*Official* New Zealand in Australia 2019/20

[NZTailender]

Yeah Santa isn't there to win matches with the ball. He's there because he can keep it tight and dry up runs at one end. No spinner is going to win a match for us in Australia. So Santa should be there as one who won't lose it for us

Though to be fair, Patel and Somerville are cheaper than Santner in that sense, if needed.

Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com


Question is, are Australia more likely to tonk Santner than the other two? Honestly I think it's about even. Patel and Somerville have more overall experience, whereas Santner will probably fall back to ODI style bowling.

 

[Bahnz]

I think it'll be pretty easy for the Australian's to score quickly off Santner. He's not actually that accurate, he bowls his fair share of drag downs and mostly gets away with it in ODI's thanks to the boundary riders that are less common in tests. Would definitely rate both specialist finger spinners as being more likely to keep it tight than Santner.

 

[Flem274*]

yep, and in australia you still want a spinner with some bite for when there is a little bit there.

we've got lord colin to bowl and bowl and bowl dry if needed, we can afford the spinner to be whoever is bowling best.

 

[Prince EWS]

Though to be fair, Patel and Somerville are cheaper than Santner in that sense, if needed.

I think part of that comes from where they've actually played their Tests, tbf. Ajaz has gone at well over 3rpo in his FC career; I think Santner would keep it tighter than him.

Santner becomes an attractive option for me if he's actually going to make some runs -- not batsman runs, but but expected to average high 20s -- especially since otherwise it's going to be Southee or Wagner at #8. If he's not going to make runs (and I suspect he probably won't against Australia's attack) he's arguably not even the third best option though.

 

[SteveNZ]

We pick the best attacking spinner, period. As Flem said, CDG can do the holding role and the difference between the three spinners in terms of RPO won't be that marked.

Ajaz is the incumbent, has bowled well for his country and deserves to be picked.

 

[Athlai]

Yes picking the best attacking spinner wins matches in Australia.

????

 

[Athlai]

Does anyone remember when we took Mark Craig and he went at 5 an over for 102 overs? Good times.

 

[Starfighter]

You pick the spinner who is going to do the best job, which hopefully includes both wickets and economy, and indeed economy is important in taking wickets. Anything else is just a gift for the batsmen.

 

[TheBrand]

Because of Australia pitches, I'd just be relying on top 7 with the bat rather than worrying about Santa at 8.

Personally think we should pick Patel as our spinner due to Smith's supposed weakness against SLA and think he's a more wicket taking option than Santa. Somerville should defs be in the mix for SCG though.

Would love to see Ferguson, Wagner, Boult but I imagine Perth is gonna be Southee, Wagner, Boult under lights. Maybe MCG will be Ferg's debut, he'd definitely rise to the occasion imo.

 

[Athlai]

Sometimes the best job isn't the one that takes the most wickets. Pressure can earn wickets even if it isn't for that bowler, look at Oram's late career Test bowling when we didn't have a lot going on outside of Chris Martin being alright. We in a very ugly way, became competitive by choking wickets out from other people.

Do I think Santa will win us the game? Of course not. Our spinners are almost certainly going to do miserably. It's Australia. I just think he is the least bad option. Though I wouldn't be upset if Somerville played either. Ajaz will get worked over and he will be leaking harder than a cheap faucet from Bunnings.

Lets not break a new wicket taking spinner by playing him in the spinner graveyard known as Australia.

 

[SteveNZ]

Yes picking the best attacking spinner wins matches in Australia.

????

Can do. Certainly wins more than picking a guy because he might go at .5 an over less than another guy.

Wouldn't you advocate the sort of approach to go over there and try and win Test matches, not to avoid losing them?

Why is Ajaz seen as a bad option? Why is Somerville? Both have been successful in Test cricket so far. Are we not going to back them? And both have been around long enough for us not to worry about them being broken by the experience of playing in Australia.

 

[Athlai]

Having Santner at the other end will get more wickets for Southee/Boult/Wagner/Ferguson/whoever

Thats how you win matches. Bowling partnerships, forcing batsman to not have an easy means of scoring, its Australia. Pressure is what wins matches, not plying turn from conditions.

 

[straw man]

Santner becomes an attractive option for me if he's actually going to make some runs -- not batsman runs, but but expected to average high 20s -- especially since otherwise it's going to be Southee or Wagner at #8. If he's not going to make runs (and I suspect he probably won't against Australia's attack) he's arguably not even the third best option though.

Agree that Santner isn't likely to score many runs against Aus attack - noone from number 8 down is. So it needs to be about bowling and so Somerville will get the nod.

 

[Starfighter]

Today I learned that 2.94 is less than 2.58, at least when it comes to the (first class) economy rates of New Zealand spin bowlers.

 

[SteveNZ]

Having Santner at the other end will get more wickets for Southee/Boult/Wagner/Ferguson/whoever

Thats how you win matches. Bowling partnerships, forcing batsman to not have an easy means of scoring, its Australia. Pressure is what wins matches, not plying turn from conditions.

So it starts turning at Sydney, you play a spinner who hasn't played the first two Tests because you've picked a holding bowler...how does he go? And will you criticise him? And since when is getting turn not something that gets wickets, by which wins matches?

That's not how you have to win matches, incidentally. Perth, I could see the justification to not pick a spinner. But CDG does the tight work. You may as well play four seamers - unless you need the batting, in which case play an extra batsman. Melbourne, we win the toss and bat, we're in a position to win on day 5, it's ragging...and Santner is your man to do the job? And then again in Sydney? We've done that before with later part of his career Vettori.

Your opinion, but don't agree. Nor do I think they'll do it.

 

[Athlai]

You pick the team for the game you're playing. You don't keep a spinner "warm" just incase it turns 2 games from now.

 

[Bahnz]

Having Santner at the other end will get more wickets for Southee/Boult/Wagner/Ferguson/whoever

Thats how you win matches. Bowling partnerships, forcing batsman to not have an easy means of scoring, its Australia. Pressure is what wins matches, not plying turn from conditions.

Nope. Santner will get milked for 4 rpo providing no wicket taking threat whatsoever. That's fine in ODI's (where he averages nearly 50 per wicket in the past couple of years), but it will be a total pressure valve in tests.

 

[SteveNZ]

You pick the team for the game you're playing. You don't keep a spinner "warm" just incase it turns 2 games from now.

Right, and I don't see any conditions in which that person is Santner. He won't bring anything.

 

[Athlai]

Nope. Santner will get milked for 4 rpo providing no wicket taking threat whatsoever. That's fine in ODI's (where he averages nearly 50 per wicket in the past couple of years), but it will be a total pressure valve in tests.

This didn't happen last time he bowled a Test in Australia though Mark Craig did get knocked around in the same innings. You can also count on one hand the number of innings hes gone at over 4 an over in Tests.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Why are we basing the selection of the team on what happened to Mark Craig in 2016?!