-
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* New Zealand in India 2010
- Thread starter Shri
- Start date
_Ed_
Request Your Custom Title Now!
But in my experience ICC doesn't like Brendon McCullum. He's been poo in all my games and I've had to reluctantly drop him.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, I was thinking if the selectors did decide to replace Arnel with Franklin in the next Test, it would be a damn strong batting lineup.
Flem274*
123/5
Averaged 32 in my long term game, which was passable.
That's why you use an editor. Or my patch
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think I may have actually developed an immunity to Morrison's awfulness. Wanted to rip his throat out a couple of years ago, but somehow he doesn't bother me now.
Howsie
International Captain
Faster then he was before his back injury according to his captain. I'd say around 140 but it's hard to tell with Boult and his whippy action.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
I think Arnel is a seam bowler - so he really suffered from bowling on a wicket that was relatively flat because he couldn't get any movement off the deck. He might have been economical but he looked unthreatening. At least he didn't break down and maintained pressure however.As a unit, better than I expected (well up to the 9th wicket falling anyways)
Thought Martin bowled without luck & probably out-bowled Southee despite only getting one wicket. Arnel was economical & bowled with plenty of control, but I can't help think McKay might have been a better option than either him or Southee. Not just because of the left arm variation, but you need 140km + bowlers to make it uncomfortable for the tail.
McKay's extra 5km or pace could have made a difference to that last wicket stand, especially as he can bowl a decent yorker.
What about you?
happy with how Southee bowled
I guess when the Indians scored 450 you can always say that we should have played a different bowler - if McKay was to come in for anyone it would be Arnel in my view.
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Arnel's bowling was exceptional imo apart from when he came on to bowl to Bhajji. He was diabolical like the rest of them.
Reckon Ryder would've had his number, if he were able to bowl. He can do anything, can Jesse.
Reckon Ryder would've had his number, if he were able to bowl. He can do anything, can Jesse.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
My mini rant on Singh's innings and the fiasco of last night
I think our field settings let us down last night. We should have maintained a mid on and mid off throughout the onslaught in case Singh hit one straight up in the air. Which he did eventually but no one was there to catch it. All in all it was an ugly century. I used to think that you couldn't fluke your way to a 100 runs and now he has done it twice on the trot. He has a fantastic eye and a sound defensive system which is the base of his game - but his attacking shots are outragous. Cross batted hoiks through mid on etc. He may be highly effective but his centuries were eye sores. He lived a charmed existence. Even today he hit a full toss one bounce to the man at long on. Any other batsman in the world would have holed out.
If he gets another century in the next test then something is wrong with us. We need a fly slip against him for miscues - a wide long on, And men in conventional fielding positions for when he ****s up.
I think our field settings let us down last night. We should have maintained a mid on and mid off throughout the onslaught in case Singh hit one straight up in the air. Which he did eventually but no one was there to catch it. All in all it was an ugly century. I used to think that you couldn't fluke your way to a 100 runs and now he has done it twice on the trot. He has a fantastic eye and a sound defensive system which is the base of his game - but his attacking shots are outragous. Cross batted hoiks through mid on etc. He may be highly effective but his centuries were eye sores. He lived a charmed existence. Even today he hit a full toss one bounce to the man at long on. Any other batsman in the world would have holed out.
If he gets another century in the next test then something is wrong with us. We need a fly slip against him for miscues - a wide long on, And men in conventional fielding positions for when he ****s up.
Howe_zat
Audio File
Manwhile, here's a list of occasions where NZ have been 0/100+. Hasn't happened since 2004.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...team=5;template=results;type=fow;view=innings
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...team=5;template=results;type=fow;view=innings
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Haha, McGuns!
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
There will probably be a more recent occurance but Richardson-Vincent is the only one that comes to mind.