*Official* New Zealand in India 2010

[thierry henry]

And bitching about the the **** Caps is fun tbh, endless material there

 

[NZ Guy]

I dunno about bad for the team, that's a stretch

He is certainly good at bowling long, innocuous spells, taking soft wickets when the horse has bolted, and scoring runs when we are getting flogged. So I guess the issue isn't so much whether he is bad, but whether he is good.

Scoring runs when we are getting flogged is a good thing? Im thinking his hundred vs Pakistan, his Bangladesh effort, runs vs Sri Lanka.

 

[thierry henry]

India will go in to the next test without a single good bowler, time for us to capitulate tbh

 

[thierry henry]

Scoring runs when we are getting flogged is a good thing

Exact opposite of what I was saying

He's played about 1000000 games, I'm sure he did something useful once or twice

 

[NZ Guy]

Exact opposite of what I was saying

He's played about 1000000 games, I'm sure he did something useful once or twice

Yea I was stating that it is a good thing, didn't word it well. Still reckon does a fantastic job for NZ, he's not a strike bowler as he can't spin it anymore, I'd say the problem is the bowlers around him not him, can anyone get his stats with Bond? Im no good on statsguru

 

[Jono]

Wow, that was domination!

Good win.

 

[thierry henry]

Yea I was stating that it is a good thing

I'm not suggesting it's ever a bad thing to score runs or take wickets, but he does a lot of good stuff when we are obviously going to lose, or when e.g. the opposition is obviously going to make 500 (whether 500 all out or 500/5 declared). Ultimately that stuff is irrelevant compared to his many poor performances when we had a chance of winning.

Still reckon does a fantastic job for NZ, he's not a strike bowler as he can't spin it anymore, I'd say the problem is the bowlers around him not him, can anyone get his stats with Bond? Im no good on statsguru

I completely disagree and tbh I don't reckon his stats with Bond (which I don't know but assume are good) prove anything. Could give various reasons for that, overall I just don't think it's feasible that Vettori would overall be more successful with better bowlers around him, but I can easily say how it might happen if he did occasionally. How many bowlers in test history have essentially been defensive, containing bowlers, but have been long term prolific wicket takers because they had good bowlers around them? People always bring this up but realistically it doesn't happen, at least not long term.

 

[Jono]

Would be massively surprised if India beat South Africa over there and doubt it'd be nearly as close as when SA toured India. I just can't see their bowlers getting 20 wickets consistently in those conditions.

Yeah, how the hell are we going to get 20 wickets in the most bowler friendly conditions in the world

We got 20 wickets there last time, we can do it again. We may not win, but lol @ the idea that our bowling attack will be our concern.

 

[Prince EWS]

I'm not suggesting it's ever a bad thing to score runs or take wickets, but he does a lot of good stuff when we are obviously going to lose, or when e.g. the opposition is obviously going to make 500 (whether 500 all out or 500/5 declared). Ultimately that stuff is irrelevant compared to his many poor performances when we had a chance of winning.

I reckon it's just a bit of a coincidence, with his batting anyway. He's a good Test batsman these days. Hate his bowling all you wish - I'm largely with you there - but his batting numbers can't be denied.

 

[Flem274*]

Ryder is out of the ODIs. Watling will probably get a recall imo.

Just saw the Guptill dismissal. Meh, would have gotten out anyway. Was pretty hilarious umpiring. I think karma is telling him to **** off and actually score some runs for Auckland.

Taylor's turned down plumb lbw and his howler of a decision for that catch were pretty funny.

 

[Flem274*]

I've just remembered I've won a bet.

Time to think of the avatar that would kick SS in the balls the most. This is the one time an NZer will get it over these Indian ****s in the series.

 

[Prince EWS]

I've just remembered I've won a bet.

Time to think of the avatar that would kick SS in the balls the most. This is the one time an NZer will get it over these Indian ****s in the series.

Chris Martin disagrees.

 

[Flem274*]

Chris Martin disagrees.

True, his batting form has been spectacular.

Was meaning in the final scores ftr. 1-0 to the ****s.

 

[Zinzan]

Yeah, how the hell are we going to get 20 wickets in the most bowler friendly conditions in the world

We got 20 wickets there last time, we can do it again. We may not win, but lol @ the idea that our bowling attack will be our concern.

We'll see, happy to concede if I'm wrong, hope you'll do the same. If I am correct, can I return the condescending eye-roll?

 

[Prince EWS]

We'll see, happy to concede if I'm wrong, hope you'll do the same. If I am correct, can I return the condescending eye-roll?

If India bat well enough in the conditions to get themselves into a situation where the only thing that stands between them winning and drawing is taking twenty wickets, they will almost certainly win IMO.

That's not to say that their bowling won't cost them, but if it does it'll be a matter more of "conceding too many runs per wicket given the conditions" than not being able to take twenty wickets in time.

 

[_Ed_]

I'm really proud of the NZ team for what they did in the first two games - that was no fluke. It was an amazing effort.

Sure, things went to poo in the third game, but that happens to all but the very best teams from time to time - they all have a nightmare game every now and then.

We have a lot to work with. I just hope we have the right people to work with our rising talent.

 

[centurymaker]

If India bat well enough in the conditions to get themselves into a situation where the only thing that stands between them winning and drawing is taking twenty wickets, they will almost certainly win IMO.

That's not to say that their bowling won't cost them, but if it does it'll be a matter more of "conceding too many runs per wicket given the conditions" than not being able to take twenty wickets in time.

I totally agree with you.
btw We got a hiding in this match- those were true indian conditions- good for batsmen the first 2-3 days and then favourable to spinners on the last 2-3 days. IMO the first two tests were played on pure batting surfaces just to make the matches last 5 days as the broadcasters probably didn't want to lose revenue due to early finishes

 

[Jono]

We'll see, happy to concede if I'm wrong, hope you'll do the same. If I am correct, can I return the condescending eye-roll?

You can give it to me now if you like.

I've read the same posts from you and the Indian bowling attack ad nauseum. Not sure you conceded after we beat Australia 2-0 though, taking 20 wickets each time.

 

[masterblaster]

Really happy with our performance this game. This was a complete thrashing and I don't think I've seen India perform so well in quite some time. The bowlers worked together well, Ishant and Sreesanth came through and even Harbhajan who has been largely ineffective with the ball up until now came through too. Great performance that gives us plenty of momentum going to South Africa.

 

[DingDong]

Ryder is out of the ODIs.

there goes my interest in the series..