England in New Zealand 28 Nov-18 Dec 2024 - 3 Tests

[RMBolton]

Young has been tried as an opener. He averages 22. He's a number 4. Maybe a number 3 if you're pushing it. He's not an opener. Swapping Latham with Young and Blundell with Latham just means you've got a worse opener and worse keeper.

I will never understand it personally.

If you drop Blundell, Young isn't coming in. You cannot have a part-timey keeper in Tests unless you're really desperate (as England is this Test). There is certainly no excuse at home. If you drop Blundell, you are calling up any one of Hay, Chu or Cleaver, depending on what you want. That's just reality.
Also, putting Young at the top is just a waste. Surely we've learned this lesson by now.

 

[Bahnz]

Just flicked through the wickets on TNT, looked to me like the vast majority (if not all) were gifted really. From what I saw in the first session, the pitch had a little bit of life in (standard for first hour) but looked pretty good for batting. So are NZ significantly under par? Did England bowl poorly but got lucky? Didn't really look like there was anything in it for the spinner either, but how did he pick up 4?

I'd say there's more than a little bit of life in the pitch. Plenty of seam movement on offer, even later in the day. Having said that, the surface is relatively slow, quite a few edges ended up falling short of the slips, and anything short just sat-up and screamed hit me. England bowled short pus, and NZ cruised to 200/3 and then threw up all over themselves to completely cede the advantage. Would say it's about 50:50 at the end of day 1.

 

[Chin Music]

Why is Potts not playing instead of Woakes?

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Why is Potts not playing instead of Woakes?

Quite.

Woakes looked innocuous today. No shock given his record away.

Carse looks good. Reminds me of Wagner. Not the best in team but totally committed trier who makes things happen.

 

[Molehill]

I'd say there's more than a little bit of life in the pitch. Plenty of seam movement on offer, even later in the day. Having said that, the surface is relatively slow, quite a few edges ended up falling short of the slips, and anything short just sat-up and screamed hit me. England bowled short pus, and NZ cruised to 200/3 and then threw up all over themselves to completely cede the advantage. Would say it's about 50:50 at the end of day 1.

I thought it was ironic that the player having the most issues early on (Williamson) would go on to top score. It didn't strike me that England were bowling well, never found the right length, yet the pitch looks like it's got a big score in it for someone, and no one has done it yet.

The question will be which England batting unit turns up, the one that folds meekly for 200, or the one that bludgeons its way to 600, coz either looks possible on this pitch.

 

[chris.hinton]

Didn't see much of it. But WE ARE BACK ;-)

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Didn't see much of it. But WE ARE BACK ;-)

Come back tomorrow. Definitely a need to see both sides bat before any prediction. Those of us at the game today are undecided if 250 or 400 is a good score...

 

[Molehill]

Come back tomorrow. Definitely a need to see both sides bat before any prediction. Those of us at the game today are undecided if 250 or 400 is a good score...

It probably will be 400 by the time England have completed their usual inept effort of dealing with a tail.

 

[_Ed_]

It probably will be 400 by the time England have completed their usual inept effort of dealing with a tail.

O'Rourke averages 2.33 in tests and 8 in FC (with a highest score of 17), so I suspect it'll end fairly quickly once the ninth wicket falls.

 

[Bahnz]

O'Rourke can stick around though, he's no Martin in that respect. Just can't seem to get it off the square.

 

[Bahnz]

I don't agree with the first paragraph but wholeheartedly do with the 2nd. Phillips is clearly a better batsman than Blundell now and probably always will be. So he needs to bat above him, to maximise his output. Fairly simple.

Mind you, I do also agree we gifted wickets and a bog average spinner taking 4 for at Hagley after being inserted is poor.

Yeah, Phillips will always find ugly ways to get out, but he's immensely talented, and doesn't have any obvious weaknesses save his propensity to play spin off the back foot regardless of length.

Speaking of ugly dismissals: Rachin, yeesh. As phenomenally talented as he is (and I honestly think he's the most gifted Nz bat I've ever seen) I don't see him ever being a 50+ average bat. Just not ruthless enough. More likely to end up in the Taylor/Chandimal category.

 

[danzydab]

Blundell has to score this series vs his favorite opposition.
Otherwise Mitch Hay is knocking the door.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

I didn't watch but it's terrible all those fielding mistakes/umpiring errors/terrible luck that must have kept Woakes from taking 5.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Anyway. If anyone there tomorrow I'll be in same place as today, basically in front of the wags to the side of pavilion. I'll be wearing a retro Salop top that looks like a rugby shirt.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

I didn't watch but it's terrible all those fielding mistakes/umpiring errors/terrible luck that must have kept Woakes from taking 5.

Bowling like a tit did actually...

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Bowling like a tit did actually...

From what I'm reading it seems that quality of bowling had little correlation with wicket taking so far.

 

[King Kane]

You guys are pretty harsh on Woakes, he has been an absolute workhorse for England and he can be a matchwinner too, when he is bowling in England.

 

[ImpatientLime]

You guys are pretty harsh on Woakes, he has been an absolute workhorse for England and he can be a matchwinner too, when he is bowling in England.

he maybe the biggest HTB of all time. i can' think of anyone with such an insanely distorted home v away record. he is a better bowler in england than anderson and broad. away from home, i reckon 75% of eligible english seamers in county cricket would put up better numbers.

 

[Molehill]

From what I'm reading it seems that quality of bowling had little correlation with wicket taking so far.

To be fair, Woakes gave Williamson a bit of a working over with the new ball, but edges kept on falling short of the slips. Given that hardly any of the wickets fell to decent deliveries (Latham probably got a good one), you needed to be a bit luckier, and Woakes clearly never is on foreign soil.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah Woakes was legitimately probably the best bowler in the first session, or at worst equal best with Carse. Subsequent spells weren't as good though.