New Zealand doom and gloom thread

[Athlai]

Guptill tonned up two matches ago FFS. Hardly like it's Beenleigh easiest conditions for an opener. Besides Latham there is no one, nooooooo one that is currently going to do a better job than Guptill. That means we have to put up with him scoring tons against the spuds and averaging 20 against the better attacks.

If he doesn't do that then he gets dropped. No one domestically is putting up their hand for his position. Hell we can barely cover a Taylor injury with our batting depth.

The reality is that we just don't have that many world class Test bats.

 

[Athlai]

I'm not absolutely suggesting we should drop him unless there's better options, but the days of him being an absolute non-negotiable 'lock' in the XI must be wearing thin.

Yeah agreed, I think we've seen a lot less swing than past summers which has definitely hurt his effectiveness but another season like this and we're going to free fall down the rankings.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Yeah, despite Guptill looking atrocious at times, I'm not to keen on riding the opener merry-go-round again.

 

[Jord]

Henry has been disappointing in his two test matches so far; I was hopeful that he was going to bring his ODI form into test cricket but he's just bowled the wrong length. Wagner does what Wagner does, he finds a way to take wickets but does it in a way that people put it down to being flukish. He's the McCullum of bowling, if you ignore the way in which he's got the results, the results themselves stand out and they're consistent enough that they should be banked upon.

The injuries for the last four months have been a big issue too. Boult, Southee, Taylor, McCullum, Williamson, Santner and Watling have all spent time out of the game during this season with injury. With the exception of Santner who has been the find of the summer, all of those guys would have been the people we expected to perform for us in the summer.

 

[Jord]

Guptill tonned up two matches ago FFS. Hardly like it's Beenleigh easiest conditions for an opener. Besides Latham there is no one, nooooooo one that is currently going to do a better job than Guptill. That means we have to put up with him scoring tons against the spuds and averaging 20 against the better attacks.

If he doesn't do that then he gets dropped. No one domestically is putting up their hand for his position. Hell we can barely cover a Taylor injury with our batting depth.

The reality is that we just don't have that many world class Test bats.

Sri Lanka has the worst bowling attack in world cricket, including Bangladesh at the moment. Not one of their established seam bowlers averaged under 40 with the ball before the series started and all of the experience had been vacated out of their batsmen in one season. I think Guptill's showing in Australia and again here in NZ shows what you could expect him to do reasonably against South Africa and their bowling attack (Morkel would have a field day) so I'd be against picking him for South Africa.

 

[Burgey]

Latham
Some random
Williamson
Taylor
Guptill
Watling
Anderson or some random leftie who hits a big ball
Santner
Wagner
Boult
Southee

Boult and Southee haven't bowled that great in these home and away matches, but there's a couple of excuses for them. I think they have enough credit in the bank to be persisted with for a little while yet.

I'd move Guptill to five and see if he can play a similar role to McCullum, hopefully against an older ball. And I'd give him a decent go at it.

 

[Zinzan]

Guptill tonned up two matches ago FFS. Hardly like it's Beenleigh easiest conditions for an opener. Besides Latham there is no one, nooooooo one that is currently going to do a better job than Guptill. That means we have to put up with him scoring tons against the spuds and averaging 20 against the better attacks.

.

Does it mean that? If we know he won't prosper against decent attacks, why keep picking him to fail?

I asked PEWS that question the other day whether it could be time for a radical horses for courses selection policy to pick Gup against the SLs of this world and look to someone like a Brownlie who has a proven record against Australia and South African attacks.

That might actually be unfair on Brownlie, but if there's nothing we've learnt this summer surely it's that Gup will rarely prospect against good test attacks. It can't be doing his confidence any favours by keeping on picking him to fail.

The guy has been given more chances than most openers in the history of the game tbf, there's nothing else he's got hidden in his back pocket, he's done the county thing for a couple of years, he's worked with M D Crowe.. if that's not going to make him a successful test bat, there's not much else.

 

[Zinzan]

Boult and Southee haven't bowled that great in these home and away matches, but there's a couple of excuses for them. I think they have enough credit in the bank to be persisted with for a little while yet.

Haha, see if I was an Australian atm I'd be suggesting NZ keep Southee as a lock for the next 10 years minimum.

 

[Jord]

Haha, see if I was an Australian atm I'd be suggesting NZ keep Southee as a lock for the next 10 years minimum.

I can't imagine him being a disciplined trainer considering how bad he bats despite showing obvious gifts in hand-eye. He looks a million bucks when he gets it right but an average of over 32 through 165 wickets indicates that isn't often enough for him to be a ten year lock

 

[Zinzan]

I can't imagine him being a disciplined trainer considering how bad he bats despite showing obvious gifts in hand-eye. He looks a million bucks when he gets it right but an average of over 32 through 165 wickets indicates that isn't often enough for him to be a ten year lock

Interestingly enough if we're to believe the McHesson camp, Southee is apparently one of the best trainers in what is a very keen squad, which did surprise me since I've always thought of Southee as a mentally soft cricketer. That's possibly unfairly too since I've mostly got that impression based on the way he bats and the fact he never toughs it out. He has far more natural ability with the bat than say a Pete Siddle does, but look at the price Siddle places on his wicket.

 

[Zinzan]

Yeah agreed, I think we've seen a lot less swing than past summers which has definitely hurt his effectiveness but another season like this and we're going to free fall down the rankings.

Good man Athers, was anticipating a scrap with you regarding that comment.

 

[Jord]

It's the issue with having two bowlers in the side as our opening weapons that have exactly the same failure point. If the ball isn't swinging and/or the batsmen last the first 15-20 overs, neither of them are that effective at finding breakthrough wickets.

When they're both on song, we look amazing. When they're not, we look decidedly average and toothless.

Siddle is one of my favorite Australian cricketers. He's been so unfairly treated by the selectors but every single time he plays, it's a million miles of effort for the team and it usually pays off in wickets.

 

[Zinzan]

I've said for years you need a Milne type 140+ bowler in your XI if for no other reason than to make it uncomfortable for lower-orders/tailenders, something NZ have struggled to knock over for years now. I'd like to see the likes of Lyon batting so comfortably when it's whistling through at 145+ as opposed to just touching 140 with the odd delivery like Henry. It's that old fashioned saying, when you're preoccupied with safety and survival first and foremost, your feet don't move in the same way.

I know Milne's body holding up is the problem, but I'd love to think he could hold up well enough to be a 5-day option in the future.

 

[Jord]

Milne was so bad in the ODI series and so easy for the Australians and Pakistanis to handle that it looked like NZ Police would love the speed radar used for him to boost their quota numbers around speeding tickets. I know the idiom is that "pace kills" but it needs to be well directed, good length and hostile pace.

Neil Wagner at 150KPH for instance. That's what we need.

 

[Hurricane]

I've said for years you need a Milne type 140+ bowler in your XI if for no other reason than to make it uncomfortable for lower-orders/tailenders, something NZ have struggled to knock over for years now. I'd like to see the likes of Lyon batting so comfortably when it's whistling through at 145+ as opposed to just touching 140 with the odd delivery like Henry. It's that old fashioned saying, when you're preoccupied with safety and survival first and foremost, your feet don't move in the same way.

I know Milne's body holding up is the problem, but I'd love to think he could hold up well enough to be a 5-day option in the future.

Yes to a Milne type player
No to Adam as he bowls a light ball.

He is a 150Ks bowler than hits the bat like 125ks.

 

[Zinzan]

Milne was so bad in the ODI series and so easy for the Australians and Pakistanis to handle that it looked like NZ Police would love the speed radar used for him to boost their quota numbers around speeding tickets. I know the idiom is that "pace kills" but it needs to be well directed, good length and hostile pace.

Neil Wagner at 150KPH for instance. That's what we need.

Look of course it helps if you actually bowl well & get the ball in the right place, but there's no doubt that lower order batsmen aren't thinking about hanging around long when it's getting close to that 150km mark, I can't see McGrath getting that test 50 if we had a Milne, let alone a Bond getting it through at those speeds. As I said in a perfect world you need someone who can get it through against the handy lowerorder/tailender bats around these days playing on flat wickets.

 

[Jord]

Yes to a Milne type player
No to Adam as he bowls a light ball.

He is a 150Ks bowler than hits the bat like 125ks.

Why do you think that is? It's not a height issue, he's a tall guy, has a front on action with a reasonably high arm, The pace is obviously there but even when he bowls back of a length he doesn't seem to hurry batsmen or seem intimidating. Is it a spin on the ball thing?

 

[Bahnz]

Nah with Wagner in the team, I think we've got the tools to bulldoze through lower order lineups. And in fact in ODI's Milne has frequently been toned by the tailenders because he's not really a dig-it-in sort of quick.

Not saying that Milne isn't worth a go at some point, but he really needs to dominate a season of FC cricket (or at the very least an NZA tour) first.

The absence of swing has of course been very noticeable. A big part of it is the blazing hot weather this summer. We really need the world to get it's **** together on climate change or our home advantage is going to evaporate along with most of the 3rd world's fresh water supplies.

And Boult and Southee's respective injuries have absolutely contributed too. I think it's still a bit silly suggesting dropping either at this stage, since Henry was definitely the closest to knocking Southee off his perch and ended up taking 0/100 in ideal conditions in this game (even if I think he bowled quite well while doing it).

 

[Hurricane]

Why do you think that is? It's not a height issue, he's a tall guy, has a front on action with a reasonably high arm, The pace is obviously there but even when he bowls back of a length he doesn't seem to hurry batsmen or seem intimidating. Is it a spin on the ball thing?

Kippax made a detailed post about it so best to ask him to repeat his points. It was quite interesting.

 

[Jord]

Kippax made a detailed post about it so best to ask him to repeat his points. It was quite interesting.

Which thread? I'd like to see that.