**Official** Pakistan v New Zealand in the UAE 2014

[Blocky]

Anyways where to for Kiwis? For mine I don't think Sodhi is ready yet. An impression amplified by the fact Pakistan's batsmen are so awesome right now. They've monstered Lyon who is pretty good so NZ's less credentialed spinners were always likely for serious humpty. Agree with WW that Wagner should come in. While discussion has been on bowling lets not forget NZ's batting needs to improve mightily as well. NZ are in much the same position as Oz were in UAE. Changes to personnel are no where near as important as every man performing a lot better. Oz couldn't do it; lets see if NZ can.

I think we really write off this series at the moment as a learning experience and likely look to bat time and get our players thinking that our mentality needs to be scoreboard and time pressure in order to negate their better bowling attack and force some of their batsmen into uncharacteristic mistakes - both Australia and NZ have been guilty of surrending too meakly and not showing the same level of discipline at the crease, meaning Pakistan is generally ahead of the game and don't feel pressured around "We have to make something happen" - ironically, Pakistan have become the masters of this - they've got three batsmen who all know how to bat time, give limited opportunities and slowly kill the opposition in the field in Azhar, Younis and Misbah.

If I was Hesson, my firm instruction to the guys would be bat time - and ultimately look to be there post 150 balls. If we get three out of our seven batsmen facing 150 balls each, we'll place time pressure if nothing else on the opposition.

The players we have in the squad, unless we see some demon like performance from Southee and Boult with the new ball and get them under extreme pressure early, we've not got the fire power in this test. Despite my defense of Wagner, he flat out is not bowling well at the moment, some major technical deficiencies in his action mean he's starting to fall over at the crease, which impacts his line, length and release. He might have tuned them though. I also think longer term, Wagner is a better bowling option in these conditions than Boult and I think longer term, NZ need to realise we will not have the spinning stocks to take two spinners into a test, so we need to give our bowlers who are more certain to play more time in these conditions to learn (i.e Wagner, Southee, Boult, Henry, etc)

 

[the big bambino]

I've just checked NZ's test squad on cricinfo. If Wagner's not bowling well would you consider Bracewell?

 

[Blocky]

I've just checked NZ's test squad on cricinfo. If Wagner's not bowling well would you consider Bracewell?

I'd say no, based on the fact that Wagner has more to offer in this type of climate than Bracewell does. Both do have the intangible "big match player" about them though and both of them will bowl 12 over spells and ask for more, something Southee, Anderson and Boult won't do.

 

[Blocky]

The other thing the selectors MUST do as part of their post tour review is not to rush to selection decisions on players who were outside their comfort zone..

i.e say Latham failed this series and failed predominately against spin on his first tour to Asia, no way should we drop him before he has a chance in home conditions again - the same with Southee, Boult, Wagner and to a lesser degree Neesham and Anderson. I think with the spin bowlers, we need to assess how much pressure they're able to exert when conditions are in their favour, if neither of them come through this series looking good or even having one or two spells where they looked threatening then we need to be realistic about their long term chances in test cricket.

I'd hate to see say Doug Bracewell brought in, go 50 overs in the test, get 1 for 150 and then be dropped. And NZ selectors in the past have been guilty of that sort of ****.

 

[hendrix]

One of those doesn't exist at the moment, the other is probably close to it also.

It's not really valid though, you have a guy with a world record in first class cricket where he was reverse swinging the ball in the 70th over to take those wickets - as well as notable wickets of Pietersen and Trott with the ball in about the 35-40th over moving off its line in reverse and suddenly "No, he can't reverse the ball" - also the provisionist argument that you've now settled for when I say "Boult doesn't get reverse and Southee takes longer to get it to reverse" has become "But Southee can get it to reverse" - which wasn't the initial argument. Your pack mentality doesn't stop the fact that your points entirely redundant on the basis of evidence.

The Pietersen wicket was conventional swing, not reverse, IIRC. Even if it was reverse I never said that he's incapable of it. Just that he hasn't really shown it much in his NZ career. I've seen Boult get reverse. I've even seen Corey Anderson get reverse in Bangladesh. Neither of them are very accomplished at reverse swing. Southee is our main weapon with reverse.

Anyway, I'm done with this silly little argument. It doesn't matter.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Yeah, I get the feeling though that the core of this team is set. Maybe this tour will confirm what our realistic spin options are. A positive is that Latham looks to be one of our long-term opener options which was what we didn't have at the start of the tour.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

One of those doesn't exist at the moment, the other is probably close to it also.



It's not really valid though, you have a guy with a world record in first class cricket where he was reverse swinging the ball in the 70th over to take those wickets - as well as notable wickets of Pietersen and Trott with the ball in about the 35-40th over moving off its line in reverse and suddenly "No, he can't reverse the ball" - also the provisionist argument that you've now settled for when I say "Boult doesn't get reverse and Southee takes longer to get it to reverse" has become "But Southee can get it to reverse" - which wasn't the initial argument. Your pack mentality doesn't stop the fact that your points entirely redundant on the basis of evidence.




Sodhi and Craig are playing, the only consideration at the moment is whether Neesham plays with Wagner being considered as an option in his place. Sodhi did bowl better than Craig in this test, but history of results and performance indicate that won't be the case in the second and third tests. But the reality is neither should be playing for NZ, neither are good enough to consistently take wickets nor tie up an end.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

I'd say no, based on the fact that Wagner has more to offer in this type of climate than Bracewell does. Both do have the intangible "big match player" about them though and both of them will bowl 12 over spells and ask for more, something Southee, Anderson and Boult won't do.

No way Bracwell is bowling even 10 over spells in the UAE.

 

[Blocky]

The Pietersen wicket was conventional swing, not reverse, IIRC. Even if it was reverse I never said that he's incapable of it. Just that he hasn't really shown it much in his NZ career. I've seen Boult get reverse. I've even seen Corey Anderson get reverse in Bangladesh. Neither of them are very accomplished at reverse swing. Southee is our main weapon with reverse.

Anyway, I'm done with this silly little argument. It doesn't matter.

One of his Pietersen wickets, you mean - he got Pietersen and Trott multiple times. And even in the recent Windies tour, he turned a game on its head when the Windies were 2 for 150 odd and he came back in and took 4 for 64 to get them all out for around 310. He was coming around the wicket and getting the ball to hold its line, going over the wicket and getting the ball to move off its line. Remember due to his seam presentation he doesn't get any movement off the wicket - but I guess you're going to say they're anomalies? Despite him having a proven track record for it?

Boult gets no reverse swing what so ever, it's kind of like your magical "Milne gets swing" - might have done it one day, but he had no clue what he was doing.

 

[Blocky]

No way Bracwell is bowling even 10 over spells in the UAE.

I didn't say he would - I'd say he could. And he'd still ask for more.

 

[hendrix]

Boult gets no reverse swing what so ever, it's kind of like your magical "Milne gets swing" - might have done it one day, but he had no clue what he was doing.

I've shown you videos of Milne swinging the ball and I can show you a big reversing yorker from Boult but evidence doesn't seem to mean anything to you, does it?

 

[Blocky]

I've shown you videos of Milne swinging the ball and I can show you a big reversing yorker from Boult but evidence doesn't seem to mean anything to you, does it?

You showed me one example of a guy getting swing on his day... I showed you many examples of him coming into the team after that and being gun-barrel straight. And please, feel free to do a break down of how many wickets Boult gets between the 25th and 80th over in test cricket and compare that against Wagner and Southee's return rate. Then tell me again how he's capable of bowling reverse swing.

It's like the ball that doesn't bounce because of the pitch condition taking you a wicket - you can't replicate it, therefore it doesn't actually exist - that's Milne and Boult in terms of conventional/reverse swing respectively.

Michael Clarke has 6 for 9 bowling left arm spin... he must be one of the worlds best all time bowlers with figures like that.
James Franklin has a test hatrick, he must be one of the greatest NZ bowlers of all time with a performance like that.

Repeatibility = Key. Milne bowling swing = no repeatability. Boult bowling reverse = no repeatability.

 

[marc71178]

Blocky, were you born a condescending argumentative **** or have you grown into the role?

 

[hendrix]

James Franklin has a test hatrick, he must be one of the greatest NZ bowlers of all time with a performance like that.

Repeatibility = Key. .

That was my point you moron. Hence why I mentioned Boult and Anderson in the first place.

Now try applying this line of thinking to Wagner...

 

[Blocky]

That was my point you moron. Hence why I mentioned Boult and Anderson in the first place.

Now try applying this line of thinking to Wagner...

Except Wagner repeatedly gets reverse swing, and repeatedly takes wickets, and repeatedly does so between the 25th and 60th over unlike Boult. And actually bowls conventional swing unlike Milne. But thanks for playing. Your eyes have been a great help.

 

[smash84]

Blocky, were you born a condescending argumentative **** or have you grown into the role?

Marc coming from you accusations of being a condescending argumentative **** are a bit rich

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

And please, feel free to do a break down of how many wickets Boult gets between the 25th and 80th over in test cricket and compare that against Wagner and Southee's return rate. Then tell me again how he's capable of bowling reverse swing.

This "statistic" is only relevant to your argument if literally every wicket in that time period is caused by reverse. The only thing it tells you is that Boult is garbage during this time. Post the figures actually, I'd be interested in them.

 

[Blocky]

This "statistic" is only relevant to your argument if literally every wicket in that time period is caused by reverse. The only thing it tells you is that Boult is garbage during this time. Post the figures actually, I'd be interested in them.

It's more relevant than "This one time, Boult managed to get the ball to move and it wasn't in the first ten overs" which seems to be the basis point of the other argument. Wagner repeatedly takes wickets (and moves the ball) post the 30th over in both first class and international cricket. I've posted examples of him doing this, like against England and also against the Windies this year.

The figures speak for themselves, if you're interested - go through and check them out. I'm happy enough for the evidence to speak for itself without me posting it to try and further my point.

As for the weight of evidence in terms of the amount of commentators, articles and such all talking about Wagner bringing the weapon of reverse swing into the Black Caps squad, combined with the evidence that Wagner can take wickets with an older ball on lifeless wickets ( Fact ) - that repeatability is more important than "I can show you one example" - in which case, I can show you five examples in a single over.

 

[hendrix]

I think it's best for all of us if I just put you back on ignore.

Goodbye, sweet Blocky. I will never forget you.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

Boult gets no reverse swing what so ever, it's kind of like your magical "Milne gets swing" - might have done it one day, but he had no clue what he was doing.

Haha thats swing bowling for you. Jimmy Anderson suffers the same problem, and he's supposed to be the best swing bowler in the world