Is New Zealand a better side than Australia at the moment?

[BeeGee]

Come on guys, let's stop it with this chest beating confidence stuff. Go back to being underdogs like real New Zealanders.

The next time we play Australia we'll put in a workman like performance and punch above our weight.

 

[Athlai]

I suspect we'd probably give them a run for their money in NZ where Boult and Southee are most effective but we'd still get trounced in Australia.

 

[straw man]

Depends entirely on whether Australia have Harris and whether Johnson is bowling like he has been. With those two Australia would easily beat us. Without them I'd go as far as saying it's 50/50 anything can happen in NZ conditions.

 

[hendrix]

And only in the subcontinent.

Seriously, one series in the UAE does not make you worldbeaters or, conversely, terrible. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that, assuming we have our first choice attack and Clarke is actually fit, we wouldn't win everywhere where there is even the slightest assistance for seam bowling. It really comes down to Johnson (and I remember Cribb saying something like this) -- without him in his current form we'd be still favourites going into most of these series now that we have a sort-of-functional batting order. With him it becomes a little silly on pitches which aren't the Port Elizabeth deck.

Well it's not one series in the UAE. It's tied series in SL, comprehensive thrashings of the Windies (requisite for a good team) and beating India at home.
I think Aus would win in Aus but NZ would win in NZ. NZ would also win in Asia and England and the Windies. AUS would win in SA.

The slightest assistance for seam bowlers means that Southee (better stats than Harris over 2 years) and Boult (also amongst the top 10 bowlers over a long period) become lethal against a very fragile batting lineup.

 

[Bahnz]

I'd say Clarke is comfortably ahead of anyone else on either side.

That's why I said "on balance". And as a few people have noted, Clarke's back problems appear to be impacting on his productivity atm, though hopefully he'll be able to recover soon.

 

[Bahnz]

Well it's not one series in the UAE. It's tied series in SL, comprehensive thrashings of the Windies (requisite for a good team) and beating India at home.

I think Aus would win in Aus but NZ would win in NZ. NZ would also win in Asia and England and the Windies. AUS would win in SA.

Reckon Aus would hammer us on the types of pitches that England played India on earlier this year. And if Australia had Harris and Johnson fully fit and in form as they were last year, they would beat us in New Zealand (though we would put up a fight if we rolled out 3 flat ones like we played on v England in 2013).

 

[hendrix]

Reckon Aus would hammer us on the types of pitches that England played India on earlier this year. And if Australia had Harris and Johnson fully fit and in form as they were last year, they would beat us in New Zealand (though we would put up a fight if we rolled out 3 flat ones like we played on v England in 2013).

I don't think you're recognising the subtleties of the conditions and batsmen's skills. Those pitches weren't fast, it was the swinging conditions that undid the Indians. It's also the Duke ball that keeps swinging through to the 40th over.

Their attack would still be dangerous, no doubt. It's their batsman that have proved repeatedly that they struggle in those conditions. We do too but we have actually put up big scores batting first in those conditions.

 

[wiff]

There are problems if Australia don't have their frontline bowling attack, but you could say that about a lot of countries except Pakistan. It all depends on the Australian batting lineup. They are so up and down tbh anything could happen.

 

[wiff]

I forgot to say, NZ are looking impressive!

 

[Bahnz]

I don't think you're recognising the subtleties of the conditions and batsmen's skills. Those pitches weren't fast, it was the swinging conditions that undid the Indians. It's also the Duke ball that keeps swinging through to the 40th over.

Their attack would still be dangerous, no doubt. It's their batsman that have proved repeatedly that they struggle in those conditions. We do too but we have actually put up big scores batting first in those conditions.

The pitches in the 4th and 5th test in that series were very fast and bouncy. You could see an enormous smile spreading across Stuart Broad's face while he was taking a brief look at the pitch before the start of play on day 1 at Old Trafford.

Anyway, Australia's batting is vulnerable, but their bowling showed last summer that if there's anything in the pitch they'll win games even against quality opposition batting lineups. That's why if we were to host a series against them, we'd need good flat, slow decks with modest bounce in order nullify (as much as possible) their pacers.

 

[cnerd123]

Yea swing doesn't bother India; it's pace and bounce.

Mitch and Clarke are the deciding factors for me. Without them; NZ is comfortably better.

 

[Burgey]

When do the two teams next play a home and away series?

 

[Bahnz]

We play in Australia in 2015/16 (when they're planning on holding a daynight test). There's a return series scheduled for the same summer under the old FTP, but that might've changed.

 

[hendrix]

Yea swing doesn't bother India; it's pace and bounce.

Mitch and Clarke are the deciding factors for me. Without them; NZ is comfortably better.

Bounce is critical so that the batsmen can't just drive good length balls through the line, but Kohli was clearly undone by swing.

Anyway the point is that the Aussie batsmen struggle against swing. Particularly Clarke actually - relatively speaking, of course. He's still played some gun innings against the moving ball but there's a reason he bats 5.

 

[cnerd123]

Yea the Aussie batting is incredibly frail. Warner and TPC have been doing well of late but without Clarke and Haddin it's hard to see where the runs will come from. I would totally back NZ's attack to run through them.

 

[SteveNZ]

When do the two teams next play a home and away series?

Memory serves me as a two-Test series at Adelaide/Hobart end of 2015, with the possibility one or the other would be a day-night Test? Neither city is a complete jump for joy after dark but I'd take a night at a dingy Tassie pub over Mitch Johnson under lights with a scuffed pink ball any day.

It's fun to have this debate, and great we believe it close enough to do so. But I'd still back Australia most days, slow sub-continent/UAE decks excepted. I'd be worrying about Harris as much as Johnson, given he's the sort of canny, give us nothing seamer (Philander with an extra yard) that's killed us over the past coiple of years.

 

[dermo]

i hope hobart cops the day nighter and not adelaide but its looking like adelaide

 

[Burgey]

Yea the Aussie batting is incredibly frail. Warner and TPC have been doing well of late but without Clarke and Haddin it's hard to see where the runs will come from. I would totally back NZ's attack to run through them.

I think Haddin is pretty close to the end tbh. Australia is pretty well served by keeper-batsmen at FC level in any event. Naturally his experience would be missed though. Certainly Australia needs to find a reliable number three. It's the key position in the line up. Williamson has done well there for NZ, though I can't recall whether he's played Australia there in that position. The same can be said for Latham UIMM.

I could see these two sides playing out draws in the UAE or SC tbh. Pakistan went through us on the back of winning all three tosses and largely by virtue of their spinners. I don't know that either of these sides really has the spinners to go through the other. Just my thoughts. It would be an interesting match up.

 

[Bahnz]

KW was number 3 for the 1st test in 2011 if memory serves and struggled, though he's a completely different proposition these days.

 

[hendrix]

When is the last time Australia drew a Test?