-
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* Australia in New Zealand
- Thread starter James
- Start date
Noble One
International Vice-Captain
Great win. Bailey with the deserved call-up. Has had the breakthrough season many have expected of him for seasons and seasons. Always been a great limited overs cricketer, could easily have been given a call-up over the last 2-3 years, but now really deserves his chance. Good batsman to have in the middle order, somewhat like Voges he is pretty handy at playing either the traditional middle order role, or hitting the ropes towards the end.
Such a shame that young Ferguson didn't get to play this summer. 15+ ODI games over the space of a couple of months could have really developed the kid.
Such a shame that young Ferguson didn't get to play this summer. 15+ ODI games over the space of a couple of months could have really developed the kid.
Days of Grace
International Captain
I was wrong about the batting powerplay.
We only had Vettori to come at that stage, so really, we should have left it for the last 45 overs.
The problem that the powerplay creates is that it gets batsmen into the mindset that almost every ball must go to the boundary. This makes them take unneccessary risks, even when they first come in.
Which can be disasterous if you take the powerplay 9 overs from the end but 5 wickets down. If you lose wicket no.6 in the first powerplay over (like we did today) then there is a chance that all remaining batsmen will slog and panic trying to use those powerplay overs whearas in normal circumstances, 6 wickets down after 42 overs, you would wait until about three or four overs out before going hell for leather. This is has even more potential for disaster if your nos. 9-11 are basically tail-enders. Which is what happened today.
In conclusion, only take the powerplay earlier than the 45th over if you are either a) 3 or 4 wickets down with strong to decent batting to come or b) chasing a huge total and are in a desparate situation with nothing to lose.
Now, having said all that, wouldn't it be much more interesting if teams had to take the batting powerplay between overs 15-40??? Think about that. Would make the game much more exciting, together with my idea of giving bowlers a maximum of 12 overs to bowl instead of 10.
We only had Vettori to come at that stage, so really, we should have left it for the last 45 overs.
The problem that the powerplay creates is that it gets batsmen into the mindset that almost every ball must go to the boundary. This makes them take unneccessary risks, even when they first come in.
Which can be disasterous if you take the powerplay 9 overs from the end but 5 wickets down. If you lose wicket no.6 in the first powerplay over (like we did today) then there is a chance that all remaining batsmen will slog and panic trying to use those powerplay overs whearas in normal circumstances, 6 wickets down after 42 overs, you would wait until about three or four overs out before going hell for leather. This is has even more potential for disaster if your nos. 9-11 are basically tail-enders. Which is what happened today.
In conclusion, only take the powerplay earlier than the 45th over if you are either a) 3 or 4 wickets down with strong to decent batting to come or b) chasing a huge total and are in a desparate situation with nothing to lose.
Now, having said all that, wouldn't it be much more interesting if teams had to take the batting powerplay between overs 15-40??? Think about that. Would make the game much more exciting, together with my idea of giving bowlers a maximum of 12 overs to bowl instead of 10.
Last edited:
Streetwise
Banned
If the openers are still in and scoring strongly then I think it would be worth taking the batting powerplay from 15-20. Would throw the bowling team out a bit especially if they rely on spinners coming on after 15.
Athlai
Not Terrible
He hurt his left hand today.Did anyone honestly expect us to win with such a depleted side?
I love the irony that Bond still stands unharmed amongst the wounded though
Days of Grace
International Captain
And was down on pace.
Could be just fatique, though, or lack of match fitness.
I wonder how he will cope because it's only one day rest between the next two matches.
Streetwise, I agree that with the openers in or even just one wicket down, then taking the powerplay in overs 15-20 could be a good idea. That is a rare occurence, though.
However, as we saw in a NZ match in the ICC Champions Trophy, when a bowling side refuses to take their powerplay, then the batting side could just say "**** you" and take theirs.
Actually, I don't understand why a bowling side has a powerplay. A powerplay should be something to be desired. But for the bowling team, it is something to get out of the way.
I posit that there should be only batting powerplays. Maybe two lots of five overs each. Or let the batting side have 10 overs in the 10-50 over period which they can use as a powerplay, i.e. turn on the powerplay, lose a wicket in the first over, and switch it off again, and use the remaining nine overs later on. Because it seems to me that half the problem with the batting powerplay is if you lose a wicket in the first over then you could lose 2,3,4, or even 5 wickets as incoming batsmen continue to go for the big shots before they are set.
Could be just fatique, though, or lack of match fitness.
I wonder how he will cope because it's only one day rest between the next two matches.
Streetwise, I agree that with the openers in or even just one wicket down, then taking the powerplay in overs 15-20 could be a good idea. That is a rare occurence, though.
However, as we saw in a NZ match in the ICC Champions Trophy, when a bowling side refuses to take their powerplay, then the batting side could just say "**** you" and take theirs.
Actually, I don't understand why a bowling side has a powerplay. A powerplay should be something to be desired. But for the bowling team, it is something to get out of the way.
I posit that there should be only batting powerplays. Maybe two lots of five overs each. Or let the batting side have 10 overs in the 10-50 over period which they can use as a powerplay, i.e. turn on the powerplay, lose a wicket in the first over, and switch it off again, and use the remaining nine overs later on. Because it seems to me that half the problem with the batting powerplay is if you lose a wicket in the first over then you could lose 2,3,4, or even 5 wickets as incoming batsmen continue to go for the big shots before they are set.
four_or_six
Cricketer Of The Year
I've heard them say quite often that it's a bit quicker. Certainly he gets a lot of wickets with it, has been for ages.
cbuts
International Debutant
cbuts
International Debutant
Its beyond belief that Broom is ahead of your mum in the pecking order
Loony BoB
International Captain
More a problem in that I can't stay up from 1am watching the cricket because, well, sleeping at work doesn't impress my boss too much.
GotSpin
Hall of Fame Member
wooooooooooooooo
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Yeah how dare they persist with someone who averaged a meagre 80 in the OD domestic competition.
But in all seriousness, replace Broom with Williamson, Stewart or Watling already. I can't stand the Broom bashing
Last edited:
KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
How dare you!
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Flintoff.