McCullum Gives Up Keeping in Tests

[Jezroy]

Not sure how Taylor would go at 3, especially if he finds himself in in the first few overs, given how our openers fare...

I know 3 and 4 are different, but doesn't he find himself in in the first few overs anyway?

 

[Hurricane]

Taylors doing perfectly well at four as is Ryder at 5. Not sure how Taylor would go at 3, especially if he finds himself in in the first few overs, given how our openers fare...

Agree with this. Seems like a risk to move Taylor and Ryder around to fit McCullum in at 5.

 

[Jezroy]

Seems like a risk to move Taylor and Ryder around to fit McCullum in at 5.

Yeah - just looking for thoughts on it really.

I still undecided on how I would put our line up.

Would love Williamson to be #3 if he's up to it.

 

[Howsie]

No way will Williamson bat at three for New Zealand in test cricket anytime soon.

 

[Jezroy]

No way will Williamson bat at three for New Zealand in test cricket anytime soon.

Who would you bat 3?

 

[Howsie]

Brendon McCullum, only because I don't want to see Taylor and Ryder moved from four and five and I want Williamson in the team. I can't see him being "good" but he'll be more then capable AFAIC, as long as he doesn't go into his shell.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

Not really about McCullum giving up the gloves but interesting all the same.

Moles never put his stamp on Black Caps job | Stuff.co.nz

 

[Jezroy]

Yeah - not really about the Great Glove Give Up, but this is about the thing that a lot of people don't like about Baz - the fact that he nearly didn't sign a central NZC contract...

Cricket: Club versus country - Sport - NZ Herald News

 

[Athlai]

Reckon all this is moot with his injury concerns. Would prefer a decent batting prospect that will play for us for years to come instead of a world class keeper who breaks his back in the next year or two.

 

[Jezroy]

Would prefer a decent batting prospect that will play for us for years to come instead of a world class keeper who breaks his back in the next year or two.

Agree agree agree

 

[SilentOne]

Brendon McCullum, only because I don't want to see Taylor and Ryder moved from four and five and I want Williamson in the team. I can't see him being "good" but he'll be more then capable AFAIC, as long as he doesn't go into his shell.

I'd rather see Ryder tried back at no. 3 ahead of Mccullum tbh.

Watling
McIntosh
Ryder
Taylor
McCullum

 

[Jezroy]

I'd rather see Ryder tried back at no. 3 ahead of Mccullum tbh.

Watling
McIntosh
Ryder
Taylor
McCullum

I'm hoping it'll be those 5 and then Williamson. Just what order they bat them in that will be the interesting thing. Then Vettori 7, keeper 8 (or even vice versa?) - and 3 bowlers. Then you have 4 front line bowlers, plus Ryder and Williamson.

Sounding alright potentially.

 

[Jezroy]

Here we go - he's talked some more about it

McCullum wants to open and give NZ flying start | Stuff.co.nz

Seems pretty realistic about the fact he has to perform otherwise he's cut.

 

[Howsie]

I'd much rather see him open then bat at three, only problem is that McIntosh and Watling shouldn't really get the chop just yet.

 

[Jezroy]

I'd much rather see him open then bat at three, only problem is that McIntosh and Watling shouldn't really get the chop just yet.

I agree with you there.

Sad isn't it how we couldn't pick one of Watling or McIntosh to drop because neither has proven they are any better than the other, yet they do seem to be the best of a bad bunch at the moment. Thing is though, that against those guys, McCullum averaging 30 or so opening might not seem like such a bad idea, instead of the 40 odd that we seem to expect from our middle order.

 

[Flem274*]

McIntosh has done a lot more than Watling.

EDIT: And I can see Josh Brodie or Jeet Raval overtaking at least one of them.

 

[Howsie]

Even so, Watling's only played four test matches and really hasn't done anything wrong. I thought selecting him for the test team when they did was wrong as he wasn't ready, but now that they have they can't just drop him.

 

[Jezroy]

McIntosh has done a lot more than Watling.

Neither of them have done much wrong.

Just sad that neither of them have done much. At all. Substantial. Showed something. But not a lot. Not looked completely useless or out of their depth, but never really come through (bar Timmy Mac's 100 vs WI).

 

[Flem274*]

Nah McIntosh has proven himself more than Watling. Of course a lot of that is due to Watling only having four tests under his belt.

 

[Jezroy]

Nah McIntosh has proven himself more than Watling. Of course a lot of that is due to Watling only having four tests under his belt.

Fair point gent.

But there have been a few times where T Mac has looked pretty poo as well. He is very much a poor man's Mark Richardson.