• 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* New Zealand vs Pakistan 2022/23

Flem274*

123/5
Also I'm not sold on the declaration but oh well.

Please don't lose. We don't deserve to unless they bazball us (very possible on this deck).
 

jcas0167

International Debutant
Not really, if there was it would of been pretty short sighted.
His keeping and batting form before that series had been fairly underwhelming and there was discussion (here at least) of Fletcher or Cleaver getting a chance. Although, it probably wasn't realistic given the selectors tend to give players a long run if they rate them.
 

Flem274*

123/5
Yes Simon Doull 3-4 overs batting tonight may be awkward. On the other hand if they do get through unscathed as they should, I can see them winning by 6-7 wickets tomorrow. Pakistan can't believe their luck, I'm sure. Late Xmas present imo.
Arguably as dumb as the Babar declaration last game. No demons in the deck and you can roll along once in. Our declaration batting showed you can hit if you choose.
 

straw man

Hall of Fame Member
He's a budget Ravindra imo so if we wanted to pursue the spin bowling allrounder thing with a player who isn't the finished article...he was there. He looked bad in one innings tho so got biffed for a 31 year old project who often looks bad.

I don't mind the idea to make a spin bowling allrounder, but they picked the wrong dude. It's done now, and he's quietly having a very reasonable series so far.
I don't know what to do with Rachin now - I've always been very much in the camp that he needs to be an opener who bowls part-time spin, but now there's no space at the top of the order. So if Rachin does his part and goes on a run-scoring spree, I guess he would have to slot in down the order.
 

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
Yes Simon Doull 3-4 overs batting tonight may be awkward. On the other hand if they do get through unscathed as they should, I can see them winning by 6-7 wickets tomorrow. Pakistan can't believe their luck, I'm sure. Late Xmas present imo.
Neither can I tbh. Dropped a hundred on Pakistan when they were paying $9 at lunch on day 1. Was sure it was going down the gurgler. Thanks Timmy.
 

The Hutt Rec

International Vice-Captain
he's quietly having a very reasonable series so far.
I have to disagree, he's scored 82 runs at 27 (he is meant to be a batsman so not really a pass there, plus the start of the 74 today was shocking).

Bowling is 4 wickets at 60.3. I know they've been roads but a spinner should do better than that in Pakistan.
 

Flem274*

123/5
We really need them to yeet it. If you bat normally as a team then you can last a very long time even if individual balls misbehave.
 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Arguably as dumb as the Babar declaration last game. No demons in the deck and you can roll along once in. Our declaration batting showed you can hit if you choose.
Right, and does the pitch really seem any different to when Henry and Patel were making it look easy? And we likely won't get a Babar wicket gifted to us this time around. I don't think the RRR will bother them either.
 

Frost

U19 Debutant
His keeping and batting form before that series had been fairly underwhelming and there was discussion (here at least) of Fletcher or Cleaver getting a chance. Although, it probably wasn't realistic given the selectors tend to give players a long run if they rate them.
His keeping was OK, by some standards anyway. I'd take a underwhelming class player over a unproven domestic guy especially in tests.
Wonder what Kane thinks of the declaration
 

Top