-
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.
McCullum Gives Up Keeping in Tests
- Thread starter Athlai
- Start date
Jezroy
State Captain
Love the Mac Attack. Martin Crowe would have a heart attack if his was commentating.
"HOLY COW!!! IT'S A MAC ATTACK HERE AT THE BASIN!"
yup thats the way to go
Howsie
Cricketer Of The Year
If the selectors felt the need to have to play Brendon McCullum as an opener right away I'd probably much rather they just drop Watling then move him around and bat him in a position he has very little experience in.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
If it is the mac attack opening and ryder at 5, which is a big if because the article suggested ryder at 3, then it is either watling, williamson, guptil, sinclair at 3.
If not Watling and if not Ryder then who do you want to see at 3 Howsie?
I like Watling technically more than Sinclair and more than Guptil for that matter. He commits more to his shots. That said Watling has an lbw issue which the Aussies exploited so he isn't perfect.
I don't think you can ask a number 3 to be an opener because of the technical demands of opening. But perhaps an opener can play 3 (as long as his name is not Timmy).
If not Watling and if not Ryder then who do you want to see at 3 Howsie?
I like Watling technically more than Sinclair and more than Guptil for that matter. He commits more to his shots. That said Watling has an lbw issue which the Aussies exploited so he isn't perfect.
I don't think you can ask a number 3 to be an opener because of the technical demands of opening. But perhaps an opener can play 3 (as long as his name is not Timmy).
Flem274*
123/5
I don't want to see Ryder, Guptill or Williamson at three.
Watling, Sinclair, Ingram, Flynn etc are all options, but what about the likes of Mybrugh (has he qualified?), Todd, Young (seem to remember him at three for Auckz when Hopkins took the gloves) and Merchant? Any takers?
My first choice would be Scott Styris, but that ain't happening.
Taylor is practically a number three, but having him come in at four with as much of a platform as possible would be a huge plus. Besides, I don't believe in forcing your trump cards into positions they don't usually operate in. So I hope Taylor and Ryder remain at four and five.
Watling, Sinclair, Ingram, Flynn etc are all options, but what about the likes of Mybrugh (has he qualified?), Todd, Young (seem to remember him at three for Auckz when Hopkins took the gloves) and Merchant? Any takers?
My first choice would be Scott Styris, but that ain't happening.
Taylor is practically a number three, but having him come in at four with as much of a platform as possible would be a huge plus. Besides, I don't believe in forcing your trump cards into positions they don't usually operate in. So I hope Taylor and Ryder remain at four and five.
Jezroy
State Captain
Read that Flynn had been doing work work with Martin Crowe and that Crowe was pleased with his progress. Let's see...
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
If Guptill can bat five then he can bat three. He has absolutely no business being in the team if he's not going to bat in the top order IMO because there are more qualified lower-middle-order options. I know he scored that big ton batting down the order against Bangladesh but the guy is an opening batsman and as a lower-middle-order bat Taylor, Ryder, Williamson, McCullum and Vettori are all comfortably better options for mine.
Taylor batting three with Ryder at four is an option, but then you have a gap at five or six anyway, unless Vettori bats six with Hopkins at seven and I think that'd be suicide. You might as well just pick another top order batsman and leave Taylor, Ryder and Williamson as the 4/5/6. This is of course assuming that McCullum is going to bat in the top order.. I actually think of my preferred order is:
McIntosh
Watling
Taylor
Ryder
Williamson
McCullum
Vettori
Hopkins
.. with Sinclair as first reserve for whenever Ryder is injured (see: almost always). But I think it's been established that McCullum's going to bat in the top three, so I'd be hoping for:
McIntosh
McCullum
Sinclair
Taylor
Ryder
Williamson
Vettori
Hopkins
Flem274*
123/5
Ftr I'm not keen on Guptill in the team at all.
Actualy Ryder has been pretty good with injury until this groin thing.
I like that last side. Though I'd still consider Watling at three.
But we might get a free minnow bashing double ton from Skippy to ensure we avoid embarrassment...
Actualy Ryder has been pretty good with injury until this groin thing.
I like that last side. Though I'd still consider Watling at three.
But we might get a free minnow bashing double ton from Skippy to ensure we avoid embarrassment...
Howsie
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah agree with most of this, espeically the points on Guptill. Like Flem though I'd probably like to see someone else at three however.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah I enjoyed your post. But I think I have seen enough of Sinclair. He talks a good game but that is about it.
Some quotes I found this morning
Ideally the description of a good number 3 sounds like Kane Williamson. But it seems like most posters want to ease him into the team for his first season at number 6. So really we just want a stop gap solution who can average around 35 for a season.
I think that Watling plays enough shots that he can be positive from the number 3 position without giving his wicket away.
David Boon both opened and batted at number 3. (Although I think he started his career at number 6)
Just not keen on seeing Sinclair back in the team and listening to more quotes about how he is more relaxed this time around. Or how he feels more confident within himself and has faith in his game etc...
I couldn't find anything about Myburgh's status when I googled it - I did find this article about three players qualifying this year and Myburgh wasn't mentioned
Cricket: Three more set to switch allegiance - Cricket - NZ Herald News
HeathDavisSpeed
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Bloody McCullum. I reckon with this 20:20 malarky allowing entertaining international cricketers to print money these days, McCullum's starting to think he's bigger than the NZ team. What happens when McCullum gets out of form with the bat? If he gets dropped (which he should do if those circumstances occur) does he offer to take up the gloves again, or does he get in a strop and retire from international cricket to ponce about in the 20:20 stuff worldwide?
I can be cynical sometimes, but he's a good gloveman and should be keeping wickets for the best of his team, not attempting to become a batsman-only.
I can be cynical sometimes, but he's a good gloveman and should be keeping wickets for the best of his team, not attempting to become a batsman-only.
Howsie
Cricketer Of The Year
If the selectors were interested then you'd think he would have gone with the A team over to Australia to playing in the Emerging players tournament. I haven't seen a lot of Myburgh but he has a pretty impressive record since coming to New Zealand and looking at his record he hasn't just cashed in at Rangiora because he only averages 33 down there.
Smudge
Hall of Fame Member
Why on earth does his decision to give his body a rest from keeping - ya know, the same body that is having some surgery on it in the next month after he's been playing with said issues since age 19 - mean he thinks he's bigger than the NZ team? He's already said he's aware he'll have to fight for his spot - give the guy a ****ing chance.
Last edited: