BeeGee
International Captain
Hopefully SL will be able to put up a decent score now. This series desperately needs a competitive game.Why wasn't Matt Henry retained? Seems a little odd.
Hopefully SL will be able to put up a decent score now. This series desperately needs a competitive game.Why wasn't Matt Henry retained? Seems a little odd.
Yeah, this needed to be pointed out. I'm thrilled by what he's achieved and do believe he'll go on to be remembered as one of the defining players of his generation, but..well, end up wishing for a little self-regulation from some of the KW-centric posting here. IIRC it was only this year when a consensus was seemingly reached on whether he definitely belonged in the all time NZ XI.If this Williamson circle jerk doesn't end, I have a feeling it will lead to a set of people similar to the ones who go around belittling Tendulkar because they see it as their duty to restore balance to a world overrun by Tendulkar worshippers.
Maybe they've decided on Henry as backup for the Tim Southee role, for the time being (swing-from-the-hip batting? check!). Looks like McCleneghan or Bracewell are preferred for the third seamer role (also Milne, if they decide to go back to the World Cup lineup). While Henry deserves to play more, I'm happy if this is the thinking behind dividing him between list A and national duty. Would much rather see him grow as a new ball specialist and slowly acquire more limited-over-tricks a la Boult.Why wasn't Matt Henry retained? Seems a little odd.
Nah, the over-hype (if it is that) didn't originate here. The stories about Alan Border choosing Kane to bat for his life above all others, 'Williamson is better than Bradman', Williamson (may be) the new Tendulkar.....all these stories are coming from the media.The idea that Williamson is miles better than the next best batsmen in the world (be it Smith, Root, Warner or whoever) is plainly silly though. He is a class player in amazing form, but on this forum he is certainly over hyped.
Glenn Turner was amazing. He did things I'd never seen batsmen do before. He invented the tactic in ODIs of deliberately chipping good deliveries over the infield as an easy scoring option. It used to drive the opposition captains nuts seeing good balls chipped just over the infield for two runs. And if they pushed the field back to stop him, he'd just switch to pushing singles along the ground instead. And of course, the two double tons he scored opening the batting on a tour of the West Indies are legendary. He was a bit of a sporting hero of mine, growing up.Interestingly someone brought up Victor Trumper, and if so I raise you Glenn Turner. Based on whatever I've heard from cricket-mad people of my dad's generation, Turner seems to be regarded in a similar sort of cult-hero way to Trumper (I could put this down to Turner's Indian connection among other things).
NewZealandCricketFans.txtPeople used to criticise him for his slow strike rate, so towards the end of his career he started to up his scoring rate. Then people started complaining he was throwing his wicket away. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Your comment re McCullum / Cook does not really relate to what AB stated.Well McCullum said Cook was this generations Bradman, didn't make it any more true. With respect most of those links aren't exactly distinguished cricketing sources either.
The KW hype has been going here for well over a year. He is a great player, but he isn't a tier ahead of anyone else in the world.
+1. He was the dominant test batsman in the NZ side after his test apprenticeship on the 69-70 tour to Eng + Ind + Pak, up to the 76-77 tour to Ind + Pak (apart from a lean spell on the 73 Eng tour). Was a shame he wasn't in many test match winning teams, as he chose not to play test cricket for NZ from 78-82 when Richard Hadlee was hitting his prime years.Glenn Turner was amazing...
Q) Is it true that McCullum called Cook 'our generations Bradman' Q) Yes, yes it is.Your comment re McCullum / Cook does not really relate to what AB stated.
Q) Is it true that AB said that he'd have Kane Williamson bat for his life? A) Yes, yes it is.
I therefore think that we have to take the man at his word, and his statement is therefore true. He would know better than anyone else who he would have bat for his life.
"Of all the gun batsmen going around, he would be the one I'd choose to bat for my life," Border told foxsports.com.au.
"Over AB de Villiers, in front of Steve Smith, in front of Warner, in front of all of them".
The links regarding Tendulkar / Williamson, I'll give you that to an extent. But the other links are 'distinguished' - if that's the right word - in that they are from Cricket AU and NineMSN websites, and here's 2 more from The SMH and The Daily Mail.
AB rates Williamson above the rest | cricket.com.au
Williamson better than Bradman?
Williamson better than Bradman?
Williamson could bat for my life: Border | Daily Mail Online
It may pain many posters that the media - mainly Aussie media - are producing stories which 'over-hype' Williamson, but rather than being an ostrich about it why not simply acknowledge that it's happening.
I'd like to see the posts where anyone stated that it was their personal opinion that Williamson was "miles ahead" of Smith, Warner, Root et al.
Not happening this time. But yeah, would like to see NZ made to chase a big-ish total.I want SL to bat first yet again, and this time to approach the innings differently. They can do it.
He only played 41 matches. If Bond can't make an Oceania XI because he played too few matches it's fair to say that Turner can't make the NZ ODI ATG XI.and athlai still insists he can't be picked in an NZ ODI XI
Yes, because the competition for fast bowlers in an Oceania XI is comparable to that for openers in an NZ XI...He only played 41 matches. If Bond can't make an Oceania XI because he played too few matches it's fair to say that Turner can't make the NZ ODI ATG XI.