***Official India in New Zealand***

[KiWiNiNjA]

On a player-by-player basis they most certainly are favorites. It's almost a mismatch, IMO.

Hmm, here was me thinking Cricket was a team sport.

 

[Jono]

I can't recall the last time they won in New Zealand.

Fair enough, but last time they played was 5+ years ago. A lot has changed, including no Shane Bond for NZ, and a far better fast bowling attack for India.

Since that 2002/03 series India have won test matches in Australia (twice), England (series win), West Indies (series win) and South Africa. Yes I understand NZ conditions are different to those countries, but I'd hardly say NZ's batting or bowling is much better than those teams.

It should be a good series, but saying India shouldn't go in as favourites because of their 2002/03 series is ludicrous. So much has changed since that series. **** I was still in high school back then

 

[Precambrian]

Fair enough, but last time they played was 5+ years ago. A lot has changed, including no Shane Bond for NZ, and a far better fast bowling attack for India.

Since that 2002/03 series India have won test matches in Australia (twice), England (series win), West Indies (series win) and South Africa. Yes I understand NZ conditions are different to those countries, but I'd hardly say NZ's batting or bowling is much better than those teams.

It should be a good series, but saying India shouldn't go in as favourites because of their 2002/03 series is ludicrous. So much has changed since that series. **** I was still in high school back then

Lol, me too! Was not exactly exciting time then.

 

[Flem274*]

Fair enough, but last time they played was 5+ years ago. A lot has changed, including no Shane Bond for NZ, and a far better fast bowling attack for India.

Since that 2002/03 series India have won test matches in Australia (twice), England (series win), West Indies (series win) and South Africa. Yes I understand NZ conditions are different to those countries, but I'd hardly say NZ's batting or bowling is much better than those teams.

It should be a good series, but saying India shouldn't go in as favourites because of their 2002/03 series is ludicrous. So much has changed since that series. **** I was still in high school back then

Whilst I agree with your views, the loss of Shane Bond is over-rated. The bowling attack post-Bond has been excellent. We miss Fleming, Astle etc far more.

 

[Athlai]

Whilst I agree with your views, the loss of Shane Bond is over-rated. The bowling attack post-Bond has been excellent. We miss Fleming, Astle etc far more.

Loss of Bond is felt everytime we can't knock over the ****ing tail IMO.

 

[Athlai]

India to win Napier (or a draw)
NZ to win Basin (or rain leading to draw)

Hamilton is the real nailbiter.

(Though of course the matches could always go either way, especially the Basin)

 

[Polo23]

but saying India shouldn't go in as favourites because of their 2002/03 series is ludicrous.

I completely agree, and so far I haven't seen anyone say India aren't favourites.

 

[Cricket_God]

India to win Napier (or a draw)
NZ to win Basin (or rain leading to draw)

Hamilton is the real nailbiter.

(Though of course the matches could always go either way, especially the Basin)

are you joking even drawing a test for newzealand will be tough.can you imagine
indian fast bowlers who have bowled so well on pitches which are dead will do in
conditions which are a bit helpful.i just cannot wait to see our attack in newzealand
,the incutters of ishant aimed at ribs of the batsman or outswing of sreesanth and
reverse swing of zaheer.

best chance for newzealand is preparing turning tracks or flat tracks ito even draw a test.
newzealand medium pacers really need grass on the wicket but that would be playing in to indians hands.

 

[Athlai]

are you joking even drawing a test for newzealand will be tough.can you imagine
indian fast bowlers who have bowled so well on pitches which are dead will do in
conditions which are a bit helpful.i just cannot wait to see our attack in newzealand
,the incutters of ishant aimed at ribs of the batsman or outswing of sreesanth and
reverse swing of zaheer.

best chance for newzealand is preparing turning tracks or flat tracks ito even draw a test.
newzealand medium pacers really need grass on the wicket but that would be playing in to indians hands.

Napier tends to be flat as heck. Expect India to pile on 500+ easy.

Na Ishant is good but he's still undercooked a little. In a few years time he'll be the best in the world or close to it but he still isn't something to keep our boys awake at night. Zaheer will do well and Sreesanth will either get some wickets or go for 0/100. The basin will swing and we'll see how good your pacers really are.

Pace isn't everything (not that the Indians are all that fast- admittedly faster than us though) it is all about how your attack works together and the plans they bowl too. If the Indian team puts in the hard yards then I can see them beating us on every track (though draws are still possible), but if they get too ****y we'll claw back on top.

 

[S.P. Fleming]

Does anybody know if fox sports in Australia are televising the India/NZ series because normally there wouldve been an ad for it by now or it wouldve been on "febuary on fox sports" ad. Or maybe do Setanta have the rights because India are playing? please help!

 

[Polo23]

Pace isn't everything (not that the Indians are all that fast- admittedly faster than us though) it is all about how your attack works together and the plans they bowl too. If the Indian team puts in the hard yards then I can see them beating us on every track (though draws are still possible), but if they get too ****y we'll claw back on top.

Especially on NZ tracks which tend to be very consistent in bounce and very easy paced. I don't think Ishant's pace (not that he's that quick anyway) will bother us, it will be movement in the air or off the pitch. It really will be interesting to see how the Indian pacers go.

 

[TT Boy]

Pace might not be everything but that is all Mohammed Sami had and he made a habit of doing the business against New Zealand.

Also in recent memory, Shaun Tait at Perth, an injured ineffective Brett Lee got wickets in the recent test series and Dale Steyn in the Republic was too quick for them. Whilst at home, Fidel Edwards, Shoaib Akhtar and Lasith Malinga have all enjoyed themselves. Facing up to real genuine quicks has been the Achilles’ heal of New Zealand sides in the past few years. Sharma is different to all those aforementioned bowlers, his not as skiddy (Malinga, Edwards, Shoaib, Tait, Sami et cetera take the pitch out of the equation) but he can crack it up and has the advantage of getting some serious bounce. It should be a good contest.

 

[Athlai]

Pace might not be everything but that is all Mohammed Sami had and he made a habit of doing the business against New Zealand.

Also in recent memory, Shaun Tait at Perth, an injured ineffective Brett Lee got wickets in the recent test series and Dale Steyn in the Republic was too quick for them. Whilst at home, Fidel Edwards, Shoaib Akhtar and Lasith Malinga have all enjoyed themselves. Facing up to real genuine quicks has been the Achilles’ heal of New Zealand sides in the past few years. Sharma is different to all those aforementioned bowlers, his not as skiddy (Malinga, Edwards, Shoaib, Tait, Sami et cetera take the pitch out of the equation) but he can crack it up and has the advantage of getting some serious bounce. It should be a good contest.

Indian doesn't have a genuine 150+ bowler though do they? From what I've seen they're all around 140 which is what we're used to.

 

[TT Boy]

Indian doesn't have a genuine 150+ bowler though do they? From what I've seen they're all around 140 which is what we're used to.

Sharma is a bit of an enigma with his pace, can bowl quick (was clocking 150 in the CB Series last year) but most of the time his pace is ordinary. Sreesanth can be lively but I haven’t seen him bowl in ages.

 

[Athlai]

Sharma is a bit of an enigma with his pace, can bowl quick (was clocking 150 in the CB Series last year) but most of the time his pace is ordinary. Sreesanth can be lively but I haven’t seen him bowl in ages.

Ah I was just meaning Test match stuff and Sharma tends to clock in at the low 140's, his swing will be the biggest issue I reckon. Genuine pace or swing doesn't seem to trouble Ryder though the guy has the most amazing timing. If he wasn't such a lazy bugger he'd be one hell of a batsman. Taylor too once he's batted himself in isn't bothered at all.

The openers however will probably be destroyed by the quicks.

 

[Polo23]

Pace might not be everything but that is all Mohammed Sami had and he made a habit of doing the business against New Zealand.

Also in recent memory, Shaun Tait at Perth, an injured ineffective Brett Lee got wickets in the recent test series and Dale Steyn in the Republic was too quick for them. Whilst at home, Fidel Edwards, Shoaib Akhtar and Lasith Malinga have all enjoyed themselves. Facing up to real genuine quicks has been the Achilles’ heal of New Zealand sides in the past few years. Sharma is different to all those aforementioned bowlers, his not as skiddy (Malinga, Edwards, Shoaib, Tait, Sami et cetera take the pitch out of the equation) but he can crack it up and has the advantage of getting some serious bounce. It should be a good contest.

I admit we have struggled against genuine pace in the past, though the Shaun Tait example is a pretty poor one...it was one T20, hardly a good sample. Sharma isn't as quick as any of the bowlers mentioned anyway, and if you notice all of them (bar Steyn) have had slingy skiddy actions. Sharma shouldnt do us with pace, it will be movement which troubles our batsmen.

 

[Precambrian]

Indian doesn't have a genuine 150+ bowler though do they? From what I've seen they're all around 140 which is what we're used to.

Sharma is a bit of an enigma with his pace, can bowl quick (was clocking 150 in the CB Series last year) but most of the time his pace is ordinary. Sreesanth can be lively but I haven’t seen him bowl in ages.

Sharma is only getting better and better. Pace is not sure shot to success in the subcontinent and to concentrate on swing, and to bowl longer spells in difficult conditions, Sharma bowled in the 140 kmph range. I am sure he will consistently clock above 145 kph in NZ, and periodically touching 150 kmph.

Zak is around 135, though some times he revs it up to 142 kmph.

Sreesanth too is around that range and has touched max of 145 kmph. However he was injured for a long time, and now is playing the Duleep Trophy to come back into match form. However unless he does something extraordinarily good, I don't see him travelling to NZ, Munaf will be the third pace bowler followed by R P Singh.

 

[Polo23]

Sreesanth is rubbish anyway, like India's Mark Gillespie.

If Sharma is consistently 145km/h+ in the tests i'll buy you a case of beers.

 

[Uppercut]

Sreesanth is rubbish anyway, like India's Mark Gillespie.

Haha, he's not that bad. There's one player with an easily better FC record than any Indian seamer who never gets a look in, despite being only 22. They seem to have pigeonholed Praveen Kumar as an ODI specialist though, for some reason.

 

[Polo23]

Haha, he's not that bad. There's one player with an easily better FC record than any Indian seamer who never gets a look in, despite being only 22. They seem to have pigeonholed Praveen Kumar as an ODI specialist though, for some reason.

Can't say i've seen an awful lot of Kumar...but he does seem a little slow for test cricket. Though in saying that, Kyle Mills gets a look in...though we don't have the depth of India.