-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
New Zealand team 1998 - 2008
- Thread starter Craig
- Start date
_Ed_
Request Your Custom Title Now!
He did score reasonably quickly in his 95 in Dunedin IIRC. At least until the hundred came within sight.
Anyway, my XI would be pretty similar to most others:
Richardson
Horne
Fleming
Taylor
Astle
Cairns
McCullum
Vettori
Nash
Franklin
Bond
The only controversial one I guess would be Taylor ahead of McMillan. McMillan had the talent of course, but if you take out Zimbabwe he only managed three centuries in his test career. Taylor's got two already, and got within sight of Crowe's NZ record for runs in a calendar year.
Oram, O'Connor and maybe even Tuffey unlucky. And I'll always believe that Drum should have played enough to be a contender...*sigh*
Hoping Flynn and Ryder will be good enough in the next little while to make choosing batsmen for the 1998-2012 XI extremely hard, and that Southee will squeeze in too.
For ODIs, Allott, Harris and Twose would come in and replace Nash, Franklin and Horne. EDIT: And someone would replace Richardson...McMillan maybe. Astle and McCullum to open.
Last edited:
Oh damn I forgot about him. McMillan out for Twose. McMillan's only in because of THAT hundred against Aussie to be fair.
And prefer the powerful lower order of Cairns and Oram to Chris Harris.
99*
International Debutant
1- M. Richardson
2- G. Stead
3- S. Fleming*
4- N. Astle
5- M. Sinclair
6- C. Cairns
7- B. McCullum+
8- D. Vettori
9- D. Nash
10- S. Bond
11- D. Tuffey
12- J. Oram
Couldn't bring myself to pick Horne, so I picked Stead. Should have played much more than he did IMO. Sinclair ahead of Macca and Styris, not many others to pick tbh. And Tuffey ahead of O'Conner/Martin if only to bowl the first over.
ODI's
1- N. Astle
2- B. McCullum+
3- S. Fleming*
4- R. Twose
5- C. McMillan
6- C. Cairns
7- J. Oram
8- C. Harris
9- D. Vettori
10- J. Franklin
11- S. Bond
2- G. Stead
3- S. Fleming*
4- N. Astle
5- M. Sinclair
6- C. Cairns
7- B. McCullum+
8- D. Vettori
9- D. Nash
10- S. Bond
11- D. Tuffey
12- J. Oram
Couldn't bring myself to pick Horne, so I picked Stead. Should have played much more than he did IMO. Sinclair ahead of Macca and Styris, not many others to pick tbh. And Tuffey ahead of O'Conner/Martin if only to bowl the first over.
ODI's
1- N. Astle
2- B. McCullum+
3- S. Fleming*
4- R. Twose
5- C. McMillan
6- C. Cairns
7- J. Oram
8- C. Harris
9- D. Vettori
10- J. Franklin
11- S. Bond
Last edited:
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Must say I don't understand the Horne-hate. Could possibly have been an OK-ish Test opener for my money.
I think the Test team virtually picks itself so for ODIs I'd have to go for:
Vettori
Astle
McMillan
Fleming
Twose
Taylor
Cairns
McCullum
Harris
Allott
Bond
With Larsen just not quite falling enough within the timescale - must've played only about 10-20 games. And if you wanted you could swap McCullum and Vettori, but I've never rated McCullum as an opener in the slightest.
I think the Test team virtually picks itself so for ODIs I'd have to go for:
Vettori
Astle
McMillan
Fleming
Twose
Taylor
Cairns
McCullum
Harris
Allott
Bond
With Larsen just not quite falling enough within the timescale - must've played only about 10-20 games. And if you wanted you could swap McCullum and Vettori, but I've never rated McCullum as an opener in the slightest.
Last edited:
Athlai
Not Terrible
WTF is with Vettori opening? I know he does it domestically but he clearly clearly clearly isn't good enough to do it for a NZ 98-08 team.
McCullum has scored over 1000 runs opening at 36.15 with a SR of 100.33
but want McCullum down the order sureeee
Vincent averages 30.30 with a strike rate of 82
How and Ryder also average mid 30's.
You could even shift Fleming there as he had some mighty success opening the ODI's! That would free up room in the middle order!
But Vettori? WTF!
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Fleming opening is a waste of a good middle-order player, not a "freeing-up" of one.
Ryder has barely been playing five minutes and has never done anything at the domestic level so his ODI success should be short-lived.
McCullum's success as an opener is basically down to one series against a diabolical England attack (in his 23 other innings' as an opener he averages 25.32. I expect that to come down further as well. However, he (unlike Vettori) offers plenty at number-eight.
How you could possibly make a case for but you'd have to drop another batsman and I'd still have McMillan (the only candidate) ahead of How.
Vincent I just don't want near any team of mine TBH, can't quite explain why. He just radiates nothingness. Would almost be worried he'd drag-down Astle.
So Vettori opening is how to make the best of a bad job. Aside from Astle, NZ have had no quality ODI openers of late.
Ryder has barely been playing five minutes and has never done anything at the domestic level so his ODI success should be short-lived.
McCullum's success as an opener is basically down to one series against a diabolical England attack (in his 23 other innings' as an opener he averages 25.32. I expect that to come down further as well. However, he (unlike Vettori) offers plenty at number-eight.
How you could possibly make a case for but you'd have to drop another batsman and I'd still have McMillan (the only candidate) ahead of How.
Vincent I just don't want near any team of mine TBH, can't quite explain why. He just radiates nothingness. Would almost be worried he'd drag-down Astle.
So Vettori opening is how to make the best of a bad job. Aside from Astle, NZ have had no quality ODI openers of late.
Athlai
Not Terrible
Fleming has never been an exceptional one day batsman during this period he averaged 33.22 with a SR of 71.20.
Opening he averages 34.64 with a SR of 73.87 which is 1 run short of Astle's average and 1 run better in terms of SR.
In fact he averages more opening than in any other position in the team.
As for Ryder the fact is he is just plain obviously much better equipped to open the batting than Daniel Vettori. And it is pretty rich to argue about how he has done nothing as of yet to back it up when your throwing a guy into the position who averages 15 in ODI cricket and has never opened at this level nor come close to even warranting such a selection.
As for McMillan? While he had a good match or two was tripe for so much of his career. FFS Taylor has already scored as many centuries as him in nearly a quarter of the same innings.
And naturally McCullum's average suffers when you take away his best matches I believe most would? And how is an attack of Sidebottom (quality) Anderson (ODI quality at least) Broad (very good prospect and quite economical) the bad basis of an attack? This is just a Dickinson attempt to undermine a player with some false assertions to make a point which doesn't exist.
Opening he averages 34.64 with a SR of 73.87 which is 1 run short of Astle's average and 1 run better in terms of SR.
In fact he averages more opening than in any other position in the team.
As for Ryder the fact is he is just plain obviously much better equipped to open the batting than Daniel Vettori. And it is pretty rich to argue about how he has done nothing as of yet to back it up when your throwing a guy into the position who averages 15 in ODI cricket and has never opened at this level nor come close to even warranting such a selection.
As for McMillan? While he had a good match or two was tripe for so much of his career. FFS Taylor has already scored as many centuries as him in nearly a quarter of the same innings.
And naturally McCullum's average suffers when you take away his best matches I believe most would? And how is an attack of Sidebottom (quality) Anderson (ODI quality at least) Broad (very good prospect and quite economical) the bad basis of an attack? This is just a Dickinson attempt to undermine a player with some false assertions to make a point which doesn't exist.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
So just imagine how good he might've been had he spent his prime years of 28-33 in his best position of three or four rather than completely out-of-position opening. IMO, Fleming would've gone on to be a pretty damn good, if not exceptional, ODI batsman had he never been forced to open the batting.
Vettori has opened a few times in ODIs, but that's not the point. The point is that Ryder isn't a bowler and thus would be a waste of a place, while Vettori is in the team for his bowling, not his batting. Vettori opening with Fleming at four > Fleming opening, because while Fleming will often have to pseudo-open, from time to time he'll get to bat in his best position of three or four. This means Fleming's prospects are improved, rather than being wholly wasted at the top.
If you want to drop McMillan to bring in How (or even, cringe, Ryder) then you can do so. I, however, wouldn't.
It's not a case of taking away his best matches, else I'd just be hand-picking every game in which he scored more than 30 and deducting it. Anderson is so far short of ODI-class it's not funny, Sidebottom IIRR contained McCullum very well, Broad is and always has been either brilliant or diabolical in ODIs with very little middle-ground, and the rest are just useless, even (on small NZ grounds) the likes of Swann and Mascarenhas who might be good on normal-sized ones.
McCullum has never been much crack as a ODI opener in my book and I'll be very surprised if that changes. However, he has started to look useful down the order of late.
Athlai
Not Terrible
He would have probably averaged the same if he batted at 3 because if he didn't open he'd be out there after the first over anyway.
This just shows an ignorance to the modern game of one day cricket. Vettori just doesn't have the ability to make use of power plays nor is he good enough to keep up any kind of run rate if conditions are difficult. He is a very talented batsman yet not in regards to the shorter form of the game, the top 3 in a ODI are often the most important and with this team you have wasted a place. There is no need for a bowler to open for an ODI team to have a lineup that has McCullum at 8. It makes no sense at all.
GGG
State Captain
I would disagree, I believe he is one of those people that shine when in the lime light but are crap when not, whether it is lazyness, a don't care attitude or his drinking.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
He'd not. No batsman, however bad (except possibly Chris Martin, and I don't imagine he'd be sent in to open EVER) is going to be out in the first over every game. Fleming batting three (or better, four) would have at least 4 or 5 overs, and often enough more, in the shed on plenty of occasions. That, in my view, would enhance his chances a good deal. I reckon had he batted four all career, he could very easily have averaged 37-38.
With McCullum opening you have an almost-wasted place (if he wasn't a wicketkeeper) and what's worse you also waste a batsman who can be of considerable use at seven or eight. You vastly overestimate, IMO, McCullum's opening powers. If Vettori would be near-useless, so would McCullum. Just because he's a strokeplayer doesn't mean he's likely to score runs very often. 13 off 10 balls is of precious little more use than 13 off 20 balls. Or even 5 off 10.
Nor does having McCullum opening, IMO. He's just not good enough. And if he wasn't good enough to bat seven\eight either, then that'd be fair enough. But he is, and offers a considerable amount there, which I don't want to be wasted by asking him to do a job he's not capable of.
Anyway, we're not going to get anywhere with this as things stand now, because there isn't enough evidence about McCullum as an opener - the case is an inconclusive one. Let's come back to it whenever McCullum has failed conclusively as an opener.