*** Official New Zealand Domestic Cricket 2011/2012 ***

[Flem274*]

Vettori is a genuine allrounder in tests these days tbh.

 

[Flem274*]

Mason > Finn

 

[straw man]

Lolotago. Trying to erase a 70 run deficit and they're 8 down and still 10 runs shy.

CD won't let Michael Mason go back to semi-retirement now!

 

[Flem274*]

Innings win.

 

[Flametree]

Those dodgy Canterbury tracks!

 

[Flem274*]

Sounds like cd have just got another wicket. Guys were saying this morning that the pitch s pretty flat over there

Second hand information, but Otago might have just stuffed up badly here.

 

[Howsie]

Innings win.

Why Otago continues to try and play five front line bowlers I'll never know, especially with Sam Wells in the team, makes no sense whatsovever.

 

[Flem274*]

Drop a spinner, bump Wells to six and play Darren Broom imo.

/didnotpickbroomindomesticselectoratall

 

[Mike5181]

Martin Guptill is looking good for a double century.

 

[straw man]

It's a strangely common ploy in NZ domestic sides - Auckland and ND are often guilty too. Otago must be regretting dropping Michael Bracewell.

Edit: @Howsie

 

[Flem274*]

Epic knock from Bates

 

[Prince EWS]

And Vettori at 5, I think it was. I know, he's a decent bat and probably needs to practice his batting more than his bowling before the Aussie series, but still. It's like NZ first class cricket is like junior high school teams where the best bowlers are also the best batsmen.

Still, at least top scorers in our test side aren't numbers 10 and 11 (indeed with our current no. 11, that's guaranteed never to happen!) Not since the days of Vettori at 10, or maybe Simon Doull.

Vettori's about the fifth best batsman in the entire country these days so it's hardly a disgrace to see him batting five. Mills and McCullum each batting six was a pretty dire state of affairs but realistically the blokes batting 7 for both their respective teams are better bats.

 

[Bahnz]

Nethula actually had a pretty good season last year too, at least by the standards of New Zealand domestic spinners. Hope he continues to go well.

 

[Prince EWS]

It's a strangely common ploy in NZ domestic sides

Has been for as long as I can remember, too. When I first started really getting into NZ domestic cricket in the middle of last decade I raised eyebrows about the lack of players who batted lower than four with decent batting records. I was told the pitches of the time had a lot to do with that but if anything low scoring games should mean you can get away with picking fewer bowlers rather than batting someone like Yovich at 5 and picking six bowlers.

Pitches are a fair bit flatter these days across the board but we still see some really odd teams at times IMO. Even if Mills really is the sixth best batsman available which I find pretty hard to believe, the fact that he's an opening bowler means Auckland could then pick the seventh or eighth best batsmen available too. Bowling options are a diseconomy of scale in a way that batting depth isn't.

 

[Howsie]

Second hand information, but Otago might have just stuffed up badly here.

Following Jase's twitter feed too?

 

[Prince EWS]

Martin Guptill is looking good for a double century.

Yeah good to see him actually scoring some runs for Auckland; averaged in the 20s for them before this game.

 

[Flem274*]

Chris Martin survives a ball with what I'm sure was a confident and perfect forward defense.

 

[Flametree]

It's a strangely common ploy in NZ domestic sides - Auckland and ND are often guilty too. Otago must be regretting dropping Michael Bracewell.

Edit: @Howsie

Is it because teams think that if any bowler bowls 20 overs in an innings he will either break down or need to be "rested" for the next game, so packing the side with bowlers spreads the load around?

 

[Athlai]

Auckland not playing Parlane is dire.

 

[straw man]

Has been for as long as I can remember, too. When I first started really getting into NZ domestic cricket in the middle of last decade I raised eyebrows about the lack of players who batted lower than four with decent batting records. I was told the pitches of the time had a lot to do with that but if anything low scoring games should mean you can get away with picking fewer bowlers rather than batting someone like Yovich at 5 and picking six bowlers.

Pitches are a fair bit flatter these days across the board but we still see some really odd teams at times IMO. Even if Mills really is the sixth best batsman available which I find pretty hard to believe, the fact that he's an opening bowler means Auckland could then pick the seventh or eighth best batsmen available too. Bowling options are a diseconomy of scale in a way that batting depth isn't.

I don't really have an answer as to why this is either... I thought it was something to do with pitches, and perhaps ND and Otago have more bowler-friendly wickets and use some sort of logic (?) that argues they should play more bowlers as a result. But Auckland have more batsman-friendly pitches and do the same thing.