*Official* Australia in New Zealand

[Halfpast_Yellow]

PJ Ingram is in his second test if he plays. Hardly a great sample size.

If we're not picking off weight of runs/wickets, what are we going to use? Talent? Talent is in the eye of the beholder, and tends to ignore results (look at WindieWeathers posts for an example).

I would prefer to pick players who have shown they are good somewhere rather than players that might be good in a few years.

Often they go hand in hand e.g. Ryder had bucketloads of FC runs behind him and he was a success. Taylor had a good List A record and an average FC record, and after a few failures at test level made some adjustments and became a better batsman.

Williamson will probably be like Ryder. I hope.

The Mathew Sinclairs and Peter Fultons shouldn't scare us off picking players with good records. If the two above batsmen did some homework I think they'd succeed and succeed well at test level. Sinclair won't change now, or he already would have. Fulton might yet. Who knows.

'Talent' is okay to describe it, I'd phrase it 'the tools/game to succeed at international test cricket.

Yes often domestic performance and weight of runs go hand in hand, if you're equipped for test cricket you're quite likely to score heavily domestically, but again it's a failure of logic to imply the reverse is true, if you score heavily at domestic cricket it does not follow to the same degree that you have the tools to succeed in international cricket.

I really hope Ingram succeeds by the way as an NZ supporter and absolutely no one can call him a proven failure at test cricket yet.

But it would not surprise me if the Aussie bowlers are all over him. My gut feeling is he is the perfect example of someone who has a game that works well enough domestically vs NZ low-tier bowlers, but falls apart vs international 145-150km bowlers like Johnson who can exploit the weaknesses in his gameplan like no one on the NZ domestic scene can

 

[Zinzan]

That's a huge logic fail

It's not 'in other words' at all.

Yes it's rubbish that good limited overs performance is not entirely indicative of good test performance (though some skills are obviously transferable).

But you can't just apply that idea to the reverse case which is Brooms bad ODI performance implies he won't be able to step up to test level.

Why I don't like Broom for tests isn't just that he's had no returns for his ODI performances, but the analysis of why he's had no return.

Missing nothing straight deliveries, technique issues, failing when he's come in and had time to bat through the innings, and just plain looking awful against international strength bowlers.

I would put more stock in this for estimating his worth as an international test player than some scores in NZ's weak 4 day domestic comp.

No-one should ever 'deserve' an international callup to the BC's based purely on run aggregate in our domestic comp. They deserve a call-up if the selector's think they can hack it against international bowlers, and runs in domestic comp is not the be-all and end-all as other posters have alluded to, and it's why the selecting job is not as easy as 'let's look at the domestic scores for the season and chuck in the high-achievers disregarding those with 2+ previous international fails'.

PJ Ingram is dangerously close to being an 'I told you so' prime example for this point.

Agree 100%. I'm in the same boat in that respect, it's not just purely the fact that Broom averages 17 in ODI's at a SR of 70, it's the way he looks. I've mentioned it before that IMO his fundamental issue seems to be his bat-lift, which points in the direction of third-man, which for me explains his incredible propensity of missing perfectly straight deliverers to be bowled or out LBW. He obviously gets away with it at FC level, but clearly not at International level,

 

[Hurricane]

With Ingram I agree with the comment that he looks awful when he gets out. I don't think it will take many failures from him in order for him to be dropped because of these optics. In some ways this is unfair on him. He might only be given three games to perform while someone else might get 5 or 6. On the other hand I think selectors should take technique into account when they select someone. It comes to whether they have the tools of the trade to succeed at test level.

I don't mind either way with Broom. He has had a lot of chances at ODI level. On the other hand I have seen him get dismissed in ODIs due to bad shot selection which could just mean he is a poor ODI player. But if I were a selector I would probably lean towards not picking him.

 

[Riggins]

So pumped to watch timmy mac play in the test series. As long as he doesn't get out to nathan hauritz its all sweet.

 

[Flem274*]

With Ingram I agree with the comment that he looks awful when he gets out. I don't think it will take many failures from him in order for him to be dropped because of these optics. In some ways this is unfair on him. He might only be given three games to perform while someone else might get 5 or 6. On the other hand I think selectors should take technique into account when they select someone. It comes to whether they have the tools of the trade to succeed at test level.

I don't mind either way with Broom. He has had a lot of chances at ODI level. On the other hand I have seen him get dismissed in ODIs due to bad shot selection which could just mean he is a poor ODI player. But if I were a selector I would probably lean towards not picking him.

If thats the case then they'd still have made a harsh decision. Other batsman in the side or just out of it have been just as bad.

This will be a hard series, and there will be casualties at the end because of the demand for blood. Hopefuly if they go on a mass culling spree the players they select aren't the same old faces on the merry go round.

 

[Athlai]

Cumming deserves a Test shout ahead of Ingram IMO.

 

[Flem274*]

Cumming deserves a Test shout ahead of Ingram IMO.

So he can get out LBW again?

 

[Athlai]

So he can get out LBW again?

To show Ingram how it's done.

 

[Flem274*]

To show Ingram how it's done.

Not sure if he needs a demonstration of what an LBW is.

 

[Hurricane]

If thats the case then they'd still have made a harsh decision. Other batsman in the side or just out of it have been just as bad.

Flynn always seems to get caught behind. Indicating some sort of technique issue.

But when he gets out you aren't cringing at the lack of technique.

I think Ingram is in a category all of his own for having a lack of text book technique.

Flem - what is your personal reaction when you see Ingram getting dismissed due to his technique issues? Do you put it down to him getting a good delivery?

 

[Flem274*]

Flynn always seems to get caught behind. Indicating some sort of technique issue.

But when he gets out you aren't cringing at the lack of technique.

I think Ingram is in a category all of his own for having a lack of text book technique.

Flem - what is your personal reaction when you see Ingram getting dismissed due to his technique issues? Do you put it down to him getting a good delivery?

I haven't seen enough of the ODIs to comment, but from what I did see the Aussies executed a good plan to him that gave him no room (Bangladesh tried this as well). This created scoring pressure. Early on he is also vulnerable, so better bowlers obviously have a better chance of getting him early, and the Australians might just be the best attack in the world atm (ODIs).

I wouldn't have him anywhere near the full strength ODI side when he exists on about four shots (despite his hitting power), but I think he deserves as much of a chance in the test side as others have had (others that got in on one season).

I do cringe at Flynn and McIntosh's technique. Granted McIntosh is improving and making what he has work for him (showing it can be done). Both of them get in no mans land, no decisive foot movement (my personal opinion is that is worse than staying still) and Flynn's poking around outside off stump is getting worse and worse.

Ingram doesn't move his feet. Fine. He relies on balance and his eye. He has quite a wide stance which means his weight is spread nicely, aiding his balance. This counteracts the lack of foot movement somewhat. It's certainly better than Peter Fulton having no idea where to go with his feet right next to each other, looking like he's about to fall over.

Ingram may well be a complete fail, but judging him on one series against Australia is imo unfair when other players have received numerous chances and against lesser opposition. Who else is going to bat number three? By the looks of it, Sinclair is next in line. I'm sure that will work.

If after a decent run he sucks, send him away. But if he screws up in two tests and three (?) ODIs against Australia and is canned after posting monster numbers since 2006 domestically (possibly the best numbers over that period if we leave the inevitable Sinclair run machine out) then that is an injustice. All over "looking bad" while others are flailing around for longer and just as badly.

People used to hate O'Brien and Elliott, and they turned out awesome in their respective fields. I remember when Mills first started out he was not very popular at all. Even Hopkins has gotten better. All that is needed is patience, and to give guys a decent go rather than thinking "Oh ****, pick Sinclair or a young guy with talent!".

Rant not directed at you btw bud, just the world in general.

 

[cbuts]

Playing him in obviously his least preferred format, which would have been ok, had he still been selected for the tests. Getting dropped for the tests, when he has been one of the best FC performers over the past 2-3 seasons because of poor form in ODI cricket is pretty harsh.

pretty sure at teh start of this thread, youll find people arguing that his domestic OD form has been up there with teh best in teh country aswell.

We have far better option in the middle order than Broom.4 5 6 7 - Taylor, Guptil, Vetorri McCullum. Still gotta bring Ryder into that.

Ingram has dominated Broom on the domestic front in all forms over the last 3-4 seasons. Also has made a better fist of the ODI's than Broom. So thats 3 out of the way. And Sinclair has dominated him on the domestic front for over a decade.

Leaves the opening spots... and as weak as we are there, Broom certinally couldnt find a spot there.

 

[African Monkey]

Flynn always seems to get caught behind. Indicating some sort of technique issue.

He does get LBW a bit as well playing across the line.

 

[Days of Grace]

So pumped to watch timmy mac play in the test series. As long as he doesn't get out to nathan hauritz its all sweet.

He won't be there when Hauritz comes onto bowl, tbh.

 

[Riggins]

He won't be there when Hauritz comes onto bowl, tbh.

Will too, he will be ~15 n.o and CRUISING!!

 

[lockton2skipper]

don't have a problem with craig cumming, thought he would have had a recall by now. tough player.

 

[Polo23]

pretty sure at teh start of this thread, youll find people arguing that his domestic OD form has been up there with teh best in teh country aswell.

We have far better option in the middle order than Broom.4 5 6 7 - Taylor, Guptil, Vetorri McCullum. Still gotta bring Ryder into that.

Ingram has dominated Broom on the domestic front in all forms over the last 3-4 seasons. Also has made a better fist of the ODI's than Broom. So thats 3 out of the way. And Sinclair has dominated him on the domestic front for over a decade.

Leaves the opening spots... and as weak as we are there, Broom certinally couldnt find a spot there.

How many times has Sinclair been tried, only to fail and be dropped again? And how old is he now? 34? I hardly see him as a long term or worthwhile selection.

I have no problem with Ingram getting selected though Broom is averaging more and has scored more FC runs in as many games as Ingram this season.

So as i've said the whole time, based on his FC form over the past 2 seasons he deserves a shot, even if it is as the backup batsman.

 

[Athlai]

How many times has Sinclair been tried, only to fail and be dropped again? And how old is he now? 34? I hardly see him as a long term or worthwhile selection.

I have no problem with Ingram getting selected though Broom is averaging more and has scored more FC runs in as many games as Ingram this season.

So as i've said the whole time, based on his FC form over the past 2 seasons he deserves a shot, even if it is as the backup batsman.

He isn't a longterm selection, we're still waiting for Ryder to recover.

 

[Days of Grace]

Keeping the seat warm for Williamson, tbh.

 

[Howsie]

Indeed. Although I hope Williamson get's 18-24 months of batting in the middle order before being shifted up to number three, in the test team anyway. If New Zealand were smart they would bat him at three in one day cricket right away.