***Official*** New Zealand in the West Indies 2014

[WindieWeathers]

Anyway...i think some people have forgotten how deadly the Bajan sensation is...so i figured i'd post a little reminder ahead of this much anticipated series

Enjoy!!

 

[Bahnz]

Good to see the stats...well for a start how can you deduce that Boult was "good" in WI when he's only played ONE test in our backyard of which his team lost easily? It's just like Roach's stats in India and BD..he's only played ONE GAME in both of those countries..both while carrying an injury which was in 2011...so imo to judge him off that is very harsh...i think you need at least two matches to really see how a player done in those conditions...i mean if Boult would have just played in the 2nd test in India his stats would be as bad as Kemar's....that's why i rarely talked about Boult's performances in WI because it's not fair to just judge off one match.

You maybe can't judge Boult's effectiveness in individual countries on the basis of one match, but the fact that he has repeatedly succeeded in a variety of conditions, over a fairly good sample of overseas matches can be taken as evidence that he is still an effective bowler when away from home.*

*so long as he has Southee around to hold his hand

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Boult has 82 wickets from 22, which is the same number Hadlee had after 22 tests (although Sir Paddles was averaging about 32 at the time which shows how amazing he was for the last 3/4 of his career). If he gets 18 wickets in this series (which would be nice, but unlikely) he would equal Hadlee's NZ record of 100 in 25.

Other fast Kiwis to 100 test wickets are Bruce Taylor 27 tests, Morrison/Southee/Vettori 29 and amongst the ones who 'got away' Caddick in 28, and Clarrie Grimmett in 17!

 

[WindieWeathers]

I'm a social science student

And how can you say that "if Boult would have played in the 2nd test in India his stats would be as bad as Kemar's"? He didn't play that Test; he may have dominated, or he may have sucked. We simply don't know.

FTR you're the one who decided to talk about it series-by-series. You brought in the potential for sample size issues, not me. The rest of us were looking at overall away records.

Actually i was talking about THIS 2nd test between NZ and India where Boult only got one wicket per innings...that's poor imo. Also it makes judging Roach's stats in India is even more ridiculous when you consider the guy has only bowled in ONE innings in that country which was HERE ..so the guy hasn't even had two cracks at the whip yet... .

 

[Howsie]

Away bowling averages

- Boult 29
- Roach 38

Boult bad, Roach good

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Bond - 87 wickets in 18 tests

 

[Flem274*]

This argument is getting ridiculous but for what it's worth I'd rate the Roach of old in the same ball park as Southee and Boult. Southee is the best of the three imo. I think if Roach can continue to improve and doesn't need a lot of bowling post injury to get back into test cricket then he will be a pretty fearsome bowler over the next 12 months.

I think the most important task for the West Indian bowling boffins is to find Roach a partner. Southee and Boult (and Anderson and Broad, Steyn and Philander, Harris and Johnson) are all varying degrees of world class bowlers on their own but when you put two of them together they become nightmarish. Whether Jerome Taylor can refind his mojo after several years away from test cicket and be the bowler he was immediately before his injuries is an open question.

But it's difficult to compare the two when they haven't played a similar amount of games tbh..and also you have to question the opposition Watling has got his runs against..Zimbabwe and Bang? not sure how many big runs have come against decent opposition.

Well only two batsmen came out of our tour to SA looking better than they had before the series and there was a keeper down the other end during the McCullum 300 too...

 

[WindieWeathers]

Away bowling averages

- Boult 29
- Roach 38

Boult bad, Roach good

Surprisingly Boult hasn't taken ten or more wickets in a single series away from home...that needs to improve imo...there's only so long you can get by by taking three or four wickets and hiding behind Southee.

And Roach's record is distorted by the single tests he played (while injured) in Bang and India..one of which he only bowled in one innings (in india)

 

[hendrix]

Southee must be a godly bowler to make Boult - who would otherwise be Ishant Sharma - average 29 away from home.

WW, is Southee better than Macko?

Macko record vs SL
0 wickets at infinity

Southee vs SL
12 wickets at 13.83

 

[WindieWeathers]

This argument is getting ridiculous but for what it's worth I'd rate the Roach of old in the same ball park as Southee and Boult. Southee is the best of the three imo. I think if Roach can continue to improve and doesn't need a lot of bowling post injury to get back into test cricket then he will be a pretty fearsome bowler over the next 12 months.

I think the most important task for the West Indian bowling boffins is to find Roach a partner. Southee and Boult (and Anderson and Broad, Steyn and Philander, Harris and Johnson) are all varying degrees of world class bowlers on their own but when you put two of them together they become nightmarish. Whether Jerome Taylor can refind his mojo after several years away from test cicket and be the bowler he was immediately before his injuries is an open question.

Well only two batsmen came out of our tour to SA looking better than they had before the series and there was a keeper down the other end during the McCullum 300 too...

Fair enough Flem...i think you've made a decent argument and just like you think Southee is the best of the lot i think Roach is the best...over the next 12 months god willing Roach stays fit and so do the NZ duo we can make a further assesment. Hell even after this series we might get more answers...as for Roach's long term partner!!..well for now it's looking like Taylor, but longterm we've got several prospects coming through with Holder being the obvious standout..then Cotterrell, Cummings, Gabriel..Delorn Johnson and the one who i think can be a star Ronsford Beaton..so we shouldn't have any worries in that department tbh.

 

[Howsie]

Surprisingly Boult hasn't taken ten or more wickets in a single series away from home...that needs to improve imo...there's only so long you can get by by taking three or four wickets and hiding behind Southee.

And Roach's record is distorted by the single tests in played in Bang and India..one of which he only bowled in one innings (in india)

Gee, that wouldn't have anything to do with playing two test series everywhere would it? Infact I don't even think he's played in a three test match series outside New Zealand. Can't help that.

At the end of the day though the numbers don't lie, Boult averages 29, Roach 38. Boult very good, Roach below average.

 

[hendrix]

Surprisingly Boult hasn't taken ten or more wickets in a single series away from home...that needs to improve imo...there's only so long you can get by by taking three or four wickets and hiding behind Southee.)

The West Indies has never taken more than 20 wickets in a one-test series. Needs to improve IMO.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

Surprisingly Boult hasn't taken ten or more wickets in a single series away from home...that needs to improve imo...there's only so long you can get by by taking three or four wickets and hiding behind Southee.

And Roach's record is distorted by the single tests he played (while injured) in Bang and India..one of which he only bowled in one innings (in india)

Because taking 10 wickets a series out of an available 40 is so easy when the guy at the other end is hogging all the poles

 

[Bahnz]

Surprisingly Boult hasn't taken ten or more wickets in a single series away from home...that needs to improve imo...there's only so long you can get by by taking three or four wickets and hiding behind Southee.

And Roach's record is distorted by the single tests in played in Bang and India..one of which he only bowled in one innings (in india)

What a meaningless stat. Boult has taken 37 wickets in 12 matches which is perfectly fine, and very similar to Roach's 33 from 10.

And Boult's record is similarly distorted by a poor 2nd test v Bangladesh and a poor 2nd test against India. You can't just ignore those certain games because they don't jibe with your argument.

 

[hendrix]

Because taking 10 wickets a series out of an available 40 is so easy when the guy at the other end is hogging all the poles

also limit wickets available to below 40 when we haven't won the match and the stat becomes even more ridiculous. Hence Malcolm Marshal vs Sri Lanka stat.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Gee, that wouldn't have anything to do with playing two test series everywhere would it? Infact I don't even think he's played in a three test match series outside New Zealand. Can't help that.

At the end of the day though the numbers don't lie, Boult averages 29, Roach 38. Boult very good, Roach below average.

What about the home stats? does anyone want to post them? we can compare both Southee and Boult's to Roach's to see where that's at too

 

[ohnoitsyou]

What about the home stats? does anyone want to post them? we can compare both Southee and Boult's to Roach's to see where that's at too

How about comparing home stats with both using the Kookaburra. On dead wickets the Duke makes an astronomical difference.

 

[hendrix]

Home:
Boult: 24.2 (10 tests, majority of wickets against England, WI and India)
Southee: 32.92 (18 tests, very poor until 2012)
Roach: 22.23 (very impressive across 13 tests. Does include plenty of wickets against Bangladesh, NZ and a relatively weak Aussie batting lineup, but very impressive nonetheless)

 

[WindieWeathers]

Home:
Boult: 24.2 (10 tests, majority of wickets against England, WI and India)
Southee: 32.92 (18 tests, very poor until 2012)
Roach: 22.23 (very impressive across 13 tests. Does include plenty of wickets against Bangladesh, NZ and a relatively weak Aussie batting lineup, but very impressive nonetheless)

Well there we have it Hendrix ...i'm not sure that Australia team was that "weak" either considering they had Warner, Watson, Clarke, Ponting and Hussey...and had just beaten India 4-0.

Also those Southee stats are just shocking tbh...it's one thing to be average away from home but home is where a decent pacer should flourish.

 

[hendrix]

Also those Southee stats are just shocking tbh...it's one thing to be average away from home but home is where a decent pacer should flourish.

have you been reading anything anyone has written or are you just having a conversation with yourself?