*Official* - Pakistan in New Zealand 2010/2011

[vandem]

Where the **** was he all this time?

McGlashan was 1st choice T20 keeper in early 2009 (T20 World Cup in Eng, tour to SL) but didn't score many runs - a couple of failures and a couple of last-over innings.

Then McCullum kept again couple of T20 series (Watling subbed in Dubai) before Hopkins took over v Aus in early 2010 after some good domestic form (220 runs @ 24, SR 127 vs McGlashan 160 runs @ 16, SR 109). Hopkins did well, 21 off 13 then 36 off 17, which secured his place for the next few series ...

 

[Flem274*]

The weird thing is, he doesn't even really bowl darts. He actually bowls quite slowly. There's just no genuine drift, dip or turn. He's a hack basically. Effective though; have to give him credit.

I know you have a weird definition for hack, but poor call. If you're effective, you're not a hack.

 

[Howsie]

Franklin's panicking now. Looks awful.

Yep, it was a terrible innings. Sure it could of been a lot worse had he got out when he was on nine after twenty deliveries but had New Zealand gone on to lose that game Franklin's innings would have looked horrible in the context of things - and it still does really.

He's a clean striker of the ball but against good 140+ bowling he isn't much chop. Perhaps they stick with him up the order like that for a little longer but I can't see it being a success

 

[Howsie]

Butler's pace has dropped since 18 months ago. Now very medium pace.

What speed was he clocking up? He definitely didn't look as sharp live as he did against India last year. Southee looked clearly the quickest last night out of the New Zealand quicks, likewise Shoaib did for Pakistan (surprise, surprise)

 

[Chewie]

The other Pakistani pace bowlers were registering 146 on the radar which is about the same Akhtar was getting. And they didn't look nearly as fast as him or Milne did in Auckland.

Re Butler's pace, I didn't watch the radar when he was bowling so I'm not sure what he was getting.

 

[Prince EWS]

I know you have a weird definition for hack, but poor call. If you're effective, you're not a hack.

You were the person I had the debate with last time, and it was about Nathan McCullum last time as well.

In the end we discovered we actually had the exact same opinion of the player but that it led me to use the word hack and not you. Maybe I should just stop using it; does me far more trouble than good.

 

[thierry henry]

My God, you really are taking it upon yourself to pick up Richard's role. He's not a ****ing hack. If you can't see drift or dip, then I'm not sure what games you are watching, and while his turn isn't regular, he does get enough balls to turn to cause problems for the batsmen.

CW living up to its reputation yet again of internet loudmouths overtly disparaging players who have reached heights the little keyboard warriors can only dream of.

I take it from this post that you think cricketweb is for offering disparaging opinions on fellow posters rather than opinions on cricketers?

 

[thierry henry]

McGlashan is the weirdest batsman btw. Makes batting normally look pretty hard, makes reverse sweeping fast bowlers for 6 look like the most natural thing in the world. Is he sure he isn't left handed?

 

[Smudge]

I take it from this post that you think cricketweb is for offering disparaging opinions on fellow posters rather than opinions on cricketers?

Sigh. I have nothing wrong with "opinions" on cricketers, but irrational, invective-filled dismissals of international players with descriptions like "hack" are completely over the top, and add nothing to the discussion. Kinda like your obsession with Vettori.

 

[Bahnz]

What speed was he clocking up? He definitely didn't look as sharp live as he did against India last year. Southee looked clearly the quickest last night out of the New Zealand quicks, likewise Shoaib did for Pakistan (surprise, surprise)

High 120's.

Franklin looked good the moment after he smashed that six off Riaz. That seemed to ease his nerves, and he played some nice shots and was also more effective at rotating the strike from that point on. I'd give him another shot up the top in the third T20. If he continues to struggle to rotate the strike and find the boundaries then a shift back down the order wouldn't hurt anyone. I actually think he'd be a better number 3 in ODI's, where he'd have a lot more time to play himself in, and less pressure from the start (he did have a lot of success there with Gloucestershire). But considering that we've already got Ryder, McCullum, Guptill, Taylor and Styris already all battling for places at the top, I don't see the point in it.

 

[thierry henry]

Sigh. I have nothing wrong with "opinions" on cricketers, but irrational, invective-filled dismissals of international players with descriptions like "hack" are completely over the top, and add nothing to the discussion. Kinda like your obsession with Vettori.

What's irrational or invective-filled about watching NcCullum or Vettori bowl and concluding they lob up innocuous straight breaks? It's a strong and probably unpopular opinion on cricket based on observing cricket. I never get the impression that PEWS offers anything other than genuine opinions on cricket.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

Have to un-ashamedly say I'm a McGlashan fan pretty much because he writes a neat blog on this site, I also like unorthodox stuff so his innovative shotmaking is just gravy and fun to watch.

In a perverse way I hope McCullum's back troubles mean he doesn't keep more often so Pete can play more.

 

[Hurricane]

. Maybe I should just stop using it; does me far more trouble than good.

Probably a good call.

 

[Hurricane]

Have to un-ashamedly say I'm a McGlashan fan pretty much because he writes a neat blog on this site, I also like unorthodox stuff so his innovative shotmaking is just gravy and fun to watch.

In a perverse way I hope McCullum's back troubles mean he doesn't keep more often so Pete can play more.

Posted this a couple of times already but not in this thread. I wouldn't mind if we played Pete and McCullum in the same team. I got told however that we are better off playing an all rounder at number 7 or 8 rather than Pete.

On his dismissal last night. He actually out thought himself. He needed to stay still and pump that ball back over the bowlers head for four.

Someone posted earlier in here about why he was dropped from the team. I remember Athlai saying that they took Pete on the tour to SL but then part way into the 20 20s they decided on tour that they wanted to use Hopkins in all 3 forms of the game. Am I misquoting you Athlai?

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

Posted this a couple of times already but not in this thread. I wouldn't mind if we played Pete and McCullum in the same team. I got told however that we are better off playing an all rounder at number 7 or 8 rather than Pete.

On his dismissal last night. He actually out thought himself. He needed to stay still and pump that ball back over the bowlers head for four.

Someone posted earlier in here about why he was dropped from the team. I remember Athlai saying that they took Pete on the tour to SL but then part way into the 20 20s they decided on tour that they wanted to use Hopkins in all 3 forms of the game. Am I misquoting you Athlai?

I don't think we need someone who can bowl if we're playing two of Ryder/Franklin/Styris?
B.McCullum isn't a bad asset to have as a fielder either.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

Okay, possible team for ODIs that I want to see?

B.McCullum
Ryder
Guptill
Taylor
Styris
Franklin
McGlashan
N.McCullum
Mills
Vettori
McKay
Southee

??

 

[Hurricane]

Okay, possible team for ODIs?

B.McCullum
Ryder
Guptill
Taylor
Styris
Franklin
McGlashan
N.McCullum
Mills
Vettori
McKay
Southee

??

looks good but you have named 12 - do you want McKay or Southee or are you saying that you don't mind either of them. I Would probably go for Southee.


B.McCullum
Ryder
Guptill
Taylor
Styris *
Franklin *
McGlashan
N.McCullum *
Mills *
Vettori *
Southee *

6 bowlers in there. So you are right we could probably get away without having an all rounder at 7.

What about Oram though...

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

Ahh you're right I can't count...

B.McCullum
Ryder*
Guptill
Taylor
Styris *
Franklin *
McGlashan
N.McCullum/Oram*
Mills *
Vettori *
McKay/Southee*

N.McCullum/Oram a tossup based on the pitch?

Favourtism for Pete though if B.McCullum can keep.

 

[Jarquis]

McGlashan is the weirdest batsman btw. Makes batting normally look pretty hard, makes reverse sweeping fast bowlers for 6 look like the most natural thing in the world. Is he sure he isn't left handed?

Prerry much reverse front foot pulls. Was awesome.

 

[SilentOne]

How likely is it under Wright that McCullum might go back down the order? Guptill will be a great opener for NZ if he continues to play more freely and confident like he has the last few games for NZ.