-
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*** New Zealand in Zimbabwe and South Africa 2015
- Thread starter NZTailender
- Start date
kykweer.proteas
International Debutant
such an unsatisfying series win, considering how our cricket is regressing.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Tom Latham averaging over 40 as opener in tests and odis.
Tests;
All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
ODIs:
All-round records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
Probably the first NZer since Glenn Maitland Turner to do that (about 40 years ago)
And he is 23
Tests;
All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
ODIs:
All-round records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
Probably the first NZer since Glenn Maitland Turner to do that (about 40 years ago)
And he is 23
Niall
International Coach
AB hates keeping in limited overs cricket though, they have a few massive test series coming up as well, so they won't risk him getting hurt in limited overs cricket.
I suppose for the champions trophy if they are in the exact same predicament that they are now, then yeah I'd definitely give him the gloves.
Surely their has to be some other wicket keepers in South Africa that at least have youth or potential? Vilas any use in 50 over cricket?
Heboric
International Debutant
Why ?? If they had lost there would be calls for every player to be dropped or sent to Robben Island.
CaptainGrumpy
Banned
With a SR batting #2 of 71.95, its as though Latham is aiming to open with Turner SR 71.6 for an openers berth in the 1970's Cricket Team ODI team.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
Read through the remainder of the thread (all of what, four pages) and assumed our spongy middle order was where we fell short - it kinda was though those low strike rates up top didn't help and one of the usual soft suspects (sorry Steve) was second last out.
Really though, didn't expect much from number 4 down, barring Elliott, and that's what they delivered.
Also, Rabada looks quite good and I see is only 20 - test debut any time soon (if there's an injury)?
Really though, didn't expect much from number 4 down, barring Elliott, and that's what they delivered.
Also, Rabada looks quite good and I see is only 20 - test debut any time soon (if there's an injury)?
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah man we should put a pinch hitter up top against Steyn, Philander, Abbott and Rabada. Worked pretty well for Ronchi.
Nah I know I'm a Latham fanboy but there's a difference between a 50 (70) when you're turning over the strike (which both Latham and Guptill were doing) and one where you're not getting bat on ball and the pressure is building. Even Williamson was somewhat slow, but it was composed slow and we felt in control when the top order was batting. Not to mention the fact that Steyn was bowling a beautiful spell and Rabada, Abbott and Philander are pretty handy.
If you were following either of the chases were they pretty well set up by the top order, they just failed to kick on and the middle order failed to do the job after them. Most of the middle order didn't get out trying to up the run rate; they weren't slogging. they just aren't good enough frankly. Worker missed a straight one, Munro and Ronchi gonna Munro and Ronchi.
Only Elliott really got ou with a slog and I think that was an error of judgement.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
It's ok I'm not criticising golden boy Latham, who has been very impressive, and I know the top order also had to contend with good fast bowling. Really just a comment on expectations vs performance:
- Expectations of Worker, Munro, Ronchi are subterranean and they overachieved relative to that - almost up to basement carpark level.
- I've grown spoilt and unused to seeing something like 39(59) from Williamson, who has been able to strike at close to 100 for many of his recent LO innings.
CaptainGrumpy
Banned
Hendrix,
We all understand that you are a card carrying member off the Tom Latham Appreciation Society, doing your best to be elected president. But despite your campaigning, the fact is Latham started the innings with a Required Run Rate of 5.67 and finished with the RRR at about 7.5. A chase of 280 off 50 overs should not be reduced to a 160 run chase off the final 20 overs with 7 wickets in hand.
SA made it difficult for batting, and Kane Williamson even had a slower strike rate than Latham. But the criticism of Latham's regular slow scoring in ODI cricket is fair.
We all understand that you are a card carrying member off the Tom Latham Appreciation Society, doing your best to be elected president. But despite your campaigning, the fact is Latham started the innings with a Required Run Rate of 5.67 and finished with the RRR at about 7.5. A chase of 280 off 50 overs should not be reduced to a 160 run chase off the final 20 overs with 7 wickets in hand.
SA made it difficult for batting, and Kane Williamson even had a slower strike rate than Latham. But the criticism of Latham's regular slow scoring in ODI cricket is fair.
Last edited:
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Err yeah, most successful chases of 280 tend to be around this rate. A RRR of around 7.5 is not ideal, no, but you shouldn't be disappointed in your top order with that effort. Elliott still had time to work things around for a wee bit.
Anderson or Neesham could well have seen that chase home.
Having McCullum blast 50 (18) certainly makes things easier at the top of the order. More than one way to skin a cat though.
kiwiviktor81
International Debutant
Williamson often has a mediocre strike rate when he gets out for less than 40, especially if we lost an opener early. It's during his longer innings where he ups the strike rate near the end and finishes on around 100.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
This particular lower order would be even worse at rebuilding if the top order went too hard early though. I think if you're going to trust Munro-Ronchi-Sodhi to do anything it's got to be accelerating after a good platform; it's not like #6-8 is Elliott-Watling-Santner or something.
At the end of the day, when you're not at full strength you're probably going to score less runs in general. That's pretty obvious, but if you're chasing a decent score with this side I definitely think the plan should be for the top three to really try to build substantial innings as opposed to trying to go at close to a run a ball throughout and increase the risk of getting out. You weren't going to chase this with everyone making breezy forties; you could've got there if one of the top three made a big (even if initially slowish) score and then one of the lower middle order played a cameo though. The top order all got starts and then got out which means you lost but I think the methodology was fine. I'd be more critical of Latham's scoring rate in a better side with more genuine resources than this one.
Last edited:
Flem274*
123/5
Yeah the team has four proven batsmen and none of them tonned up.
2-1 to SA away from NZ with half the first team missing is good imo. We have some depth, even if it's not smart to play all the reserves at once. Take Amla, AB, Steyn and Tahir out and SA would be stoked with a similar resultagainst a full strength ir near full strength NZ
2-1 to SA away from NZ with half the first team missing is good imo. We have some depth, even if it's not smart to play all the reserves at once. Take Amla, AB, Steyn and Tahir out and SA would be stoked with a similar resultagainst a full strength ir near full strength NZ