Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
They might have bowled to the conditions.
-
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 England series 2013
- Thread starter NZTailender
- Start date
I didn't say they weren't swing bowlers. I said they were, but that Jimmy was much better at it. Understand?
I was wondering about that. I've seen them do it before. When the ball loses its shine they tended to bowl faster. Perhaps in England with a ball that swings for longer they decided not to increase their speed.
Sounds plausible yes?
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
Not sure I agree with the criticisms of the run rate. Firstly, 2 runs per over isn't an issue. This is Test cricket. I am sure England back themselves to bowl NZ out twice and believe that the most likely way to lose this Test would be to get rolled over first innings and gift wickets. They obviously wanted to make NZ graft for their wickets. 300 on here will be a decent score. Secondly, the out field was exceptionally slow and players didn't get full value for their shots. Also, is is a track the was easy to set a field to. Hard to get it through the infield.
Basically, I don't have an issue with 2 runs an over and this was worth more than 2 runs an over anyway.
The game is set up nicely. The morning session on day two could decide this Test.
Basically, I don't have an issue with 2 runs an over and this was worth more than 2 runs an over anyway.
The game is set up nicely. The morning session on day two could decide this Test.
Days of Grace
International Captain
Because Southee and Boult are from New Zealand and therefore are not very good.
wellAlbidarned
International Coach
Our home speed guns are rigged to cater to our fetish for bowlers to bowl 140, so I wouldn't pay attention to them. Boult and Southee can hit those speeds, but they're both in the 130s the majority of the time.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Um, your basing this on what exactly? Boult's pace in the home series was entirely consistent with what we've seen of him elsewhere imo.
Last edited:
social
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Boult's pace seem to vary a lot from what I saw - he bowled a couple of balls above 85 mph but also many below 80
Wagner and Southee's speeds seemed to be more uniform at late 70s
If that is slower than usual, reckon you can also take into account the heavy outfield as that generally takes something away from the bowlers' runups
Wagner and Southee's speeds seemed to be more uniform at late 70s
If that is slower than usual, reckon you can also take into account the heavy outfield as that generally takes something away from the bowlers' runups
wellAlbidarned
International Coach
I can't find a detailed record of bowler speeds but in general our home radars seem to kick things up a few kph for both sides. Not really verifiable though because no-one keeps track of these things.
also this
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
It's strange, because according to Cricinfo's Hawkeye app, Tim Southee's average pace was above 84 mph, which seems way to quick based on my recall of his speeds. I didn't see his first spell though, so maybe that influenced it.
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Combination of pitch being slow and overhead conditions doing enough all day meant that bowlers didn't need to ramp it up. Never trust the speed guns that much anyway.
wellAlbidarned
International Coach
Trott summed it up quite nicely on the news. Good effort from both sides, high quality cricket.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
HAts off to our bowlers. If that trott catch had not swung in the air we might have done even better.
I was fascinated by that Southee over in the first session. Sometimes I think he should bowl a whole over of cutters just to mess with the batsman.
We have had this discussion before about whether he rolls his fingers on the cutter or just bowls it cross seam - but it seemed like he was rolling his fingers last night.
I was fascinated by that Southee over in the first session. Sometimes I think he should bowl a whole over of cutters just to mess with the batsman.
We have had this discussion before about whether he rolls his fingers on the cutter or just bowls it cross seam - but it seemed like he was rolling his fingers last night.
It has been quite interesting to see the different views in the press about the run rate. Personally I don't have a problem with the way in which they played the quicks but they really should be doing more against Martin. Even with the slow pitch and outfield, scoring 1 and half runs an over off him is unacceptable.
I defend Bell more often that not but I think his scoring rate was the biggest issue yesterday and it is not the first time in the last year that he has been too slow. I don't expect him to be going along at great pace but Bell is a much better player when he is playing with a certain amount of freedom, we saw Trott score at pretty much his normal pace so it's not like it was impossible.
the big bambino
Cricketer Of The Year
I think hawkeye picked up the swing of Cairns' bat.
MW1304
Cricketer Of The Year
Chris Tremlett is still listed as medium-fast tbf, I'd say its more inactive, moderately ******** cricinfo updaters and Sky being sheep.
Scaly piscine
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yea Martin bowled so many full tosses and got away with the vast majority. It was ridiculous.
Don't know what it is with Bell, once he goes into his shell that's it.