*Official* New Zealand in England 2015

[Meridio]

Definitely harder to bat. With enough wind even the least competent bowler will get swing - it will happen naturally.

Disagree with this - having played in Wellington for three years, I definitely found bowling (my dibbly dobbly 100 kph outswingers) much harder in a howling gale than batting. It throws your runup out, and you can end up just pushing the ball against the wind and expecting it to swing around into the right spot, which doesn't always happen. Batting's not easy either, you can have balance issues, but tbh I didn't mind batting in high winds, always felt I could use the wind to my advantage by playing certain shots.

 

[Stapel]

If England and the new ball keep NZ under 360, my money would still be on NZ. IMHO, it's really theirs to lose now.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Cook's management of the bowlers been pretty awful this Test. Don't know why he bowled Stokes first up at the tail yesterday morning, the pitch is much more suited to Wood and why overbowl an all-rounder who's much more likely to bowl well at key batsmen than the tail.

He's gone from wanting to bowl Anderson and Broad predominantly to spreading the load across 5 bowlers regardless of their effectiveness, which isn't really necessary unless you've got one eye on The Ashes. It's cold, Wood and Broad could easily have bowled 20 overs each today - instead of 27 between them.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Disagree with this - having played in Wellington for three years, I definitely found bowling (my dibbly dobbly 100 kph outswingers) much harder in a howling gale than batting. It throws your runup out, and you can end up just pushing the ball against the wind and expecting it to swing around into the right spot, which doesn't always happen. Batting's not easy either, you can have balance issues, but tbh I didn't mind batting in high winds, always felt I could use the wind to my advantage by playing certain shots.

Hated bowling on an East-West Hutt Valley wicket with a Northerly or, even worse, a strong Southerly blowing. Never had many problems bowling into or with the wind, but really struggled for a consistent line with a gusty perpendicular wind,

 

[Meridio]

Hated bowling on an East-West Hutt Valley wicket with a Northerly or, even worse, a strong Southerly blowing. Never had many problems bowling into or with the wind, but really struggled for a consistent line with a gusty perpendicular wind,

Yeah, gusty winds are the worst, never feel like you're in control of your bowling. Actually, that's another thing with batting in those conditions - I knew the bowler would be struggling with consistency, so always saw it as an opportunity to put them under pressure and pick up quick runs. Having said that, fastest bowling I ever faced was in Wellington courtesy of a roaring gale at (from memory) Kilbirnie Park; only time I've ever been bounced out in my life.

 

[artvandalay]

Ali's bowling mirrored Craig's at Lord's almost like for like. In general I thought England didn't bowl all that well today and Ali and Stokes were pretty poor, they bowled a lot of pies. New Zealand were scoring at a very healthy rate without really taking many risks and they got lucky with BMacs wicket IMO though he looked like he would get out at any point at that stage. They should bat for as long as possible and attempt to get to 400 though Craig looks a walking wicket and none of the other 3 after him are the sort who would be intent on staying at the crease.

 

[weldone]

250 more in 2 sessions doable imo. I have no idea why you'd "give them a sniff" with just 375 though. Which is why I responded with a bit of hyperbole by saying 600.

They should score a maximum of 400. Not a run more. If they get there that is.

Done for the day. Wonderful day for New Zealand. England would be sorely disappointed. Especially in their spin bowling.

Ya I don't see NZ crossing 400 either, with the new ball to come in 5 overs.

Having said that, 400 is a big big score to chase. As I predicted earlier, NZ's superb run rate made sure that they get a solid lead before the 2nd new ball.

 

[Pratters]

I watched the portion where Guptill and Taylor were batting. Not sure why they were playing so aggressively. To save time as there might be possibility of rain later? I see they have scored a lot of runs, as they did in the first inning. It is a tough one to call - the strategy has worked but I wouldn't be comfortable with it most of the time.

 

[Bahnz]

Went to bed after Taylor's dismissal in a grumpy mood. Advantage NZ obviously, especially as England will likely be hopping on and off the field tomorrow with the forecast showers.

Watling is becoming just an unbelievable player, can't wait to watch the highlights.

 

[Spark]

I do wonder if Stokes is just knackered. Very stiff there in the afternoon session, sending down half-trackers at 80mph...

 

[Moss]

Highly satisfying for NZ to be in this position, though England have a great chance to limit the damage with the new ball tomorrow. Though NZ should be favourites whatever they set England, given how Cook and Lyth have played they'd want at least 400 I would imagine. Wonder if pitch misbehaviour (or lack of it) might play a role too.

 

[Flem274*]

Watling watling watling watling

Worlds. Premier. Wicketkeeper. Batsman.

Since people who don't even keep anymore get rated ahead of him this knock counts ftr

 

[Flem274*]

Go for 400-450. If England chase that then well dond them. We have to win or all the rankings work is undone. We have to.

 

[Bahnz]

It's not entirely straightforward, as there is some rain forecast for tomorrow, and a chance that there'll only be 40-50 overs play as a result. Would be tempted to declare after 20 overs no matter how many runs we have on the boarf.

 

[Moss]

Go for 400-450. If England chase that then well dond them. We have to win or all the rankings work is undone. We have to.

Will depend on being able to counter the new ball. Of course the lower order could give a damn but we've seen from England's innings how important the new ball is in this game.

I think the determination to not undo the good work of the last 18 months has really shown itself in this game. The strategy to counterattack when England made inroads was quite a calculated one at least in the second dig, and McCullum and Watling really knuckled down to make make the most of favourable batting conditions when it was needed. There's an element of desperation that often used to go missing in sides under Fleming and Vettori.

 

[GGG]

A rapid 40 - 50 for me, new ball available in 5 overs and if it is overcast then only Watling is really equipped to play defensively.

 

[Moss]

It's not entirely straightforward, as there is some rain forecast for tomorrow, and a chance that there'll only be 40-50 overs play as a result. Would be tempted to declare after 20 overs no matter how many runs we have on the boarf.

Yeah that's another big consideration. Might cause McCullum to give the batsmen a license to hammer the bowling.

 

[weldone]

I watched the portion where Guptill and Taylor were batting. Not sure why they were playing so aggressively. To save time as there might be possibility of rain later? I see they have scored a lot of runs, as they did in the first inning. It is a tough one to call - the strategy has worked but I wouldn't be comfortable with it most of the time.

I don't know why they did it; but if it was to get a very very healthy lead before the 2nd new ball is available then it was a smart move IMO. We all know what Anderson and Broad can do with a new ball. Just imagine being 240/4 after 80 overs, and then losing the last 6 to the 2nd new ball.

 

[Jezroy]

Craig looks a walking wicket.

I look like a walking wicket, yet I have never scored 55 unbeaten runs in a test match (or in any kind of real match possibly). Credit where credit's due.

 

[weldone]

I do wonder if Stokes is just knackered. Very stiff there in the afternoon session, sending down half-trackers at 80mph...

The fact that Cook has overused him as a bowler didn't help either.

Mmmm, Hope you don't send me for one-week ban again for being critical to Cook/England