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

[SteveNZ]

To me it doesn't reflect well on your maturity levels if you have to come out with that...but i digress. For me it was too wide and those calls should be umpire decisions..but like i said it wasn't too costly so it is what it is.

Bats cost 5x as much as pads for a reason.

If it was hitting the top of leg and he'd played a shot, fair. But he's padded up to a leg-spinner outside off stump. Tell your story walking Shiv

Seriously, batsmen and their liberties. I'd hate to work for the bowlers' union, you'd have a stack of paperwork regarding unfair practice.

 

[Bahnz]

After the world cup he will be 33, though young by many international standards compared to nz players it is relatively similar to when other players finished there test careers, Vettori (33), Crowe (33), Cairns (34), Parore (31), Astle (35), Fleming (34) Richardson (33). Really the only guys to play on the other side of 35 are Chris Martin and John Wright.

To be fair, the retirements of Crowe, Vettori and (to a lesser extent) Cairns were all heavily influenced by injury. Crowe, in particular, was very keen to play on until the 1999 World Cup before finally becoming resigned to the fact that his body couldn't cope. Richardson was also a bit of an odd case because the reason he retired was more due to being unable to cope with the psychological stress that he put himself under every time he walked out to bat. I agree though that guys who play into their late 30's for NZ in recent times are rare. The only other obvious example that I can think of is Hadlee.

 

[hendrix]

To be fair, the retirements of Crowe, Vettori and (to a lesser extent) Cairns were all heavily influenced by injury. Crowe, in particular, was very keen to play on until the 1999 World Cup before finally becoming resigned to the fact that his body couldn't cope. Richardson was also a bit of an odd case because the reason he retired was more due to being unable to cope with the psychological stress that he put himself under every time he walked out to bat. I agree though that guys who play into their late 30's for NZ in recent times are rare. The only other obvious example that I can think of is Hadlee.

 

[Bahnz]

Check the quote, RxGM mentioned him in his original post.

 

[hendrix]

I just wanted to use that pic, tbh.

 

[Blocky]

It's tough to say that McCullum is more talented than Bravo. It's the equivalent of saying that McCullum is better than Williamson. It might be true in terms of their career, but that doesn't mean an awful lot when we're talking about talent. Or similarly, Ryder.

I'd be taking Bravo, anyway.

you're not going to have anyone agreeing with you in saying NZ is "head and shoulders" the more talented team.

Only because NZ'ers are pessimistic and not willing to play the role of over-dog.

If you match position for position

1. Gayle beats Fulton / Rutherford
2. Latham beats Braithwaite
3. Williamson beats Edwards
4. Taylor beats Bravo
5. Chanderpaul beats McCullum
6. Neesham beats Blackwood
7. Watling beats Ramdin
8. Southee beats Taylor
9. Benn beats Sodhi
10. Roach beats Craig
11. Boult beats Gabriel

So as much as you want to be contrary, realistically what happened in the first test is NZ ****ed up from a position of power and gifted a bunch of soft dismissals, then adopted the wrong strategy in the remainder of the match to make it interesting or get through to the draw... but man for man, our bowling combination (even without Wagner) is better than theres and although we don't have the class of a Chanderpaul in our side, man for man, our batting comes across as stronger too.


l

 

[hendrix]

I agree that on the balance of things, our side is slightly stronger than theirs, but it's not "head and shoulders" stronger, and moreover, these are their home conditions that we're playing in.

Yes, there was some element of complacency about the first innings dismissals, but they still played better than us throughout that whole test match.

 

[Howsie]

Latham beats Brathwaite if you're a Kiwi, Brathwaite if your West Indian. Neesham and Blackwood the same. You can't really accurately rate them against each other IMO.

 

[Blocky]

I disagree on your view that Brendon needs to hunt numbers, I think that his raison d’etre is winning, which has lead to him moving around the order because he thinks it will help the team to win. His 302 has cured how he will be perceived as a batsman (Greatbatch is remembered for the innings at perth not as a guy that only averaged 30) and I don’t think he is capable of the numbers that you suggest given how average his away form is. His current average is almost identical to where it was at when Vettori gave up the captaincy. He will still finish with Most runs (Right Hander), most fifties (Right Hander) and most consecutive games from debut (Internationally).
If you look at the current international calendar post world cup he is only scheduled for 4 weeks off till the end of the next NZ summer, he could potentially drop Zim series and ODIs but it is still very hectic.

BMac has already stated he wants to tick a few more statistic milestones off the list, he mentioned he'd come close to retirement due to his debilitating back problems after the English series but that with time off, his back was manageable again and he didn't see his retirement coming in the next few years.

After the world cup he will be 33, though young by many international standards compared to nz players it is relatively similar to when other players finished there test careers, Vettori (33), Crowe (33), Cairns (34), Parore (31), Astle (35), Fleming (34) Richardson (33). Really the only guys to play on the other side of 35 are Chris Martin and John Wright.
I don’t know the state of his back but he has been affecting his cricket since 2008, odds on it is pretty buggered by now. Presently he has a goal in mind being CWC which must be fuelling him. – but if he is not scoring the runs it will be hard for him to continue on

Right, but in those above situations

Vettori - not retired yet, simply can't bowl with his achilles injury.
Crowe - chronic knee problems and bad management forced him out early
Cairns - chronic knee problems, the ICL and County Cricket forced him out early
Parore - saw the writing on the wall with McCullum coming into the side, had business interests that were profitable
Astle - bad management and the ICL forced him out earlier than he'd have gone
McMillan - diabetes impairing his movement and vision forced him out earlier
Fleming - bad management post resigning captaincy and seeing a future in business/coaching got him out early
Richardson - couldn't maintain high standards due to not playing enough cricket and decided to give it away rather than damage what he'd managed to do.

Undoubtedly I think he's going to continue probably until he's 36 in tests. I think if anything he'd throw the ODI away after the world cup and focus on Tests and T20. That wouldn't surprise me in the least but ultimately, I think Baz sees an opportunity to do what Fleming did - take himself from a mid to high thirties to forties average, lead a team from the bottom of the table to a higher position and retire being seen as one of NZ's greats.

The other thing that will keep McCullum playing later than the others is the IPL, he knows a lot of his marketability comes from what he's done in International T20 cricket.

 

[Blocky]

Latham beats Brathwaite if you're a Kiwi, Brathwaite if your West Indian. Neesham and Blackwood the same. You can't really accurately rate them against each other IMO.

Latham beats Braithwaite on sheer statistics both first class and test.
Neesham beats Blackwood on sheer statistics and start to cricket - Blackwood has impressive first class statistics, but in a weaker competition (in my view) than Neesham's statistics. Neesham's start to tests has been highly impressive, Blackwood has had a good innings for his first dig.

Cricket is a game of statistics, it's very easy to do comparison especially when they're of the same era.

 

[Howsie]

Latham beats Braithwaite on sheer statistics both first class and test.
Neesham beats Blackwood on sheer statistics and start to cricket.

Cricket is a game of statistics, it's very easy to do comparison especially when they're of the same era.

It's three test matches, as I said, if you're a Kiwi the kiwi's are better, if you're West Indian the West Indian's are better. You can't say after three test matches comprehensively that one is better than the other. Their first class statistics are hardly a good way to judge them either, I mean both Brathwaite and Blackwood average 40+ in first class cricket which is outstanding in that part of the world, the pitches are a lot tougher to bat on then they are in New Zealand.

 

[Blocky]

cricket which is outstanding in that part of the world, the pitches are a lot tougher to bat on then they are in New Zealand.

Disagree - have a look at how many Windies cricketers have a first class average of 40, versus NZ cricketers.

 

[Howsie]

Nikita Miller | West Indies Cricket | Cricket Players and Officials | ESPN Cricinfo

From what I've heard (and the scorecards would certainly suggest it) is that the domestic pitches in West Indian cricket are pure rubbish. 100 plays 100 kind of stuff. I could probably rattle off 10 players around Latham's age that average 40+ in domestic cricket in NZ, it's decent going but hardly outstanding. How many batsman around Brathwaite's age could you say the same about in the West Indies?

 

[hendrix]

Latham is better than Bradman (obviously), but he's not (yet) objectively better than Brathwaite at this point in time.

 

[RxGM]

Yea I missed Hadlee, that’s a major oversight, my point I was trying to make is that generally guys retire from the nz side between 33-35 which is lower than international standards. This could be due to injury, form, politics or oppourtunities elsewhere (there is always a reason why someone retires), its just we tend not to produce guys like Sri Lanka do who look like they can play forever. So retiring at 33 is maybe slightly earlier than typical but not significantly so.
I was not aware of Brendons comments, if you could link to them Blocky, I will be much appreciated, I still don’t think he will listen to his own advice, though, if he needs rest to perform he wouldn’t have undertaken the schedule he did prior to his arrival for this tour.
Though if I had of told you when Vettori took the 5 fir vs Zimbabwe that Vettori would only take 7 more test wickets in his career you would have called me an idiot, he had said he wanted to play till 2015 break hadless record etc, but instead he got old. [Ftr Imo Vettoris test career is over, im happy for Dan to prove me wrong]
Brendon also will get old. It happens to every one and I think post world cup, he will give up test cricket

 

[Bahnz]

Cricket is a game of statistics, it's very easy to do comparison especially when they're of the same era.

Yeah, but statistics only really become useful once you get a large enough pool of data. One or two data points can't be used to objectively point to who's the better player.

Furthermore, as Howsie says, while they may be of the same era, their early careers have been played in very different conditions. Furthermore, while Latham was allowed to mature in domestic cricket, Brathwaite was thrust into the test match arena when he was just 18. If you cut out his first year of test cricket, then his first class average looks pretty similar to Latham's (around 43/44).

 

[Dan]

If we're looking at an actual combined XI from the series so far, rather than arbitrarily comparing players based on their batting position:

1. Latham
2. Brathwaite
3. Williamson
4. Bravo
5. Chanderpaul
6. Neesham
7. Watling +
8. Southee
9. Craig
10. Taylor
11. Boult

12th: Benn

7-5 NZ's way for the squad of 12, IMO.

 

[Blocky]

If we're looking at an actual combined XI from the series so far, rather than arbitrarily comparing players based on their batting position:

1. Latham
2. Brathwaite
3. Williamson
4. Bravo
5. Chanderpaul
6. Neesham
7. Watling +
8. Southee
9. Craig
10. Taylor
11. Boult

12th: Benn

7-5 NZ's way for the squad of 12, IMO.

I think that's fair, although contentious around Ross Taylor and Bravo - considering Taylor has more runs than Bravo so far in the series and they're both operating around about the same average.

Bravo 121 @ 40
Ross 136 @ 45

Also Sodhi vs Benn is interesting too (I hate Sodhi... but going off this series)

Sodhi 8/228 @ 28.5
Benn 9/340 @ 37.7

So at best, 7/5 to NZ - at worst 9/3

Then if you think recent performances - i.e last ten matches

1. Latham
2. Braithwaire
3. Williamson
4. Taylor
5. Chanderpaul
6. McCullum
7. Watling
8. Neesham
9. Wagner
10. Southee
11. Wagner
12. Taylor.

 

[Dan]

Yeah, Bravo was **** in the first game, but bounced back with a century in the second that was seriously classy. He's also had one less chance to bat compared to Taylor, which matters in a sample size of 2 Tests.

Ross really hasn't been impressive IMO. But it's testament to his overall quality that he's still averaging 45 for the series. WAG. Could probably justify him in there ahead of Neesh, but I thought the 5th bowling option, even if a bit rubbish at the moment, is a better bet.

 

[hendrix]

1. Latham
2. Braithwaire
3. Williamson
4. Taylor
5. Chanderpaul
6. McCullum
7. Watling
8. Neesham
9. Wagner
10. Southee
11. Wagner
12. Taylor.

Not enough Neil Wagners, IMO. Put another one in to open the batting.