-
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.
***Official**** Sri Lanka in New Zealand 2014/2015
- Thread starter Flem274*
- Start date
Immenso
International Vice-Captain
Yeah, it is.
kiwiviktor81
International Debutant
Fair enough.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
How good is it to go into a series favourite, expect our side to win and then have them perform like that? Expectations have increased but I have to remind myself how amazing this is compared to a few years ago.
Arguments can be made for Rutherford, Wagner or Craig to be left out of the next test, but it won't happen because we won the first, we don't have another test series for a while and some players are being held back for the World Cup. This is quite awkward because it means those three are almost certain to play the first test against England at least, if not both, and that is just not our best option imo.
I guess Bracewell is also a fairly good option, though I just feel that complicates the picture when we really should instead be giving Henry his test debut sooner rather than later.
As for Rutherford, I didn't see either of his brief innings this match but none of you were positive about his batting. I think we're stuck with him for this and the England series though.
Arguments can be made for Rutherford, Wagner or Craig to be left out of the next test, but it won't happen because we won the first, we don't have another test series for a while and some players are being held back for the World Cup. This is quite awkward because it means those three are almost certain to play the first test against England at least, if not both, and that is just not our best option imo.
Agree with this and it will doubly be true for the England tour with the Duke. I really really want Henry to be first change on that tour; provided he gets some experience with the Duke I can see him being extremely threatening with that seam position, targeting the stumps and nipping the ball around. Wagner and Craig can fight for the fourth bowler spot (probably Craig). Forget the World Cup, I think Henry should play the next test, because if he doesn't we won't see him in England either.
I guess Bracewell is also a fairly good option, though I just feel that complicates the picture when we really should instead be giving Henry his test debut sooner rather than later.
As for Rutherford, I didn't see either of his brief innings this match but none of you were positive about his batting. I think we're stuck with him for this and the England series though.
Kippax
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah Edgar and Hesson will need to be very careful with that squad announcement for the England tour. Henry could forgo the IPL for three or four county rounds in April conditions, for all we know.
NZ then turn up with Wagner, a whole press box of Bob Willis ****s duly sneer at why Wagner is touring and how dumb they were to not even have Henry in the squad.
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
I imagine that trio and their potential replacements will have the remainder of the PS to get themselves on the plane. But a 5fer from Wagner or Craig in the next Test and a couple of 40+ or one century from Rudds and they're on the plane no question.
Blocky
Banned
Man you guys talk some ****.
Wagner has had a better year this year than Trent Boult in terms of strike rate and average. The problem with the "We must drop performing players" stance is that in the same token, some of you continue to endorse playing Sodhi or Craig. Wagner even in this test took three first innings wickets that were valuable.
Sure, should he go through a test series averaging 45 with the ball, drop him - but you can't drop him on the basis of one test match. Craig, yes. Drop him for Bracewell, but Wagner can't exactly be dropped when he's averaging 27 per wicket this year.
Wagner has had a better year this year than Trent Boult in terms of strike rate and average. The problem with the "We must drop performing players" stance is that in the same token, some of you continue to endorse playing Sodhi or Craig. Wagner even in this test took three first innings wickets that were valuable.
Sure, should he go through a test series averaging 45 with the ball, drop him - but you can't drop him on the basis of one test match. Craig, yes. Drop him for Bracewell, but Wagner can't exactly be dropped when he's averaging 27 per wicket this year.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
For somebody who was so sneery about Sodhi's "tail-end" and "declaration" wickets in WI and the UAE, you sure are eager to value Wagner knocking over a couple of tail-enders (Prasanna averages less than 20 in Australia and New Zealand) and getting Matthews out caught whilst slogging for quick runs. Furthermore, obviously the reason why Wagner has a superior bowling average and strike rate to Boult was that he got to sit out the hard graft in the UAE. Once you look at the matches where the two of them have played together, Boult has a superior average and strike rate.
Anyway, in the past things were a little different. Wagner was the best performing seamer on the domestic circuit, was generally in pretty good rhythm and benefitted from the fact that all of the other top contenders were either in **** form (Bracewell and Gillespie), injured (Bennett and Henry) or both (Milne). But that's no longer the case this season. Through happy chance pretty much all of New Zealand's top seamers are currently fully fit and in excellent form, and Wagner's numbers in domestic and international cricket in the last 6 months now look pretty rubbish in comparison. Furthermore, the main ace in Wagner's pack - the ability to reverse the ball and remain effective longer than Southee and Boult can - is kind of irrelevant in early season conditions when the ball is swinging conventionally until the 70 over mark, and the lush outfields mean we'd probably need to be waiting until the 150th over for even Wagner to generate appreciable reverse. Throw in the obvious technical flaws Wagner is currently recovering from (something which you yourself have commented on more than once) and you don't have a particularly compelling case to keep him in the side.
Last edited:
Flem274*
123/5
Both Southee and Boult are now reverse swing bowlers too. Southee in particular now has the outswinger, the off cutter, reverse swing, and maybe a leg cutter. His well directed bouncer, use of the crease and bog standard line and length means he ticks every box except extreme pace.
Kippax
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah people say Wagner deserves faith, but you watch him in the vault, and what his current bowling form deserves is to be benched. If you let Ronnie Hira score a legitimate ton as a FC opener, you've only got yourself to blame these days. Compared to Bracewell's bowling in Auckland, it was utterly pathetic to watch.
Blocky
Banned
Utter dribble, most of which seems to be a really horrible attempt at revisionist history.
Remove Boult's performance in the UAE ( where he actually took wickets at a reasonable 32 ) - Wagner is still ahead. Wagner in the Waste Indies which had pitches not too different to the UAE outperformed Boult massively, it was actually stupid that he wasn't selected in the UAE. But regardless, this isn't a "Boult vs Wagner" - this is more so showing how stupid people sound when they advocate dropping Wagner at the same time they're calling Boult one of the greatest in the world. This season, Wagner has had more to do with NZ's victories than Boult has. Wagner also has a tendency of getting first innings wickets to setup the game for his side, and Wagner repeatedly takes the big dog out - remind me again how Matthews is a tail end wicket?
Wagner might be bowling absolute **** compared to his usual standard, but remind me again how many NZ bowlers have successfully come into test cricket and performed anywhere near their domestic records of late? I can give you three names - Wagner, Boult and Southee. That's it. That's why they're our top three. Now, go back to advocating for Sodhi and Craig while telling us how Wagner should be dropped despite realistically having as much impact in our wins against India and WI as anyone else.
Remove Boult's performance in the UAE ( where he actually took wickets at a reasonable 32 ) - Wagner is still ahead. Wagner in the Waste Indies which had pitches not too different to the UAE outperformed Boult massively, it was actually stupid that he wasn't selected in the UAE. But regardless, this isn't a "Boult vs Wagner" - this is more so showing how stupid people sound when they advocate dropping Wagner at the same time they're calling Boult one of the greatest in the world. This season, Wagner has had more to do with NZ's victories than Boult has. Wagner also has a tendency of getting first innings wickets to setup the game for his side, and Wagner repeatedly takes the big dog out - remind me again how Matthews is a tail end wicket?
Wagner might be bowling absolute **** compared to his usual standard, but remind me again how many NZ bowlers have successfully come into test cricket and performed anywhere near their domestic records of late? I can give you three names - Wagner, Boult and Southee. That's it. That's why they're our top three. Now, go back to advocating for Sodhi and Craig while telling us how Wagner should be dropped despite realistically having as much impact in our wins against India and WI as anyone else.
Blocky
Banned
Yup, and then he came in and took three first innings wickets and bowled pretty well in the second innings without luck. You can't drop someone in between test matches when they've repeatedly performed for you in test matches. Wagner isn't bowling anywhere near as well as he usually does although in the second innings he was getting through his action a lot better and seemed to get his pace back up to where it needs to be for him to be threatening. Fact remains, you can't say "Douggie Bracewell will perform better than Wagner" - because Boult hasn't.
Flem274*
123/5
You harp on about our supposed love for Craig, advocate his dropping and ironically your own logic for retaining Wagner doesn't apply to Craig. Craig has played a major role in two overseas test victories this year.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
And yeah I forgot that Hira ton. That's criminal. That's not us being big bullies to Wagner, that's legitimately "wtf happened there?" material.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
And yeah I forgot that Hira ton. That's criminal. That's not us being big bullies to Wagner, that's legitimately "wtf happened there?" material.
Last edited:
Blocky
Banned
"Overseas test victories"
A: This isn't overseas.
B: I'm happy for Craig being our #1 spinner when conditions suit spin bowling, these conditions do not.
C: I'm harping on more so about your supposed love for Sodhi, who continues to be seen as "viable for test cricket" despite performances that I'd not want from a part timer.
Taste it, I told you a season ago that Wagner was not only our third best bowler but probably in stiff competition as our second - a season on, he was our second best bowler and arguably the bowler who contributed most to our victories by taking so many first innings wickets so cheaply this season.
A: This isn't overseas.
B: I'm happy for Craig being our #1 spinner when conditions suit spin bowling, these conditions do not.
C: I'm harping on more so about your supposed love for Sodhi, who continues to be seen as "viable for test cricket" despite performances that I'd not want from a part timer.
Taste it, I told you a season ago that Wagner was not only our third best bowler but probably in stiff competition as our second - a season on, he was our second best bowler and arguably the bowler who contributed most to our victories by taking so many first innings wickets so cheaply this season.
HeathDavisSpeed
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Here we go again...
Blocky
Banned
By that token, we should drop Watling for failing in domestic cricket in between test matches, should probably have a think about dropping Williamson too for not performing as well at domestic level as he has for the Black Caps.
Flem274*
123/5
Flem274*, noted Sodhi fanboi. Riiigghht.
Wagner wasn't our second best bowler. He was a solid contributor and won one game. He's a good player but no matter how often you keep saying it he isn't better than Boult anywhere other than in your edited ICC game.
And it's "Tastle it". God, get it right.
Wagner wasn't our second best bowler. He was a solid contributor and won one game. He's a good player but no matter how often you keep saying it he isn't better than Boult anywhere other than in your edited ICC game.
And it's "Tastle it". God, get it right.
Blocky
Banned
Fortunately, it's not really an argument you guys win.
McHesson aren't brainless, they don't drop performing players and they'll be more than aware who has had the tendency this year of breaking the stubborn partnerships and getting set batsmen out - in order, it's been Wagner, Southee and Craig (in the odd test)
Boult has been beautiful at ripping a couple at the top and coming back to finish the tail, but he's looked toothless (look at the second innings in this test) when there is a set partnership. Again, the comparison to Boult is simply to show how silly you are, you can't go on and on about how great Boult's been without acknowledging that Wagner's been better.
McHesson aren't brainless, they don't drop performing players and they'll be more than aware who has had the tendency this year of breaking the stubborn partnerships and getting set batsmen out - in order, it's been Wagner, Southee and Craig (in the odd test)
Boult has been beautiful at ripping a couple at the top and coming back to finish the tail, but he's looked toothless (look at the second innings in this test) when there is a set partnership. Again, the comparison to Boult is simply to show how silly you are, you can't go on and on about how great Boult's been without acknowledging that Wagner's been better.
Last edited: