ohnoitsyou
International Regular
Said this a while back, but theres no reason KW shouldn't reach 30 test hundreds.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Kane Williamson
- Thread starter Howsie
- Start date
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
yeah. the lofty heights of 17 don't really cut it when he already has 7 as a 24yo.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Given that he's unlikely to ever be a T20 superstar, and that he has a sound defensive technique that should stand the test of time, I see no reason why Williamson shouldn't play to 36/37 (barring a Crowe-esque injury). That gives him another 13 or so years. NZ usually plays around 8-9 tests a year, so that gives him a maximum of of around 110 tests between now and retirement. Assuming he'll have a few absences along the way, that'll probably be reduced to around 100. Given that he's hit 5 centuries in his last 19 tests, and looks to be improving with almost every series, I see no reason why he shouldn't hit 30 hundreds comfortably.
Blocky
Banned
The problem is we don't know what profile of test cricket NZ will play in the coming years with changes coming due to the Big 3.
Personally I think NZ should be investing a lot more in relationships with teams like the Windies, Pakistan and Sri Lanka and setting up more three test series with them, as well as investing in relationships with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe where it suits.
We should be targeting 10 to 12 test matches a year in my view - 6 at home, 4 to 6 away from home - each and every year. Book in a lot more tri series tournaments with other nations for T20 and ODI stuff - admittedly the financials make this a bit harder to pull off as ODIs generally pay for the tests, but if NZ want to become more marketable, it's imperative we play more test cricket.
Personally I think NZ should be investing a lot more in relationships with teams like the Windies, Pakistan and Sri Lanka and setting up more three test series with them, as well as investing in relationships with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe where it suits.
We should be targeting 10 to 12 test matches a year in my view - 6 at home, 4 to 6 away from home - each and every year. Book in a lot more tri series tournaments with other nations for T20 and ODI stuff - admittedly the financials make this a bit harder to pull off as ODIs generally pay for the tests, but if NZ want to become more marketable, it's imperative we play more test cricket.
Flem274*
123/5
Yeah he's got the advantage Cook and Tendulkar had for their respective countries - how good they are compared to past players is irrelevant because they're good enough to be run machines and their early debuts give them such a head start on past batsmen.
He'll accumulate his way to 100+ tests and a billion NZ batting records.
He'll accumulate his way to 100+ tests and a billion NZ batting records.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
If there is to be a reason it'll be the few test matches NZ are likely to play in the next 10 or so years. He'd be doing pretty damn well to score 30 test hundreds in anything less than 130 tests (considering Lara was 34 from 131) so unless NZ get themselves a test schedule like 2013 as opposed to 2-3 piddly 2-match series per year, I doubt he'll rack up enough test matches. Certainly would be anywhere near Cook's rate of 104 tests in 8 years.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
ohnoitsyou
International Regular
Hopefully us being less **** is going to mean 3 match series become the norm. So thats a minimum of 8 tests a year compares to 6.
Biggest problem I see is India not wantinf to tour again in the next 20 years will significantly cut revenue
Biggest problem I see is India not wantinf to tour again in the next 20 years will significantly cut revenue
G.I.Joe
International Coach
Why would India not want to tour? India would want NZ to tour India, and reciprocity implies India will have to tour NZ.
Flem274*
123/5
simonlee48
School Boy/Girl Captain
Good to see him making runs. Pleasing to watch.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Haha, TumTum.
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
He couldn't have been more than 12. Surely?
Teja.
Global Moderator
What do you guys think about Kane Williamson's issues with good fast bowling attacks? Hopefully it's just a young cricketer having a few failures but are there technical problems involved and by what magnitude do you think he has the potential to improve against quality pace?
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
He likes to drive on the up off the back foot between cover and point; he nails it a lot of the time but it's high risk against good fast bowling, particularly on bouncy tracks. His defence is fine but he needs to restrain himself from playing that shot when it's not on.
He's certainly been doing it less often over the last year so I don't see it so something that can't be improved upon by any stretch of the imagination, but that's what has caused most of his issues in the past.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think his unbeaten match-saving hundred against Steyn, Morkel & co in Wellington a couple of years back went a long way in dispelling any myth that he can't handle really good pace. Agree with Pews in that it's not necessarily his technique, but more a case of having the mental discipline not to play loosely outside off stump, particularly earlier in his innings. Whilst his driving off the back foot through the cover/point region is actually one of his greatest strengths, it can also be his undoing.
ohnoitsyou
International Regular
Don't think KW's issue is anything more than lazy footwork early on, when he doesn't have to reach for the ball. The biggest problem in the past has always been copping a good one early, cause hey de-facto opener.
Blocky
Banned
His footwork is OK - it's actually just the plane of movement he brings his bat down in. He tends to come inside out at the ball and against faster bowlers, he doesn't have the time to adjust and get his bat into line. If he's in form and seeing it early, it's not an issue - if he's not, he'll edge it.
As for "de facto opener" - look, if it was good enough for the likes of Fleming, Dravid, Amla, Langer, etcetera - then why doesn't he put his hand up and solve that issue for NZ?
As for "de facto opener" - look, if it was good enough for the likes of Fleming, Dravid, Amla, Langer, etcetera - then why doesn't he put his hand up and solve that issue for NZ?
ohnoitsyou
International Regular
Because moving KW to opener just moves the problem down a position. Unless you fancy moving the guy whos averaged 51 over 51 games at four...
Like you say, he probably does get into trouble for playing inside out to much, i don't have a good enough knowledge of the technical stuff to really notice that except when he's playing square of the wicket. What i have noticed over the past, is too many dismissals were he plays half-heartledly at one outside off, where if he had went for it and moved his feet he would of creamed it for four.
Like you say, he probably does get into trouble for playing inside out to much, i don't have a good enough knowledge of the technical stuff to really notice that except when he's playing square of the wicket. What i have noticed over the past, is too many dismissals were he plays half-heartledly at one outside off, where if he had went for it and moved his feet he would of creamed it for four.