-
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.
***Official New Zealand Domestic Season Thread 2009/10
- Thread starter 204*
- Start date
Flem274*
123/5
(not at you, at McIntosh)
How are we getting out to Kaneria? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't this guy go to pot after being brilliant at the beginning of his career?
Anyway, without Ryder we're pretty reliant on Taylor and Vettori this series, along with hoping like hell Guptill finally kicks on.
McIntosh, Cumming and Watling doing their best to hand a test cap to Pinga. Sadly Pinga would rather get out to the (excellent) bowling of Trent Boult.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
Harsh - at least McIntosh managed to bat for over an hour which, given our usual problems is against the new ball is a good thing.
It's a pity against Pakistan that only gets us into the middle overs where we're vulnerable to the spinners. Clearly even with a ball only 25 overs old.
It's a pity against Pakistan that only gets us into the middle overs where we're vulnerable to the spinners. Clearly even with a ball only 25 overs old.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
Will get his second chance pretty soon. Imagine the Whangarei pitch must have flattened out a fair bit.
McIntosh, Cumming and Watling doing their best to hand a test cap to Pinga. Sadly Pinga would rather get out to the (excellent) bowling of Trent Boult.
Still, from what I've seen of Pinga I wouldn't want him anywhere near the test side
I also see Fulton is 172 not out for Canterbury. Say what you want about him but he certainly has the patience for batting long periods.
Flem274*
123/5
Batting forever can actualy damage the side if you're not scoring runs. A fast scorer that can average 35 is better than a slow one that averages 35. Its good McIntosh can last forever but he's not doing himself or NZ any favours by not being able to get the ball into the gaps for ones and twos. It would be nice if he could move the ball into gaps a bit more instead of stonewalling then getting out for 10 off 70 balls (exaggeration). That just puts the next man in (the equally annoying Flynn) under more pressure because we're 40/1 when we could have been on 40 odd half an hour previous.Harsh - at least McIntosh managed to bat for over an hour which, given our usual problems is against the new ball is a good thing.
It's a pity against Pakistan that only gets us into the middle overs where we're vulnerable to the spinners. Clearly even with a ball only 25 overs old.
Plus getting those singles doesnt give the bowler a chance to explore your weaknesses and relieves the pressure off yourself.
Flem274*
123/5
Yeah Pinga has an interesting way of batting, I'm mainly a fan because he taught at my high school (along with Tim Weston). It seems to be working though, as long as his eye is good enough for test bowlers he could do alright. He deserves a chance and is certainly no worse than T Mac (in fact I'd vote he's better).Will get his second chance pretty soon. Imagine the Whangarei pitch must have flattened out a fair bit.
Still, from what I've seen of Pinga I wouldn't want him anywhere near the test side
I also see Fulton is 172 not out for Canterbury. Say what you want about him but he certainly has the patience for batting long periods.
Having a picture perfect technique didn't help Jamie How either.
Fulton's awesome. I'm a fan. Its a shame we didn't play many tests in 06/07 because he was a fantastic ODI player for us back then. Who knows, if he'd started his test career back when he moved his feet properly and had his confidence up Daniel Flynn might still be confined to making stodgy 40s for ND instead of NZ.
Flem274*
123/5
You have conclusive proof I imagine?
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
I partly agree, but it depends on the circumstances. In our case I've seen our top order knocked over and middle order exposed to the new ball so many times that I genuinely think a 25 (70) from McIntosh is a lot more valuable than 25 (30) from Guptill. This is because the batsmen we really rely on to score runs (Taylor and Ryder) are IMO that much more likely to score runs coming in after 30 overs than after 10.
If you're Australia it's the opposite like you say, because they have batsmen in the middle order who are not as suspect against the new ball as ours, and wasting balls at the top only decreases their chance of pushing for a result.
Edit: You're obviously right about importance of singles and not allowing the bowler to work over the same batsman over after over. Flynn impressive with 27 (53) and not a single boundary so far. Of course if he goes out now the invitational XI is going to really struggle.
Last edited:
Howsie
International Captain
That's pretty much what I was going to say about batting time.
Flem274*
123/5
Ryder's not that bad against the new ball and Taylor spent most of his early career coming in after the likes of Bell, Redmond and towards the end How got out. Plus he already has Guptills 25 (30)s to enjoy.
Batting time is certainly valuable, but a slower scorer that isn't too slow, even if they're not much chop, like Cumming or Watling, would probably be a better bet.
Or Pinga
Flem274*
123/5
Where's a scorecard for this match? The NZ cricket site doesn't seem to have one. Am about to go on cricinfo which *should* have one.
Yeah it does...exactly the same as the domestic matches.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
Flem274*
123/5
Doesn't seem to pop up for me. I'll just keep refreshing the main page.
Flem274*
123/5
Got it but cheers for the link.
Anyone else find it hilarious we saw off Asif but got out to the rest, some of whom probably won't play any part in the tests?
It's there...the only explanation is that either you or your computer are ********
