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

[Kippax]

 

[Beamer]

Thanks Kippax. That check on-drive for 6....just wow. Pure talent against one of the World's best swing bowlers.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Still well behind obviously but far from a disaster of a day. Definitely kept oursellves in it. Loved that battle between Blackwood and Boult. Boult beat him with some real crackers and Blackwood played that absolute beauty over long-on. Can't think of many debutants who'd do that.

 

[Flem274*]

Not a fan of the suggestion a few pages back to drop both spinners and play both allrounders. Three specialists and three fifth bowlers doesn't add up to a balanced attack, it just means you're short one proper bowler. I rate both allrounders but atm there is no room unless one becomes either a top five batsman or a test standard 3rd seamer.

If we drop the spinners and go for pace then we should do it properly rather than hedging our bets by batting deep. I'd select Matt Henry, Hamish Bennett or Bevan Small. All three are test standard or near enough, and fitness is the only issue. Henry is the best option because his fitness worries should end before long since he has a great action and has gone through his recovery properly.

Besides, if one crocks themselves, call up someone else. Fielding both batting allrounders and plonking one at number eight is a waste though because Anderson has an injury record which might even outdo Bennett and he isn't as good a bowler.

 

[hendrix]

Yeah I pretty much agree. I'm not happy that Neesh/Anderson could block the selection of Milne/Henry.

I always want to see the best bowlers at least getting experience. We're only a Boult/Southee injury away from being a mediocre attack so we need to get those promising fast bowlers playing when we can.

 

[kyear2]

A big thank you to Kippax, until I get home I can only listen to the game on the radio so these highlights packages really are appreciated.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Can't complain about today...Blackwood showed real encouraging signs and the more he plays at this level the more his game should improve. That 6 off Boult sums him up to a tee...real brave and correct in his shot selection.

Wanted at least one more wicket before close but i'll still take a 160 odd lead going into tomorrow...i'm hoping we'll be chasing around 100 at the most but even if it's 170ish from the start of the 5th day i'd be happy to take that too.

Should be an interesting first hour tomorrow..get two quick wickets and things could move fast.

I also echo what Beamer said..Narine would have been perfect on this pitch..but the board have decided to remain hard headed (smh). Lets hope the rumours are true and he's picked for the last test in bim...i also think Gabriel is playing for his place because Holder at Kensington would be the perfect way for the lad to debut.

 

[Bahnz]

Latham continues to impress with sound judgement and a compact technique. Don't want to jinx him, but he's closing in on 300 runs for the series which would be a fantastic achievement for a guy in his first full test series - Only 2-ton Peter and McCullum have managed that in the last decade. It's pretty hilarious to think that, collectively, New Zealand's openers are still averaging nearly 40 in this series, given that McCullum, Rutherford and Fulton have contributed 7 runs in 4 innings!

 

[SteveNZ]

A big thank you to Kippax, until I get home I can only listen to the game on the radio so these highlights packages really are appreciated.

Hear, hear. Very much appreciated for me, who gets no TV coverage at all

 

[Blocky]

Playing the sort of cricket we did in the first innings never works well either. No one's saying we're going to bat at one and a halves for the rest of the Test, it was 40 overs after we lost our captain early on. I'd tend to allow them to play circumspectly until stumps then reassess overnight.

If there is one adage I hate more than anything in cricket, it's the one surrounding hit out because eventually you'll be got out. It's the weakest fallacy in cricket on anything apart from the most ridiculous of wickets.

And if there's a new ball/reverse swinging ball coming, so what? One is a Test opener, one is a #3 (which is an opener in our side). They're employed to be equipped for it.

It's hardly hitting out when you pick opposition bowlers that are weaker and therefore likelier to give you crap balls. If you just go into your shell and don't punish those bowlers, you don't move the game forward in any shape or form. You can't tell me that looking to score at 3.5 against Gabriel and Gayle in particular isn't achievable.

 

[Bahnz]

It's hardly hitting out when you pick opposition bowlers that are weaker and therefore likelier to give you crap balls. If you just go into your shell and don't punish those bowlers, you don't move the game forward in any shape or form. You can't tell me that looking to score at 3.5 against Gabriel and Gayle in particular isn't achievable.

After McCullum's dismissal, the primary concern had to be getting to stumps without losing any more wickets. Yes, having 30 or 40 more runs on the board would've been ideal, but I'm not too bothered about it. The important thing is that Latham and Williamson will still be there tomorrow morning. I agree that we'll need to be more positive tomorrow though.

 

[straw man]

Not a fan of the suggestion a few pages back to drop both spinners and play both allrounders. Three specialists and three fifth bowlers doesn't add up to a balanced attack, it just means you're short one proper bowler. I rate both allrounders but atm there is no room unless one becomes either a top five batsman or a test standard 3rd seamer.

If we drop the spinners and go for pace then we should do it properly rather than hedging our bets by batting deep. I'd select Matt Henry, Hamish Bennett or Bevan Small. All three are test standard or near enough, and fitness is the only issue. Henry is the best option because his fitness worries should end before long since he has a great action and has gone through his recovery properly.

Besides, if one crocks themselves, call up someone else. Fielding both batting allrounders and plonking one at number eight is a waste though because Anderson has an injury record which might even outdo Bennett and he isn't as good a bowler.

I think the unfortunate reality is that injury is going to play an overwhelming part in dictating who we pick for third seamer, fourth seamer and/or seam bowling all-rounder. Anderson, Henry, Milne, Wheeler, Small and Bennett have all had recurring injury problems and it's anyone's guess as to who might combine fitness and form for any length of time to get themselves into the NZ side. Fingers crossed that Southee and Boult stay fit throughout. Wagner also seems relatively injury-free.

Agree with your general point though on selecting a proper fourth bowler instead of two fifth bowlers; can probably get away with the latter only if your first three bowlers are all amazing.

 

[SteveNZ]

It's hardly hitting out when you pick opposition bowlers that are weaker and therefore likelier to give you crap balls. If you just go into your shell and don't punish those bowlers, you don't move the game forward in any shape or form. You can't tell me that looking to score at 3.5 against Gabriel and Gayle in particular isn't achievable.

I must admit I've seen jack all of it, so I'm not well placed to comment on whether we should've scored quicker against those bowlers. But I know 70-1 would have been a score we'd have taken by stumps.

I'd imagine it'll be stressed on day 4 to come out playing natural games, to hopefully forge a lead by the middle session on day 5 that makes it difficult for 1-all to be achieved.

Again as I didn't see it, why did McCullum open?

 

[Bahnz]

Again as I didn't see it, why did McCullum open?

Rutherford had some kind of bug, and so couldn't field for most of the day. As a result he has to sit out roughly the first 3 hours of New Zealand's innings. If he's recovered, I imagine he'll be next in to bat tomorrow.

 

[hendrix]

Again as I didn't see it, why did McCullum open?

Rutherford was sick and off the field. He'll bat at 7.

God I hope Latham doesn't throw this away. He's ticked the box 4 times out of 4 but a century is what he really needs. I also know he can lift the scoring rate and dominate when he needs to because he's a bloody good limited overs player too.

 

[straw man]

On our batting scoring rate, I think most batsmen have some sort of ideal balance between attack and defense that they feel most comfortable with. It's the approach they'd use if batting in a bubble with thoughts free of the match situation and a sole focus on the construction of their innings. The match situation here where batting for both a lot of time and a lot of runs is basically the same as that, and so I think all our batsmen should just bat at the rate with which they are most comfortable. McCullum and Watling did that to save the match v India and McCullum played most of his innings at an SR of around 50, while Watling scored at around 33. If either had tried to push that in a more attacking direction I think the extra risk would have been not worth the reward, while defending more could have led to frustration, inertia, or the bowler getting on top of them.

It's a little dependent on conditions and opposition bowlers but I think Williamson is most comfortable striking at around SR 33-40, while Latham is probably similar. It may seem slow but that's the right balance for them imo. Taylor will push things along and score at closer to 50 while Neesham's balance is skewed towards attack and he should continue to bat that way, striking at perhaps 60. Watling at 33 again. That's the recipe for tomorrow imo.

 

[Prince EWS]

On our batting scoring rate, I think most batsmen have some sort of ideal balance between attack and defense that they feel most comfortable with. It's the approach they'd use if batting in a bubble with thoughts free of the match situation and a sole focus on the construction of their innings. The match situation here where batting for both a lot of time and a lot of runs is basically the same as that, and so I think all our batsmen should just bat at the rate with which they are most comfortable. McCullum and Watling did that to save the match v India and McCullum played most of his innings at an SR of around 50, while Watling scored at around 33. If either had tried to push that in a more attacking direction I think the extra risk would have been not worth the reward, while defending more could have led to frustration, inertia, or the bowler getting on top of them.

It's a little dependent on conditions and opposition bowlers but I think Williamson is most comfortable striking at around SR 33-40, while Latham is probably similar. It may seem slow but that's the right balance for them imo. Taylor will push things along and score at closer to 50 while Neesham's balance is skewed towards attack and he should continue to bat that way, striking at perhaps 60. Watling at 33 again. That's the recipe for tomorrow imo.

This is such a good post.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Latham continues to impress with sound judgement and a compact technique. Don't want to jinx him, but he's closing in on 300 runs for the series which would be a fantastic achievement for a guy in his first full test series - Only 2-ton Peter and McCullum have managed that in the last decade. It's pretty hilarious to think that, collectively, New Zealand's openers are still averaging nearly 40 in this series, given that McCullum, Rutherford and Fulton have contributed 7 runs in 4 innings!

Guptil did similar in the last tour to the caribbean didn't he? so id be inclined to wait until he's had a few series under his belt before i can make a full judgement on him..no doubt he looks solid though.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

It'll definitely the best approach being well behind - thinking too much about the reality of the match situation will just mess with their heads.

 

[Flem274*]

Hopefully we'll unleash the Neesh after we have at least a small lead on the board. If he just bats normally and gets going he might be able to not just frustrate the West Indian bowlers but induce some panic about the test getting away from them.

We need him to come in after we pass their score anyway because assuming Rudds is in next Jimmy is coming in at 4 down and we really don't want to be 4 down and not in the lead.