-
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.
Stephen Fleming to retire from International Cricket
- Thread starter Brett Dale
- Start date
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Well, a bit of a shame, as 34 isn't that old, but many have retired at that sort of age. And it had to happen sometime, probably fairly soon.
I'll always think of Fleming as an underachiever, and I actually agree with KiWi that the number-of-centuries thing isn't a big a thing as some claim. What always annoyed me about Fleming was the number of single-figure scores he seemed to fall for - a bigger problem later on in his career than earlier. Had he made less low scores, his average would be much better.
I actually think, in the second half of his career at least, that he converted pretty damn well, both from half-centuries to "big" scores (am reluctant to give an arbitary figure of 100) and centuries to very sizeable centuries. It was just the fairly large proportion of single-figure scores that let him down. I'm hoping he can close his career with some runs at home against England, something he failed completely to do in 2001\02.
One thing that's always annoyed me most is the fact that he ever opened. His ODI career could have been lots, lots better IMO had he batted at three or four throughout, and his Test career is certainly better when you consider middle-order innings only. Opening was a waste of his talent, even if from 2002\03 onwards he did a pretty respectible job in ODIs at it.
I do think he could, had the stars aligned slightly differently, have been one of NZ's best Test and modern ODI players. He didn't, but he was still a very fine player for a long time. Undoubtedly will be missed.
I'll always think of Fleming as an underachiever, and I actually agree with KiWi that the number-of-centuries thing isn't a big a thing as some claim. What always annoyed me about Fleming was the number of single-figure scores he seemed to fall for - a bigger problem later on in his career than earlier. Had he made less low scores, his average would be much better.
I actually think, in the second half of his career at least, that he converted pretty damn well, both from half-centuries to "big" scores (am reluctant to give an arbitary figure of 100) and centuries to very sizeable centuries. It was just the fairly large proportion of single-figure scores that let him down. I'm hoping he can close his career with some runs at home against England, something he failed completely to do in 2001\02.
One thing that's always annoyed me most is the fact that he ever opened. His ODI career could have been lots, lots better IMO had he batted at three or four throughout, and his Test career is certainly better when you consider middle-order innings only. Opening was a waste of his talent, even if from 2002\03 onwards he did a pretty respectible job in ODIs at it.
I do think he could, had the stars aligned slightly differently, have been one of NZ's best Test and modern ODI players. He didn't, but he was still a very fine player for a long time. Undoubtedly will be missed.
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
he'll be a dead loss imo, not a good player.
slowfinger
International Debutant
Yes, its true! Fleming announced today I heard on Sky News !
He retires at end of test series at end of next month against England
He will be missed
Certainly brought NZ cricket back woth Shane Bond
He retires at end of test series at end of next month against England
He will be missed
Certainly brought NZ cricket back woth Shane Bond
Last edited:
slowfinger
International Debutant
Yeah with-out them two theres no NZ cricket....
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
He hasn't retired, has he? Can't find anything on him retiring...
Worst person. Deserves another ban just for this.
JBMAC
State Captain
Vincent doubts he'll play for NZ again
AAP - February 14, 2008, 5:45 pm
New Zealand batsman Lou Vincent says he doubts he will ever return to international cricket after revealing he is battling depression.
The discarded Black Cap, who is now on anti-depressants and receiving help from a clinical psychologist, said he believed he had been suffering from the illness for some time before he was diagnosed.
"For as long as I can remember I've been riddled with self-doubt, I've had no self-belief, and I've just been hating the guy I've seen in the mirror," he told NZ's Sunday Star Times.
"I remember so many days that should have been great days when I've gone home, slumped over a chair and thought `I just hate this and I hate myself'," he said.
Vincent pulled out of all cricket before Christmas last year citing exhaustion but has since returned to domestic cricket with Auckland.
New Zealand Cricket selector and former fast bowler Dion Nash said he had seen similar cases before in cricket.
"If they weren't `diagnosed', I have known a few guys who should have been, including myself at times," he told the Herald on Sunday.
Cricket is a tough game mentally and players had to stay calm, positive and in a neutral headspace, which was particularly difficult to do on overseas tours, he said.
The game often involved a player battling their own head more than the opposition and was particularly tough for players like Vincent who only had one chance to perform in each innings, Nash added.
Vincent made his Test debut with the Black Caps in 2001, scoring a century.
He played 23 Test matches and 102 one-day internationals.
His last Test was in South Africa in November last year.
armchairumpire
U19 Cricketer
I think Lou has always been an upfront sort of guy. Even though he isn't a star I've always enjoyed watching him play.
After all isn't that what it's all about - enjoyment for the spectators?
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
He hasn't retired, though.
Yeah, back to the Stephen Fleming tribute thread...
All up, I think that Fleming was a quality, aesthetically pleasing batsman, with excellent powers of concentration once he got his eye in. Sure, in the context of world cricket, he would probably be regarded as merely being good to very good (I hope he does get his average past 40 before he bows out, though), but in the context of New Zealand batsmen, he would rank as easily being one of their best. If he hadn't grown up in seam-and-swing friendly conditions, he would probably average in the early-to-mid 40's (he averages 46 overseas). As some have stated, he was also an effective player of spin (I remember him mauling Murali some years ago). While his inability to convert half-centuries to centuries is a sore point, he is a little like Brian Lara, in that he can make massive scores once he passes 100. Like many on this forum, I have no clue why he opened - indeed, he arguably underachieved in one-dayers at this position. He probably would've been better served at #3 or lower in both forms of the game, to be frank. He could occassionally, from memory, be rooted to the crease against high quality swing-and-seam bowling, which is probably his only substantial weakness.
As a captain, he was undoubtedly sublime. He was both inventive (his use of Vettori.vs.Australia in a 2003 SS game on a seemingly unsuitable pitch) and composed. Basically, he was able to turn clay, bronze and other lesser substances into gold at times. He could even conjure up seemingly miraculous captain's knocks under adverse circumstances (his 134 versus South Africa, for one). So, although a fair amount of his victories may have come against minnows, I will refrain from criticising his captaincy any further. He was a decent slipper, too - I don't recall him dropping many (unlike a certain MJ Clarke
).
I wish him, basically, the best of luck in his future endeavours. He was a fine leader and a batsman who was just about very good.
As for Brett Dale, I feel that he was a bit harsh. Much of what he says is technically correct, albeit quite misleading. With some luck too, Fleming would've won at least one test against Australia (Perth and maybe Brisbane 2001). However, he is entitled to his opinion and probably does not deserve the brickbats that have come his way from some posters. Remember...this is a discussion site, not a fan shrine or whatever. We need varying opinions, therefore, to make it interesting.
All up, I think that Fleming was a quality, aesthetically pleasing batsman, with excellent powers of concentration once he got his eye in. Sure, in the context of world cricket, he would probably be regarded as merely being good to very good (I hope he does get his average past 40 before he bows out, though), but in the context of New Zealand batsmen, he would rank as easily being one of their best. If he hadn't grown up in seam-and-swing friendly conditions, he would probably average in the early-to-mid 40's (he averages 46 overseas). As some have stated, he was also an effective player of spin (I remember him mauling Murali some years ago). While his inability to convert half-centuries to centuries is a sore point, he is a little like Brian Lara, in that he can make massive scores once he passes 100. Like many on this forum, I have no clue why he opened - indeed, he arguably underachieved in one-dayers at this position. He probably would've been better served at #3 or lower in both forms of the game, to be frank. He could occassionally, from memory, be rooted to the crease against high quality swing-and-seam bowling, which is probably his only substantial weakness.
As a captain, he was undoubtedly sublime. He was both inventive (his use of Vettori.vs.Australia in a 2003 SS game on a seemingly unsuitable pitch) and composed. Basically, he was able to turn clay, bronze and other lesser substances into gold at times. He could even conjure up seemingly miraculous captain's knocks under adverse circumstances (his 134 versus South Africa, for one). So, although a fair amount of his victories may have come against minnows, I will refrain from criticising his captaincy any further. He was a decent slipper, too - I don't recall him dropping many (unlike a certain MJ Clarke
).I wish him, basically, the best of luck in his future endeavours. He was a fine leader and a batsman who was just about very good.
As for Brett Dale, I feel that he was a bit harsh. Much of what he says is technically correct, albeit quite misleading. With some luck too, Fleming would've won at least one test against Australia (Perth and maybe Brisbane 2001). However, he is entitled to his opinion and probably does not deserve the brickbats that have come his way from some posters. Remember...this is a discussion site, not a fan shrine or whatever. We need varying opinions, therefore, to make it interesting.
Last edited:
Flem274*
123/5
Pretty good sum up for mine.Yeah, back to the Stephen Fleming tribute thread...
All up, I think that Fleming was a quality, aesthetically pleasing batsman, with excellent powers of concentration once he got his eye in. Sure, in the context of world cricket, he would probably be regarded as merely being good to very good (I hope he does get his average past 40 before he bows out, though), but in the context of New Zealand batsmen, he would rank as easily being one of their best. If he hadn't grown up in seam-and-swing friendly conditions, he would probably average in the early-to-mid 40's (he averages 46 overseas). As some have stated, he was also an effective player of spin (I remember him mauling Murali some years ago). While his inability to convert half-centuries to centuries is a sore point, he is a little like Brian Lara, in that he can make massive scores once he passes 100. Like many on this forum, I have no clue why he opened - indeed, he arguably underachieved in one-dayers at this position. He probably would've been better served at #3 or lower in both forms of the game, to be frank. He could occassionally, from memory, be rooted to the crease against high quality swing-and-seam bowling, which is probably his only substantial weakness.
As a captain, he was undoubtedly sublime. He was both inventive (his use of Vettori.vs.Australia in a 2003 SS game on a seemingly unsuitable pitch) and composed. Basically, he was able to turn clay, bronze and other lesser substances into gold at times. He could even conjure up seemingly miraculous captain's knocks under adverse circumstances (his 134 versus South Africa, for one). So, although a fair amount of his victories may have come against minnows, I will refrain from criticising his captaincy any further. He was a decent slipper, too - I don't recall him dropping many (unlike a certain MJ Clarke
I wish him, basically, the best of luck in his future endeavours. He was a fine leader and a batsman who was just about very good.
As for Brett Dale, I feel that he was a bit harsh. Much of what he says is technically correct, albeit quite misleading. With some luck too, he would've won at least one test against Australia (Perth and maybe Brisbane 2001). However, he is entitled to his opinion and probably does not deserve the brickbats that have come his way from some posters. Remember...this is a discussion site, not a fan shrine or whatever. We need varying opinions, therefore, to make it interesting.
I definitely agree he should never have opened.
The_CricketUmpire
U19 Captain
This may seem strange to a lot of you because this thread was way back in 2008. But with New Zealand's thrilling win over England in the recent Test match in New Zealand against England (by 1 run) I actually thought about Stephen Fleming.
Let's look at his stats in Test cricket:
Matches: 111
Innings: 189
Runs: 7172
Average: 40.06
50s: 46
100s: 9
Not Outs: 10
Ducks: 16
Highest Score: 274 not out
50+ Scores: 55
50+ Ratio Avg: 50+ Score every 3.43 innings
1000+ Runs in Calandar Year: 0
Most Runs in Calandar Year: 737 (2004)
Average Runs Per Calander Year: 478.13
The stats say he was a good batsman and more then serviceable for New Zealand. Currently he is part of a small group of players to score 7,000 or more Test runs in their career - to date only 55 have done it.
Did he underachieve with the bat? I reckon he did, for what reasons....I'm not sure. He scored 46 half-centuries so he knew how to score, he just didn't convert some of those half-centuries into centuries often enough. Of the players to score 7,000 or more Test runs - he has scored the least amount of centuries (9), the second least amount is Michael Atherton (16). Also he has the third lowest Test batting average (40.06) for players to score 7,000 Test runs or more, Alec Stewart (39.55) and Michael Atherton (37.70) have lower averages.
So all in all in regards to his batting - good stats but his career with the bat could of been so much more.
However Fleming as a captain, in my opinion, was very good and I have him as one of the best captains I have seen. Good decision maker, good cricket brain too.
At the end of the day - he will be known as First: Excellent captain and Second: Good batsman.
Let's look at his stats in Test cricket:
Matches: 111
Innings: 189
Runs: 7172
Average: 40.06
50s: 46
100s: 9
Not Outs: 10
Ducks: 16
Highest Score: 274 not out
50+ Scores: 55
50+ Ratio Avg: 50+ Score every 3.43 innings
1000+ Runs in Calandar Year: 0
Most Runs in Calandar Year: 737 (2004)
Average Runs Per Calander Year: 478.13
The stats say he was a good batsman and more then serviceable for New Zealand. Currently he is part of a small group of players to score 7,000 or more Test runs in their career - to date only 55 have done it.
Did he underachieve with the bat? I reckon he did, for what reasons....I'm not sure. He scored 46 half-centuries so he knew how to score, he just didn't convert some of those half-centuries into centuries often enough. Of the players to score 7,000 or more Test runs - he has scored the least amount of centuries (9), the second least amount is Michael Atherton (16). Also he has the third lowest Test batting average (40.06) for players to score 7,000 Test runs or more, Alec Stewart (39.55) and Michael Atherton (37.70) have lower averages.
So all in all in regards to his batting - good stats but his career with the bat could of been so much more.
However Fleming as a captain, in my opinion, was very good and I have him as one of the best captains I have seen. Good decision maker, good cricket brain too.
At the end of the day - he will be known as First: Excellent captain and Second: Good batsman.
Last edited:
Molehill
Cricketer Of The Year
For some reason, whenever I think of Fleming I'm reminded of this knock. It was effectively a knockout semi to decide who would face Australia in the Final of the CB Series in 2007. He scored a ton, yet was seemingly the key reason NZ failed to win. He ran out a well set Taylor then took so long to get to his ton he sucked the life out of the innings and forced those at the other end to play daft shots (very Trott like). England would somehow go on to beat the Aussies 2-0 in the Final despite not having KP and generally getting hammered by them for the previous 3 months.
www.espncricinfo.com
ENG vs NZ Cricket Scorecard, 12th Match at Brisbane, February 06, 2007
Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get England vs New Zealand 12th Match, cricket scorecard, Commonwealth Bank Series 2006/07 dated February 06, 2007.
www.espncricinfo.com
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Fleming was basically a more elegant and slightly more talented Tom Latham. Genuinely classy player in Asian conditions but struggled against both pace and swing. Remember Chaminda Vaas in particular absolute having him on toast. Similar mental issues also held him back from converting good scores into big runs. Admittedly got better and better as he aged, so his career numbers do a disservice to the player he became in the last 4 or 5 years of his career.
Flem274*
123/5
Fleming has tons in Perth, SA and England and scored good runs against the GOAT spinner. Miles ahead of Tom Latham imo, and often batted #3 or even opened through neccessity.
The Vaas thing was mostly in odis when he opened. I re,ember because Migara keeps bringing the same point up for tests so I have to start reminding him of Fleming's results.
The Vaas thing was mostly in odis when he opened. I re,ember because Migara keeps bringing the same point up for tests so I have to start reminding him of Fleming's results.
There's no doubt he underachieved. Only passed an average of 40 in his final Test - he needed something like 60, I think, got there and got out. Which perfectly encapsulated his career, two 50s and out in his final Test. So much ability but scored 46 half tons to 9 100s. Had to face some pretty outstanding attacks through that era, but when you get the consistency of starts he used to get, it was pretty apparent his mental game wasn't as good as it could b e.