***Official*** Australia in New Zealand 2016

[Flem274*]

lol guys Guptill is a hero but he's not better than Taylor, Astle or Turner yet let's all calm down.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Turner played 41 matches. He was a great player who played a few ODIs rather than a great ODI batsman.

Guptill averages 8 runs per innings more than Astle at 14 more runs per 100 balls. There's just no contest anymore.

 

[Flem274*]

but is he better than michael bevan?

yes australian posters i am going to make you read this again

 

[kiwiviktor81]

The Guptill vs. Hayden contest might be worth its own thread soon

 

[vic_orthdox]

Geez, tough one that. I reckon maybe Guptill has him covered, having had that awesome World Cup to match Hayden's 2007 effort.

 

[Flem274*]

i had no idea hayden *only* scored 10 tons in 161 odis. i know he came good in the format late but...

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Guptill's last 30 matches: 1677 runs @ 64.50, SR 100.5
Last 60 matches: 2603 runs @ 51.03, SR 91.6

He's been Amla-esque for the past three years, and that includes one relatively weak year.

Guptill's 237* and that 180-odd that Hayden got against us in 2006 or so were very similar innings as well.

 

[NZTailender]

I'd take Taylor over Guptill any day of the week. He's scored better runs and been more successful against the top sides while Guptill has pretty much pummeled England, WIndies and Zimbabwe boost his average.

I like Guptill and think he's very good, and has a phenomenal 12 months in the short form of the game but he's behind Crowe, Taylor, Williamson and Astle atm for greatest NZ ODI bat.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Astle's not really in the conversation with Crowe, Williamson and Taylor.

 

[Moss]

Wow, that's some result to wake up to. Not entirely a surprise though, given it was three-day turnaround for Australia after the India series. Expecting them to come back strongly but the performance of Boult and Henry against their top order has got to be a big boost.

The McCullum-Guptill opening stand was a circus act as usual but in hindsight was probably the way to go, considering how the pitch was slowing. Though Guptill's been excellent all summer, it showed how having an opening partner like Baz has been great for his ODI game.

 

[vandem]

... Guptill's 237* and that 180-odd that Hayden got against us in 2006 or so were very similar innings as well.

Except that Hayden's innings was for the losing side ... :-)

3rd ODI: New Zealand v Australia at Hamilton, Feb 20, 2007 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[YorksLanka]

Wow , maybe our results weren't so bad after all then in the recent series??

 

[_Ed_]

That's 16 wins in our last 17 home ODIs, according to stats on the radio this morning. Cbf checking, but sounds right.

Also, Guptill loves Eden Park - 13 ODIs there now, 674 runs @ 67.40 with two centuries.

EDIT: And we lost the toss in every single one of those 13 games.

 

[honestbharani]

So many often remark that the boundaries in NZ are so short.. Its even a big hashtag now. Wonder if Kiwi players gain an advantage on how bat, bowl and field in them coz they are used to it, similar to how Australia tend to take advantage of the huge outfields when teams tour over there.

 

[TheJediBrah]

So many often remark that the boundaries in NZ are so short.. Its even a big hashtag now. Wonder if Kiwi players gain an advantage on how bat, bowl and field in them coz they are used to it, similar to how Australia tend to take advantage of the huge outfields when teams tour over there.

well, yeah, that kind of goes without saying

 

[_Ed_]

Overall Chappell-Hadlee stats now:

25 matches, Australia 11, NZ 11, 3 no result.

I know Australia cbf in a few of those series, but still.

 

[Flem274*]

The thing with eden park is it's a swing bowlers ground if you have the balls to pitch it up

 

[SteveNZ]

So many often remark that the boundaries in NZ are so short.. Its even a big hashtag now. Wonder if Kiwi players gain an advantage on how bat, bowl and field in them coz they are used to it, similar to how Australia tend to take advantage of the huge outfields when teams tour over there.

The natural reaction is to get up in arms about the short boundaries but Eden Park absolutely suits us more than any other ground in the world does, arguably.

Kane aside, and Elliott when he gets runs, our guys aren't accumulators. We know on that ground, if we get bogged down for 3-4 balls there's always a get out of jail free card 50m in front of us. Gup uses it tremendously well and good luck to him - it's not his fault that administrators keep booking us in on a ground that is a farce for international cricket. Hence why his record is so good there (not convinced he averages well there because he owns property in the area). I suppose we saw that in the WC final where he scored 15 off 48, with nerves and didn't have that straight hit card on him.

At the death, we know we can be six down and our lower order (I include Ronchi in this) can access that boundary and get us to a stronger total.

And it has nothing to do with Australia yesterday or in the World Cup, because we pitched it up and knocked guys over. But in a general sense, especially T20s, we're very hard to beat there because we're more accustomed to where to get hit and the lengths to bowl. Opposition sides seem to have the best of intentions but their natural tendency is to go fuller every now and then without thinking too much about it.

But Eden Park aside, the 'smaller' grounds ie Hamilton, Wellington require proper cricket at all times. So I don't see a tremendous advantage there. And if there is, well that's touring cricket.

 

[Moss]

Good post. But I thought the small-grounds thing was always common knowledge. Overseas current players and those who've moved to commentary have toured and played on these grounds enough times over the years. Internet memes are a relatively recent phenomenon, but other than that..how come all the noise now?

NZ sides have turned this into an advantage many times in the past. The most famous example would be Martin Crowe's strategies in the 1992 WC, sending Greatbatch up the order to take advantage of the short boundaries, and also opening the bowling with Patel thus challenging batsmen to take the aerial route with the field up if they were game. Worked a treat against the likes of Srikkanth and Botham. I remember Eden Park wickets in the 90's being mostly slow and low, and sub-200 scores being the norm in ODI's. You needed guys like Larsen and harris to utilize those conditions well. (This is also the reason for Sachins 82(49) in 1994 being one of my favourite ODI knocks)

 

[TheJediBrah]

Good post. But I thought the small-grounds thing was always common knowledge. Overseas current players and those who've moved to commentary have toured and played on these grounds enough times over the years. Internet memes are a relatively recent phenomenon, but other than that..how come all the noise now?

NZ sides have turned this into an advantage many times in the past. The most famous example would be Martin Crowe's strategies in the 1992 WC, sending Greatbatch up the order to take advantage of the short boundaries, and also opening the bowling with Patel thus challenging batsmen to take the aerial route with the field up if they were game. Worked a treat against the likes of Srikkanth and Botham. I remember Eden Park wickets in the 90's being mostly slow and low, and sub-200 scores being the norm in ODI's. You needed guys like Larsen and harris to utilize those conditions well. (This is also the reason for Sachins 82(49) in 1994 being one of my favourite ODI knocks)

I don't know why there would be any "noise" at all. It's all part of home advantage.

It's not like the home team go ahead and deliberately shorten boundaries by 30m to give themselves an advantage. It's just the way the grounds are