***Official*** Pakistan in New Zealand 2017/18

[Athlai]

Wtf how is kitchen still getting picked?

 

[The Hutt Rec]

$45 for the 20-20 vs Pakistan at Westpac Stadium on the last day before I return to work. Would have headed along to see Chapman debut. Will most likely give it a miss with Kitchen still there.

 

[Zinzan]

I never sought I'd say this, but it really seems like CdG might just actually be quite good - at least in NZ conditions. Him bullying WI is one thing, but this is a pdg Pakistani bowling attack. Will be interesting to see how he handles Starc and Cummins (if they bother coming that is).

His natural ability has been obvious to anyone with half a cricketing brain for a good few years now. Just the effortless way he murders bowling with basic cricket shots, not dissimilar to Chris Cairns. My only reservation with him has been whether he himself thinks he's good enough, & it appears he's starting to believe.

I think he would have learned a lot from some choking moments in the series in India and in the CT last year, and I think this recent personal tragedy could even help in putting failure and fear into perspective, as it often can.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Looking to the England series briefly, looks like NZ have some serious bowling depth. Bloody shame that it's only a two test series! Looking forward to seeing CDG. He was our pro a few seasons back, and funnily enough never got into 3 figure even though you could see he had serious potential with the bat - clubbed it miles!

Do you guys think he may continue to open the bowling in the tests?

 

[Zinzan]

Great our selectors just confirming they're the idiots we all thought they were if they're looking past Chapman again.

You can bet the Aussie selectors won't be such idiots and overlook their obvious talented youngster in Darcy Short.

Stupid stupid stupid, but not surprising.

 

[thierry henry]

I thought the rap on CDG was that he has always had uncanny ball-striking ability and an aesthetically pleasing, relatively "correct" technique, but just didn't know how to put together an innings properly.

I mean, it would be great if he suddenly developed this ability throughout the duration of his international career, but given his batting has always looked the part I don't know how you could ever watch a particular innings of his and know that he suddenly "got it".

I also think that when a guy gets the better part of a decade to "get it" at domestic level, still doesn't "get it" but gets picked for internationals anyway, that it's reasonable to be sceptical of him and of his selection in the first place. The old chestnut of "no matter how well he does I was still right to say he shouldn't have been selected" is a bit of a dirty old Richard-ism but there's truth to it.

 

[straw man]

Do you guys think he may continue to open the bowling in the tests?

Shouldn't do - that was a one-off because NZ played two spinners and picked a seamer that doesn't open the bowling (Wagner). I guess it's not impossible he open the bowling again if he's in the XI next time we tour the subcontinent.

Looking to the England series briefly, looks like NZ have some serious bowling depth. Bloody shame that it's only a two test series!

Would be a cracker if it was 3 tests, I would be gagging for it to start. Point the finger squarely at NZC for that; idiots.

 

[Athlai]

I thought the rap on CDG was that he has always had uncanny ball-striking ability and an aesthetically pleasing, relatively "correct" technique, but just didn't know how to put together an innings properly.

I mean, it would be great if he suddenly developed this ability throughout the duration of his international career, but given his batting has always looked the part I don't know how you could ever watch a particular innings of his and know that he suddenly "got it".

I also think that when a guy gets the better part of a decade to "get it" at domestic level, still doesn't "get it" but gets picked for internationals anyway, that it's reasonable to be sceptical of him and of his selection in the first place. The old chestnut of "no matter how well he does I was still right to say he shouldn't have been selected" is a bit of a dirty old Richard-ism but there's truth to it.

TBF he is only there as icing

 

[straw man]

I thought the rap on CDG was that he has always had uncanny ball-striking ability and an aesthetically pleasing, relatively "correct" technique, but just didn't know how to put together an innings properly.

I mean, it would be great if he suddenly developed this ability throughout the duration of his international career, but given his batting has always looked the part I don't know how you could ever watch a particular innings of his and know that he suddenly "got it".

I also think that when a guy gets the better part of a decade to "get it" at domestic level, still doesn't "get it" but gets picked for internationals anyway, that it's reasonable to be sceptical of him and of his selection in the first place. The old chestnut of "no matter how well he does I was still right to say he shouldn't have been selected" is a bit of a dirty old Richard-ism but there's truth to it.

Share your feeling that whatever's stopped him achieving in the past, despite the great ball-striking, is unlikely to have magically gone away now he's playing for NZ. Though tbf he has 'got it' with the bat in domestic cricket for quite a while now, at least in FC (I'll give you that his List A record is bad). Averages 36 in FC but I think it's more like 40 if you leave out his first couple of seasons where he struggled.

Certainly hope that if it's a confidence thing, he'll have proved a lot to himself this season.

 

[thierry henry]

TBF he is only there as icing

Shouldn't really be there at all then tbf as he doesn't warrant selection as an all-rounder and certainly not as a bowling all-rounder in 50-over cricket.

Realistically he's only ever going to make an impact as a batsman, innit.

 

[jcas0167]

Share your feeling that whatever's stopped him achieving in the past, despite the great ball-striking, is unlikely to have magically gone away now he's playing for NZ. Though tbf he has 'got it' with the bat in domestic cricket for quite a while now, at least in FC (I'll give you that his List A record is bad). Averages 36 in FC but I think it's more like 40 if you leave out his first couple of seasons where he struggled.

Certainly hope that if it's a confidence thing, he'll have proved a lot to himself this season.

Indeed. He had a great first class season in 2008/09 when Auckland won the Plunket Shield, he averaged in the 50's and hit the winning runs against CD. Not sure if he was eligible for NZ at that stage though. Then when Anderson & Neesham emerged it looked like he might have missed his chance. Great to see him really break through at international level over the last 12 months. Last night was his first innings back in the team since his dad passed away too.

 

[cnerd123]

Yeah, the selectors obviously have too much of an ego to admit they got it wrong on Anaru. Chapman is top of the run-scoring charts, Anaru is no form at all. One is 23 one is 34. It's just such a no-brainer but they're being pig-headed about their poor selection option in the first plaace.

I should point out I don't care about T20 internationals, it's just a poor selection issue and the fact Chapman should be exposed to international cricket as is the only straw-grasping relevance to T20 ints.

It's because Chapman is a Hong Konger


You thieving ****s

 

[thierry henry]

Share your feeling that whatever's stopped him achieving in the past, despite the great ball-striking, is unlikely to have magically gone away now he's playing for NZ. Though tbf he has 'got it' with the bat in domestic cricket for quite a while now, at least in FC (I'll give you that his List A record is bad). Averages 36 in FC but I think it's more like 40 if you leave out his first couple of seasons where he struggled.

Certainly hope that if it's a confidence thing, he'll have proved a lot to himself this season.

Yeah that's the thing, he is actually sort of palatable as a batting all-rounder in tests but is almost playing as a bowling all-rounder.

I'm *almost* prepared to accept that his slogging makes him a decent middle-order batsman for T20s, shouldn't really be bowling though.

He is really just a flat-out poor 50-over cricketer but even putting that aside, his role in the team doesn't make sense unless you are comfortable basically having a specialist batsman at number 7. While he keeps smashing it people won't mind, but he doesn't make sense as an ODI player because his bowling is garbage and he isn't being used as a proper batsman.

 

[Athlai]

Shouldn't really be there at all then tbf as he doesn't warrant selection as an all-rounder and certainly not as a bowling all-rounder in 50-over cricket.

Realistically he's only ever going to make an impact as a batsman, innit.

Reckon theres always a spot for icing in limited overs cricket.

 

[thierry henry]

Reckon theres always a spot for icing in limited overs cricket.

Name me one well regarded ODI player ever who was a bad bowler/non bowler, not a keeper, and batted 7 or lower.

Sorry, that actually sounds like a really snarky question now that I've typed it out because the answer is obviously "no-one" but that's kinda the point.

Icing is definitely needed but it's supposed to be a part of some sort of valid cricketing package, not just "specialist slogger who averages 25".

 

[Immenso]

Name me one well regarded ODI player ever who was a bad bowler/non bowler, not a keeper, and batted 7 or lower.

Sorry, that actually sounds like a really snarky question now that I've typed it out because the answer is obviously "no-one" but that's kinda the point.

Icing is definitely needed but it's supposed to be a part of some sort of valid cricketing package, not just "specialist slogger who averages 25".

Ricardo Powell.

Edit: Oh, hang on. Just read further on and that "specialist slogger who averages 25" doesn't qualify as 'well regarded'.

 

[Chewie]

Name me one well regarded ODI player ever who was a bad bowler/non bowler, not a keeper, and batted 7 or lower.

Sorry, that actually sounds like a really snarky question now that I've typed it out because the answer is obviously "no-one" but that's kinda the point.

Icing is definitely needed but it's supposed to be a part of some sort of valid cricketing package, not just "specialist slogger who averages 25".

Does Mahmudullah count as "well regarded"?

 

[Athlai]

Name me one well regarded ODI player ever who was a bad bowler/non bowler, not a keeper, and batted 7 or lower.

Sorry, that actually sounds like a really snarky question now that I've typed it out because the answer is obviously "no-one" but that's kinda the point.

Icing is definitely needed but it's supposed to be a part of some sort of valid cricketing package, not just "specialist slogger who averages 25".

Well actually theres a pretty well regarded one who played quite a bit at 7.

Mike Hussey - 725 @ 120.83

But of course it was a freak side, CDG is icing in the vein of the classic norounders of the past and present like...

Justin Kemp - 579 @ 36.17 - SR 82
Mahmudullah - 1484 @ 33.72 SR 77
Mohammad Kaif - 667 @ 33.25 SR 88
Ravia Bopara - 441 @ 31.50 SR 82
Moeen Ali - 682 @ 29.65 SR 118
Russell Arnold 707 @ 29.45 SR 72
Yusuf Pathan 490 @ 28.82 SR 111
Darren Sammy 714 @ 27.46 SR 100

They're not exactly legends of the game, but all of them are perfectly well regarded and handy cricketers.

 

[thierry henry]

Every single person named so far either typically batted higher than 7 or was at least supposed to be a proper bowler

....the point being that a number 7 in ODI cricket either needs to be playing as a genuine bowling option or he needs to be a "proper batsman" who happens to be in a long batting order who is eventually supposed to move up.

Now that I think about it Bangladesh have made a bit of a habit of doing this in recent years but it's always with guys who are supposed to be proper batsmen.

 

[straw man]

If your ODI keeper is ideally suited to bat higher than 7 as ours is, I don't see any problem in fielding a fast-scoring batting allrounder at 7. In fact, I'd say that's exactly the type of player you'd want to select there.

Whether this changes if Latham loses his spot is another question.