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

[hendrix]

Neil Wagner might come into the side and make a difference, but it's got to be remembered that it wasn't long ago when he was scrapping it out with Doug Bracewell as contender for our 3rd seamer aka guy who drops the ball after Southee and Boult take out the top order.
India tried to get out of tough positions by attacking Sodhi, Anderson and Wagner. Wagner got the rewards for that.
I'm not saying he didn't bowl well because there were some real brutes, and the delivery to get Dhawan probably turned the match. But even Sodhi has claim to wickets that have turned matches in our favour.

Wagner's performance against India was due to McCullum and Hesson showing faith in him after he'd been largely disappointing for a long time. I'm quite happy for them to show the same faith in Sodhi and/or Craig.

 

[Athlai]

Wagner's performance against India was due to Wagner having a heart the size of an elephant.

 

[Beamer]

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.

This is ridiculous and quite frankly you are so one eyed that this is going to be my only post on the matter. You know next to nothing about our FC competition, what makes you able to outright say it's weaker than the NZ one? That is incredibly arrogant. I don't know much about your FC cricket so I won't go accusing it of being weaker than ours.

As a few posters have quite rightly pointed out, our pitches have been terrible for the last 3/4 years, as has the standard of umpiring. Also we have a number of decent spinners who bowl in favourable conditions. So to average over 40 consistently in FC cricket is very impressive.

By the same yardstick, for a spinner to force their way into the team they have to averaged under 20 with the ball. Our set up is different, but I really don't see how you, coming from a position of seemingly complete ignorance when it comes to our players, can come come to the conclusion that it is weaker.

I think as it stands now, NZ are the slightly better side mainly due to a combination of Southee and Boult, superior discipline and the form of Ross Taylor. The re-introduction of JT and Roach has evened things up somewhat and I think either side has a chance. If we had selected Narine for this series, I'd have even said it was a 50-50 call.

 

[Athlai]

I'd consider someone averaging 40 in the WI competition over the last 3-4 years to be the equivalent of someone averaging 50-55 in NZ.

Crazy pitches. There will be a fair WI spinners who are fairly terrible who average under 15 in this period.

 

[GotSpin]

When does this third test start? Its great reading posts though suggesting one team is head and shoulders above another when the score líne is squared up and the last match Was decided by a margin of 10 wickets.

 

[NZTailender]

When does this third test start? Its great reading posts though suggesting one team is head and shoulders above another when the score líne is squared up and the last match Was decided by a margin of 10 wickets.

Yeah one feels whoever takes out the third will have bragging rights for years. TBH I'm hoping for a tight contest that comes down to the wire, which would be a fairer result considering the previous two tests were overwhelmingly comprehensive for the victors.

Scary to think what WI would be capable of with a competent board and more of a dedicated and motivated attitude amongst some of its players towards Test cricket.

 

[vandem]

Yeah one feels whoever takes out the third will have bragging rights for years. ....

Don't think so. If NZ win, they have bragging rights. If WI win, the ledger is squared, both teams won their home series after an initial setback.

 

[Hurricane]

NZ need to get on top day 1 of the final test to demotivate the west indies.

 

[Howsie]

Don't think so. If NZ win, they have bragging rights. If WI win, the ledger is squared, both teams won their home series after an initial setback.

Yeah this.

Still backing New Zealand to come good and win the next test. I'd love to see Watling move up to six, with Neesham moving down a spot. He's wasted down at seven IMO, would add a lot more to this team up the order. Neesham; with his raw power would probably be better suited down the order anyway. Unless it's a raging turner I'd drop Craig for Wagner too.

 

[GotSpin]

Its always ifs and buts With West Indies cricket and has Been this way for years now.

But as a discussion earlier in the thread pointed out, how many world class batsmen have the Windies produced in roughly 25 years.

We can lament island politics, team selection or different types of rum, but it doesnt matter when they cant put enough runs up on the scoreboard. Runs on the board influences everything, from confidence in the field to bowler fitness

I meant to quote NZtailender

 

[Slifer]

This is ridiculous and quite frankly you are so one eyed that this is going to be my only post on the matter. You know next to nothing about our FC competition, what makes you able to outright say it's weaker than the NZ one? That is incredibly arrogant. I don't know much about your FC cricket so I won't go accusing it of being weaker than ours.

As a few posters have quite rightly pointed out, our pitches have been terrible for the last 3/4 years, as has the standard of umpiring. Also we have a number of decent spinners who bowl in favourable conditions. So to average over 40 consistently in FC cricket is very impressive.

By the same yardstick, for a spinner to force their way into the team they have to averaged under 20 with the ball. Our set up is different, but I really don't see how you, coming from a position of seemingly complete ignorance when it comes to our players, can come come to the conclusion that it is weaker.

I think as it stands now, NZ are the slightly better side mainly due to a combination of Southee and Boult, superior discipline and the form of Ross Taylor. The re-introduction of JT and Roach has evened things up somewhat and I think either side has a chance. If we had selected Narine for this series, I'd have even said it was a 50-50 call.

Every time that I remember this it makes my blood boil. We have a potential world class spinner being left out, who in his most recent test (away) versus the current opposition taking a 6 for. I mean who does that?? Oh wait the incompetent WICB. One test ban was enough but the whole damn series, just to prove a point.

 

[Hurricane]

^Yet they are proving they can win without him and that the team is bigger than him.

 

[Slifer]

Its always ifs and buts With West Indies cricket and has Been this way for years now.

But as a discussion earlier in the thread pointed out, how many world class batsmen have the Windies produced in roughly 25 years.

We can lament island politics, team selection or different types of rum, but it doesnt matter when they cant put enough runs up on the scoreboard. Runs on the board influences everything, from confidence in the field to bowler fitness

I meant to quote NZtailender

Lets see: Shiv, Lara,Gayle, Bravo (potentially)..but I see your point. What people on here seem to forget is that the WI is not a single country and only functions together in cricket. Each territory has their own agenda and this sometimes spills over a lot in WI cricket (to the detriment of our cricketing product). My solution would be to bring in neutral/outside personnel who would choose our sides on merit and not on politics

 

[NZTailender]

Its always ifs and buts With West Indies cricket and has Been this way for years now.

But as a discussion earlier in the thread pointed out, how many world class batsmen have the Windies produced in roughly 25 years.

We can lament island politics, team selection or different types of rum, but it doesnt matter when they cant put enough runs up on the scoreboard. Runs on the board influences everything, from confidence in the field to bowler fitness

I meant to quote NZtailender

2, both top 10. Lara and Chanderpaul. FWIW, Australia in the same time have had 4.

If World Class is 40+ (50+ being great) then add Gayle, Adams, Sarwan and Bravo.

Also you seem to be saying 'runs on the boards influences everything'. But if you have a board hindering cricket at both International and Domestic level, as well as T20 affecting attitudes towards how to play, do you not think that has an impact on putting runs on the board? Things like the mental game that Australia has been so good at in recent decades is something carried through Domestic cricket as well. Look at NZ, and the post Academy players versus those who came before. You're talking as if nothing else affects a persons game except how they are in the moment of a test. You don't magically come equipped to these thing already. Like in life, you're shaped by the experiences leading up to the present which also affects how you treat the future. Thats how a politics and team selection can play a part on performance.

 

[Hurricane]

2, both top 10. Lara and Chanderpaul. FWIW, Australia in the same time have had 4.

If World Class is 40+ (50+ being great) then add Gayle, Adams, Sarwan and Bravo.

Also you seem to be saying 'runs on the boards influences everything'. But if you have a board hindering cricket at both International and Domestic level, as well as T20 affecting attitudes towards how to play, do you not think that has an impact on putting runs on the board? Things like the mental game that Australia has been so good at in recent decades is something carried through Domestic cricket as well. Look at NZ, and the post Academy players versus those who came before. You're talking as if nothing else affects a persons game except how they are in the moment of a test. You don't magically come equipped to these thing already. Like in life, you're shaped by the experiences leading up to the present which also affects how you treat the future. Thats how a politics and team selection can play a part on performance.

excellent post.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Don't think so. If NZ win, they have bragging rights. If WI win, the ledger is squared, both teams won their home series after an initial setback.

Hold on a minute!!..we won the series vs NZ 2-0 in 2012...which was just as dominant as anything NZ done against us in 2013...so that already "levelled" things,.. .

Imo there was a lot of big talk after the first test..a lot of chest beating. We'll see what transpires in this third test...at the end of the day one side is confident and settled while the other side has a lot of question marks over selection.

 

[hendrix]

.at the end of the day one side is confident and settled while the other side has a lot of question marks over selection.

legitimately don't know which teams you're talking about here.

 

[GotSpin]

Okay I think I might have actually contradicted myself or something. I meant to say that the inability of the West Indies to produce World Class batsmen is a symptom of the problems with Windies cricket itself and why its so low in the rankings

Lets be generous and set the standard of being world class as 40+. That's still only 6 players with Sarwan just getting in. (Bit fan of Sarwan though btw). It's not many players to hold a batting order together.

 

[Jono]

No doubt they have produced some mediocre batting lineups, but surely its their inability to produce a fast bowler of note who consistently performs and is consistently fit which is the issue?

 

[WindieWeathers]

legitimately don't know which teams you're talking about here.

When things aren't as rosey as they were confusion often takes hold.