**Official** New Zealand in England

[wpdavid]

Interesting tactically now, it's effectively a 1-day, 1-innings match, and it'll be interesting to what extent NZ are willing to roll the dice, or if they're just gonna play it safe and go for the draw. I reckon they should probably gamble...

It would be one hell of a gamble.

Only chance of a result now is England bowling NZ out for less than 150, which isn't very likely, esp now the ball is not at all new. Disappointing stuff from the bowlers at the start of NZ's 2nd innings - again there was far too much they could leave, which is pretty unforgiveable.

 

[social]

Explain grossly unfair.

He only came into the side for the 3rd test because of injuries to all the bowlers ahead of him in the pecking order, who are now fit and should in return have been selected ahead of him for the Lords test. Sure he bowled well in a session or two in his debut test but that is simply no way justification for shooting him immediately to the top of the bowling picks below Martin/Mills.

If anything is 'grossly unfair' it has been 1) the media hyping up the kid on that one debut performance and placing a huge weight of expectation on him to perform/expect selection, and 2) the mismanagement by the selectors which resulted in him playing the test ahead of one of the other experienced and in form NZ bowlers who should have been in the side instead.

This is Test Cricket and the opening match of a series. You look to play your best product bowlers(if fit) at the time of the match, not your 'investments in the future' and media hyped teenage talents. Save the 'investing' for A tours, county matches, and perhaps dead rubbers.

I'm actually quite sad to be somewhat vindicated by my pre-test insistence Southee should not play at Lords. Following his development somewhat it was obvious that yes he did have a good couple of sessions with the ball in Napier and a he rode his luck a bit with the bat and had a slog in a lost cause at the end, but in the wider picture was he was still a 19 year old and still quite raw at adult 1st class level, nevermind test level. It's quite frustrating that the NZ team management weren't able to do their job properly and have the balls to stand down the media hype and make the justifibly correct selection calls.

And aside from all that, even if the hype had been justified he should absolutely not have played with that recent back injury or soreness or whatever it was, being his age and all, and our history with stuffing our bowling talent when they're young by bowling them into the ground in the pressure situation that is test cricket. FFS NZ selectors! Way to learn nothing from Chris Cairns or Dan Vettori.

Just what is it in Mason's record that indicates that he'll be anything other than average - 33, can't bat, OK fc record with the ball (but he is playing on NZ wickets ffs) and is obviously little more than medium pace as he is compared to Chatfield and Lance Cairns.

The selection of Southee over him was a no brainer IMO

It would be different if it was a Bond or a fit Gillespie but Mason???????

 

[Richard]

Mason might do well, he might not - but he's earned the chance, more so than Southee. Southee has all the promise in The World, which if anything is all the more reason not to be picking him at the age of 19. It's fairly remarkable that he's done as well as he has, you can't really be expecting another Napier (which was good, but far from outstanding) any time in the immediate future.

Mason has done far better so far this tour.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

@ social What does NZ wickets have to do with it? This is England in may.

Considering Mason took 7/101 and dismissed Cook twice in the last match he played on this tour, perhaps he would have been doing better than Southee, who last time I checked is a 19 yr old kid who thus probably doesn't have a great handle on his game yet at first class yet alone at the highest level, and in his last two innings bowling to the English test side has sent down 40 overs and been taken for 143 runs, picking up zero wickets.

As Richard says, Southee has promise, yes. Does he merit a spot in the NZ lineup at this stage of his career? IMO no.

 

[Flem274*]

Explain grossly unfair.

He only came into the side for the 3rd test because of injuries to all the bowlers ahead of him in the pecking order, who are now fit and should in return have been selected ahead of him for the Lords test. Sure he bowled well in a session or two in his debut test but that is simply no way justification for shooting him immediately to the top of the bowling picks below Martin/Mills.

If anything is 'grossly unfair' it has been 1) the media hyping up the kid on that one debut performance and placing a huge weight of expectation on him to perform/expect selection, and 2) the mismanagement by the selectors which resulted in him playing the test ahead of one of the other experienced and in form NZ bowlers who should have been in the side instead.

This is Test Cricket and the opening match of a series. You look to play your best product bowlers(if fit) at the time of the match, not your 'investments in the future' and media hyped teenage talents. Save the 'investing' for A tours, county matches, and perhaps dead rubbers.

I'm actually quite sad to be somewhat vindicated by my pre-test insistence Southee should not play at Lords. Following his development somewhat it was obvious that yes he did have a good couple of sessions with the ball in Napier and a he rode his luck a bit with the bat and had a slog in a lost cause at the end, but in the wider picture was he was still a 19 year old and still quite raw at adult 1st class level, nevermind test level. It's quite frustrating that the NZ team management weren't able to do their job properly and have the balls to stand down the media hype and make the justifibly correct selection calls.

And aside from all that, even if the hype had been justified he should absolutely not have played with that recent back injury or soreness or whatever it was, being his age and all, and our history with stuffing our bowling talent when they're young by bowling them into the ground in the pressure situation that is test cricket. FFS NZ selectors! Way to learn nothing from Chris Cairns or Dan Vettori.

100% correct. Sadly I am vindicated also.

At least Richard Hadlee is now no longer a selector. Great player but sorry, its unfair to send Southee into his second test at 19 with a recent injury on a tour which we are 80% likely to lose. Would much rather see him play for NZ A, the odd dead rubber test and some 20/20s.

EDIT: Bet Trent Boult lays his first test within 12 months. He's already in NZ A or something similar despite not playing any FC cricket. Thats fine with me, he's a good bowler, put him in NZ A. However our national selectors are generally quite good at accelerating people through because "our FC comp is poor." Here's some news boys: It will stay poor if every half decent player under 25 is away on Black Caps tours.

OTT rant over. Lets draw this test and stick it up the tabloids somewhat.

 

[NZTailender]

Mason should've been picked quite a few tests back; ahead of O'Brien for instance, and Southee himself (despite his great debut).

The last time I saw Mason bowl he was bowling really well. Swinging it, putting it on a good length (for bowling) and troubling the batsmen.

 

[Flem274*]

Mason should've been picked quite a few tests back; ahead of O'Brien for instance, and Southee himself (despite his great debut).

The last time I saw Mason bowl he was bowling really well. Swinging it, putting it on a good length (for bowling) and troubling the batsmen.

It was a 20/20 wasn't it?

Mason aint fast, he aint young, he aint pretty but he's been far more effective than anyone domestically including Shane Bond. Evidently he has something there to be utilised and one test wasn't a fair go imo. He's a wily old bastard that keeps getting wickets (mainly domestically) that can bowl all day in a line up that includes the injury non-resistance of Mills and Oram. Use him.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

I think he was injured around the Napier test. Otherwise I agree. However I can see why they went with O'Brien v Bangladesh @ the basin and so on.

Anyways, as Flem says lets get back to the test and NZ not going down 3-0

 

[Flem274*]

I think he was injured around the Napier test. Otherwise I agree. However I can see why they went with O'Brien v Bangladesh @ the basin and so on.

Anyways, as Flem says lets get back to the test and NZ not going down 3-0

Well we can't possibly lose from here. Heck if we collapse then the batsmen should just timekill by backing away as the bowler comes in, calling for drinks constantly etc. Hell, start a fight if we need to.

 

[Leslie1]

Regarding Southee...

Has he disgraced himself so far? Has he been shown to be out of his depth like Matthew Bell was last series? Let the kid be and if we are losing test matches because Southee is in the lineup, then drop him. If we can carry a bowler, in the hope that he comes good sooner rather than later, why the hell not? He will learn ten times faster than if he had played in development tours.

I still think he'll do really well this tour. This first test hasn't shown anything towards Southee as a bowler aside from the pitch flattening out and the first ball had to be changed 20 odd overs in for Martin, Mills and Oram to get wickets.

Having said all that, he hasn't had a quality test performance to remember. Let's see him after the series is done to make the assessments. As everyone agrees, it's not like we are going to win this series.

 

[Flem274*]

Regarding Southee...

Has he disgraced himself so far? Has he been shown to be out of his depth like Matthew Bell was last series? Let the kid be and if we are losing test matches because Southee is in the lineup, then drop him. If we can carry a bowler, in the hope that he comes good sooner rather than later, why the hell not? He will learn ten times faster than if he had played in development tours.

I still think he'll do really well this tour. This first test hasn't shown anything towards Southee as a bowler aside from the pitch flattening out and the first ball had to be changed 20 odd overs in for Martin, Mills and Oram to get wickets.

Having said all that, he hasn't had a quality test performance to remember. Let's see him after the series is done to make the assessments. As everyone agrees, it's not like we are going to win this series.

He hasn't been a disgrace however I suspect he's been thrust in too early. Certainly give him experience where possible (like when we play Zimbabwe or Bangladesh) but this tour is on a hidng to nothing, we're really under the pump and I just think its unfair on the kid. Redmond and Marshall may be rookies too but they've got tons of FC experience and the almost a decade older.

 

[Leslie1]

Actually now that I think about it, he is picked a bit too early, but look at Stuart Broad. At 21, nobody thinks he's picked for his first test too early. And this is England, where the players' depth is even deeper.

 

[Flem274*]

Actually now that I think about it, he is picked a bit too early, but look at Stuart Broad. At 21, nobody thinks he's picked for his first test too early. And this is England, where the players' depth is even deeper.

Not in the bowling its not. No way. I timidly and biasedly suggest we have greater bowling depth.

England reserves:

Hoggard
Tremlett
Flintoff (back in when fit obviously)
er...Harmison

Have a feeling I've forgotten someone. Even so, if the commentators are talking up Onions for a go then I feel a bit safer now.

The difference between England and NZ is what little decent depth they have is better than ours thanks to the stars in their first team. We're also a side at rock bottm. England are meandering along and will either rise up and kick ass or crash and burn once the stars go (though the batting will remain strong). Their bowling attack is fairly grown up and old now. I may be very wrong, they could debut some snotty nosed 14 year old who destroys test nations (no not George Bushs English nephew) but their bowling stocks are a bit worrying. I want them winning the Ashes next year after all and if they all get injured...

 

[Richard]

If we can carry a bowler, in the hope that he comes good sooner rather than later, why the hell not? He will learn ten times faster than if he had played in development tours.

Not a chance.

 

[Richard]

Actually now that I think about it, he is picked a bit too early, but look at Stuart Broad. At 21, nobody thinks he's picked for his first test too early.

I certainly do.

And I thought he was picked too early at 20 in 2006, too.

 

[Bahnz]

Actually now that I think about it, he is picked a bit too early, but look at Stuart Broad. At 21, nobody thinks he's picked for his first test too early. And this is England, where the players' depth is even deeper.

You do realise, that for all the promise and talent of Broad, he still averages over 40 in test cricket?

 

[Leslie1]

Game's started.

Taking a piss, should we take a nomination for which batsmen in the top 6 to score the top score this innings?


Me - D Flynn to top score.

 

[Richard]

New Zealand off-the-mark today and into the lead.

 

[_Ed_]

Game's started.

Taking a piss, should we take a nomination for which batsmen in the top 6 to score the top score this innings?


Me - D Flynn to top score.

If I'm being pessimistic, Jamie How...without adding much to his overnight score.

Hoping to see someone get 80+ today though.

 

[Goughy]

Actually now that I think about it, he is picked a bit too early, but look at Stuart Broad. At 21, nobody thinks he's picked for his first test too early. And this is England, where the players' depth is even deeper.

*holds hand up*