Clearly, they are subscribing to the model that worked during the 2015 World Cup. Issue with that being, all of our guys had form from memory going into 2015. And the reserves were either world class (Mills) or a semi-proven performer (McClenaghan, Milne, Nathan McCullum). Now we have a plethora of guys out of form, and reserves who are not near world class and are now rusty.i wanted us to play the 4 reserves against afghanistan for precisely this situation - you need them with a game or two under the belt if someone is injured or terrible. anyway it's time for nicholls and maybe blundell.
anyway on saturday we learn the gap between our current 3/4/5 standard team and the top 3 of india/aus/eng. i suspect it's rather large.
(Total number of runs scored/total number of overs batted) -btw, how is NRR calculated?
I would disagree that a debut on his home ground against a trash WI side is equivalent to a World Cup semi-final or an NZ v Australia game at Lords.Last time we debuted Blundell in a hard situation he scored a ton at the Basin
286-6 wasnt looking great tbf.I would disagree that a debut on his home ground against a trash WI side is equivalent to a World Cup semi-final or an NZ v Australia game at Lords.
Last time we debuted Blundell in a hard situation he scored a ton at the Basin
He was also debuted in a type of cricket he was actually good at. A decent innings in a warmup game doesn't change the fact that he's been a despicably bad player in this format; Latham could get another ten consecutive ducks looking like Chris Martin before I'd consider making that particular swap unless he started keeping like a complete dunce as well.I would disagree that a debut on his home ground against a trash WI side is equivalent to a World Cup semi-final or an NZ v Australia game at Lords.
u mad?Man itd be hilarious if Pakistan beat India in the sf/final. I'd be annoyed too but it would almost be worth it to witness the reaction here in India.
Looking at this game in isolation, Pakistan probably had the better of the (pace) bowling conditions and bowled and fielded superbly - the Taylor dismissal in particular, so with just about any lineup you feel NZ would still be 83 for 5. The reason people are going on about the Sodhi omission is that Kane actually read the pitch correctly (stated it was a used surface), won a good toss but totally negated that advantage by proceeding to leave out the second spinnwr. Very strange from the same skipper who didn't mind playing 3 spinners at Nagpur in that world T20 game against India.Congrats Pakistan, excellent game. England must be shitting themselves.
NZ saying they got it wrong by not playing Sodhi is all well and groovy, but it ignores the "83 for 5" elephant in the room. Is Nicholls edging every delivery in the nets? Does Munro have pictures of Williamson and Stead in a three way with Guptill's wife? I don't get it.
Well Pakistan won, so yes of course.u mad?