***Official*** New Zealand tour of Zimbabwe and South Africa 2016

[Hurricane]

This is a comment I stewed on while out for a walk right now.

Those were tricky batting conditions yesterday. 300-350 is a par score for that pitch. And despite our "good" bowling SA is 280-3.

I had the distinct impression that South Africa were well prepared from a batting perspective for any swing bowling we could throw at them. They were expecting us to come hard at them with swing and then countered it. Often by playing for swing. If anything, and this is hindsight, we probably should have bowled more cross seamers to keep them honest. It was fantastic cricket to watch. Sure I would have liked more wickets. But at the end of the day that was a high standard test cricket being played out there.

Based on that Bracewelll bowling performance yesterday I would say those are our top 4 seamers in the country. We threw our very best against South Africa and South Africa stood tall and weren't having any of it.

All that said - with the exact same deliveries on another day SA would have been 5 down. There were a large number of play and misses and there will be a small amount of horse shoe rubbing at the end of the day by the batsman.

 

[Hurricane]

Another post I will make
a) to get my post count up
b) in the bizarre hope some blackcap will happen upon this site and actually read this.

Tim is always more a of a threat to get the right hander out, and Boult does better against lefties (strangely Wagner and Bracewell are equally effective against both).

Memo to tim - just bowl it on Quentin's pads and give him one to fine leg on the first ball of the over. Don't admit it to your mates or to the team captain but do it anyway. You needed 5 balls at the right hander and we weren't getting the match ups we wanted often enough. Same goes for you trent to a certain extent. Your job is to get the left handed opener out. Get him on strike by fair or foul means and do the business.

 

[hendrix]

pretty sure all bowlers do that already.

 

[NZTailender]

Did any of you actually watch the whole days play?

We bowled well. Not great, not super threateningly, not superbly, just well. Not horribly, not spraying it everywhere, not pathetically, but well.

Southee bowled well. Bracewell bowled well. Wagner was very good, higher than well. Boult was good. Santner wasn't good. Are these FTP/Battrick-esque rating levels doing it for you all?

At times, there was too much movement, to which Bracewell and Southee couldn't quite control it to their advantage, despite repeated beating of the bat by centimetres. This is hardly close to spraying it everywhere. Bracewell and Boult both had wickets that weren't and rightly overturned. Boult and Wagner both had wickets that weren't awarded and weren't reviewed so are 'unlucky' to not have more in their column.

We bowled well. We bowled ok. It wasn't terrible, just South Africa's day. No need to bump the doom and gloom thread. I continue to get the distinct imrpession Kane is feeling his way through the captaincy; the bowling changes, the fielding set ups. it was 6-6.5/10 performance. Hopefully today we'll do better.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yeah, they were genuinely unlucky for most of the day tbh.

 

[Hurricane]

excellent post nzt

 

[Hurricane]

Well I am really scraping the barrell with the next post but I am bored so here goes...

Where to from here on Day 2 for New Zealand. What targets should they set?

We have zero chance of bundling SA out for less than 400 - but if we really pull up our sleeves and restrict them to 450 that will be a positive from a saving the game perspective.
Did I actually use that phrase? Yes I did. I think our chances of winning are byeski after day one and we are looking at draw as a best outcome. Yes being positive thinkers the blackcaps will still
consider some scenarios and pathways overnight that could lead to a victory, such as a second inning SA collapse, but yeah that is some ways away from happening. Step 1 is restrict SA to 450 to control the scoreboard pressure. If SA make it through to 550 that would be a difficult psychological blow for the Kiwis to deal with.

Any complaints about the quality of this post please email idon'tcareIsaiditwasthebottomofthebarrel@gmail.com

 

[StephenZA]

To put my 2 cents in as a non-NZ supporter

I don`t think that NZ bowled badly, but while the ball was always doing something I don`t think that the NZ bowlers were always threatening... there was the occasional play and miss, nature of the swinging ball and wicket, but there was never 3/4 plays and misses an over that started making the batsmen uncomfortable and uncertain.

Boult was good as always, but I thought he lacked a little pace at times. Southee was swinging the ball nicely, but not consistently threatening. Wagner for my mind was excellent, making the batsman think, getting the ball to do just enough extracting decent bounce etc. I was not impressed with Bracewell and he gave to many 4 balls away. If NZ is going to go with a 4 man pace attack then the 4th paceman must offer something different, Bracewell does not appear to do this. Is there not a genuine pace bowler 145+ (even if he sprays it a bit) that you can ask to come in and just bowl 4/5 over bursts of high speed stuff? If not I would personally be looking for a spin bowler that can do at least a holding job, a bit of flight and guile would be nice...

But that's what little I`ve seen as a SA supporter in one match, plus a few look ins here and there, so take it with much salt.

 

[hendrix]

Did any of you actually watch the whole days play?

We bowled well. Not great, not super threateningly, not superbly, just well. Not horribly, not spraying it everywhere, not pathetically, but well.

Southee bowled well. Bracewell bowled well. Wagner was very good, higher than well. Boult was good. Santner wasn't good. Are these FTP/Battrick-esque rating levels doing it for you all?

At times, there was too much movement, to which Bracewell and Southee couldn't quite control it to their advantage, despite repeated beating of the bat by centimetres. This is hardly close to spraying it everywhere. Bracewell and Boult both had wickets that weren't and rightly overturned. Boult and Wagner both had wickets that weren't awarded and weren't reviewed so are 'unlucky' to not have more in their column.

We bowled well. We bowled ok. It wasn't terrible, just South Africa's day. No need to bump the doom and gloom thread. I continue to get the distinct imrpession Kane is feeling his way through the captaincy; the bowling changes, the fielding set ups. it was 6-6.5/10 performance. Hopefully today we'll do better.

excellent post nzt

WTF ****.

He said pretty much exactly what I've been saying in this thread. **** you, 'Cane.

 

[hendrix]

If NZ is going to go with a 4 man pace attack then the 4th paceman must offer something different, Bracewell does not appear to do this. Is there not a genuine pace bowler 145+ (even if he sprays it a bit) that you can ask to come in and just bowl 4/5 over bursts of high speed stuff? If not I would personally be looking for a spin bowler that can do at least a holding job, a bit of flight and guile would be nice...
.

Haha, it's what we've been looking for for a long time.

It was supposed to be Bruce Martin. Nope. Craig and Sodhi were never going to be economical. Santner was brought in as the AR to try do the job. Way too early for him.

 

[StephenZA]

Haha, it's what we've been looking for for a long time.

It was supposed to be Bruce Martin. Nope. Craig and Sodhi were never going to be economical. Santner was brought in as the AR to try do the job. Way too early for him.

We`ve got a few genuine pace bowlers hanging around here..... maybe you could entice one across to NZ

 

[Zinzan]

We`ve got a few genuine pace bowlers hanging around here..... maybe you could entice one across to NZ

If they're anything like Wagner, yes please, we'll take em gladly!

 

[Zinzan]

To put my 2 cents in as a non-NZ supporter

I don`t think that NZ bowled badly, but while the ball was always doing something I don`t think that the NZ bowlers were always threatening... there was the occasional play and miss, nature of the swinging ball and wicket, but there was never 3/4 plays and misses an over that started making the batsmen uncomfortable and uncertain.
t.

Agree, we just weren't consistent enough to beat the bat 3-4 time in an over, especially with that first new ball. Also the pitch was weird in that it either played really true, or seamed too much for the edge.

 

[NZTailender]

To put my 2 cents in as a non-NZ supporter

I don`t think that NZ bowled badly, but while the ball was always doing something I don`t think that the NZ bowlers were always threatening... there was the occasional play and miss, nature of the swinging ball and wicket, but there was never 3/4 plays and misses an over that started making the batsmen uncomfortable and uncertain.

Boult was good as always, but I thought he lacked a little pace at times. Southee was swinging the ball nicely, but not consistently threatening. Wagner for my mind was excellent, making the batsman think, getting the ball to do just enough extracting decent bounce etc. I was not impressed with Bracewell and he gave to many 4 balls away. If NZ is going to go with a 4 man pace attack then the 4th paceman must offer something different, Bracewell does not appear to do this. Is there not a genuine pace bowler 145+ (even if he sprays it a bit) that you can ask to come in and just bowl 4/5 over bursts of high speed stuff? If not I would personally be looking for a spin bowler that can do at least a holding job, a bit of flight and guile would be nice...

But that's what little I`ve seen as a SA supporter in one match, plus a few look ins here and there, so take it with much salt.

This is why promoting Duminy to keep the LH/RH combo has actually worked quite well in this test tbh despite Duminy's dubious quality.

 

[StephenZA]

This is why promoting Duminy to keep the LH/RH combo has actually worked quite well in this test tbh despite Duminy's dubious quality.

Whether that's the reason or not... it has definitely worked. With Duminy performing in this match and no other matches until Aus later, I can not see Faf being in the first team selection when AB returns. If Duminy ever got his form back with the ball would sort many SA problems....

but I`ve been down this road before with him, gives me a glimpse of hope then squanders it for the next 2 years keeping out better batsman. Also he has not faced a decent spinner for awhile and that is a big Achilles heel.

 

[NZTailender]

Whether that's the reason or not... it has definitely worked. With Duminy performing in this match and no other matches until Aus later, I can not see Faf being in the first team selection when AB returns. If Duminy ever got his form back with the ball would sort many SA problems....

but I`ve been down this road before with him, gives me a glimpse of hope then squanders it for the next 2 years keeping out better batsman. Also he has not faced a decent spinner for awhile and that is a big Achilles heel.

Wasn't really a comment on Duminy, just the tactic. He's a hack.

 

[Zinzan]

Did any of you actually watch the whole days play?

We bowled well. Not great, not super threateningly, not superbly, just well. Not horribly, not spraying it everywhere, not pathetically, but well.

Southee bowled well. Bracewell bowled well. Wagner was very good, higher than well. Boult was good. Santner wasn't good. Are these FTP/Battrick-esque rating levels doing it for you all?

At times, there was too much movement, to which Bracewell and Southee couldn't quite control it to their advantage, despite repeated beating of the bat by centimetres. This is hardly close to spraying it everywhere. Bracewell and Boult both had wickets that weren't and rightly overturned. Boult and Wagner both had wickets that weren't awarded and weren't reviewed so are 'unlucky' to not have more in their column.

We bowled well. We bowled ok. It wasn't terrible, just South Africa's day. No need to bump the doom and gloom thread. I continue to get the distinct imrpession Kane is feeling his way through the captaincy; the bowling changes, the fielding set ups. it was 6-6.5/10 performance. Hopefully today we'll do better.

I don't think anyone said nor implied we were bad incidentally, unless I missed a post somewhere. I'd personally say 'adequate' or 'average' is the best way to describe that performance from the bowlers not named Wagner yesterday. Southee in particular just didn't control the new ball well enough to describe him as actually bowling 'well' for me.

 

[Hurricane]

Yeah well I think it is high bar to bowl an over where the player pays and misses three times when the batsman are all being disciplined and leaving most stuff outside off stump.

Nonetheless enjoyed your perspective Stephen. We do have Adam Milne who is very fast btw someone has probably mentioned already but he would never last 5 days. Goodness knows how many 4 day matches he has played. Let me look it up...Hmm 15 FC games which is more than I thought. So yeah maybe he could.

 

[StephenZA]

Yeah well I think it is high bar to bowl an over where the player pays and misses three times when the batsman are all being disciplined and leaving most stuff outside off stump.

We shall see once Steyn, Philander and Rabada have bowled....

 

[Hurricane]

We shall see once Steyn, Philander and Rabada have bowled....

Wonderful Retort. Love these threads where we can banter with the oppostion fans. Keep up the good posts. LOL. (You may be right by the way).