Brendon McCullum to retire after upcoming Australia series

[SteveNZ]

Why was his approach in the WC final irresponsible when it is literally the way he batted all tournament to get them into the final, including against Australia chasing a small total and against South Afrca chasing a big total?

Mere opinion. A bloke bowling 150+ inswingers and having taken 20 odd poles at 10 was never afforded a sighter. I know he wasn't given one at Eden Park either, different situation when you're chasing 150 on a small ground to setting a target on a big one in a massive occasion. If he wanted to take a cookie cutter approach and do exactly the same for every game just because it worked earlier on, that's fine. It showed to be unsuccessful. And it's not hindsight because the one that whizzed past his off pole first ball, I said gee he wouldn't be wrong to have a look at a few here and go after Johnson in particular if he needs to.

 

[Jono]

I think it is absolutely fair to say that he should have given a sighter or once he missed the first to pull back since Starc was bowling so well. You can disagree with the tactic, but I don't think you can say what he did was dumb. Particularly since he batted that way all tournament no matter what the circumstance was.

And there is equally an argument that he should have batted more circumspect chasing a small total compared to batting first - swings and roundabouts.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

I also like it more when plans work than when they don't work but hey you can't have it all

 

[thierry henry]

He wasn't batting like an unparalled maniac. He was seeing the ball and hitting it without the mental baggage of trying to bat the way everyone had been telling him to bat his whole career because it's "proper cricket" no matter how ineffective it was or how unnatural it felt.

Yeah, I find that incredibly charitable. McCullum has been "see ball, hit ball"-ing for most of his career, not really trying to bat "properly". That's all well and good, blokes that I mentioned like Warner and Sehwag have been known to do that to great effect. However, over the last 12 months or so it's been more like he's been trying to manufacture a 150 strike rate no matter what, backing away, premeditating, going through phases where it's as if he has to hit every ball for 6....basically batting like, well, a maniac.

Now where I might be inclined to concede to you is that if you put together all of his "maniac" innings (including the 190 against Sri Lanka and his CWC innings) he has arguably been more prolific in that mode then in his "bat kinda almost properly" mode. But on the other hand, with his performances against India in 2013/14 he proved himself quite capable of being aggressive, prolific, and fairly sane. I don't agree that he didn't have the ability.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

What I am not saying : I unwaveringly support every decision McCullum ever made

What I am saying : On the whole, I am willing to take the bad with the brilliant which his loose approach to batting has brought

 

[wellAlbidarned]

I think it is absolutely fair to say that he should have given a sighter or once he missed the first to pull back since Starc was bowling so well. You can disagree with the tactic, but I don't think you can say what he did was dumb. Particularly since he batted that way all tournament no matter what the circumstance was.

And there is equally an argument that he should have batted more circumspect chasing a small total compared to batting first - swings and roundabouts.

Yeah McCullum was basically a cricketing molotov ****tail for the whole tournament. Our team was structured well to accomodate for him playing like that and anyone who thinks it's even close to the main reason we lost needs to remember losing 30/7 or whatever it was in the last 10 overs

 

[thierry henry]

It's kind of hard to sum him up overall. Great leader of men, jury's out on him as a tactician. Good batsman, at times insanely good, but not world class in his career as a whole. Has the 300 in a match-saving situation, the other doubles including as an opener, the other amazing innings but nothing really clutch to point to in big tournaments or match-winning v top sides. One of the greatest all-time T20 players which no one really pays much credence to given the format. Was also a world class glovesman which has tended to be forgotten now. Top-class bloke you'd have a beer and a punt with but had 'controversies' like the IPL/rumour of not signing NZC contract/turning up late for England tours etc, the Cairns trial, saying Martin Crowe was someone no one listened to etc.

So yeah, good luck to anyone writing the perfect obit for that.

Yep.

Some might see him as a man who just wanted the best for his team, a well-spoken, charismatic and exciting guy who sacrificed personal milestones for the team cause, etc

And some (yes, I admit it, me) would lean more towards him choosing his batting role for himself as something of a shortcut, enabling him to bat exactly as he pleased, take the glory and have a ready excuse for the criticism...him being more style than substance as a captain (and yes, sometimes style does inspire more, especially short term, than substance)...his savvy media presence being galling in its dissonance between him being superficially well-spoken but mostly talking nonsense...and ultimately in him managing to successfully cultivate a cult of personality around himself which actually in and of itself perpetuated the idea that he was selfless

Now I'm not saying that he was basically an evil genius, just that someone might well say that

 

[wellAlbidarned]

shun the non believer. SHUUNNN

 

[Hurricane]

What I am not saying : I unwaveringly support every decision McCullum ever made

What I am saying : On the whole, I am willing to take the bad with the brilliant which his loose approach to batting has brought

Hmmmm

 

[Jono]

Yeah McCullum was basically a cricketing molotov ****tail for the whole tournament. Our team was structured well to accomodate for him playing like that and anyone who thinks it's even close to the main reason we lost needs to remember losing 30/7 or whatever it was in the last 10 overs

Exactly. NZ were willing to risk being 1 down for 0 to try and be 30 runs off 3 overs. Changing tactics randomly in a final is a very Sri Lankan WC final thing to do.

 

[thierry henry]

I think I've basically started off being the anti-Reason McCullum-basher, and working through my thoughts I realise I'm Mark Reason and I'm ok with that.

I never liked Brendon McCullum. I think he was like 90% BS and hot air. I guess it is what it is. I need to embrace it.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Exactly. NZ were willing to risk being 1 down for 0 to try and be 30 runs off 3 overs. Changing tactics randomly in a final is a very Sri Lankan WC final thing to do.

To post any kind of threatening total it was essential that he put a serious dent in starcs confidence. Playing out starcs overs safely would've just conceded the game anyway given how poorly the rest of the lineup (sans elliott) batted, because there wasn't any weak link in the attack to pick on.

 

[Niall]

I think it is absolutely fair to say that he should have given a sighter or once he missed the first to pull back since Starc was bowling so well. You can disagree with the tactic, but I don't think you can say what he did was dumb. Particularly since he batted that way all tournament no matter what the circumstance was.

And there is equally an argument that he should have batted more circumspect chasing a small total compared to batting first - swings and roundabouts.

I think Mc Cullum in England read to much of his hype and to be fair it was probably hard not to, non stop fawning over him everywhere.

However yeah when it comes to the world cup, NZ do not reach the final without him going mental against South Africa, his assault at the top really shook South Africa and was needed as it was a big score that needed to be chased down. Imagine if it was Latham who had opened the batting, Philander would have still bowled his trash, but would Tom or anybody else have butchered him like Bmac? Its very doubtful.

Also, he wasn't the only NZ player that bombed in the world cup final, why does nobody talk about the bowlers who were ****, Kane who had a poor knock and the lower order who contributed nothing?

Openers have fallen for zero before and their teams do go onto win sometimes.

 

[Hurricane]

Yep.

Some might see him as a man who just wanted the best for his team, a well-spoken, charismatic and exciting guy who sacrificed personal milestones for the team cause, etc

And some (yes, I admit it, me) would lean more towards him choosing his batting role for himself as something of a shortcut, enabling him to bat exactly as he pleased, take the glory and have a ready excuse for the criticism...him being more style than substance as a captain (and yes, sometimes style does inspire more, especially short term, than substance)...his savvy media presence being galling in its dissonance between him being superficially well-spoken but mostly talking nonsense...and ultimately in him managing to successfully cultivate a cult of personality around himself which actually in and of itself perpetuated the idea that he was selfless

Now I'm not saying that he was basically an evil genius, just that someone might well say that

Haha - why don't you go ahead and say what you really think and take your slippers off while you are at it?

I could easily join in and say much stronger things than what you have said. His express yourself dogma for example was not only something he followed but something he encouraged the lower order to pursue. Because one Mark Craig bought into it hook line and sinker he is no longer in the test team. I reckon had Craig put up more consistent numbers with the bat he might have been persevered with longer. I could say more to disparage him. I am already on record as saying he is the worst captain we have had.

His performance in the World Cup final was appalling. A) he should have fielded first to let us feel the atmosphere of the MCG and settle into the match b) in the quarterfinal against the windies he got to 1 not out sensibly before he started charging. Even if he could have just played even 3-4 defensive strokes for the first over. But no.

I like Steve's summary with some good stuff and bad stuff.

I am forever greatful to Brendon that he wasn't a **** to Ross Taylor, he could have organised a conspriacy of silence against Ross when he returned but he wasn't a jerk and he integrated Ross back into the team.

His 300 also brought me much joy.

He also was good at declarations once he learned the lesson of that Eden Park test against England.

*He also gave Smudge a ride across town when Brendon lived on the other side of Dunedin (if memory serves me correctly)*
He would probably give you the shirt off his back if you asked him.

 

[Bahnz]

Yeah, I find that incredibly charitable. McCullum has been "see ball, hit ball"-ing for most of his career, not really trying to bat "properly". That's all well and good, blokes that I mentioned like Warner and Sehwag have been known to do that to great effect. However, over the last 12 months or so it's been more like he's been trying to manufacture a 150 strike rate no matter what, backing away, premeditating, going through phases where it's as if he has to hit every ball for 6....basically batting like, well, a maniac.

Don't think this is really fair. If you think back to his innings this year:

1) That 40 odd at lords were he went mental right from the start. Fair enough, but he came in to bat with New Zealand 350/3, so it wasn't an unreasonable approach (especially given that batting at the time was extremely difficult, as shown by the fact that Kane struggled for a couple of hours making no runs before eventually getting a gaffer and being dismissed).
2) Got a peach from Stokes first up, not a lot you can do.
3) A really dumb innings no doubt.
4) A crucial hard-fought 50 that help push NZ out to an insurmountable lead.
5) Just one part of an epic NZ collapse against a fired up Johnson.
6) A really cracking innings that was sadly sawn off before it had the chance to be a classic.
7) Aggressive, but another case of coming out to bat at 350/3. Saw off a furious Starc (with a touch of luck).
Didn't see a lot of the Adelaide test, so can't comment.
8) Cracking innings that pushed NZ's scoring rate up on day 1, giving NZ enough time to bowl SRL out on day 5.
9) Declaration slogging
10) Didn't see it.
11) Smart at the beginning (seeing off the boundaries and picking the 4 balls) dumb at the end.

Think you're letting your Reason-tinted glasses obscure your perception of his play in 2015.

 

[Teja.]

This thread has been a great read.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I think it is absolutely fair to say that he should have given a sighter or once he missed the first to pull back since Starc was bowling so well. You can disagree with the tactic, but I don't think you can say what he did was dumb. Particularly since he batted that way all tournament no matter what the circumstance was.

And there is equally an argument that he should have batted more circumspect chasing a small total compared to batting first - swings and roundabouts.

That dismissal gets so much attention as well. Casual fans always point to that as the main reason nz lost. Conveniently forgetting that NZ recovered wonderfully and we're 150/3 or something with 15 overs left. They were very well placed to get 275+. The collapse thereafter, especially the Faulkner over is what cost them. Always infuriates me when some dumb **** fan says McCullum's shot single handedly lost the final.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I can see why McCullum can be infuriating to watch but as a neutral I loved the guy. So entertaining to watch. Quickest hands on a pull shot of all time?

 

[Hurricane]

That dismissal gets so much attention as well. Casual fans always point to that as the main reason nz lost. Conveniently forgetting that NZ recovered wonderfully and we're 150/3 or something with 15 overs left. They were very well placed to get 275+. The collapse thereafter, especially the Faulkner over is what cost them. Always infuriates me when some dumb **** fan says McCullum's shot single handedly lost the final.

Don't be rude.

 

[Jono]

That dismissal gets so much attention as well. Casual fans always point to that as the main reason nz lost..

Yeah its ****.

Two annoying myths of the 2015 WC:

- McCullum batted irresponsibly
- West Indies batted the right way when chasing NZ's big score in the quarter final