James
Cricket Web Owner
Snap!
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
***Official*** England in New Zealand 2018
- Thread starter BeeGee
- Start date
weldone
Hall of Fame Member
Wow! Hope he carries on for many years (5 seems doable)
Days of Grace
International Captain
Yes, I just calculated Crowe's innings and it makes no.10 in place of Taylor's knock in the 2011 w.c.
Moss
International Vice-Captain
Yeah, and interesting that Astle who for so many years was NZ's one certified century-maker and batting matchwinner figures nowhere in these lists. 119 against Pakistan in a decider at Dunedin (2001) and 115* against India in a tri-series final (2005) were among the best I remember of him, but again wouldn't come close to the ones mentioned so far.
The 1992 WC aside, the 90's were a really barren time for NZ batsmanship, so few centuries. One innings I really enjoyed in terms of match situation and quality of the attack was Roger Twose's 80* in the 1999 World Cup against the Aussies. NZ were 49 for 4 chasing 200-plus and recent NZ-Aus encounters suggested it would go only one way. His partnership with Cairns was excellent backs-to-the-wall stuff for its time, but yes things could only get better.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Cairns' ton in the final of the CT has to be right up there considering it got NZ their only ICC trophy.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Excellent point about Astle.
Greatbatch scored consecutive ODI centuries (one in a win, one in a loss) on a tour of England in 1990 as a middle order batsmen (not pinch-hitter opener), at a time when very few ODI centuries were scored. John Wright, for example, only scored one in his career and Andrew Jones never reached three figures.
Greatbatch scored consecutive ODI centuries (one in a win, one in a loss) on a tour of England in 1990 as a middle order batsmen (not pinch-hitter opener), at a time when very few ODI centuries were scored. John Wright, for example, only scored one in his career and Andrew Jones never reached three figures.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I’d say yes overall. KW still has an edge for me in Tests, but even if I grant tests more weighting than the other forms, Taylor is further ahead in the Whiteball forms. Not so much statistically speaking, but the big difference for me in Whiteball cricket is KW can set-up games, whereas Taylor can win them.
straw man
Hall of Fame Member
We're incredibly lucky to have all three of Taylor, Guptill and Williamson in our ODI side at the moment - all three have played superlative knocks and when in peak form are immense.
Don't see how Taylor is going to be fit for the decider though - quad strain isn't just going to go away in a couple of days. Not looking good for the first test either.
Don't see how Taylor is going to be fit for the decider though - quad strain isn't just going to go away in a couple of days. Not looking good for the first test either.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Obviously between the retirement of Fleming and the emergence of KW, Taylor was largely unchallenged as NZ's best batsman (though in between suspensions and injuries Ryder would fleetingly enter the equation).
It's tough, as Williamson was so damn good from 2014-2017 that I doubt Taylor, even without his eye-problems, could ever match that level of quality - so I'm still saying KW is #1 overall. It's worth noting that despite only now entering the prime of his career, he's inobtrusively amassed an ODI record that's at the very least the equal of Taylor's in every way save raw aggregate. KW might not be as good at clearing the boundary rope as Taylor, but imo he's better at finding the gaps during the middle overs which is just as important a role. Having said that, Taylor's definitely the form player of the two atm.
It's tough, as Williamson was so damn good from 2014-2017 that I doubt Taylor, even without his eye-problems, could ever match that level of quality - so I'm still saying KW is #1 overall. It's worth noting that despite only now entering the prime of his career, he's inobtrusively amassed an ODI record that's at the very least the equal of Taylor's in every way save raw aggregate. KW might not be as good at clearing the boundary rope as Taylor, but imo he's better at finding the gaps during the middle overs which is just as important a role. Having said that, Taylor's definitely the form player of the two atm.
Last edited:
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Vettori was the best for 2 or 3 years (in tests)
Last edited:
Athlai
Not Terrible
Nah he was second best. Even when Vettori was at his best in 2008/2009 Taylor was still scoring more runs than him.
Yeah, I'm in the Taylor camp as far as our best bat is concerned. I just feel like he's more adaptable, can absolutely put fear into batsman, can consolidate and knock it around, bat time in all forms etc. Kane might have the odd blitzkrieg moment ala England at the Cake Tin last month but he hasn't got 181 not in him to win a game. And Rossco's got him in consistently lately as well, I'd say his deviation in scores since his eye surgery would be much less than Kane's.
And I was heartened to hear quite a few people (albeit on talk radio) go after Southee today. The host read out a stat that he averages 50 with the ball at home over the last 2 or 3 seasons, I forget how long. And Henry averaged 18 in that time, and had taken around the same amount of wickets in 12-13 less games. I cannot see any justification for Tim Southee to continue to be picked in ODI cricket. Just wish Henry was a bit hungrier.
Pretty close if you do a combined test/odi best batsman. Ive never liked that way though, each format should be treated separately, no such thing as best overall for me.
Also that stat might be a bit unfair on kane given that he was pretty average at the start of his career and Ross was settled by 2010.
What about 2013-2018?