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

[OverratedSanity]

The to Marsh, he had a couple of excellent knocks vs Pakistan in his first series with the rest of the team crumbling around him. And he's a good bowler, obviously. He's just batting a spot too high.

 

[Dan]

I don't think MMarsh has had a shred of luck with the bat in Test cricket, but FMD I'm constantly surprised that he somehow bowls like an actual bowler.

 

[Hurricane]

...he really hasn't.

He made 48 against Pakistan coming in at 3/47, and the 38 in the first innings here. They're literally the only knocks that can qualify as fighting out of difficult situations, and neither actually got New Zealand out of said difficult situation.

I mean, if 4/180 is a 'difficult situation' then he's made a couple of high 30s too, but that seems like a pretty standard Test match situation tbh. And all his Test match 50s have been downhill skiing or mostly irrelevant.

No. No. No, Dan. No. Shall I say no a few more times. Perhaps I will. Nein. Kao (according to Google that is Maori for no although they have a few ways of saying no so it is confusing).

I won't have a word said against his fighting characteristics. On this issue I won't compromise.

Here are his FIGHTING knocks

116 vs Bangers came in at 4 for 127 (Bangers are decent at home)
38 vs West Indies at 4-189
39 vs West Indies at 4-179 (when Narine was really getting it to turn on a helpful pitch)
48 vs Pakistan at 4-130
67 vs england at 4-61
38 vs Australia at 4-47

Anything less than 200 on the board is uphill skiing and to prove my point (and I just finished a scrap so let this pass Jimmy fans) Neesham couldn't perform any time he walked out with less than 200 on the board. The pressure is on and the game is very much in the balance with some score like 160-4

Where you can argue that it wasn't a fighting knock is that often the score was 38 or 39 or a score like that and he really needs to go on with it. But he did the initial hard work and survived the immediate test only to not convert.

It troubles me that he can't convert and I think a season of county criket batting in the top 4 for a some lesser team would do him wonders - there is a skill to tonning up. From a mindset and an innings pacing perspective. And as an aside it is a skill that Don Voges has down pact at the moment.

 

[TheJediBrah]

And as an aside it is a skill that Don Voges has down pact at the moment.

random tidbit, but is this a saying? Does it mean the same as down pat?

Anyway i think it's debatable that 30's should really count unless its a game where 120 is a winning team score. The 67 v England could have been legit though.

 

[Hurricane]

random tidbit, but is this a saying? Does it mean the same as down pat?

Anyway i think it's debatable that 30's should really count unless its a game where 120 is a winning team score. The 67 v England could have been legit though.

My bad - thanks for the correction have never seen it written down before.

Yes I will partially pay out that 30s don't really count. But he showed a lot of grit to get there and did all the hard work. And for me the fight was there.

Also, one of the things the NZ team was preaching last year is "no wickets in clumps". So at least a 30 allows for a bit of a partnership and for the other team not to get a roll on.

 

[Bahnz]

random tidbit, but is this a saying? Does it mean the same as down pat?

Anyway i think it's debatable that 30's should really count unless its a game where 120 is a winning team score. The 67 v England could have been legit though.

Eh, it was in the 4th innings and England had the fielding up going for the win, so there were quite a few cheap boundaries on offer.

Ultimately Anderson badly lacks the temperament to play long innings. Even when he's in a destructive shot, or a poor choice is only a matter of time.

 

[Flem274*]

No. No. No, Dan. No. Shall I say no a few more times. Perhaps I will. Nein. Kao (according to Google that is Maori for no although they have a few ways of saying no so it is confusing).

I won't have a word said against his fighting characteristics. On this issue I won't compromise.

Here are his FIGHTING knocks

116 vs Bangers came in at 4 for 127 (Bangers are decent at home)
38 vs West Indies at 4-189
39 vs West Indies at 4-179 (when Narine was really getting it to turn on a helpful pitch)
48 vs Pakistan at 4-130
67 vs england at 4-61
38 vs Australia at 4-47

Anything less than 200 on the board is uphill skiing and to prove my point (and I just finished a scrap so let this pass Jimmy fans) Neesham couldn't perform any time he walked out with less than 200 on the board. The pressure is on and the game is very much in the balance with some score like 160-4

Where you can argue that it wasn't a fighting knock is that often the score was 38 or 39 or a score like that and he really needs to go on with it. But he did the initial hard work and survived the immediate test only to not convert.

It troubles me that he can't convert and I think a season of county criket batting in the top 4 for a some lesser team would do him wonders - there is a skill to tonning up. From a mindset and an innings pacing perspective. And as an aside it is a skill that Don Voges has down pact at the moment.

yeah you don't get these when you constantly deride everything neesham has ever done unless it happened on a green top against malcolm marshall, glenn mcgrath, richard hadlee and dennis lillee

and i wouldn't play him in the top four in county cricket because it's a competition where dobbers like ryder and franklin get unplayable swing. he'd get rekt. jesse did and corey isn't half the batsman jesse was around 2009

 

[Dan]

Nah scoring ~40 from 4/180 isn't a tough situation. That's about as close as you can get to the definition of 'average' -- an average score for an average specialist batsman on the way to an average first innings score for an average Test team against average opposition on an average pitch.

The 48 was actually coming in at 3/47, btw. He was out at 4/130. The 67 was ultimately rather fruitless but yeah, he still made the runs. And yes, he fought well in the first dig in this Test.

I think you overrate his apparent fighting characteristics; we're all well aware that Coriander's natural game isn't scrapping around as the underdog fighting his way through. The reason that he's so often making belaboured 20s and peaking with quick 50s from 4/400 or tons vs. Bangladesh probably has less to do with his mentality, and more to do with him not being that good a batsman at Test match level. That's not to say he won't sort his **** out and become a competent #6, but he's well and truly failed to deliver on his potential in his Test career to date.

I know you like the "Corey's a fighter, Neesham's a downhill skiier, Santner's a brat" narrative, but it straight-up doesn't match with reality. The results that each of them have delivered at #6 (or lack thereof) has a lot less to do with these inferences of personal characteristics, and more to do with none of them being Test match quality #6s.

 

[Flem274*]

6. Watling (wk)
7. Santner (5)

for south africa imo. another series we're going to get smashed in because while we've had some success this century in australia, india and england, south africa just pummel NZ every time and NZ are going into that series after 6 months of nothing.

that series will hurt.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

random tidbit, but is this a saying? Does it mean the same as down pat?

Interestingly, 'tidbit' itself is commonly found to be a North American slant on the British/Commonwealth usage titbit. With both spellings originating from tyd bit in the 1600s, supposedly.

An intriguing article here about how the two usages have increased and declined in American vs. British English. https://britishisms.wordpress.com/2014/01/01/titbit/

 

[hendrix]

etymology is fun

 

[Bahnz]

6. Watling (wk)
7. Santner (5)

for south africa imo. another series we're going to get smashed in because while we've had some success this century in australia, india and england, south africa just pummel NZ every time and NZ are going into that series after 6 months of nothing.

that series will hurt.

Yeah you just know that SA will have Steyn back fit and firing for that series and he'll rip us to shreds on a September greentop.

 

[Prince EWS]

and i wouldn't play him in the top four in county cricket because it's a competition where dobbers like ryder and franklin get unplayable swing. he'd get rekt. jesse did and corey isn't half the batsman jesse was around 2009

He never said he had to go and play half his games at Chelmsford, tbf.

 

[Hurricane]

Nah scoring ~40 from 4/180 isn't a tough situation. That's about as close as you can get to the definition of 'average' -- an average score for an average specialist batsman on the way to an average first innings score for an average Test team against average opposition on an average pitch.

The 48 was actually coming in at 3/47, btw. He was out at 4/130. The 67 was ultimately rather fruitless but yeah, he still made the runs. And yes, he fought well in the first dig in this Test.

I think you overrate his apparent fighting characteristics; we're all well aware that Coriander's natural game isn't scrapping around as the underdog fighting his way through. The reason that he's so often making belaboured 20s and peaking with quick 50s from 4/400 or tons vs. Bangladesh probably has less to do with his mentality, and more to do with him not being that good a batsman at Test match level. That's not to say he won't sort his **** out and become a competent #6, but he's well and truly failed to deliver on his potential in his Test career to date.

I know you like the "Corey's a fighter, Neesham's a downhill skiier, Santner's a brat" narrative, but it straight-up doesn't match with reality. The results that each of them have delivered at #6 (or lack thereof) has a lot less to do with these inferences of personal characteristics, and more to do with none of them being Test match quality #6s.

Pro tip: You saying simply stating "Your theory doesn't match reality" with confidence and panache doesn't add to the truthfulness of your statement. My narrative is correct although I hope you are using brat in a tongue in cheek manner. Only the truth carries the day with me. Not rhetoric (and never common sense as an aside)

As for this statement "not being that good a batsman at Test match level. That's not to say he won't sort his **** out and become a competent #6, but he's well and truly failed to deliver on his potential in his Test career to date."

Who says I disagree with that comment? I said he could use a year in county cricket batting in the top order. His failure to convert starts has really hampered his ability to make a meaningful contribution.
He should have at least two more tons by now. Like I said the next game is pivotal for Corey and ideally he needs to make a statement by tonning up. The competitors are knocking at his door.

The final thing I disagree with is your statement that 4-180 is par for the course so just get on with the job and perform your role Corey. The heat is on at 4-180 as you could collapse easily. Even if yes it is an average score. The heat is off at 350-4. The inferno is on at 50-4.
To prove my point and negate yours an opener walks out to bat at 0-0. They do it every game. Does this mean there isn't a lot of pressure on them because 0-0 is an average score that openers face all the time? No - coming out to bat with the score less than 200 you are going to be facing a bowling attack with their tail up.

 

[Dan]

He never said he had to go and play half his games at Chelmsford, tbf.

Yeah the best option is to get him into a **** Div 1 team. More chance of roads than absolute greentops.

 

[Flem274*]

Pro tip: You saying simply stating "Your theory doesn't match reality" with confidence and panache doesn't add to the truthfulness of your statement. My narrative is correct although I hope you are using brat in a tongue in cheek manner. Only the truth carries the day with me. Not rhetoric (and never common sense as an aside)
.

posts like this and your previous are why some people are starting to think you're a dick. get some self awareness ffs

 

[NZTailender]

Neesham's done more with the bat for NZ than Corey ever has. Like, actually contributed to wins and put runs on the board when needed (and yes, before the score was at 200).

Anderson's starting to slide down the hill towards unfulfilled talent and limited overs specialist.

 

[Jord]

It's so painful watching this team at the moment. I get that Hesson likes to show loyalty and it's a good quality, but how much longer can you continue to select Bracewell for? Or go back to Craig? Or use Anderson in tests? Or trust that Southee and Boult will regain form. I can't believe they're keeping the same 13 considering they just got resoundingly thrashed due to no application/aptitude in the batting and no penetration at all in the bowling.

It's also painful listening to the constant crap about umpiring too. It's not the umpires fault that Doug Bracewell pretty much cuts it close to a no ball with every single delivery he bowls. If you don't like having a no ball called on your wicket taking deliveries, don't bowl so close to the line.

 

[Hurricane]

It's so painful watching this team at the moment. I get that Hesson likes to show loyalty and it's a good quality, but how much longer can you continue to select Bracewell for? Or go back to Craig? Or use Anderson in tests? Or trust that Southee and Boult will regain form. I can't believe they're keeping the same 13 considering they just got resoundingly thrashed due to no application/aptitude in the batting and no penetration at all in the bowling.

It's also painful listening to the constant crap about umpiring too. It's not the umpires fault that Doug Bracewell pretty much cuts it close to a no ball with every single delivery he bowls. If you don't like having a no ball called on your wicket taking deliveries, don't bowl so close to the line.

Good post - welcome to CW.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Post your team.