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

[hendrix]

This isn't the argument though, it's a byproduct of the argument.

The argument is, how do we give ourselves the best chance to win this Test match?

The answer to that is, we declare overnight.

So you consider winning in isolation from drawing and losing? What world do you live in?

is not going to increase New Zealand's chance of winning by very much at all, and will increase the West Indies chance of winning by tenfold.

yup, this is what it comes down to.

 

[SteveNZ]

not often i agree with blocky but nailed it.

if you ever want to lose a game, lose it in your head by imagining everything going drastically wrong before the game.

I agree with the sentiment, not the wording. Calling it a loser's mentality is exactly the sort of stuff that has made this thread painfully handbaggy at times.

I'd rather we declared overnight. Can always manipulate fields later on if we have to, which is not necessarily negative if the Windies are looking to chase it - which we presume they will at any stage with half a sniff.

 

[hendrix]

The West Indies won't win unless they play brilliantly.

And you think it would be ok if they won from a day of brilliant play?

Why let their brilliant play trump the brilliance of KW's century or Neesham's twin half centuries?

 

[Flem274*]

And you think it would be ok if they won from a day of brilliant play?

Why let their brilliant play trump the brilliance of KW's century or Neesham's twin half centuries?

Because then you'd never win a game because you're too busy preparing for the worst possible outcome.

 

[Flem274*]

It's also going to rain tomorrow. We're not setting 300 in 3 sessions, we're setting 300 in maybe 2 and at most 3 and a bit sessions.

 

[hendrix]

Final point because I've expressed my opinion enough:

I would keep batting for 5 overs tomorrow no matter what team we were facing, but it's worth noting that West Indies have batted worse when they're being defensive than when they're being positive. Their hitting ability is not in question; their defensive technique is (barring Chanderpaul).

 

[Kippax]

.

INJURY UPDATE: Darren Bravo was struck on the fingers of his right hand. No major damage just a little bruising. He will be OK

 

[hendrix]

It's also going to rain tomorrow. We're not setting 300 in 3 sessions, we're setting 300 in maybe 2 and at most 3 and a bit sessions.

40% chance of precipitation means 40% chance of precipitation. Not "it is going to rain tomorrow".

 

[hendrix]

Because then you'd never win a game because you're too busy preparing for the worst possible outcome.

Completely disagree, but anyway I'm not asking to prepare for the worst possible outcome (e.g. batting to a 450 run lead). I'm asking for 5 overs for another 33 runs.. Which takes 7 overs out of 98 potential overs.

 

[Flem274*]

40% chance of precipitation means 40% chance of precipitation. Not "it is going to rain tomorrow".

Toss a coin. There's your chances.

300 will be fine. 70-80% chance of a win to NZ or draw. They have a long tail. If you spend your time worrying about the 20% chance you'll **** it up then you'll think yourself into losing.

Plus that 5 overs in the morning could give us a nice moist pitch to bowl on, rather than try to slog on.

 

[Hurricane]

Completely disagree, but anyway I'm not asking to prepare for the worst possible outcome (e.g. batting to a 450 run lead). I'm asking for 5 overs for another 33 runs.. Which takes 7 overs out of 98 potential overs.

What happens if we don't get our eyes in - aren't seeing it properly, lose a wicket and only score 20 runs. Do we keep batting or call it quits after 5 overs no matter what?

 

[hendrix]

What happens if we don't get our eyes in - aren't seeing it properly, lose a wicket and only score 20 runs. Do we keep batting or call it quits after 5 overs no matter what?

yes. 5 overs max.

 

[Bahnz]

On a different topic, I just wanted to comment about what a massive difference Williamson makes to this team. In my opinion he's probably the 2nd biggest factor (behind Southee's bowling) in the turnaround that NZ has achieved over the past 2 years. Having a genuine test class (soon to be world class if he keeps improving at his current rate) bat at number 3 just makes this side look so much more well balanced, and gives me so much more confidence when we lose an early wicket or two. Seven test 100's and an average of 40 (fingers-crossed) before the age of 24 - this guy is going to ruin those NZ batting records.

 

[Flem274*]

Guess who averages 51 since their 135 in Sri Lanka?

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Days of Grace]

If Kane finishes unbeaten, I have a question:

When was the last time New Zealand played two batsmen with over 1000 career runs and averages over 40?

 

[Slifer]

And on another side note, congrats to Kemar Roach on taking your 100th test wicket at a very respectable average of 27. Take your overseas average to sub 30 and you're well on your way. Him, Holder and a certain Narine should form the backbone of our attack for many years to come (if injuries permit and if our selectors have any sense).

 

[Flem274*]

Jones/Crowe and Reid/Crowe were my first thoughts, but Astle poked his nose into the forties a bit as did McMillan so it could well be those two and Richardson.

 

[_Ed_]

Jacob Oram was also well into the 40s for quite a bit of his early career - might have coincided with Richardson there too.

 

[Flem274*]

Hang on, the obvious might be Jesse and Ross.

 

[Days of Grace]

Hmmm, I was thinking Crowe and Jones at Perth in 1993 (the last time they played together).

Check career averages in match scorecards. I don't think Astle ever ended a match averaging 40 or over.

Did Oram have 1000 career runs at the time?

It might be McMillan and Richardson.

Anyway, it's pretty darn rare for NZ teams.