand

[_Ed_]

So we've discovered that Elliott isn't test-standard with the ball...hope he is with the bat.

I find it strange that he's batted ahead of McCullum in both innings.

 

[Days of Grace]

No, that's it for Sinclair. There's no way back.

What's the point in recalling him again? He'll just do the same. Over and over again.

 

[Prince EWS]

Not sure about the end of his career. He'll almost certainly be dropped, but there's no doubt he'll be prolific for CD again next year and the selectors may well turn to him again.

And then he'll probably have a couple more bad innings and again be shown the door. And then be recalled again.

I don't think they'll go back to him anymore. Despite the commentators yabbering on about how much "faith" the selectors have had in him, it can't be further from the truth. They're extremely impatient with him several times and basically have their hands forced by weight of FC runs to recall them. This latest failure will give them the ammunition they need to keep him out of the team regardless though, IMO.

 

[pasag]

There might be; there also might not be. It's very possible that some time very soon Fleming would have ceased to have been more use to NZ than the Fultons, Taylors, Ryders, Hays et al. That could very easily, IMO, have started with the next Test NZ play.

We can't know anyone ever has more to offer though, we can only guess. If a player reckons he is soon to stop having anything to offer, then for mine the wise decision is to retire. I guess that's what Fleming thought. If, on the other hand, he wants to wait and see when that happens, that's also the risk he takes.

I personally am always happy, I repeat, to see a player retire before they've stopped being worth their place. Stephen Fleming has done that.

I doubt that he'd stop deserving his place in the near future. NZ's immeadite short-term batting future isn't exactly looking rosy at the moment. It's not like Gilchrist who had Haddin snapping at his heels.

Obviously I respect his decision, like that of all players who decide it is time as is their absolute right and I am in no way questioning his decision at all, but it just saddens me when I feel players could still have gone on and contributed to their country. Especially when their are rumours of politics in play - same with Lara and Inzi.

 

[_Ed_]

What's the point in recalling him again? He'll just do the same. Over and over again.

That hasn't stopped him being recalled many times in the past.

The fact that he consistently scores way more heavily than any of the other options in domestic cricket is something that really attracts the attention of the selectors.

 

[Richard]

No, that's it for Sinclair. There's no way back.

What's the point in recalling him again? He'll just do the same. Over and over again.

Hey, Skippy: **** you you ****en wanker. You let the whole country down and you deserve whatever bad luck happens to you for the rest of your life. Burn in hell after your misarable life ends, hopefully sooner rather than later.

Sheeysh, overreaction much?

 

[Richard]

I doubt that he'd stop deserving his place in the near future.

Mmm, I don't neccessarily think so. I think he could easily have stopped performing to a degree of much note sometime very soon - he's a good player, not a great one, he's 35 years old, and not many players who are not from the very top drawer can go on performing to a degree of much note in Test cricket from the age of about 35.

NZ's immeadite short-term batting future isn't exactly looking rosy at the moment. It's not like Gilchrist who had Haddin snapping at his heels.

I'm certainly not sure about that. There's a fair few batsmen - who I named in a previous post - looking good at the current time. Fulton, Taylor and Ryder all look serious prospects, and hopefully very soon Hay will do so too.

Obviously I respect his decision, like that of all players who decide it is time as is their absolute right and I am in no way questioning his decision at all, but it just saddens me when I feel players could still have gone on and contributed to their country. Especially when their are rumours of politics in play - same with Lara and Inzi.

The politics is indeed a shame, yes.

 

[Days of Grace]

That hasn't stopped him being recalled many times in the past.

The fact that he consistently scores way more heavily than any of the other options in domestic cricket is something that really attracts the attention of the selectors.

Because now the selectors know that whenever he plays for NZ (no matter how good a form he is in in domestic redneck cricket) he will never ever pass 50 again.

 

[pasag]

Mmm, I don't neccessarily think so. I think he could easily have stopped performing to a degree of much note sometime very soon - he's a good player, not a great one, he's 35 years old, and not many players who are not from the very top drawer can go on performing to a degree of much note in Test cricket from the age of about 35.

I'm certainly not sure about that. There's a fair few batsmen - who I named in a previous post - looking good at the current time. Fulton, Taylor and Ryder all look serious prospects, and hopefully very soon Hay will do so too.

The politics is indeed a shame, yes.

Yeah, well that's a different thing. If you think he won't deserve his place in the near future, then I have no issues with you being satisfied with him retiring now.

 

[JBH001]

Jeez, Days of Grace, take it easy.

As a New Zealand supporter you should have realised by now that all this sort of stuff is par for the course where the Black Caps are concerned. A phlegmatic forbearance is the default state of mind of the NZ cricket supporter (occassionally leavened by curses and groans before returning to a condition of stoic acceptance).

 

[Richard]

Yeah, well that's a different thing. If you think he won't deserve his place in the near future, then I have no issues with you being satisfied with him retiring now.

Different to what? That's the only reason I'm ever happy for a player to be retiring. It's also the only reason I've ever been happy for a player to be retiring.

I hate the fact that people, especially sensible people like you, think I want players who once averaged 55 to stop playing the moment they no longer are, even if they're going to be averaging 45 for 20 Tests later on. It's unutterably frustrating, and so completely wrong-end-of-stick.

The truth is, though, times when players are "not up to previous standards but still worth a place" are actually pretty rare. You'd have to be a truly outstanding player (like the above example) for something like this to happen. Should Fleming have played another, say, 15 Tests and averaged, say, 30 in them, that to me would still represent not being worth his place any more, even though it wouldn't be disgraceful.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Sinclair will hopefully naff off to the ICL and not come back and score big runs for CD; thus preventing the future issue.

 

[Richard]

FFS, this is rubbish. I hate seeing short-delivery crap like this be gifted wickets. Sinclair and Elliott, you're shocking.

 

[NZTailender]

Elliott, worst NZ international of recent times.

Yes, worse than O'Brien.

 

[_Ed_]

So we've discovered that Elliott isn't test-standard with the ball...hope he is with the bat.

No.

No he is not.

 

[Prince EWS]

Care of Voltman. Probably apt in here at the moment.

 

[_Ed_]

Sinclair will hopefully naff off to the ICL and not come back and score big runs for CD; thus preventing the future issue.

Good thinking.

 

[99*]

Any chance McCullum goes for the Nathan Astle record?

 

[Richard]

Elliott, worst NZ international of recent times.

Yes, worse than O'Brien.

Lance Hamilton not almost O'Brien-esque?

 

[Days of Grace]

Any chance that McCullum will top edge a full toss straight up in the air to mid-off 5th ball?