**Official** New Zealand in England

[Leslie1]

Fulton for the ODIs please!

Nothing pleases me more than to see this man back in the groove. Now that Ryder is gone I'd like to see him at first drop.

NZ ODI (without Jesse):

McCullum
How
Fulton
Styris
Taylor
Oram
Vettori
Patel
Mills
Southee
Mason

I don't think we need Martin, his batting is too much of a liability in limited overs.

 

[Blakey]

What did he say? Anything that actually contributes to the debate or condescending as usual?

A good debater will ensure their contribution is valid i.e. can be substantiated with fact and figures.

Your contribution is most often tainted with domestic bias and exuburance bordering on teenage giddyness, where by I'm tempted to offer your screen a protective shield and yourself a box of tissues.

Merely trying to keep things on topic and within perspective.

 

[Blakey]

Fulton for the ODIs please!

Nothing pleases me more than to see this man back in the groove. Now that Ryder is gone I'd like to see him at first drop.

NZ ODI (without Jesse):

McCullum
How
Fulton
Styris
Taylor
Oram
Vettori
Patel
Mills
Southee
Mason

I don't think we need Martin, his batting is too much of a liability in limited overs.

You should judge your specialist bowler on his specialist talent. Not bank on him to hit some quick runs and turn over the strike near the end of an innings.

If he is the best one day bowler then he should be in the team.

 

[S.P. Fleming]

i think martin is fine, considering that we are likely to have a number 10 of the calibre of mills or southee, both very capable with the bat. fulton is good to watch when he is in form and if he is then I see no reason why he cant be our 3.

 

[Prince EWS]

You should judge your specialist bowler on his specialist talent. Not bank on him to hit some quick runs and turn over the strike near the end of an innings.

If he is the best one day bowler then he should be in the team.

He isn't though. He's actually a pretty awful one day bowler. I agree it was quite a strange reason for Leslie1 to leave him out, but I wouldn't have him in there anyway.

 

[TT Boy]

Cook's strike-rate is poor, but who do you suggest should be opening? Mustard and Wright? That's a quick route to 10 for 2.

I would have backed Mustard or at least given him a home series - would not have had him open alongside Wright, as you say that's a recipe for disaster especially after what happened with Luke in South Africa.
And to be honest I can not actually suggest a suitable candidate aside from Cook but I do think you need two openers who have that ability to just change gears, size up the situation and Cook for all his talents doesn't yet have that, his just content to play it his way.

 

[Silver Arrow]

Fulton gone, out for 57

NZ 113/1

 

[Richard]

I would have backed Mustard or at least given him a home series - would not have had him open alongside Wright, as you say that's a recipe for disaster especially after what happened with Luke in South Africa.
And to be honest I can not actually suggest a suitable candidate aside from Cook but I do think you need two openers who have that ability to just change gears, size up the situation and Cook for all his talents doesn't yet have that, his just content to play it his way.

Apart from Ian Bell, the sad truth of the matter is that we don't have any one-day openers at the current time who show even the slightest of promise. There's no-one who's scored consistent runs in the FP at the top of the order this year, never mind someone who also did well last season.

We've tried manufacturing useless domestic lower-order batsmen into openers. We've tried picking poor domestic openers. Cook is simply someone who is something other than useless at one-day opening at the current time, and that's all we've got.

The prospect of Cook and Bell opening isn't terribly appealing either, but it is at least better than carrying passengers like all those wicketkeepers and one or two others who we've tried at the top of the order in recent times.

 

[Richard]

Fulton gone, out for 57

NZ 113/1

The one decent seamer in Northants' lineup gets the first wicket.

 

[Leslie1]

Apart from Ian Bell, the sad truth of the matter is that we don't have any one-day openers at the current time who show even the slightest of promise. There's no-one who's scored consistent runs in the FP at the top of the order this year, never mind someone who also did well last season.

We've tried manufacturing useless domestic lower-order batsmen into openers. We've tried picking poor domestic openers. Cook is simply someone who is something other than useless at one-day opening at the current time, and that's all we've got.

The prospect of Cook and Bell opening isn't terribly appealing either, but it is at least better than carrying passengers like all those wicketkeepers and one or two others who we've tried at the top of the order in recent times.

I bet you wish you had someone of McCullum's elk in your ODI lineup. That's probably where NZ has the legs up on England atm. The openers. Note: I actually think if Marshall scores less than Fulton in this game he should be dropped for the 3rd test for Fulton.

 

[Richard]

I'm far from convinced McCullum will end-up a particularly good ODI opener either, but he has at least done more to date than Geraint Jones, Matthew Prior and Philip Mustard ever did in their careers. In their combined 36 innings at the top of the order against ODI-standard teams they managed a whole 2 half-centuries.

 

[Days of Grace]

Darn, I wish Fulton would have stayed in and got a century. Would have really pushed his claim for a spot in the third test.

 

[Prince EWS]

I bet you wish you had someone of McCullum's elk in your ODI lineup. That's probably where NZ has the legs up on England atm. The openers. Note: I actually think if Marshall scores less than Fulton in this game he should be dropped for the 3rd test for Fulton.

Two games is not a long enough run for mine. Unless you want to change the balance of the team completely or have someone coming back from injury, you shouldn't go around selecting someone for two Tests and then dropping them. I'm far from a James Marshall fan and I've long been an advocate of Fulton, but Marshall shouldn't be dropped so soon. He should be given the series at least AFAIC.

 

[_Ed_]

Darn, I wish Fulton would have stayed in and got a century. Would have really pushed his claim for a spot in the third test.

I think he has done so anyway - especially since Marshall just departed for 11.

Redmond's 46* should keep him in.

 

[FBU]

.

Sidebottom, Flintoff, Mascarenhas, X, Swann. A pretty decent attack, and if we could manage one more bowler to fill that gap, one of the best going around.

QUOTE]



Sidebottom, Anderson, Flintoff, Broad, Swann.
Collingwood as the 6th bowler.

strike rates of 31.6, 35.5, 34.4, 34.5, 42.8
Collingwood 48.1
Mascarenhas 70.0

 

[Scaly piscine]

Averaging 23 is not 'Doing allright' as steds said, I'd go either Prior or Ambrose.

One sentence and you've managed to:

Completely ignore his strike-rate which is very good
Completely ignore the pitches and conditions he played on which basically entailed 1 road (where he got a rapid 50), the odd typical flattish wicket and a few tough 'uns. His record would be more like a mid to high 20s average with ~100 SR if he'd been playing on a good cross-section of pitches.
Completely ignore the role England need to fill which Mustard was selected to play in.
Suggest someone who's a proven failure in ODIs, a guy who averages 21 at a poor strike rate and isn't very good with the gloves. Essential worse than Mustard in everything.
Display rubbish grammar and spelling.


Still at least you haven't posted 56,000odd times.

 

[aussie]

Damn Trescothicks retirement has really messed up the balance of the ODI team top order.

 

[Richard]

Sidebottom, Anderson, Flintoff, Broad, Swann.
Collingwood as the 6th bowler.

strike rates of 31.6, 35.5, 34.4, 34.5, 42.8
Collingwood 48.1
Mascarenhas 70.0

Mascarenhas is a much better one-day bowler than Anderson or Broad, though. Strike-rate isn't particularly important in one-day cricket, economy-rate is the main factor.

 

[Richard]

One sentence and you've managed to:

Completely ignore his strike-rate which is very good
Completely ignore the pitches and conditions he played on which basically entailed 1 road (where he got a rapid 50), the odd typical flattish wicket and a few tough 'uns. His record would be more like a mid to high 20s average with ~100 SR if he'd been playing on a good cross-section of pitches.
Completely ignore the role England need to fill which Mustard was selected to play in.
Suggest someone who's a proven failure in ODIs, a guy who averages 21 at a poor strike rate and isn't very good with the gloves. Essential worse than Mustard in everything.
Display rubbish grammar and spelling.


Still at least you haven't posted 56,000odd times.

It's hilarious the way your best attempts at rebuttals to Morris usually involve comparing him to me. If you added the amount of credibility the two of us have amongst those on these forums and divided it by 20 it'd still outstrip the amount you've ever had by a considerable distance.

The irony of
"Essential worse than Mustard in everything.
Display rubbish grammar and spelling."
is pretty hilarious too. I'd guess you'll try to find a way to spin it that that sentence wasn't wrong, obviously.

Mustard has batted on flat wickets in ODIs a few times, easily often enough, and (bar the McLean Park game where the square boundaries were about as short as a useless herb) come up as short on them as he did on the slow seamers. He's very obviously (to anyone but somone who can usually see precisely zero fault in any Durham player) not a very good batsman, and he was extremely fortunate to get anywhere near ODIs. He's done sod-all in the FP Trophy this year, which, given he'd done zero of any note before then either, suggests his 2007 was a flash-in-the-pan. Hopefully from an England POV, he'll go the same way as those wastes of space Jones and Prior, who were useless one-day batsmen as well.

 

[Days of Grace]

Strike-rate isn't particularly important in one-day cricket, economy-rate is the main factor.

I believe that the two are closely connected. If a bowler takes wickets, he normally has a good economy-rate, as the opposition would take fewer risks against him. Don't underestimate the value of taking wickets in ODIs.