**Official** New Zealand in Australia

[Flem274*]

Pfft, make outlandish predictions, get egg on your face, it's all part of the game. Better then being a fence sitter

You do realize you're talking to somebody who predicted Fleming would get a triple hundred against the yarpies and that NZ would beat Bangladesh?

And I still maintain that Martin will get a fifty in his career. Unfortunately it will probably be in ducks.

 

[NZTailender]

I don't agree that the NZ batting line up is terrible, Cribbford. Statistically speaking, yes it is, but then most of them have been debuted over the past 12 months, going back to South Africa last November (IIRC) - Redmond, Flynn, Ryder and Taylor make for an inexperienced middle order, brought on by retirements of Astle and Fleming, Vincent going to the ICL, Styris giving up Tests and Sinclair generally been dire Ideally these guys would've been more slowly intergrated into the team rather than bringing them all in so close to each other, but what's happened has happened and we have to continue from here.

Starting at the top, Jamie How has best resembled that of an opener out of all that have had a shot since Richardson retired. All he needs to do now is start converting the starts and make his first tonne.
Redmond, geeze getting harder and harder to defend him, as am a fan, but I'm pretty sure this will be his last series if he doesn't average over 30 in (theoretically) 4 innings.
Ryder, has all the talent in the world which I think everyone knows. Just new in the Test side after his injury kept him out of England. Basically will simply see how he handles the best team in the toughest country and then go from there. Am confident he can do well if he can keep his idiocy in check.
Dan Flynn, was never a fan of his selection but he's kept himself in there with some incredibly gritty innings, which is good to see because our batting generally folds like a pack of cards. Would prefer Fulton ahead of him though.
Taylor, just needs to keep learning and gaining experience. After a fairly terrible debut he's looked the goods, easily one of the best batsman in the country.
I really hope Elliott doesn't play, as I don't think he's up to scratch with bat or ball in the longer form. Reckon he'd have similar output as Cameron White recently had in India, performance wise.

Currently, bowling is our strong point and batting is Australia's strong point, so I think we can take 20 wickets in a match (especially if we're going with the 5 bowlers as hinted at by Vettori) but we probably won't be taking them too cheaply either.
Our batting will fare better than people are making out, but we won't be piling on the runs. I dare say the matches will play out in the form of something like Australia 350 all out, NZ 260 all out, Australia 280 all out, New Zealand 180 all out.

 

[Prince EWS]

Comparing an established line up to a new line up with averages is a bit pointless really.

I don't see why - the ridiculous different in experience was actually the key thing I was trying to point out with the total number of runs in each team. The NZ batting lineup has done basically nothing in Test cricket and the fact that players are relatively "new" does not necessarily mean they're better than what's gone by, particuarly when they've performed worse than them in First Class cricket or barely played FIrst Class at all.

New Zealand's batsmen are poor and inexperienced. They've done very little and what they have done has either been of poor standard or against Bangladesh. Jamie How will make a few technically excellent 40s before throwing it away, Taylor will gift his wicket in all but one of his innings on tour, McCullum will be having far too much trouble dealing with the nosebleeds he'll be getting at #5 to score any runs and the less said about Flynn and Redmond playing Tests against Australia, the better. The only batsman I really have any immediate hope for Jesse Ryder as he'd probably be as happy watching the game at the pub as he would be playing it.

I'm certainly not one to under-estimate New Zealand on a typical basis as I'm sure you know and I think they've generally been an under-rated team over the last few years as people pay so little attention to them as a whole, but whilst the bowling attack is good, the current batting lineup is terrible.

Yep, we were pretty ****y against the Bangers and a few Aussies here are setting themselves up as beautifully as we (including myself) did.

Actually, I wasn't talking about your ****iness. I was talking about certain members who bitched and moaned in doomsday fashion when the batting collapsed against Bangladesh, calling the players incompetent etc etc.. who have now backed that up by saying New Zealand are an outside chance of doing something and that the top order has improved lately. It's contradictory to the extreme.

EDIT: Bet half the reason you're so critical of our battingi s because your two favourite kiwi batsmen aren't included add in Sinclair and Fulton and I'd be interested to see your opinion

Well I think they're better than some of the batsmen you've picked so I'm bound to think their inclusion would improve the batting slightly overall. My thoughts would be slightly different I guess but still much the same TBH - they're certainly not world-beaters who would transform the side and the batting would still be roundly below standard.

 

[Prince EWS]

I don't agree that the NZ batting line up is terrible, Cribbford. Statistically speaking, yes it is, but then most of them have been debuted over the past 12 months, going back to South Africa last November (IIRC)

The fact that they're all so inexperienced doesn't absolve them of being terrible as a unit though - in fact it just adds to it. Inexperience is obviously not a good thing to take to Australia.

It'd be a different story if they've performed on the First Class scene consistently. Ryder aside (who's the only one I actually think could do something significant in Australia), they haven't done that. How's First Class record gave us every indication that he'd perform exactly how he has in Tests and whilst I had high hopes after the home series against England, the tours of England and Bangladesh have really put things into perspective - he looks great at the crease but he's not likely to make a big score even if he gets a start. Taylor's quite possibly the most strangely inconsistent batsman I've ever seen with the way he bats from innings to innings and I suppose he might play an innings of note but he's extremely unlikely to pass 50 twice in the series from where I sit (ironic criticism coming from someone pushing for Sinclair, I know, but three Taylors > one Taylor, one Redmond and one Flynn). Redmond's had a wholly average First Class career which has unsurprisingly followed on to his Test career and Flynn's had one good season and has shown early signs of "Jamie How syndrome".

It's the worst batting lineup out of the top 8 Test teams for mine, and regardless of the reasons for it, it has no standing in any way at the current time and I'd be surprised if they passed 300 at any venture. I'm not saying they'll all crap individually as such and I'm sure a couple of them will go on to have good Test careers (namely Ryder and Taylor), but if such an inexperienced batting lineup which has done nothing in Tests and has several members who have done very little in even First Class cricket can't be criticised as weak then I don't think any lineup really can.

 

[Athlai]

Prince you don't seem to understand a few things about our players.

See Ross Taylor's chief problem is despite the fact he looks so good at the crease most of the time, his mind tends to go numb and he gets out. He actually plays better cricket against Australia than anyone due to the fact he has no chance to relax. He must always be thinking about his cricket.

How on the other hand has VASTLY improved as a player over the past few years.

Ryder still has a lot to prove.

I'd rather Fulton be in the team than Flynn, and with no 2nd opener and no Oram our batting is weaker than it could be.

I don't think we'll be as trounced as you seem to be letting on though.

 

[Polo23]

That eleven though only has 6,958 Test runs between them though, at an average of 24. Australia have two batsmen in the team with more Test runs to their names individually than that, and the eleven that played the fourth Test in India has a combined 28,262 runs @ 48 - that's double the average! I'll admit it's not the best measure as the likes of Martin batting so many times in comparison to say, Ryder, drags the NZ average down, but even if you just take the top 8s you get 6,748 @ 28 playing 26,662 @ 52.

Firstly, that is an absolutely terrible way to compare any teams. Of course an established lineup is going to have more runs than a completely inexperienced one. We all know the NZ batting lineup is in a rebuilding stage, and we all know the Australian batting lineup is pretty settled and experienced. Terrlble comparison.

Secondly, how is this even relevant? It's not like we can magically come up with a player or two who have scored 6000 test runs at an average of 50. We are playing the best young talent we have in NZ, there isnt exactly a lot more we can do.

 

[Precambrian]

Why only 2 tests? Is CA going the BCCI way?

 

[Prince EWS]

Of course an established lineup is going to have more runs than a completely inexperienced one. We all know the NZ batting lineup is in a rebuilding stage, and we all know the Australian batting lineup is pretty settled and experienced. Terrlble comparison.

The point was to show exactly how vast the difference in experience and proven ability actually was.

 

[Raghav]

Even though we are inexperienced, we store the big performances against Australia. I predict that the kiwis are going to be best in their performance and Australia will definitely suffer if they are complacent.

 

[aussie]

Although i personally love for Ponting & Lee to rest from this series, plus finding away for both Symonds & Watson to play in the same XI. Australia need to settle on a regular XI quickly & ATM it has to be this IMO:

Hayden
Katich
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Symonds
Haddin
Noffke
Lee
Johnson
Clark

With Krezja or McGain playing on surface that looks spinner friendly.

 

[Polo23]

The point was to show exactly how vast the difference in experience and proven ability actually was.

Yeah, I understand that. But what exactly are we supposed to do about it? With the sudden retirements of Fleming, Astle, McMillan, Cairns and Vincent going to the IPL all happening at around the same time we were always going to be left with an incredibly inexperienced batting lineup. As I said, we have the best young talent in NZ there at the moment, most of these guys will likely be there for a long time and end up having very decent test records (Ryder, Taylor, McCullum, How). They have the potential to put on 400+ against Australia, it is just whether they can actually do it.

 

[Bahnz]

If the selectors do play four specialist seamers it would be an act remarkably ignorant of our performances over the past 12 months. The batting lineup is at its weakest in more than a decade and so the consensus is that we need more bowlers? Ugh.

 

[Polo23]

If the selectors do play four specialist seamers it would be an act remarkably ignorant of our performances over the past 12 months. The batting lineup is at its weakest in more than a decade and so the consensus is that we need more bowlers? Ugh.

Would you rather try and win the test, or try and draw the test? I'd rather we risked losing and go for the win, than go for the draw and lose anyway.

 

[Bahnz]

Would you rather try and win the test, or try and draw the test? I'd rather we risked losing and go for the win, than go for the draw and lose anyway.

We're not going to win. And even if that were a legitimate possibility, adding one more medium pace swing bowler to the mix isn't going to improve our chances much. People quote the cliche that you need 20 wickets to win a match all the time, but you need to make runs as well. You could have the best bowling attack in the world but if you keep losing your top 5 wickets for less than 150, then it's not going to do you much good.

 

[Polo23]

We're not going to win. And even if that were a legitimate possibility, adding one more medium pace swing bowler to the mix isn't going to improve our chances much. People quote the cliche that you need 20 wickets to win a match all the time, but you need to make runs as well. You could have the best bowling attack in the world but if you keep losing your top 5 wickets for less than 150, then it's not going to do you much good.

Yeah, that's a really good message to send to the players. "Hey guys, we arent going to win so Tim, you're out and we're bringing in Grant to try and get the draw".

Anything can happen and we have the nucleus of a good side, they just have to all fire over the 5 days (which yeah, maybe a longshot, but its possible).

With Oram out, and on a seam friendly track, the extra seamer will be more than handy. If NZ had the mindset you have, I doubt anyone would support them.

 

[Bahnz]

Yeah, that's a really good message to send to the players. "Hey guys, we arent going to win so Tim, you're out and we're bringing in Grant to try and get the draw".

Anything can happen and we have the nucleus of a good side, they just have to all fire over the 5 days (which yeah, maybe a longshot, but its possible).

With Oram out, and on a seam friendly track, the extra seamer will be more than handy. If NZ had the mindset you have, I doubt anyone would support them.

I'm not saying that we should play for a draw...we're not going to manage that either. What I'm saying that our best chance to be competitive is to bolster the strength of our batting, which has been our biggest weakness in recent times. And I would prefer it if we had a better batting option than Grant Elliot, but that's the selectors choice.

Brisbane, while not a bad track for fast bowlers, is hardly a seamers paradise. There might be something there for a bowler with genuine pace and bounce, but at this stage, Southee has neither, and is largely reliant on swing and putting it generally in the right place.

 

[Polo23]

I'm not saying that we should play for a draw...we're not going to manage that either. What I'm saying that our best chance to be competitive is to bolster the strength of our batting, which has been our biggest weakness in recent times. And I would prefer it if we had a better batting option than Grant Elliot, but that's the selectors choice.

Brisbane, while not a bad track for fast bowlers, is hardly a seamers paradise. There might be something there for a bowler with genuine pace and bounce, but at this stage, Southee has neither, and is largely reliant on swing and putting it generally in the right place.

And I disagree. The best chance we have to win, and to knock over Australia is with the extra bowler. Bracewell and Vettori are doing the right thing.

Southee gets a lot of bounce and bowls 135-140, he isn't express, but he definitely gets the ball to bounce (he is 6'4") at a decent pace. As we saw in the ODI's against England, he came on at first change when the ball had stopped swinging, and bowled brilliantly throughout the series, mainly getting wickets through balls which bounced.

 

[Athlai]

If Franklin was back we wouldn't even need to discuss having 5 bowlers.

 

[Polo23]

If Franklin was back we wouldn't even need to discuss having 5 bowlers.

How
Redmond
Ryder
Taylor
McCullum
Flynn
Franklin
Vettori
Mills
Southee
O'Brien/Martin

You reckon?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

No way Watson should be dropped. And as much as I'd like to see a four seamer attack in a certain sense, it isn't going to happen.

Hayden
Katich
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Watson
Haddin
Lee
Krezja
Johnson
Clark

Noffke in for someone would be a nice suprise, but also won't happen.