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

[hendrix]

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

hahahaha I don't even

 

[GGG]

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.

Well at least we won a test, WI didn't even get close to winning a test when they were here and if it wasn't for rain it would of been 3 zip. Damn near 20 years since the WI have won a test in NZ. New Zealand much much better that the WI at home, WI better that NZ at home but that may change, nothing more needs to be said.

 

[WindieWeathers]

Well at least we won a test, WI didn't even get close to winning a test when they were here and if it wasn't for rain it would of been 3 zip. Damn near 20 years since the WI have won a test in NZ. New Zealand much much better that the WI at home, WI better that NZ at home but that may change, nothing more needs to be said.

We beat pretty much the best NZ had to offer in 2012 while NZ beat a WI side missing half it's best players...and that's a fact...you can't have an attack made up of Best, a raw Gabriel and Darren Sammy and expect to compete.

 

[SteveNZ]

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.

Only 50/50? You'd be 70/30 for mine. Taylor and Roach as dangerous as they've been, Benn being parsimonious and having Narine at the other end flummoxing people, our guys wouldn't have the technique or the mental tools to work through it on the type of decks being played on.

I hate the IPL with a passion but the WICB have gone far further than cutting off their nose to spite their face. I'm sure yourself, WW and other posters know the ins and outs far better than me but with in a region/national team where cricket is not necessarily the #1 option any longer, creating blanket rules that inhibit players from seeking opportunities to maximise their wealth doesn't strike me as a wonderful idea.

 

[WindieWeathers]

hahahaha I don't even

No..do "even" .

 

[Mike5181]

We beat pretty much the best NZ had to offer in 2012 while NZ beat a WI side missing half it's best players...and that's a fact...you can't have an attack made up of Best, a raw Gabriel and Darren Sammy and expect to compete.

The best we had to offer?

Some NZ players that featured in that 2012 series: Chris Martin, Doug Bracewell, Kruger van Wyk, Martin Guptill, Daniel Flynn, Dean Brownlie etc

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Oh dear lord, please let it stop.

 

[hendrix]

No..do "even" .

humour me for a second.

Which of these two sides is more "confident and settled" and which has "question marks over selections"?

 

[WindieWeathers]

The best we had to offer?

Some NZ players that featured in that 2012 series: Chris Martin, Doug Bracewell, Kruger van Wyk, Martin Guptill, Daniel Flynn, Dean Brownlie etc

Lets also name the others that featured in that series..

Taylor
Williamson
Mccullum
Watling
Southee
Boult
Wagner
Brownlie (at the time wasn't he scoring runs?)
Vetori

I'd say that's the best NZ had to offer tbh...

 

[Flem274*]

 

[Athlai]

It was a two Test series where we played 14 blokes.

A fixed team it was not.

 

[WindieWeathers]

humour me for a second.

Which of these two sides is more "confident and settled" and which has "question marks over selections"?

Take a wild guess!!

 

[WindieWeathers]

It was a two Test series where we played 14 blokes.

A fixed team it was not.

The point is NZ had their best players to choose from...we didn't in NZ.

 

[Mike5181]

Lets also name the others that featured in that series..

Taylor
Williamson
Mccullum
Watling
Southee
Boult
Wagner
Brownlie (at the time wasn't he scoring runs?)
Vetori

I'd say that's the best NZ had to offer tbh...

2013:
Chanderpaul
Samuels
Narine
Ramdin
Shillingford
Edwards
Brathwaite
Powell
Gabriel

 

[Athlai]

The point is NZ had their best players to choose from...we didn't in NZ.

This is a pretty silly game to be playing.

Vettori and Patel couldn't play in this series. This doesn't mean NZ should feel hard done by if we are beaten, it means that Vettori and Patel aren't consistently in the NZ team and our position on the standings should reflect that.

 

[SteveNZ]

The point is NZ had their best players to choose from...we didn't in NZ.

It would be pertinent to point out that any injury or Board-related absences are 100% your own issues, no one elses.

Unless they are something like Trevor Franklin breaking his leg at Heathrow being run over by a luggage trolley.

 

[Howsie]

I don't quite understand the relevance of bringing up a test series that was played 24 months ago when the two teams have just played six test matches, home and away, in the past six months.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Oh dear lord, please let it stop.

drastic times call for drastic measures

 

[GGG]

We beat pretty much the best NZ had to offer in 2012 while NZ beat a WI side missing half it's best players...and that's a fact...you can't have an attack made up of Best, a raw Gabriel and Darren Sammy and expect to compete.

So let me get this straight, when WI loss to NZ they have a 2nd string team and when they win they have their best team playing. Gotcha. I may as well play the same game, we were missing Southee and Ryder on that 2012 tour, this tour are missing Vettori and Ryder.

 

[hendrix]

Take a wild guess!!

I'm trying to imagine how a team that has just replaced it's captain, 3 bowlers and 2 batsman can be considered "settled" and without "question marks over selections".

Nope. So it can't be West Indies you're talking about.

Must be NZ.

I suppose only 2 changes in personnel over 6 months and coming off back-to-back series wins is pretty "confident and settled", why yes indeed.