DWTA, Cumming was hardly flash, but he had a better defensive technique than most openers who've played for New Zealand in recent years. Was bad luck that arguably his best innings for New Zealand (against a rampant Dale Steyn in 2007) was curtailed by a broken jaw. He was certainly better than the men who came after him: Matthew Bell, Jamie How, Aaron Redmond and Tim MacIntosh.Cumming looked completely out of his depth at test level tbh.
Yeah, out of 'that generation' of openers, of which we can also include Papps and Ingram, I always definitely felt Cumming had the best setup against genuine pace, and his off stump judgement was good as well. He struggled with the ball swinging back in to him (especially Vaas IIRC?) and he hadn't really mastered domestic cricket yet when he first got the call up, but his forward/back footwork was always precise and early which is something all those others really struggled with.DWTA, Cumming was hardly flash, but he had a better defensive technique than most openers who've played for New Zealand in recent years. Was bad luck that arguably his best innings for New Zealand (against a rampant Dale Steyn in 2007) was curtailed by a broken jaw. He was certainly better than the men who came after him: Matthew Bell, Jamie How, Aaron Redmond and Tim MacIntosh.
That's not really relevant to my comment. The only test standard opener we have had since Richardson is McCullum. Guptill is slowly getting there, I guess. Saying he was better than Bell, How, Redmond and Macintosh doesn't prove he was test standard though. Perhaps he was unlucky not to play a few more tests when all those players were in the team, but for someone that wasn't test standard, playing eleven test matches isn't so bad.DWTA, Cumming was hardly flash, but he had a better defensive technique than most openers who've played for New Zealand in recent years. Was bad luck that arguably his best innings for New Zealand (against a rampant Dale Steyn in 2007) was curtailed by a broken jaw. He was certainly better than the men who came after him: Matthew Bell, Jamie How, Aaron Redmond and Tim MacIntosh.
Well, I think he did look test standard, although only marginally. PEWS has already stated why I think that far more eloquently than I could hope to, so I'll leave it at that.That's not really relevant to my comment. The only test standard opener we have had since Richardson is McCullum. Guptill is slowly getting there, I guess. Saying he was better than Bell, How, Redmond and Macintosh doesn't prove he was test standard though. Perhaps he was unlucky not to play a few more tests when all those players were in the team, but for someone that wasn't test standard, playing eleven test matches isn't so bad.
I think part of his criticism of Redmond stemmed from the fact that he really rated McIntosh, who was his eventual replacement. Crowe was very keen for that change and worked as McIntosh's batting coach for a little while too.I might just take a break from posting and pretending I know arse from elbow for a while...
In my defence, I did remember Crowe said something. That's not bad.
That retraction sounds very much like he was put up to it by SKY - ie Mexted being cut down for making critical comments about their product. He's gone from brickbats at Redmond to bouquets for every single man involved in the squad. And how I know it's fluff is that even Justin Vaughan gets a tick. And he's a dick.
Yeah, I don't see why he can't average 45+ in test cricket.Tbf, when he's in touch Ryder makes international cricket look too easy.
Besides the obvious you mean. Anyway, BFJ brings up a ton at quicker than a run a ball for the second time in the match.Yeah, I don't see why he can't average 45+ in test cricket.