-
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 Australia 2011
- Thread starter Hurricane
- Start date
Shocking post.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Nup, dropped. A while ago actually...
TumTum
Banned
Why? He looked like a good bowler.
KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
Says the guy who doesn't rate Williamson.
TumTum is from a parallel universe were Chris Martin averages 99.94 and Bradman was a walking wicket!
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
TBH I'm a bit surprised a some posts about the reservation of picking Bracewell. Fact is, in recent years in Australia, young and inexperienced bowlers have actually done very well (Pathan, Sharma, Roach, Finn and even Southee). He's just won you a test match, so age and experience shoudn't necessarily be the be-all and end-all.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
It's not his age that bothers me, but the fact that his performances throughout his career have been pretty poor. That said he definitely does not deserve to be dropped after that debut.
I will add though that your examples are a bit off, unless by "done very well" you actually meant "looked promising, prompting commentators and fans to salivate over them, but not actually performed very effectively at all". The one exception to that was Finn who, ironically in a way, was bagged despite doing well and then got dropped mid-tour. If New Zealand expectations of Bracewell in this series are that he averages 50 odd with the ball but gets the commentators talking then they really should drop him.
Howsie
International Captain
Why, because he picked up Phillip Hughes?
Arnel just didn't do enough with the ball and he wasn't anywhere near quick enough to make up for it.
Pup Clarke
Cricketer Of The Year
TBH it's pretty easy to look up their series averages and deduce that there was promise there but ultimately lacking substance i.e >30 average. But Sharma and Roach bowled genuinely well throughout the entire series, I watched close to all of the play, and you can't really argue that they didn't, because they did. Roach's spells may not have led West Indies to victories, but he made Ponting look almost amateurish a number of times, and not just in one spell. While Pathan, Southee and Finn all indeed show 'promise', I suppose that's most what you want to see from a young bowler.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I think it goes against your point if anything though. You were suggesting that the Australian tour was a good one to play a young bowler in based on previous evidence, but despite the fact that many young bowlers have bowled well there lately they haven't actually been effective anyway. If anything that would show that it's actually a pretty poor choice of tours for a young bowler because even if they bowl well they'll probably still be fairly toothless on the scoreboard. The conditions and the batsmen you bowl to don't actually change the quality of your bowling; they just change how incisive your bowling ends up.
In the end I don't think we should read into too much either given the Australia side is very different now, somewhat in personal but extremely so in the place they're at generally, and it's a pretty small sample size anyway. But if you're going to extrapolate that particular set of events and take anything from it, it should probably be the opposite conclusion to what you came up with.
Last edited:
I've got no idea what you've based this on. To be fair, no one has any idea what you based any of that post on.
There have been a few tests recently where "50 runs" would have made the difference between winning and losing. Eg, SA v Aus, Zim v NZ (admittedly NZ weren't bowled out), and in NZ's recent history the win over Pakistan at Dunedin. I think NZ's best hope to beat Australia is to hope the pitch has a lot in it and it's a low-scoring game. Five bowlers won't be needed. Where you play 4 seamers, one tends to be underbowled and effectively offers very little, unless you have four out and out stars like the Windies used to (page one of the Clive Lloyd captaincy manual : stick the first two on for an hour, switch them over at drinks...).
Vettori's "dip" in form has lasted almost two years, and to me, he's a number 7 really. If we had a keeper like Prior or Dhoni, and/or a genuine number 8 like Broad/Bresnan then it might balance out. But we don't. England have no settled no. 6 batsman, a keeper who could happily bat at 6, and plenty of lower order allrounders (Broad, Bresnan, Swann). And yet they still play the 6+1+4 formula, and it's got them to no. 1 in the world.
Vettori's "dip" in form has lasted almost two years, and to me, he's a number 7 really. If we had a keeper like Prior or Dhoni, and/or a genuine number 8 like Broad/Bresnan then it might balance out. But we don't. England have no settled no. 6 batsman, a keeper who could happily bat at 6, and plenty of lower order allrounders (Broad, Bresnan, Swann). And yet they still play the 6+1+4 formula, and it's got them to no. 1 in the world.
TumTum
Banned
Ah, everyone knows he's better against the spinners... Can work them around easily and puts the loose ball away. Did well in India.
Athlai
Not Terrible
Playing spin better than your teammates =/= you play spin better than pace