**Official** England in New Zealand

[NZTailender]

No. Just no. Franklin in no way is near Vettori in test batting skill, how do you come to that sort of conclusion?

By watching him play? Vettori may have averaged quite highly in the past few years in tests but I've never, ever, been confident in his technique or ability - it's been merely a bonus (and often something that has saved us from embarrassment) when he's scored a lot of runs.

Franklin, on the other hand, is someone who could be a Hadlee.

 

[Raghav]

I really would like to see this sqaud lining up for the 1st test vs England

Jamie How
Mathew Bell
Ross Taylor
Peter Fulton
Mathew Sinclair
Jacob Oram
Brendon McCullum
Daniel Vettori
Kyle Mills
Tim Southee
Chris Martin

This is squad is selected with the conditions is England kept in mind

 

[Raghav]

By watching him play? Vettori may have averaged quite highly in the past few years in tests but I've never, ever, been confident in his technique or ability - it's been merely a bonus (and often something that has saved us from embarrassment) when he's scored a lot of runs.

Franklin, on the other hand, is someone who could be a Hadlee.

 

[NZTailender]

He has a good technique, one that I rate far higher than Vettori's. His batting could develop to be around the league of Hadlee's; certainly in usefulness to the team.

 

[NZTailender]

I really would like to see this sqaud lining up for the 1st test vs England

Jamie How
Mathew Bell
Ross Taylor
Peter Fulton
Mathew Sinclair
Jacob Oram
Brendon McCullum
Daniel Vettori
Kyle Mills
Tim Southee
Chris Martin

This is squad is selected with the conditions is England kept in mind

I'd really like to see this squad lining up in the 1st test against England:

1. Richardson
2. How
3. Fleming
4. Vincent
5. Astle
6. Oram
7. McCullum+
8. Vettori
9. Franklin
10. Bond
11. Martin


Not going to happen though, tbf.

 

[Raghav]

He has a good technique, one that I rate far higher than Vettori's. His batting could develop to be around the league of Hadlee's; certainly in usefulness to the team.

Vettori is a good calculated bowler who knows his limitations very well. Love his change of pace. He rely on it and he is always on target. But the problem with Vettori is that he doesn't have any unplayable deliveries in store. He gets wickets if anything silly is done by batsman. He is a handy ODI bowler. Considering him as a test player, he can be handy with his ball and bat at some stages of the test match.

On the other hand, Franklin is a bowler who mainly depends on his bowling action to bowl decently. Once he gets everything right with his action, he is perfect on that day. He is some what riskier when compared to Vettori as he sometimes strays the line more often. Its up to Selectors to choose their own option.

 

[99*]

By watching him play? Vettori may have averaged quite highly in the past few years in tests but I've never, ever, been confident in his technique or ability - it's been merely a bonus (and often something that has saved us from embarrassment) when he's scored a lot of runs.

Franklin, on the other hand, is someone who could be a Hadlee.

Regradless of what Vettori's technique looks like, it is effective. Just because it looks ugly does not mean it does not work. Would you take Franklin over Vettori because Vettori doesn't look good batting? Why not take Patel over Murali just because Patel looks better while bowling?

Franklin is a good batsman (for a bowler) no doubt, but to say he's better than Vettori right now is just plain stupidity.

 

[Athlai]

Love Patel and Vettori bowling together, they seem like they have such a good relationship. You see in all the breaks during the game, Patel bowling (or throwing) to Vettori as Vettori practices batting. A 12th man duty more or less but a good relationship was shown between the two. I reckon this also shows how much these two work their asses off for the team. Patel spinning his heart out and Vettori trying to give our batting line up some dignity.

The more often we can play them both the better.

 

[Raghav]

Love Patel and Vettori bowling together, they seem like they have such a good relationship. You see in all the breaks during the game, Patel bowling (or throwing) to Vettori as Vettori practices batting. A 12th man duty more or less but a good relationship was shown between the two. I reckon this also shows how much these two work their asses off for the team. Patel spinning his heart out and Vettori trying to give our batting line up some dignity.

The more often we can play them both the better.

Absolutely right! I love Patel, Vettori combinely bowling

 

[Athlai]

Evidently Patel works on variations with Vettori and also worked hard with Murali when Sri Lanka toured here (and I believe in the WI during the WC), really works hard to improve his bowling and I think it shows, his recent Tests performances out did Vettori on what was some pretty unhelpful looking pitches. Coupled with that was the fact he was unlucky with a few drops and decisions that could have really went the other way.

 

[Flem274*]

been found out without Bond in our team that we have almost no bowlers of test quality anymore.

WHAT? What is wrong with Martin, Mills, Franklin,.Southee, Patel, Vettori, Mason, Gillespie and the good young 'uns coming through? We got very good bowling depth.

 

[NZTailender]

Regradless of what Vettori's technique looks like, it is effective. Just because it looks ugly does not mean it does not work. Would you take Franklin over Vettori because Vettori doesn't look good batting? Why not take Patel over Murali just because Patel looks better while bowling?

Franklin is a good batsman (for a bowler) no doubt, but to say he's better than Vettori right now is just plain stupidity.

Right now Franklin is injured so yes, that would be stupid. But Franklin has more talent IMO than Vettori with the bat and will end up being a very handy bowling-allrounder.

 

[NZTailender]

Vettori is a good calculated bowler who knows his limitations very well. Love his change of pace. He rely on it and he is always on target. But the problem with Vettori is that he doesn't have any unplayable deliveries in store. He gets wickets if anything silly is done by batsman. He is a handy ODI bowler. Considering him as a test player, he can be handy with his ball and bat at some stages of the test match.

On the other hand, Franklin is a bowler who mainly depends on his bowling action to bowl decently. Once he gets everything right with his action, he is perfect on that day. He is some what riskier when compared to Vettori as he sometimes strays the line more often. Its up to Selectors to choose their own option.

We're talking about batting, itbt.

 

[99*]

WHAT? What is wrong with Martin, Mills, Franklin,Southee, Patel, Vettori, Mason, Gillespie and the good young 'uns coming through? We got very good bowling depth.

We may have good depth coming through the U-19's, but right now you can not say we are in good shape. Mills seems to get injured every series, Franklin has been out for a while now and Gillespie is either the great bower he should be or the one of the most frustrating. Southee has been a real find, but we need to be careful with him. And of course we have Boult and Anderson coming up but they are quite young and I'd rather wait for them to get older than risk them to any major injury.
Other than that who could we select as a test bowler? (I don't follow the State Championship and Shield much so are there any pacemen of any note that we could call up?)

 

[99*]

Right now Franklin is injured so yes, that would be stupid. But Franklin has more talent IMO than Vettori with the bat and will end up being a very handy bowling-allrounder.

Oh I agree with that, that Franklin has more talent, and once he's healthy I hope he is able to use it and become a Hadlee type player.

 

[Flem274*]

We may have good depth coming through the U-19's, but right now you can not say we are in good shape. Mills seems to get injured every series, Franklin has been out for a while now and Gillespie is either the great bower he should be or the one of the most frustrating. Southee has been a real find, but we need to be careful with him. And of course we have Boult and Anderson coming up but they are quite young and I'd rather wait for them to get older than risk them to any major injury.
Other than that who could we select as a test bowler? (I don't follow the State Championship and Shield much so are there any pacemen of any note that we could call up?)

So if you admit that how can you comment on our bowling depth?

Bradley Scott and Leighton Burtt look promising but have a few things to work on still. (Burtt has been destructive but his ER has been too high). Mark Houghton and Roneel Hira look like good spinners coming through, Ewen Thompson is a cracking List A swing bowler, dark horse for an England tour.

 

[99*]

So if you admit that how can you comment on our bowling depth?

Bradley Scott and Leighton Burtt look promising but have a few things to work on still. (Burtt has been destructive but his ER has been too high). Mark Houghton and Roneel Hira look like good spinners coming through, Ewen Thompson is a cracking List A swing bowler, dark horse for an England tour.

I have some knowledge of it, I just have not followed it much this season. I was commenting on the fact that beyond Martin, Mills, Franklin, Mason and Gillespie we have had no real 'breakthrough' bowlers that have forced their way into the squad. If it's just that Braces and the selectors don't want them then thats another issue. But so far only we only seem to pick the same bowlers for the squad even after they show bad form.

 

[Flem274*]

I have some knowledge of it, I just have not followed it much this season. I was commenting on the fact that beyond Martin, Mills, Franklin, Mason and Gillespie we have had no real 'breakthrough' bowlers that have forced their way into the squad. If it's just that Braces and the selectors don't want them then thats another issue. But so far only we only seem to pick the same bowlers for the squad even after they show bad form.

How are they in bad form? You could only argue Gillespie, and he was bad for only one test. Most nations only have about 5-8 definite test class bowlers as well, just like us. (Of course, all the top 8 sides have potential test class bowlers as well but cannot be sure until they're used)

Mills
Southee
Martin
Vettori
Franklin
Patel
Gillespie
Mason

Thats 8. A pretty good eight.

Compare to England

Hoggard
Sidebottom
Broad
Panesar
Flintoff
Tremlett
Jones
Anderson (greentop only)

We're about the same. Thank God we get more use out of ours though, Jones and Flintoff are always MIA/KIA sadly.

 

[Leslie1]

Love Patel and Vettori bowling together, they seem like they have such a good relationship. You see in all the breaks during the game, Patel bowling (or throwing) to Vettori as Vettori practices batting. A 12th man duty more or less but a good relationship was shown between the two. I reckon this also shows how much these two work their asses off for the team. Patel spinning his heart out and Vettori trying to give our batting line up some dignity.

The more often we can play them both the better.

Good god, this is what I'm trying to make sure people avoid discussing. If these two play, we only have Martin and Mills opening the bowling, with Oram the first change. And when Oram is injured, HELLO medium pacers - Elliot, Taylor, Ryder... AS OUR FIRST CHANGE BOWLER~~~~~~~~

If Patel play, SOUTHEE IS out of the side. That's freaking tragic on wickets that doesn't take turn in English conditions. In fact I'll go as far as to argue that's the weakness of the Indian side with Kumble and Harbajan having to take the field at the same time.

IDEALLY, you'd want swing bowlers opening the bowling, then first change should be a bowler with pure pace and bounce. Oram doesn't have the pace. He's more a stock bowler, not a wicket taking bowler. This is tragic. I hope he does us all a favor and quit trying to hog a place in the side with his negative bowling.

 

[Leslie1]

How are they in bad form? You could only argue Gillespie, and he was bad for only one test. Most nations only have about 5-8 definite test class bowlers as well, just like us. (Of course, all the top 8 sides have potential test class bowlers as well but cannot be sure until they're used)

Mills
Southee
Martin
Vettori
Franklin
Patel
Gillespie
Mason

Thats 8. A pretty good eight.

Compare to England

Hoggard
Sidebottom
Broad
Panesar
Flintoff
Tremlett
Jones
Anderson (greentop only)

We're about the same. Thank God we get more use out of ours though, Jones and Flintoff are always MIA/KIA sadly.

Excuse me Flem, I think you rate our bowlers a bit too highly. Sidebottom and Hoggard and Broad all are better bowlers than our Mills and Martins. The only bowler anywhere near the English bowlers in quality is Franklin, and he's injured. The rest are bits and pieces bowlers with adequate pace, and only bowl well to a plan. Once the batsmen get dominant, they don't have a clue how to get them out. We have only had one really good bowler since Hadlee, and that is Bond. The rest are rubbish. I'll chuck Vettori in that same bunch.

If you need a rough guide, trying You tubing any of those New Zealand bowlers and see if there is any highlights package. Sharma and Steyn have plenty, so do Hoggard, Harmison, Sidebottom. We have none, apart from Bondy. It's a fair reflection.

One thing we do have is we always punch above our weight. We will resort to all sorts of negativity bowling (holding them down in economy rates, make them score slow, frustrate the batsmen), and most of the time, this doesn't win you test series. It gets you the odd win every now and then in 1 game, then the opposition works us out, and we get kicked losing series 2-1. Or we can be just rubbish and get kicked. That's how it will always be.

We won't ever threaten other countries above us in rankings with "awesome" bowlers, we can only toil away and hope they are out of form. Even then it's pushing it.