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

[Prince EWS]

I honestly think that the best possible top 6 that New Zealand could field would be: Latham, KW, Taylor, Ryder, McCullum, Anderson. It'll never happen for obvious reasons, but I reckon that would represent a tough proposition for any team save Oz and SA.

Latham, McCullum, Williamson, Taylor, Ryder, Watling for me.

If you're looking at the best possible top six in a bubble then Watling has to be part of it IMO. I can understand the comparative advantage argument for him batting seven but he's certainly in the "best top six New Zealand can possibly field".

I also still think McCullum is worth more opening than he is at five; not because he'll score more runs but because the opportunity cost of the move is less than the opportunity cost of picking another opener over Ryder, or moving both Williamson and Taylor up a spot.

 

[Flem274*]

Brownlie has "it". I don't know why he's been so easily thrown away - he's seriously flawed but he can play.

 

[Bahnz]

NZ needs to stop selecting spinners if they're not performing better domestically than Kane Williamson. That should be our new benchmark. "Did you out perform KWill with the ball? No? Too Bad, So Sad, no spot for you"

While I agree with this in principle, the problem is that KW simply isn't going to be playing more than 2-3 Plunket matches a year, so it'll be very difficult to use his bowling as a benchmark. For instance, we can't say for certain whether KW would've finished a full PS season with better numbers than Craig's 20 wickets at 38 (or whatever it was).

 

[hendrix]

Brownlie has "it". I don't know why he's been so easily thrown away - he's seriously flawed but he can play.

I don't know about that, but in either case I see Ronchi's batting style as poor man's Brownlie; and that's a bad thing to say when we consider what we know of Brownlie.

 

[Blocky]

And that's the whole basis of a formula for success for me.

If you look at when NZ has been successful - it's on the basis of an opening combination who generally get them to fifty without loss, a bowling attack who work well in tandem and a spin bowler who can hold his own in terms of drying up an end and taking wickets when its spinning.

i.e Edgar and Wright with Hadlee, Chats and Cairns, with Bracewell chipping in with wickets - or Richardson and Fleming with Cairns, Nash and Doull, with Vettori doing his piece.

We're never going to have the luxury that Australia (until recently) had where their Top 7 all averaged over 40 and they had a world class spinner, so we've got to work on keeping ourselves in the fight and hoping that Southee and Boult turn out to be our best bowling combination period, with Wagner playing the support role.

 

[Flem274*]

Meh, this whole thought on Ryder not being capable as a test opener forgets that his biggest strengths as a player is how incredibly late he hits the ball and how well he plays pace bowlers. I think with the right mental state and preparation, there is nothing stopping Ryder becoming a Hayden style of opener for New Zealand. He doesn't have the same degree of talent that Hayden had, don't get me wrong - but I think he could comfortably become a guy who could average between high thirties and low forties for NZ as an opening batsman at about strike rate of 60.

I think a lot of people just see what he's done in Limited Overs and not how he rebuilt his career at Otago in the first class season being a lot more circumspect. His performance hasn't been great for Essex which is a shame but I still think if we look at who we have available in the country and go on the basis of "What do we need to become a competitive side to the Top 4" - then Ryder is one of perhaps four players in the country I'd give good odds of sustaining an average over 35 as an opener.

Latham, McCullum, Williamson, Taylor, Ryder, Watling for me.

If you're looking at the best possible top six in a bubble then Watling has to be part of it IMO. I can understand the comparative advantage argument for him batting seven but he's certainly in the "best top six New Zealand can possibly field".

I also still think McCullum is worth more opening than he is at five; not because he'll score more runs but because the opportunity cost of the move is less than the opportunity cost of picking another opener over Ryder, or moving both Williamson and Taylor up a spot.

Disclaimer: I've given up on Jesse having a meaningful test career.

Ryder at his best walks into the middle order, no questions asked. The man should be sitting on 50+ tests with a record equal to Ross Taylor.

@ blocky specifically: Ryder's greatest strength is bullying spinners and pacers with lazy elegance, but it's also his weakness. He's a timer and a stroker of the ball in test cricket, but he's also very minimalist and some of his favoured shots (the cover drive, cuts and slashes through point) are exactly what will get him in trouble against lateral movement. He looks like an all time great sometimes because he can stroke very good balls to the boundary but that's because they're not moving sideways.

His "lol cute" would be the unmaking of him as a test opener.

 

[hendrix]

Honestly, I can see Craig and Sodhi winning us this test. It will be due to Southee and Boult nipping out the top order, but sometimes substandard spin can be effective against Jekyll and Hyde teams (e.g. Tahir vs Pakistan).

 

[hendrix]

@ blocky specifically: Ryder's greatest strength is bullying spinners and pacers with lazy elegance, but it's also his weakness. He's a timer and a stroker of the ball in test cricket, but he's also very minimalist and some of his favoured shots (the cover drive, cuts and slashes through point) are exactly what will get him in trouble against lateral movement. He looks like an all time great sometimes because he can stroke very good balls to the boundary but that's because they're not moving sideways.

His "lol cute" would be the unmaking of him as a test opener.

He can completely tighten up when he wants to.

 

[Blocky]

Disclaimer: I've given up on Jesse having a meaningful test career.

Ryder at his best walks into the middle order, no questions asked. The man should be sitting on 50+ tests with a record equal to Ross Taylor.

@ blocky specifically: Ryder's greatest strength is bullying spinners and pacers with lazy elegance, but it's also his weakness. He's a timer and a stroker of the ball in test cricket, but he's also very minimalist and some of his favoured shots (the cover drive, cuts and slashes through point) are exactly what will get him in trouble against lateral movement. He looks like an all time great sometimes because he can stroke very good balls to the boundary but that's because they're not moving sideways.

His "lol cute" would be the unmaking of him as a test opener.

We've seen Ryder bully some world class attacks, we've also seen Ryder grind out hard fought big test tonnes too. I think the largest thing (as we all know) holding him back is not his talent, potential or technique. It's his mental state and physical fitness. If he got himself into the type of shape that Hayden was in, a big imposing brute of a man who feasted on opposition and was fit enough to do it consistently, then I think you'd find his "lol cute" would tend to disappear. A lot of his cutesy **** tends to come out either through boredom or in my view, when he's starting to puff a little after being out there for a while.

It's a huge shame that he hasn't got the right mental state to make the most of his talent and for that reason I really think he's probably got one more run in the NZ side before he blows it for good, but I think if he really wants to make a splash for himself, tackling a hard challenge like being NZ's best test opener should be right up his alley.

 

[Flem274*]

We're never going to have the luxury that Australia (until recently) had where their Top 7 all averaged over 40 and they had a world class spinner, so we've got to work on keeping ourselves in the fight and hoping that Southee and Boult turn out to be our best bowling combination period, with Wagner playing the support role.

We certainly won't with this attitude.

Guess what we're two openers away from being close to with the performance of our top seven post SL 2012?

We're sitting on a world class batsman, one of the best young batsmen in the world, a world class keeper batsman and a guy who is finally delivering on the talent he promised for a decade. We also have two young allrounders who are already impressing. We're two openers and a spinner away from starting a run to rival Hadlee's NZ.

 

[Blocky]

Honestly, I can see Craig and Sodhi winning us this test. It will be due to Southee and Boult nipping out the top order, but sometimes substandard spin can be effective against Jekyll and Hyde teams (e.g. Tahir vs Pakistan).

Yup, I'm just waiting for Sodhi to rip through, give a five-for not many performance on a pitch that helped him against batsmen who couldn't be ****ed against him and then wait for another 2-3 years of him playing and losing us matches. I hope Craig (more accuracy) gets in before him, at least Craig won't be persisted with on the basis of "OMG YOUNG LEGGIE!"

 

[Blocky]

We certainly won't with this attitude.

Guess what we're two openers away from being close to with the performance of our top seven post SL 2012?

We're sitting on a world class batsman, one of the best young batsmen in the world, a world class keeper batsman and a guy who is finally delivering on the talent he promised for a decade. We also have two young allrounders who are already impressing. We're two openers and a spinner away from starting a run to rival Hadlee's NZ.

Absolutely, our 3-7 at the moment is as close to world class as it's ever been - but we're still putting ourselves well behind on the basis of our 1 and 2 costing us dearly, our 8 and 9 no longer being the strengths they used to be and a spin bowling option which means we're giving away easy runs without many wickets whenever we play him.

 

[Flem274*]

We've seen Ryder bully some world class attacks, we've also seen Ryder grind out hard fought big test tonnes too. I think the largest thing (as we all know) holding him back is not his talent, potential or technique. It's his mental state and physical fitness. If he got himself into the type of shape that Hayden was in, a big imposing brute of a man who feasted on opposition and was fit enough to do it consistently, then I think you'd find his "lol cute" would tend to disappear. A lot of his cutesy **** tends to come out either through boredom or in my view, when he's starting to puff a little after being out there for a while.

It's a huge shame that he hasn't got the right mental state to make the most of his talent and for that reason I really think he's probably got one more run in the NZ side before he blows it for good, but I think if he really wants to make a splash for himself, tackling a hard challenge like being NZ's best test opener should be right up his alley.

It's all a big if though, because I do think he could be most things in a test batsman.

I should clarify my "lol cute" though. You know when the bowler sends down a good delivery in the channel with a packed offside field, and Jesse strokes it through the smallest gap? That's what I meant.

 

[Bahnz]

Disclaimer: I've given up on Jesse having a meaningful test career.

Yeah, I'm sorry to say it, but I agree with this. His comments in that Times article that Kippax posted in the off-season thread were really eye opening, and not in a good way. To me, the fact that he can't understand what was wrong with getting on the piss the night before a test when our best batsman's wife could go into labour at any moment, is indicative of one of the following:

a) He's an idiot;
b) He's a selfish idiot;
c) He's a selfish idiot with a drinking problem.

The fact that he's not even apologetic for that episode makes me think that he's never going to take responsibility for getting the most out of his appreciable talent. I tend to suspect that if he ever does get back into the test side, he'll flare out after half a dozen tests, and then wander off to make the most of the world T20 circuit.

 

[Flem274*]

Absolutely, our 3-7 at the moment is as close to world class as it's ever been - but we're still putting ourselves well behind on the basis of our 1 and 2 costing us dearly, our 8 and 9 no longer being the strengths they used to be and a spin bowling option which means we're giving away easy runs without many wickets whenever we play him.

I wish we had John R. Reid.

Spinner problem solved, and he's our greatest allrounder ever imo. Plus if we get bored he can revert to his medium pacers.

 

[Blocky]

It's all a big if though, because I do think he could be most things in a test batsman.

I should clarify my "lol cute" though. You know when the bowler sends down a good delivery in the channel with a packed offside field, and Jesse strokes it through the smallest gap? That's what I meant.

For me, it's his "I'm well set, scoring four runs an over easily simply by turning over the strike and putting the **** away... but I'm going to heave across the line at a good ball and risk it all" which he constantly does in first class cricket. Sometimes he gets away with it, sometimes he doesn't.

Ryder unquestionably has more talent than anyone else currently playing for NZ as a batsman, he's one of the best judges of a single, period despite his bulk, he can find and play for gaps and he can brute the bowling around whenever he feels like it. I actually think he and Williamson could set batting records together.

 

[Blocky]

Yeah, I'm sorry to say it, but I agree with this. His comments in that Times article that Kippax posted in the off-season thread were really eye opening, and not in a good way. To me, the fact that he can't understand what was wrong with getting on the piss the night before a test when our best batsman's wife could go into labour at any moment, is indicative of one of the following:

a) He's an idiot;
b) He's a selfish idiot;
c) He's a selfish idiot with a drinking problem.

The fact that he's not even apologetic for that episode makes me think that he's never going to take responsibility for getting the most out of his appreciable talent. I tend to suspect that if he ever does get back into the test side, he'll flare out after half a dozen tests, and then wander off to make the most of the world T20 circuit.

Yup, but Zach Guildford aside, you look at the man management capabilities the All Blacks employ to get players with the same sort of behavioural problems to transform themselves. Jesse is not helped by the fact that the game he is prodigiously talented in has the type of administrators and culture it has. You go to any premier club in New Zealand and you'll find going out on the piss and making an ass of yourself is actually part of the game and something that is expected. When you have the social issues and history that Ryder has, and the problem with substances and arrogance/ego, and you've constantly got the types of people who gravitate to administration of Cricket (the Glen Turners) who just heap more and more disdain on the guy rather than try to help him and you get a situation where you lose a prodigiously talented player because you don't know how to get the best out of him.

Imagine Shane Warne in the NZ side... take him from the point that he went into the Australian academy as a fat pisshead with arrogance/ego issues but prodigious talent that hadn't been seen before. Do you think he'd have done any better than Ryder?

The point is not to absolve Ryder of his own personal sins and demons, because he has to confront that **** and own it as much as anyone else.

But I dare say Cricket is probably the worst sport for a guy who was abandoned by his family, living on the streets at certain periods of his life, taking up alcohol as a form of self medication and enjoying the "cult" following that he received due to being outstanding at a sport. In this country, it has no idea how to deal with the transformation required to take a guy from amateur to professional which is seen CONSTANTLY by how many domestic superstars we have that can't make it internationally.

 

[hendrix]

It's not that I'm sympathetic to Ryder, but NZC have been at least partly to blame as well.

His latest episode (drinking before a test match) was his worst, IMO.

 

[Blocky]

It's not that I'm sympathetic to Ryder, but NZC have been at least partly to blame as well.

His latest episode (drinking before a test match) was his worst, IMO.

Why they're letting him out with a boof head like Bracewell and expecting that a young player like Neesham can control him is beyond me.

Ryder has shown he can not only perform at the top level, but be a world class performer and we've really ****ed up the way we've gone about managing him. And for me having played to a professional standard in Cricket, one of the things that I have a view on is how much of a drinking culture the game has and how many true piss-heads are playing it to a high level. Trying to be a sober cricketer is impossible if you actually want to fit in at the club or district side you're in.

 

[hendrix]

That's NZ culture in general though. I agree it's a massive issue.

At least at the professional level rugby has somewhat dealt with the issue. Somewhat.