**Official** New Zealand in England

[Richard]

Not sure about probably, but it was certainly about even-money.

Of course, had we known time was available to make-up all that was lost, we might have played differently, Oram might have played differently, etc. etc. No knowing, sadly.

 

[sledger]

I'd imagine the result would have still been a draw tbh, I would have been surprised if NZ had managed to pull off the win.

 

[FBU]

Marron said this morning that the wicket isn't going to be as quick as people expect.

 

[Richard]

I'd imagine the result would have still been a draw tbh, I would have been surprised if NZ had managed to pull off the win.

Can't see that Lord's game being drawn if 444 overs had been possible TBH.

 

[Richard]

Marron said this morning that the wicket isn't going to be as quick as people expect.

Oh well, as long as it either seams or turns that's something. Obviously quick seam or quick turn is better, but without either it'll be a foregone draw again methinks.

Still a poor local forecast?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Southee should be persisted with. If it were up to me I'd play him in both tests regardless of how he does. I think most will acknowledge he has potential, but I also think it's something he can realize fairly soon (as opposed to after several years of FC cricket). I do have a long history of backing losers, though.

There are huge negatives attached to that. The biggest is probably the potential psychological damage if he continues to struggle. Wicketless in his last 2 innings and not looking incredibly likely to take wickets either. The other huge risk is injury. So many bowlers have been picked young only to fall to injury and have to make major adjustments to technique. It's not usually the makings of a better bowler. And then, of course, it could be very damaging to the NZ win-loss ratio.

 

[andruid]

Was that spectacularly low scoring Championship match between Lancs and Durham (the one where Flintoff bagged a pair and Durham were out for less that 100) at Old Trafford?

 

[Richard]

Yep.

Heck, even part-timers like Park and Collingwood took 2 for not-many in Durham's spells in the field.

 

[Pup Clarke]

And Park's meant to be a keeper as well.

 

[Richard]

Haha, so that's two wicketkeepers who've somehow managed to take 2-fors this season. What with Cross in that one-day game.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Down as Medium/Fast and Wicketkeeper in Cricinfo as well.

 

[Woodster]

Seemed to bowl at decent pace against Lancs.

 

[Steulen]

Southee possibly out with Delhi belly...must be global warming to blame there.

 

[Leslie1]

There are huge negatives attached to that. The biggest is probably the potential psychological damage if he continues to struggle. Wicketless in his last 2 innings and not looking incredibly likely to take wickets either. The other huge risk is injury. So many bowlers have been picked young only to fall to injury and have to make major adjustments to technique. It's not usually the makings of a better bowler. And then, of course, it could be very damaging to the NZ win-loss ratio.

We need to blood him now. Arguably this tour of England, unlike the last one, we have our bowlers in their peaks for a change. Last tour, it was the batting that was peaking. Blooding youngsters should come ideally when the facet of the game they are being blooded for are peaking so can deal with the excess baggage.

Think how Michael Clarke got blooded in, although he's a prodigy anyway.

The kid won't have nightmares, if he has that kind of tendency it would have been found out in his debut.

Southee's potential = bowling + lower order batting. Both are in prime condition with or without him so it might as well be with him in there.

 

[Days of Grace]

I am hoping Southee will play, because if he doesn't, I feel damn sure that Bracewell will go for O'Diren over Mason, despite all form pointing to the opposite.

 

[Zinzan]

I am hoping Southee will play, because if he doesn't, I feel damn sure that Bracewell will go for O'Diren over Mason, despite all form pointing to the opposite.

I'm praying common sense prevails and Mason is picked if its a bouncy pitch. To pay him the ultimate compliment Mason is quite Mcgrath-like though obviously not nearly as good.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I am hoping Southee will play, because if he doesn't, I feel damn sure that Bracewell will go for O'Diren over Mason, despite all form pointing to the opposite.

I think you'll find that O'Brien bowled pretty well in the warm ups - or certainly not far behind Mason who bowled pretty well himself. Frankly, either will provide a similar job; accurate but unpenetrating at international level. Bad bowlers, they are not - international bowlers they aren't either.

When's Jimmy Franklin coming back???

 

[Perm]

Never been a big fan of Michael Mason, but the games he played last season impressed me. Showed a lot more bounce, movement and pace than he has done in the past. His accuracy is obviously a hell of a lot better than O'Brien too.

 

[Days of Grace]

Ah, yes, that is what I meant: Mason provides more accuracy.

One of the reasons England beat us in 2004 was their scoring rate, which they carried on to the 2005 Ashes. They have lost a little of that scoring rate, but we don't need bowlers leaking unneccesary runs.

 

[Zinzan]

Great, fine weather today in Manchester but rain forecast for tomorrow