***Official*** New Zealand in England series 2013

[GGG]

Once the Fulton experiment goes horribly wrong:

1. Vettori
2. Rutherford
3. Williamson
4. Taylor
5. Brownlie/Ryder
6. McCullum
7. Watling
8. Bracewell
9. Wagner
10. Southee
11. Boult


Hear me out for running with Flem's half-joking crazy selection.

On a pitch that does something, Fulton's a liability. Guptill's a liability, Latham's untested and makeshift, most of Raval's career runs came on roads, Baz won't do it and there's only so much you can put on BJ (out of context that would sound terrible). No matter what, there is no easy solution to who opens - so why not forget about it?

Yeah, Vettori will probably do **** in the role - but every other option is likely to. Why not chuck him there, avoid the 'which middle order batsman do we drop to not risk losing firepower' situation, and tell Kane to put his pads on from the start? Is Vettori's technique that much worse than Fulton's?

Plus the spin combination of Vettori and Williamson gives you a couple of options there, while letting the pace battery bowl sides out. Vettori + 3 feels a bit weak, Vettori + 4 results in telling Brownlie to GAGF. Neither of which is ideal.

Now I do understand why it was a joke, and I'm not necessarily advocating it, but it's worth some discussion IMO.

If you are going to go down that road you might as well open with Southee and tell him to try and knock the leather off the ball, Vettori plays to may dab shots to last longer than a couple of balls.

 

[wpdavid]

Even by CW standards this is such a non-issue.

Bah - it's just some idle chat on a quiet day afaics..

 

[Flem274*]

Once the Fulton experiment goes horribly wrong:

1. Vettori
2. Rutherford
3. Williamson
4. Taylor
5. Brownlie/Ryder
6. McCullum
7. Watling
8. Bracewell
9. Wagner
10. Southee
11. Boult


Hear me out for running with Flem's half-joking crazy selection.

On a pitch that does something, Fulton's a liability. Guptill's a liability, Latham's untested and makeshift, most of Raval's career runs came on roads, Baz won't do it and there's only so much you can put on BJ (out of context that would sound terrible). No matter what, there is no easy solution to who opens - so why not forget about it?

Yeah, Vettori will probably do **** in the role - but every other option is likely to. Why not chuck him there, avoid the 'which middle order batsman do we drop to not risk losing firepower' situation, and tell Kane to put his pads on from the start? Is Vettori's technique that much worse than Fulton's?

Plus the spin combination of Vettori and Williamson gives you a couple of options there, while letting the pace battery bowl sides out. Vettori + 3 feels a bit weak, Vettori + 4 results in telling Brownlie to GAGF. Neither of which is ideal.

Now I do understand why it was a joke, and I'm not necessarily advocating it, but it's worth some discussion IMO.

Yes; for one Vettori's best scoring spot is behind the wicket on the off-side...

Tbf he has shots all around the wicket now and can put the cut away unless it's an absolute gimme.

And if there is one guy in New Zealand who can make this work with sheer willpower and brains, it's Vettori.

/continuingthemadness

 

[KungFu_Kallis]

If you are going to go down that road you might as well open with Southee and tell him to try and knock the leather off the ball, Vettori plays to may dab shots to last longer than a couple of balls.

I was actually thinking they should try this in the 2nd innings. Sometimes you need to be ballsy and pull such a left field move to tilt the odds, even if he lasted 4-5 overs at the top it would be worthwhile. Plus Cook would be ****ting bricks :P

 

[Adders]

Bah - it's just some idle chat on a quiet day afaics..

Yer, I can't see what's wrong with discussing the attributes of the most skill-full bowler in the world while we wait for the cricket to start.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

I was actually thinking they should try this in the 2nd innings. Sometimes you need to be ballsy and pull such a left field move to tilt the odds, even if he lasted 4-5 overs at the top it would be worthwhile. Plus Cook would be ****ting bricks :P

Would place money on Southee not hitting a single delivery. It's such a different game up top.

 

[Bahnz]

I was actually thinking they should try this in the 2nd innings. Sometimes you need to be ballsy and pull such a left field move to tilt the odds, even if he lasted 4-5 overs at the top it would be worthwhile. Plus Cook would be ****ting bricks :P

Fleming tried pulling this stunt back in 2006, by sending out poor Kyle Mills to face Steyn and Ntini with the new ball. He got a 2nd ball duck and the experiment was promptly binned.

 

[Neil Young]

Good post. Better inswinger by bowler who bowls more slowly and with less control = "most skillful". Why is it that some people - and I've found this trait to be all too common in England - always seem to be looking to give something homegrown, and of which they are quite justifiably proud, a completely inappropriate degree of praise, which at times becomes so indiscriminate as even to cross over into idolatry?

Why can't such people - I assume they're either thick, or "on something" - just be content to acknowledge Ronnie Scott's as a pretty good jazz club, and not "the best jazz club in the world"; Wimbledon as a very prestigious tennis tournament, one of four with slightly different characteristics, which all have their particular pros and cons, that all the best players want to win, and not "the greatest tennis tournament in the world"; British TV as pretty good (and especially by comparison to the fare on offer in countries like Italy and Germany), but not necessarily "the best television in the world"; and Jimmy Anderson as a bloody good bowler, whom we cricket lovers are very fortunate to be watching in his prime, but not "the most skillful bowler in the world".

Why always this mania for unreserved adulation? Why this constant mockery-inducing quest for the absolute? By this unthinking rush to declare Anderson "the most skillful" - which, despite the mealy-mouthed denials, is basically just a proxy for "the best" which they can't openly declare as the mere existence of Steyn and Philander would make such an assertion outlandish - they actually poison one's enjoyment of watching this fantastic bowler by making one look out all the more keenly for his flaws - just to counter their heady enthusiasm.

I've recounted the anecdote once before of having had the enjoyment of watching Graham Thorpe play a wonderful innings against the convicts utterly ruined by a fat-faced idiot sat next to me, who couldn't stop hailing him as "by far the best" left handed batsmen in the world, "much better" than Lara. Such stupidity makes me physically sick.

I have no idea where your from but all countries act like this. All of them.

 

[Hurricane]

If Southee opened he would be a fish out of water and would try to bat sensibly (and get out) before having a wild swing if he lasted to the 5th over.

In our club cricket we often promote number 11 to open if we run out of ideas to fix a batting slump. We give instructions to the tail ender to just have a crack and try to unsettle the bowlers. In all twenty times I have seen it tried the "big hitting" tail ender tries to impersonate a dour opening batsman and gets out quick smart.

 

[GGG]

Fleming tried pulling this stunt back in 2006, by sending out poor Kyle Mills to face Steyn and Ntini with the new ball. He got a 2nd ball duck and the experiment was promptly binned.

I don't remember that, it wasn't a test though was it? I have a faint memory of us practically reversing the batting order on a very green wicket, I can't recall what year or who was playing, it may have even been a first class game it is that distant in my memory.

 

[_Ed_]

I don't remember that, it wasn't a test though was it?

Sure was.
1st Test: South Africa v New Zealand at Centurion, Apr 15-19, 2006 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[_Ed_]

Actually that game is eerily similar to the ghastly spectacle we just saw, innit? Chasing a seemingly gettable 249, then suddenly 28-6.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Oram scoring a 100 against steyn, ntini, and pollock in SA. I just can't picture it.

 

[_Ed_]

Oram scoring a 100 against steyn, ntini, and pollock in SA. I just can't picture it.

How about Franklin's match figures of 6-135 against Smith, Gibbs, Kallis et al?

Opening the bowling, no less.

 

[Bahnz]

How about Franklin's match figures of 6-135 against Smith, Gibbs, Kallis et al?

Opening the bowling, no less.

Franklin was a damn good bowler in those days though, and there was plenty of life in the pitch too.

 

[BeeGee]

Oram scoring a 100 against steyn, ntini, and pollock in SA. I just can't picture it.

How about Franklin's match figures of 6-135 against Smith, Gibbs, Kallis et al?

Opening the bowling, no less.

Oram used to be a great batsman and Franklin used to be a great bowler.

In other news....
Cricket | BJ Watling ruled out, Dan Vettori likely... | Stuff.co.nz

McCullum to keep in an entire test? I thought his back was shot.
Guptill at 6?
Vettori to play a test when he hasn't played a FC game since the WI tour?

We're screwed.

 

[MW1304]

Great? Haha woooah woah. Wooahh there. Woah.

 

[Howe_zat]

I had a great pasty earlier

 

[MW1304]

Woahhh there did you test it in different conditions?

 

[Mike5181]

Oram used to be a great batsman and Franklin used to be a great bowler.

In other news....
Cricket | BJ Watling ruled out, Dan Vettori likely... | Stuff.co.nz

McCullum to keep in an entire test? I thought his back was shot.
Guptill at 6?
Vettori to play a test when he hasn't played a FC game since the WI tour?

We're screwed.

Why the **** was Luke Ronchi not included in the squad if they had no faith in Latham as a keeper? Even ignoring the gloves, he's arguably got a higher chance of scoring runs at test level than Martin Guptill.