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

[Athlai]

]Looking at ten years worth of history doesn't really give you a feel for what is current.
[/B]
What is current is that

NZ has one of its best middle order batting line ups ever, in some of their best individual form ever complimented by two of its best seam bowlers, ever

versus

Windies rely heavily on Chanderpaul, with Gayle and Bravo being the only other two you'd consider world class - against an attack that isn't only bad, but sorely untested in recent times at test level and making a comeback this series. (Benn, Taylor, Roach)

You can either say "But history tells us..." or you can look at the two sides and the wicket they're playing on and make a call. My call is ultimately that NZ should be ashamed if they don't win this series based on talent available to both sides.

*past doesn't matter*

*Taylor averages 35 with the ball*

 

[Dan]

[mod mode]

WW, I don't think that line of discussion is worth pursuing.

To everyone, let's not make this thread any more personal than it already is.

[/mod mode]

 

[Blocky]

I agree with you that New Zealand are the better side as it stands. However, I think you might well be as guilty as you say WW is in over-rating your side, the difference isn't that huge. Lets analyse the sides:

- Both of our teams have poor opening partnerships but at least we have one Test class opening batsman averaging over 40. Advantage us.

- Up until your last home summer our middle order was in a different league from yours. The NZ middle order have picked up form and are batting well at the moment but I'd still prefer Edwards, Bravo, Shiv and Samuels to Kane, Taylor, Mcullum, Neesham. I'd say current advantage to New Zealand based on form and confidence but in terms of pedigree that could change at any moment, especially in these conditions.

- The keeper batsman, as discussed before yesterday, average exactly the same as each other over the last 2 years so take your pick. Even as far as I'm concerned, and it's backed up by stats.

- We have the better spin options, even without Narine. Advantage us.

- You have the better seam options. Advantage You.

Due to current form, I fear New Zealand will win but if one or two of our big bats hit form, which is entirely possible, the balance between the two teams will completely change because there is not much in it. Right, now I've said that, I am going to avoid this jingoistic flag waving that some of you are indulging in and concentrate on the cricket as it happens.

Beamer - I agree with most of your points. Ask any NZ Fan on this forum my sentiments about Sodhi and Craig and you'll see that I think we're actually playing you with eight international cricketers and three vacationers ( Fulton, Sodhi, Craig ) I actually think with Shillingford messing up his action and not allowed to bowl his Doosra that Kane Williamson could potentially be the best spinner on display on either side at the moment in the absence of Narine.

You'll also note that I don't only consider Chanderpaul a current great, but I see him as someone who should potentially be knocking on the door as an all time great for the Windies and someone who could potentially disrupt some of the immortals for a place in the side. I think as highly as most rate Chanderpaul, he's severely underrated for what he's managed to do for almost twenty years despite some circumstances where he had little to no support. Gayle is a powerhouse brute who hasn't performed to potential in test cricket in the last few years and I'd enjoy it if he came alive in this series, but I don't think he will and Bravo seems to be the type of guy that will play two great innings and four bad innings for every six times he bats.

Keeper Batsman wise, I'm bias here. I know of Watling's potential as a batsman and how great his technique is. I'm not taking anything away from Ramdin but I'd take Watling in my side over any keeper batsman not named De Villers, Haddin or Sangakarra in world cricket at the moment.

Seam bowling wise, I rated Holder as more likely than what I've seen out of Roach and Taylor was impressive early but I fear he's not going to create massive inroads into a side. Where as we know that Southee and Boult both possess the potential (in almost any condition if the ball moves) to rip sides apart.

Spin wise, as facetious as it sounds, Williamson is probably as good as Benn as a spin bowler. I'll say that Shillingford is ahead of him but I really don't know how Shillingford will go with a major weapon neutralized and the fact that he now has a different action. You could find that Williamson is actually the best spinner on display in either side, as scary as that is, considering we've selected two spinners in the side. I'd feel more comfortable if we had Wagner as I think he'd break through even if conditions don't suit him against some of your better players.

Let's put it another way.

If Chanderpaul, Gayle and Bravo have great series - the Windies will probably draw due to the weakness of their bowling attack. If they don't have great series, the Windies will probably lose due to the weakness of their bowling attack and other players.

 

[Blocky]

*past doesn't matter*

*Taylor averages 35 with the ball*

And based on today, doesn't seem likely to improve on that any time soon either - with Taylor you only really have "the past" to assess him on, because he's been absent from the side for nearly six years.

 

[Athlai]

To say Taylor was even a "35" bowler when he was first stopped for injury would be grossly unfair as well. He was an extremely talented young bowler who looked like he was going to be the best West Indian bowler since Walsh by a long way.

Southee averaged the same after almost as many matches.

Just last year he was at 36.

 

[hendrix]

It's not a weak bowling attack.

If Roach comes right - which could happen even during this test - and the spinners hit the right areas more consistently, it's very capable of taking 20 wickets rapidly.

 

[hendrix]

Jerome has been on a probing line and length but I'd still rather face him than Ishant Sharma

...This is worse than anything WW has said, tbh.

 

[Blocky]

To say Taylor was even a "35" bowler when he was first stopped for injury would be grossly unfair as well. He was an extremely talented young bowler who looked like he was going to be the best West Indian bowler since Walsh by a long way.

Southee averaged the same after as many matches.

Southee actually averaged worse after as many matches - he had an average as high as 40 until the last three seasons, where he's operated in the low twenties. The difference being that Southee hasn't been out of the side for five years, expecting that Taylor will come straight back into international cricket and make a mockery of his existing average doesn't seem right, considering he was steady but hardly threatening to rip the heart out of the NZ side.

Taylor can only really be assessed on how he bowled today, which I thought was well enough but only threatening at the very start of the day.

 

[Blocky]

...This is worse than anything WW has said, tbh.

Despite Ishant tearing the NZ side apart in one of the innings, and taking fifteen for the two match series.

Guarantee you Ishant has better figures against NZ in the series he just played than Roach or Taylor will generate in this series. In fact, if either Roach or Taylor manage to take 15 wickets in these two tests at an average of 25.1, I'll say that the West Indies will win this series.

 

[Athlai]

Southee actually averaged worse after as many matches - he had an average as high as 40 until the last three seasons, where he's operated in the low twenties. The difference being that Southee hasn't been out of the side for five years, expecting that Taylor will come straight back into international cricket and make a mockery of his existing average doesn't seem right, considering he was steady but hardly threatening to rip the heart out of the NZ side.

Taylor can only really be assessed on how he bowled today, which I thought was well enough but only threatening at the very start of the day.

Which is why you're assessing him by his career average that has no actual bearing on how he is playing right now?

 

[Flem274*]

Ishant > Taylor?

Blocky pls. Blocky stahp.

 

[Prince EWS]

...This is worse than anything WW has said, tbh.

That's worse than anything anyone has said. Ever.

 

[Blocky]

It's not a weak bowling attack.

If Roach comes right - which could happen even during this test - and the spinners hit the right areas more consistently, it's very capable of taking 20 wickets rapidly.

"If Roach comes right"

 

[Dan]

Just when I thought this thread couldn't go any lower. FMD.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Despite Ishant tearing the NZ side apart in one of the innings, and taking fifteen for the two match series.

Guarantee you Ishant has better figures against NZ in the series he just played than Roach or Taylor will generate in this series. In fact, if either Roach or Taylor manage to take 15 wickets in these two tests at an average of 25.1, I'll say that the West Indies will win this series.

We're talking about Ishant in NZ compared to Taylor in WI. Ishant got some decks which were perfect for him in that series, he's proven to be utter piss anywhere else.

 

[Prince EWS]

Just when I thought this thread couldn't go any lower. FMD.

Coming up next: someone will put forward a gambler's fallacy case for why someone is due a good/bad performance.

 

[Blocky]

Ishant > Taylor?

Blocky pls. Blocky stahp.

I said I'd rather face Jerome Taylor than Ishant. For all the "But Jerome has shown so much promise" - Ishant just took 15 wickets in two tests against NZ in NZ conditions. Is Ishant terrible? Yes. Is Jerome Taylor a world beater? No. Are they comparable? Yes.

 

[Flem274*]

Thread desperately in need of live cricket.

 

[Prince EWS]

We're talking about Ishant in NZ compared to Taylor in WI. Ishant got some decks which were perfect for him in that series, he's proven to be utter piss anywhere else.

He's also extremely unlikely to repeat it anyway IMO. Ishant gonna Ishant.

 

[Athlai]

I reckon Sodhi will go well, he bowled some really threatening balls in NZ. Those half chances have to go our way some time.