Hasn't he been out for a first ball duck to a similar ball in ODI cricket before?Even if Broom was technically not out, the fact that he was so comprehensively beaten for pace by a high 130's delivery does not reflect well on him.
Indeed, the number of occasions he seems to miss straight deliveries is unbelievable for a supposed top order batsman. Strikes me as someone who will always flatter to deceive at FC level, but will always be massively found out at the top level, as illustrated by his international career thus far.Even if Broom was technically not out, the fact that he was so comprehensively beaten for pace by a high 130's delivery does not reflect well on him.
You're not wrong there, it's the 16 or so innings prior to this series where he averaged around 16 with a strike rate of around 69 that countsBroom.
Not an international quality opposition, so it doesn't count!
I havent seen Kayes on this tour but saw him play against West Indies last July when Bangladesh won the series...He was part of the winning side, and yet he looked pretty unimpressive.I know you posted this a while back but some interesting points. I'm no expert when it comes to Bangladeshi cricket but I can't disagree with your first and third recommendations. Maybe a bit harsh on Kayes in your second point, he was run out today primarily due to a poor call from Ashraful (though admittedly not entirely without fault of his own) and made a reasonable start at Napier before being dismissed.
Not aware of Richardson and Doull's history as commentators but I can understand why people consider Rubel impressive. You have to look at the context here..He is the first and only bowler for Bangladesh to go past 140 kph. Thats impressive..jeez Richardson and Doull (mostly Richardson) annoy me.
They're wanking on about Rubel being "impressive" based solely on the fact that he can bowl 140-143kph.
Not wanting to hate on Rubel, but that sort of pace is neither here nor there at international level. I daresay Rubel's record will show you that.
Richardson does this every single time he sees a bowler over 140kph and it's simply based on the fact that he was scared of such bowlers during his playing days (and freely admits as much). It doesn't make for good analysis.
As the commentators kept mentioning Taylor's form and none could provide an example of the last time they could remember Taylor being out of form, I actually looked into it. Found it would be interesting to note that even though hes striking the ball brilliantly of late, he hasn't actually scored a century at international or domestic level in any format of the game since the test against India at the Basin Reserve in April 2009, i.e. ten months without a three figure score...I so hope Taylor is in this form when Australia come
This might've been what you were referring to?Hasn't he been out for a first ball duck to a similar ball in ODI cricket before?
a golden duck against BangladeshShowed his quality quite clearly. Obviously he is not "rubbish" as so many people have labeled him. Give him a bit of time to bat (like he had yesterday) and he'll come up trumps.
I'm still puzzled how almost everyone can write the guy off after 15 or so innings, almost all of which he's had to come in at the death and slog which is not his game, and he's been batting 2 positions lower than what he should for NZ. You bat most players 2 places out of position and they arent going to be as effective as they could.
He's batted 5 once in his ODI career. Sorry to destroy your baseless rant with facts, but it's only fair, right?a golden duck against Bangladesh
How that man got 70 odd the other day, I do not know, but good to see him back to his usual best. Give Williamson a shot
he has rarely came in at the death.... and he has also had a number of chance at number 5. And its not like he is getting out cheaply cos he is trying to smash it etc.... He geniuenly looks inept with a bat in his hand
If by "most people", you mean the average man in the crowd, then sure. But any decent top order batsman should be able to keep a medium fast yorker out, regardless of how new at the crease they are.He's batted 5 once in his ODI career. Sorry to destroy your baseless rant with facts, but it's only fair, right?
Most people would have struggled to keep that ball out first up yesterday.
If you're able to proclaim Broom as the second coming of Crowe after knocking about a 70 odd (after being dropped on 20) against a less than FC quality bowling attack at Napier, then why shouldn't his detractors get to stick the boot in when he fails against the same team?I like it how none of the Broom haters give Broom any credit when he scores 70 and pulls us out of the ****, but are only too happy to put the boot in when he fails.
Just for the record, Brendon McCullum averaged 16 after 18 innings, Styris averaged 12.8 (probably a little unfair because he was picked more as a bowler back then...but he could still bat and was down the order, similar to Broom), Fleming averaged 25.
Yep, Broom has no chance of ever succeeding based on his first 18 ODI innings, no chance at all.
Yeah, let's pick Williamson and bat him at six or seven, that will work Broom's been totally screwed over by the selectors during his international career, hopefully nobody else get's this type of treatment in the coming years.a golden duck against Bangladesh
How that man got 70 odd the other day, I do not know, but good to see him back to his usual best. Give Williamson a shot
he has rarely came in at the death.... and he has also had a number of chance at number 5. And its not like he is getting out cheaply cos he is trying to smash it etc.... He geniuenly looks inept with a bat in his hand