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

[BeeGee]

Great? Haha woooah woah. Wooahh there. Woah.

Great. Just like the great plains, the great lakes or the Great Britain.

 

[BeeGee]

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.

Totally agree.

I get the impression Hesson doesn't like Ronchi, which is bad news for Ronchi.

 

[hendrix]

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.

This this this

 

[Kippax]

The way Hesson talked about the Champions Trophy being "later on in June", and therefore Ronchi opening should be fine, is the hint I'd suggest.

Ronchi Drop - YouTube

Ronchi on a Greentop - YouTube

It was actually the little maximising-his-talents domestic battler Watling who Hesscum would vote off the island at the first opportunity (for Ronchi), if Howsie was to be believed.

 

[Flem274*]

I actually think Latham is a better chance than Guptill to score runs, even if it is handing out a debut too early to Latham.

No chance Watling can't play as just a batsman?

McCullum's keeping appeared pretty rusty when he took over the gloves. Here's hoping he gets up to speed asap.

 

[Bahnz]

Guptill's return to the side is surely evidence that if there is a god, he really hates New Zealand cricket fans. Would rather they played Jeetan Patel in at number 6 than guppy. And can just see him getting a 0 and a flukey 40 being used as justification for replacing Brownlie with him when Watling returns.

Vettori's return will be interesting if nothing else. Can he build pressure with the ball? Can he play one of his classic arsey innings?

 

[KungFu_Kallis]

Guptill's return to the side is surely evidence that if there is a god, he really hates New Zealand cricket fans. Would rather they played Jeetan Patel in at number 6 than guppy. And can just see him getting a 0 and a flukey 40 being used as justification for replacing Brownlie with him when Watling returns.

Vettori's return will be interesting if nothing else. Can he build pressure with the ball? Can he play one of his classic arsey innings?

This post was to be honest a bit painful to read... Yes Guptill failed as a Test opener, but as a middle order bat, he's as worth a chance as anyone, if he's been in good county form over there. Regarding Dan. On form he has scored tough Test runs so consistently to dig NZ out of their usual holes I don't think he's arsey in the slightest.

And please don't even mention Patel, he really is a joke.

 

[Kippax]

Yeah I'd agree Eeyore was feeling his oats a bit there, I want him betting his entire winnings on a Guptill <30 when it appears.

Fulton certainly dreams of a patchy 97 against a moving Duke.

Martin Guptill 97 v West Indies 2012. - YouTube

 

[straw man]

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

Great? Haha woooah woah. Wooahh there. Woah.

Heh Beegee, you have blasphemed by using the reserved word 'great' in a everyday sense rather than its cricketweb meaning. Great is God. Read fifty pages of Murali vs Warne as penance for your sins.

 

[straw man]

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?

Agree with nearly all the comments on this. Just classic NZ selection - pick squad reserves for certain roles and then when someone is injured, decide you actually want someone else and make like a Filipino contortionist to rearrange everything. Similar to the 2009 Champions Trophy where they left Styris and others at home, took several questionable reserves and then once the injuries occurred, refused to use those reserves and flew other players in.

Vettori playing in place of Bracewell is fairly meh. So we're celebrating the success of our bowlers in the last test by playing three front-line bowlers next test. The only benefit I can see in playing Vettori is perhaps it may reignite his hunger to play tests, and I believe he still has something to contribute over the next couple of years before retiring.

I do disagree with Bahnz that Guptill is no chance to score runs - he has sizable flaws but has shown plenty of ability to score runs when he's not facing a new red ball. However agree it would be a terrible move to give him a permanent spot in the middle order - needs to work on his game to somehow come back a better test opener in 12 months when Fulton/Rutherford is gone. In general, selecting both Guptill and Vettori sends the message that our batting is running scared and so we're going to add padding at the expense of our bowling. Really puts pressure on Southee and Boult to work some magic. And pressure on McCullum to keep and captain as well.

 

[RxGM]

Hesson on the radio today talking about Vettori

He’s not the sort of guy who is going to bowl 30 overs a day ... he’s more a 20 over a day man

At about the 2min mark at
Mike Hesson. - LiveSPORT Radio Audio Archive Player - Audio - LiveSPORT

Also rules out Jeets playing saying if Dan thinks he is fit enough he plays otherwise Bracewell will play.

This is just ridiculous.

 

[jcas0167]

Having previously spoken of Guptill having the potential to be a clean hitting middle order Astle, I'm pretty happy to see he's back

 

[MW1304]

Heh Beegee, you have blasphemed by using the reserved word 'great' in a everyday sense rather than its cricketweb meaning. Great is God. Read fifty pages of Murali vs Warne as penance for your sins.

You can call me out rather than generalising my comment as a 'cricketweb' thing if you want, I don't really associate my views with this website. Simply of the opinion that great is a very strong word for those two players.

 

[straw man]

You can call me out rather than generalising my comment as a 'cricketweb' thing if you want, I don't really associate my views with this website. Simply of the opinion that great is a very strong word for those two players.

Nah I generalised because 'great' does seem to be a reserved word on this site, which I was poking fun at rather than trying to criticize you. I can understand it has special meaning if capitalized e.g. 'one of the Greats' but I'm also happy for small-g 'great' to just mean above average. I guess context also relevant in deciding what is average, but that's the subjectivity of language.

I half agree with you on those two players. Franklin was at his best a 'good' test bowler, but I do think Oram at his best played some 'very-good/great' innings - that Safrican one being one of them.

 

[Dan]

I just can't get the image of Franklin being an utter shunt out of my head. Like I know he could bowl pre-injury, but he just seems to be so ridiculously **** now that I feel him performing must have been a complete myth.

 

[straw man]

I just can't get the image of Franklin being an utter shunt out of my head. Like I know he could bowl pre-injury, but he just seems to be so ridiculously **** now that I feel him performing must have been a complete myth.

If it makes you feel better, even when he bowled well and had a good test average, he still bowled a lot of trash in between the good balls.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Franklin not being a shunt

His action was pretty inconsistent but some of that late swing is just beautiful.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Re McCullum taking the gloves - it makes very little sense. If it's just a one-off then why not make a direct swap of Rochi/Latham for Watling? He can't permanently take the gloves again or he'll look like a liar.

 

[Kippax]

Not sure what would happen if McCullum now suffers a back spasm tbh. Trusty English benevolence to spare Taylor a turn.

2010:

Opinion: Sense behind McCullum's decision | Otago Daily Times Online News : Otago, South Island, New Zealand & International News

Having previously toyed with giving up the gloves in limited-overs cricket, he opted to give them away at test level instead.

And it's a decision which makes far more sense.

Back and knee concerns, and a desire to play as a specialist batsman meant a choice was always imminent.

No doubt the arrival of twenty/20 hastened his decision.

2011:

“It’s about managing it with him. With keeping and batting and all that stuff, the more he does on it the more he annoys it,” the team spokesman said. “For him, it’s just about managing his activity; he does what he has to do to get it right for the game, but without doing the extra stuff like playing games [at training] and that sort of thing,” he added.

 

[Mike5181]

McCullum probably thinks he's safe to fill in for one test match now. When Young/Hopkins/Van Wyk etc all had their time with the gloves, there was always that feeling they weren't far away from being dropped. So if he took the gloves for a game or two while they were finding a replacement or something, there was always that danger that he'd be stuck in the role. Now they have Watling, who is a level or two above those guys, and adequate replacements if a long-term injury were to ever happen to BJ in Luke Ronchi and to a lesser extent Tom Latham. He probably feels there's far less chance of him getting stuck with the gloves again.