Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Anderson was definitely still better than Woakes.Really?????
I doubt he would've been more effective than Carse and Atkinson
Anderson was definitely still better than Woakes.Really?????
I doubt he would've been more effective than Carse and Atkinson
AgreeAnderson was definitely still better than Woakes.
In the 90s our selections weren't conservative at all. If anything they were reckless. Lots of players got chances.Stead's selections are conservative even by 1990s standards.
I think Stead's approach is the pendulum swinging in the opposite direction to the 90's chopping and changing that he would have observed first hand as a player in that era.Consistency of selection is admirable but when sticking with your guys actively damages the development of an entire generation of players, questions should be asked.
He often mentions being "ready to play Test cricket" is important but it is an old fashioned view. England didn't care if Bethell et al were "ready" by whatever notional standards Stead would use. They picked on tools and potential. So do other countries to a less radical extent. NZ seems to be the other extreme. Stead's selections are conservative even by 1990s standards.
Yeah, the 90's were wild. The 80's also featured Crowe debuting as a 19 yr old against Thomson and Lillee then Rutherford as a 19 year old opener in the Windies against Marshall, Garner and Holding.In the 90s our selections weren't conservative at all. If anything they were reckless. Lots of players got chances.
Germon went straight in as captain.
Most provincial openers got a chance and there were gambles on players like Greg Loveridge and Carl "Cricket Max Star" Bulfin.
Also Vettori got picked after 2-3 1st class games. Craig McMillan had probably 1 good season before debuting. Fleming captain at 23 etc.
I did mean more in the general sense of how selectors in most places would've operated in the 1990s, rather than specifically NZ, but I take your point.In the 90s our selections weren't conservative at all. If anything they were reckless. Lots of players got chances.
Germon went straight in as captain.
Most provincial openers got a chance and there were gambles on players like Greg Loveridge and Carl "Cricket Max Star" Bulfin.
Also Vettori got picked after 2-3 1st class games. Craig McMillan had probably 1 good season before debuting. Fleming captain at 23 etc.
Better to drop a guy when he’s still got something left, but when others also have lots to offer than not give those guys a chance in the first place and then find out that the old guy is past it. You have to remember that it was the Windies, bottom of the WTC with a historically weak batting lineup, I’m sure we could have called up plenty of county trundlers and they’d have done well, and likewise who’s to say Anderson would have had as much success as Carse and Atkinson have had in NZ and Pakistan (it’s easy to respond with ‘but Woakes’, but aside from this series where he’s done quite well, he’s been picked as much for his batting as his bowling)he's a selfish guy or so Ive heard online and whatnot. I think he would not have retired of his own volition until he was approaching a wheelchair. I think that is just part of his personality and he loved he attention (not knocking how good he was). I said it at the time but it completely was the right time and he stunk the place out with his attitude instead of taking it gracefully.
Contrast that to Moeen after the ashes when Stokes asked him to stay on, and he told him to swivel on it so he could enjoy his retirement on the high of the last Ashes test win.
Shame we haven't brought a spinner with a 1/4 of his ability yet though
If ever there was a time to bring in a newbie pace bowler, it was probably that series at home. He already had a few games under his belt by the time tour came. It certainly also wasn't the seamers fault for the loss in Pakistan as they fared well on pitches that were never going to help them.Better to drop a guy when he’s still got something left, but when others also have lots to offer than not give those guys a chance in the first place and then find out that the old guy is past it. You have to remember that it was the Windies, bottom of the WTC with a historically weak batting lineup, I’m sure we could have called up plenty of county trundlers and they’d have done well, and likewise who’s to say Anderson would have had as much success as Carse and Atkinson have had in NZ and Pakistan (it’s easy to respond with ‘but Woakes’, but aside from this series where he’s done quite well, he’s been picked as much for his batting as his bowling)
What a sentence....he's a selfish guy or so Ive heard online and whatnot. I think he would not have retired of his own volition until he was approaching a wheelchair. I think that is just part of his personality and he loved he attention (not knocking how good he was). I said it at the time but it completely was the right time and he stunk the place out with his attitude instead of taking it gracefully.
Contrast that to Moeen after the ashes when Stokes asked him to stay on, and he told him to swivel on it so he could enjoy his retirement on the high of the last Ashes test win.
Shame we haven't brought a spinner with a 1/4 of his ability yet though
Stead has been leaning heavily on false equivalence. The other day it was "well Southee wasn't the only one getting smashed and everyone has patches of bad form", ignoring the last two years entirely."One of the things I've said in the past is we don't select people to drop them and the last thing I want is revolving doors the whole time.”
The team's form under Stead is patchy to say the least and it can be argued that the best success they've had under him had more to do with Hesson & McCullum. They certainly weren't responsible for four straight home losses for the first time in 70 years, including one of our worst ever defeats.“I think all that happens then is players start looking over their shoulder. They play for themselves and, in a country of our size, we can't afford to do that. We've got to play very, very well as a team together."
It's a beauty....so selfish that he then took a job coaching his successors and seems to be having quite a bit of success.What a sentence....
I think that's an unfair post on Jimmy. If they didn't like the bloke they'd have not kept him on for the remainder of this year as coach.he's a selfish guy or so Ive heard online and whatnot. I think he would not have retired of his own volition until he was approaching a wheelchair. I think that is just part of his personality and he loved he attention (not knocking how good he was). I said it at the time but it completely was the right time and he stunk the place out with his attitude instead of taking it gracefully.
Contrast that to Moeen after the ashes when Stokes asked him to stay on, and he told him to swivel on it so he could enjoy his retirement on the high of the last Ashes test win.
Shame we haven't brought a spinner with a 1/4 of his ability yet though
Consistency of selection is one consideration. Absolutely, you don't want to be chopping and changing, and guys who have performed in situations like Nicholls did, and Blundell did as well deserve some level of leniency at the selection table. But nor do you want these guys to believe they can put up the odd good performance and go as long as some of our batsmen have without centuries. This might be a team game, but it's also an individual pursuit. Competition for spots and feeling like you need to justify yourself ahead of the next wave is absolutely a desirable thing. Who feels threatened for their spot in our side? I'd suggest no one in the XI from last week.Consistency of selection is admirable but when sticking with your guys actively damages the development of an entire generation of players, questions should be asked.
He often mentions being "ready to play Test cricket" is important but it is an old fashioned view. England didn't care if Bethell et al were "ready" by whatever notional standards Stead would use. They picked on tools and potential. So do other countries to a less radical extent. NZ seems to be the other extreme. Stead's selections are conservative even by 1990s standards.
Average of 5.4 overs, that is diabolical.Stuff
www.stuff.co.nz
‘The Black Caps’ opening partnership in test cricket has been performing as bad in 2024 as it has at any stage since 2007.
Captain Tom Latham, 32, has been joined by Devon Conway, 33, for nine tests and by Will Young, 32, for two. Altogether, they’ve had a total of 22 partnerships, where they have scored an average of 17.72 runs and lasted an average of 5.4 overs.
Not since 2007, when the Black Caps averaged 14.5 runs for the first wicket, with the opening pair lasting an average of five overs – albeit across just four innings – have the returns been as low as they have been this year.
Ffs, you’ve literally just played Sri Lanka!
I wonder if his aversion to 'revolving doors' is because he's still salty about not being given years to prove that he was NZ's greatest opener since Glenn Turner.Daily reminder that Gary Stead is our coach, and was a former opening bat for NZ.