***Official New Zealand in India Nov-Dec 2021 Thread***

[hendrix]

So your point is that there should never be substitute fielders allowed ever? Otherwise, you don't have one.

That is my point, yes. I don't think substitute fielders should be allowed, and particularly not specialists like wicketkeepers. If someone is on the field for 5 overs at fine leg, whatever.

The new laws allow for a huge amount of pisstaking though.

 

[hendrix]

I think we have a chance but it involves our clueless captain actually understanding that bowling our two best bowlers in tandem is actually an option on this track.

lol we had the same problems with Williamson's captaincy. Frustrating as hell.

 

[Flem274*]

Jadeja has lost his meme powers. We need Axar to do an axar or else you'll walk this,

Ok Guatam

 

[hendrix]

Jadeja has lost his meme powers. We need Axar to do an axar or else you'll walk this,

Jadeja is definitely a lesser bowler than what I remember.

Makes it all the more frustrating that he wasn't targeted in NZ's first innings.

 

[hendrix]

It doesnt really make sense though. Saha is a great keeper and a Bharath is seen as a better batsman at the moment. If India really wanted to game the system they're doing a **** job of it and giving NZ an advantage.

I just don't think it should be allowed in general.

The whole point of selecting a test XI is that you have to balance between the specialist skills of bowling, batting and fielding. Allrounders are useful. Keepers who can bat are now also extremely common.

I think the new sub fielder rules risk really taking away from that fundamental aspect.

 

[honestbharani]

That is my point, yes. I don't think substitute fielders should be allowed, and particularly not specialists like wicketkeepers. If someone is on the field for 5 overs at fine leg, whatever.

The new laws allow for a huge amount of pisstaking though.

Fair enough, I dont agree with that coz I feel it ends up creating 10 V 11 situations but if that is your view, at least you are consistent.

 

[honestbharani]

Jadeja has not been the same bowler since the finger injury and surgery. But most times bowlers seem to find 80-90% of their mojo quickly post injury but that extra 10%, usually what makes them that much more successful, takes a bit more time. Usually takes at least an year, so will reserve judgement on his bowling till then. But at the moment, he is very much a fifth bowler/ sixth batsman and we should expect contributions accordingly, i.e, more with the bat than with the ball.

 

[hendrix]

Fair enough, I dont agree with that coz I feel it ends up creating 10 V 11 situations but if that is your view, at least you are consistent.

I find it interesting when a team suffers an injury and have to go through the adversity of e.g. using a part time keeper, being a bowler short etc etc. It's part of the difficulties of a 5 day test.

Not to mention that fitness is also part of a 5 day test and hence why it's a major risk to select someone who's not 100% fit. Maintaining that is important to test cricket IMO.

 

[hendrix]

For actual concussions then I am in support of substitutions.

There's a big difference between a traumatic brain injury and a regular sporting injury like a pulled hamstring or whatever. For a start, you can't really train or be fit enough to prevent concussions (well you could do some crazy Mike Tyson neck strengthening exercises but YMMV), and also there's long term serious consequences to repeat concussion whereas the consequences of regular sporting injuries are not as debilitating.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Yeah part of what makes test cricket unique is that you need to be able to do things continuously for 5 days, including battling through injuries.

 

[Burgey]

NZ should send Southee in next with a licence to go a bit silly. If he could jag a quick 30 odd it will make India have a bit of a think about things for a while.

Plus it would be funny.

 

[hendrix]

NZ should send Southee in next with a licence to go a bit silly. If he could jag a quick 30 odd it will make India have a bit of a think about things for a while.

Plus it would be funny.

Reckon if it comes down to it, Jamieson with his long levers might be useful

 

[Flem274*]

NZ should send Southee in next with a licence to go a bit silly. If he could jag a quick 30 odd it will make India have a bit of a think about things for a while.

Plus it would be funny.

Thought this too. Would go further and send in Jamieson after. Dont give them a look at a specialist batsman for ages.

 

[honestbharani]

I find it interesting when a team suffers an injury and have to go through the adversity of e.g. using a part time keeper, being a bowler short etc etc. It's part of the difficulties of a 5 day test.

Not to mention that fitness is also part of a 5 day test and hence why it's a major risk to select someone who's not 100% fit. Maintaining that is important to test cricket IMO.

Yeah but if the injury happens during the game, it is not always a question of fitness or selection. Which is the case here. I think the rules are fine as they are. They are the same for all sides too.

I am actually on the other side of this coz I would allow full injury substitutions not just concussion and covid subs. You got neutral doctors there anyways to adjudicate on the concussions, why not use them to certify the actual injury and let the player be subbed. Coz while it seems great for guys to play with injuries or whatever, we have seen guys get seriously injured on the cricket field and asking someone who is not quite fit in the first place to face up to all that seems needless. The worry is the abuse of such rules and if you have ICC appointed neutral doctors to adjudicate I dont see this being a problem.

 

[hendrix]

Yeah but if the injury happens during the game, it is not always a question of fitness or selection. Which is the case here. I think the rules are fine as they are. They are the same for all sides too.

Yeah but that should just be a case of **** happens. "Injuries" is too nebulous term to just automatically allow substitutions for it.

The Saha injury is "stiff neck".

Well ****, I get that walking down the street on a summer's day.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah but that should just be a case of **** happens. "Injuries" is too nebulous term to just automatically allow substitutions for it.

The Saha injury is "stiff neck".

Well ****, I get that walking down the street on a summer's day.

Nah sprained neck is not the same as stiff neck, I think. And again, there maybe rules on the levels of injury if you want to get down to that level but as far as being fair goes, that can be managed with a neutral doctor being part of the match staff IMO.

 

[Flem274*]

Sprained neck sounds terrifying tbh. I wouldnt be thrilled playing with that injury. Far scarier than a broken arm or whatever.

 

[Athlai]

Gentle reminder that Kurt Angle won an Olympic Gold medal with a broken freaking neck

 

[honestbharani]

Sprained neck sounds terrifying tbh. I wouldnt be thrilled playing with that injury. Far scarier than a broken arm or whatever.

 

[TheBrand]

That's the first mention of a sprained neck by anyone I've heard. Source? I've only heard the commentators and cricinfo refer to a "stiff neck".