***Official***Match #21- India vs New Zealand- October 22nd-Dharamsala (D/N)

[Moss]

S. Bond made some good observations in the post match wrap up on CI, said that with India five down and NZ having to get just one more wicket to get into the tail, they pretty much gave up on getting Kohli out and focused on Jadeja - hence turning to Phillips *only* at that stage, and Lockie mainly bowling fairly harmless short balls. Beyond that, didn’t have a lot of ideas, and couldn’t create any pressure. Jadeja absorbed all of that quite easily and full credit, but NZ probably didn’t put their best foot forward when they had the opening.

Pretty much a thing with Latham’s captaincy (so too with KW at times).

 

[OverratedSanity]

And for Doull to turn around and use Kohli, who just last match did manipulate things to try to get his century rather than just finish off the match, as an example of what Mitchell should have done, is so laughably backwards that I originally interpreted it as a joke or troll comment. Bizarre.

Hahaha that part was me trolling. Apologies. Doull only criticized Mitchell.

 

[straw man]

Hahaha that part was me trolling. Apologies. Doull only criticized Mitchell.

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE

(sorry Doull)

 

[SteveNZ]

Neesham is actually a good option.

Don't think he is. He has no form to speak of, only really has the wipe to the leg side as a shot, and can't see him being any more effective with the ball than any of the part timers. He's only there as injury cover. I've been saying for years he could've been an effective death bowler but it never eventuated.

Instead, we're picking Chapman (rightly, to me) so he can offer 25 off 12 in a big moment. That should be Neesham's spot but he's never consistently or for any great length of time made too much of his ability

 

[The Hutt Rec]

If this happened (and I'm certain it did) it's peak Doull. Classic company man behaviour, sucking up to India.

I want to make it clear that I don't blame Mitchell for anything, I wouldn't use that word. But I think it is fair to say we might've certainly wanted more out of him and Phillips from their partnership, even against good bowling. It looks like there's a chance you have to set or chase 320 plus to win this thing, we should've scored that, and didn't.

He was absolutely praising India like they were the second coming whenever I was paying attention (had a few things going on during the innings!).

But anyway, I feel like Doull is just from the tabloid headline style of media. He’ll just go for the most insane take to try and get a headline or get people talking (or get people talking about him, probably the real reason!). When he actually does just commentate the game thoughtfully he’s very insightful and knowledgeable. But he just can’t help scratching that itch and going all out on some crazy theory.

 

[Moss]

Don't think he is. He has no form to speak of, only really has the wipe to the leg side as a shot, and can't see him being any more effective with the ball than any of the part timers. He's only there as injury cover. I've been saying for years he could've been an effective death bowler but it never eventuated.

Instead, we're picking Chapman (rightly, to me) so he can offer 25 off 12 in a big moment. That should be Neesham's spot but he's never consistently or for any great length of time made too much of his ability

Unfortunately with Ravindra already there as SLA 5th bowler they just won’t turn to Chapman at the bowling crease, whereas Neesham will definitely bowl if he plays (including the final over, ha ha). I do support Chapman over Neesham but it must be pretty hard being a specialist no.7 and not getting in the game apart from that, while Phillips gets overs here and there *only* because he bowls right arm fingerspin.

(More a comment on NZ’s somewhat inflexible ways of handling bowling changes than the merits of each of these options)

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

As for the Kohli, you guys are criticising him too much for basically winning that match. Henry bowled a slot ball, and that was there to be hit for six. Kohli left Jadeja(an AR) 5 to get from 14, with 4 wickets left,

 

[R!TTER]

S. Bond made some good observations in the post match wrap up on CI, said that with India five down and NZ having to get just one more wicket to get into the tail, they pretty much gave up on getting Kohli out and focused on Jadeja - hence turning to Phillips *only* at that stage, and Lockie mainly bowling fairly harmless short balls.

Conversely RGS or Gill don't throw their wickets away if this wasn't a relatively inconsequential game? This is probably the best conditions they will get for their pacers in India yet their bowling didn't do that great in the second innings with runs on the board.

I dunno but Latham doesn't look captaincy material to me, if this were a SF or the title game I see NZ losing probably even more easily, KW should come back soon even if just as a Captain.

 

[Flem274*]

This might be a do-gooder hot take from a white boi who should mind his own business but this was bugging me last night.

The commentators constant reference to Ravindra's heritage, especially the comment from one of them on how he must idolize Kohli, is a bit yuck to me. There was a bit of mild claiming going on from the Indian commentators as well.

Second gen kiwis I know in their 20s find their identity a bit of an awkward topic, especially if their parents are hot on the 'don't forget who you really are' train. I'll be blunt - that's a lot more prevalent among Asian NZ families than it is in immigrants from Western Europe. South Africa is 50/50.

I think the commentators should **** the hell off on that line of implying he's actually just Indian, especially the kiwi ones. English commentators don't go down that path on the legion of white guys from SA, NZ and Australia playing for England and their cricketing rivals only do it to blatantly wind up the English rather than stake a 'claim' on a guy. NZ commentators have never really painted Wagner, Conway, Elliott or Munro as secretly still full South African and have instead been quick to point out how they throw themselves into the NZ cause.

I'm not going to pretend to know how Ravindra (or Sodhi, Ajaz, Raval..) sees himself but while I don't think anyone meant anything by it, it's none of our business and not really on to infer someone wearing the silver fern and born in Wellington might be someone else below it.

YMMV.

 

[Moss]

Conversely RGS or Gill don't throw their wickets away if this wasn't a relatively inconsequential game? This is probably the best conditions they will get for their pacers in India yet their bowling didn't do that great in the second innings with runs on the board.

Was a mixed bag for sure. Henry will bowl as well (see:Old Trafford 2019) or worse and end up with more wickets. Beat the bat very often, and when he got hammered was more due to good calculated aggression from Rohit. Pretty influential passage of play that India won because they decided not to sit back and wait for a ball with their number on it.

Boult was not great with the new ball but came back well later on, seems to have become a recurring theme in this WC for him. Needs to bounce back soon because new ball bowling is one clear area of NZ’s strength. Should also perhaps be more selective with this around-the-wicket routine that he seems to turn to reflexively.

Ferguson was disappointing in overdoing the short ball (someone correctly pointed out it wouldn’t have the same effect on India as it did on Bangladesh). India showed how changes of pace and length was the way to go. He’s definitely capable of much better, don’t know if the brains trust just decided that banging it in short was the plan to stick to at all costs.

 

[Moss]

The commentators constant reference to Ravindra's heritage, especially the comment from one of them on how he must idolize Kohli, is a bit yuck to me. There was a bit of mild claiming going on from the Indian commentators as well.

Second gen kiwis I know in their 20s find their identity a bit of an awkward topic, especially if their parents are hot on the 'don't forget who you really are' train. I'll be blunt - that's a lot more prevalent among Asian NZ families than it is in immigrants from Western Europe. South Africa is 50/50.

On the larger point, yes this is an area where commentators should tread very carefully, but maybe the bar has been set so low that we no longer hold them accountable for things like tact. With regard to the subcontinent, identity is something that’s a relatively ‘open’ topic of discussion (eg. asking people you meet for the first time questions about their heritage isn’t necessarily considered intrusive) so can see why the Indian comms may veer that way.

On Ravindra himself, there’s a bit of a flavour of the season reaction to him in this WC IMO. Youngster-named-after-Rahul-Sachin in a team of 30-somethings scoring a century on WC debut in his country of origin etc. - there’s just no way the media won’t milk that for whatever it’s worth.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

This might be a do-gooder hot take from a white boi who should mind his own business but this was bugging me last night.

The commentators constant reference to Ravindra's heritage, especially the comment from one of them on how he must idolize Kohli, is a bit yuck to me. There was a bit of mild claiming going on from the Indian commentators as well.

Second gen kiwis I know in their 20s find their identity a bit of an awkward topic, especially if their parents are hot on the 'don't forget who you really are' train. I'll be blunt - that's a lot more prevalent among Asian NZ families than it is in immigrants from Western Europe. South Africa is 50/50.

I think the commentators should **** the hell off on that line of implying he's actually just Indian, especially the kiwi ones. English commentators don't go down that path on the legion of white guys from SA, NZ and Australia playing for England and their cricketing rivals only do it to blatantly wind up the English rather than stake a 'claim' on a guy. NZ commentators have never really painted Wagner, Conway, Elliott or Munro as secretly still full South African and have instead been quick to point out how they throw themselves into the NZ cause.

I'm not going to pretend to know how Ravindra (or Sodhi, Ajaz, Raval..) sees himself but while I don't think anyone meant anything by it, it's none of our business and not really on to infer someone wearing the silver fern and born in Wellington might be someone else below it.

YMMV.

S-tier post this one.

 

[honestbharani]

This might be a do-gooder hot take from a white boi who should mind his own business but this was bugging me last night.

The commentators constant reference to Ravindra's heritage, especially the comment from one of them on how he must idolize Kohli, is a bit yuck to me. There was a bit of mild claiming going on from the Indian commentators as well.

Second gen kiwis I know in their 20s find their identity a bit of an awkward topic, especially if their parents are hot on the 'don't forget who you really are' train. I'll be blunt - that's a lot more prevalent among Asian NZ families than it is in immigrants from Western Europe. South Africa is 50/50.

I think the commentators should **** the hell off on that line of implying he's actually just Indian, especially the kiwi ones. English commentators don't go down that path on the legion of white guys from SA, NZ and Australia playing for England and their cricketing rivals only do it to blatantly wind up the English rather than stake a 'claim' on a guy. NZ commentators have never really painted Wagner, Conway, Elliott or Munro as secretly still full South African and have instead been quick to point out how they throw themselves into the NZ cause.

I'm not going to pretend to know how Ravindra (or Sodhi, Ajaz, Raval..) sees himself but while I don't think anyone meant anything by it, it's none of our business and not really on to infer someone wearing the silver fern and born in Wellington might be someone else below it.

YMMV.

I understand your sentiment and even agree with it in general, but I am not sure this is the best place to apply it given he was literally named after two Indian legends. There is a fair chance he did, in fact, idolize some of those players.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Shouldn't he be idolizing Kohli's coach and not Kohli then?

 

[honestbharani]

Shouldn't he be idolizing Kohli's coach and not Kohli then?

Yeah, fair enough and he probably did.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

In an interview he said his two favourite players were/are Kohli and Kane.

 

[thierry henry]

Conversely RGS or Gill don't throw their wickets away if this wasn't a relatively inconsequential game? This is probably the best conditions they will get for their pacers in India yet their bowling didn't do that great in the second innings with runs on the board

I feel like some posters were watching a different opening 10 overs to me. Yes, India scored quickly and some of the shots they played looked like they were doing it easy if you only watch a highlights package, but in between the nice shots Gill in particular couldn't have been more fortunate to last as long as he did.

Like, yeah, I get that opening batsmen are allowed to play and miss, but opening bowlers are allowed to find the outside edge too. To say that the Indian openers were only going to get themselves out does not reflect what I saw with the new ball at all.

Sharma looks to be in freaky ball-striking form, but the corollary of trying to bosh every other ball he sees into the second tier is that, shock horror, he might get out. This game was no different in that respect to previous games in the tournament for him.

 

[Prince EWS]

I feel like some posters were watching a different opening 10 overs to me. Yes, India scored quickly and some of the shots they played looked like they were doing it easy if you only watch a highlights package, but in between the nice shots Gill in particular couldn't have been more fortunate to last as long as he did.

Like, yeah, I get that opening batsmen are allowed to play and miss, but opening bowlers are allowed to find the outside edge too. To say that the Indian openers were only going to get themselves out does not reflect what I saw with the new ball at all.

Sharma looks to be in freaky ball-striking form, but the corollary of trying to bosh every other ball he sees into the second tier is that, shock horror, he might get out. This game was no different in that respect to previous games in the tournament for him.

#bosh

 

[thierry henry]

On Ravindra himself, there’s a bit of a flavour of the season reaction to him in this WC IMO. Youngster-named-after-Rahul-Sachin in a team of 30-somethings scoring a century on WC debut in his country of origin etc. - there’s just no way the media won’t milk that for whatever it’s worth.

This has also been bugging me in a different way - because the NZ/Indian cricket media already did a variation on exactly the same coverage 2 years ago when Ravindra saved his debut test in India. The "what a find for NZ" and "how cool for a young player of Indian heritage to succeed in India" angles were already covered.

I get that he hadn't previously shown his prowess as an attacking batsman at international level but it legitimately feels like they've forgotten he's already been there. I guess I expect too much.

 

[thierry henry]

Re: Ferguson, prior to this WC from what I'd seen his speeds had still been good despite him being ineffective. However, most of the short balls I've seen him bowling here have been like 135-138kph? The quickest stuff I've seen from him has been low 140s.

Ironically, while still being expensive, he's actually started taking wickets again though. Do we reckon his rhythm is off, does he have more up his sleeve, or is this all that 32 year old Lockie can muster now?