Final – India v New Zealand – Sunday, March 9 – Dubai

[Bahnz]

I imagine most people agree. That was an ultra conservative selection that is typical of Stead. We could have also played 2 seamers, with the spin options + Chapman/Mitchell bowling cutters. I wouldn't have minded three seamers if they were KJ/O'Rourke/Henry, but when it's Smith who has proven to be cannon fodder on hard decks, India would have wanted Smith to play. But obviously steady as she goes Gary thought Smith's ability to hold a bat was worth investing in.

India had the advantage and we did nothing to negate that by picking Smith, who was unlikely to contribute anything.

Yeah, hard to argue with in hindsight. Of course it would've taken some massive balls to expect both Rachin and GP to bowl 8-10 overs (with the filler being bowled by Mitchell/Chapman). Stead would've been absolutely pilloried if he'd gone that route and one or both of the part-timers had ended up going the distance. What we really needed was another spin-bowling allrounder (Foxcroft?) in the squad - but having said that, we had to pick a squad for our games in Pakistan as well, where pitches have offered a lot less for the spinners and made 3 quicks a bit more of a necessity. Real pity that Henry and Ferguson were unavailable.

 

[straw man]

This tournament has really shown how badly we missed Bracewell at last year's world cup. His absence quite possibly cost NZ a top 3 finish in the group phase and a more winnable semi-final.

Shouldn't say 'coming of age' for a 33 year old, but this was the performance of his life given the stage and the pressure of the situation when he came to the crease. Exactly the type of batting you want to see from a number 7.

 

[Skyliner]

 

[Mike5181]

Shouldn't say 'coming of age' for a 33 year old, but this was the performance of his life given the stage and the pressure of the situation when he came to the crease. Exactly the type of batting you want to see from a number 7.

53 (40) + 2/28 off 10 against India in a final is something no one would've picked from him a few years ago.

I wonder who's played their last ODI now? Latham, Conway potentially.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Reckon Henry might pack it in as well.

 

[Bahnz]

View attachment 45929

While I hate the framing, I'm glad the public is proud of the BC's efforts.

 

[Bahnz]

Reckon Henry might pack it in as well.

Hope not, he shouldn't be too old for the next WC, and SA will offer him favourable conditions, but yeah wouldn't suprise me.

 

[Skyliner]

When you stare into the abyss….

 

[jcas0167]

Yeah, hard to argue with in hindsight. Of course it would've taken some massive balls to expect both Rachin and GP to bowl 8-10 overs (with the filler being bowled by Mitchell/Chapman). Stead would've been absolutely pilloried if he'd gone that route and one or both of the part-timers had ended up going the distance. What we really needed was another spin-bowling allrounder (Foxcroft?) in the squad - but having said that, we had to pick a squad for our games in Pakistan as well, where pitches have offered a lot less for the spinners and made 3 quicks a bit more of a necessity. Real pity that Henry and Ferguson were unavailable.

Chapman has seemingly giving away bowling (doesn't seem to have bowled in recent times in domestic cricket either). Not sure whether that was due to injury or form (Mitchell hardly bowls now either).

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

*tied in the Super Over

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

All the graphic tells me is that we should be bowling first.

 

[James]

Yeah, hard to argue with in hindsight. Of course it would've taken some massive balls to expect both Rachin and GP to bowl 8-10 overs (with the filler being bowled by Mitchell/Chapman). Stead would've been absolutely pilloried if he'd gone that route and one or both of the part-timers had ended up going the distance. What we really needed was another spin-bowling allrounder (Foxcroft?) in the squad - but having said that, we had to pick a squad for our games in Pakistan as well, where pitches have offered a lot less for the spinners and made 3 quicks a bit more of a necessity. Real pity that Henry and Ferguson were unavailable.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing of course, but a left-field selection in Ajaz would have been interesting to see. As I've said in these threads before, I wish we'd taken him over on stand-by for Henry given we knew how the Dubai pitch was going to play.

Ajaz in for O'Rourke and Conway in for Smith would have been my play.

 

[ataraxia]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing of course, but a left-field selection in Ajaz would have been interesting to see. As I've said in these threads before, I wish we'd taken him over on stand-by for Henry given we knew how the Dubai pitch was going to play.

Ajaz in for O'Rourke and Conway in for Smith would have been my play.

I agree that we should've CD's premier spinner in the squad and I pointed that out at the time. However, that's Lennox, not Ajaz, who not only is a 36yo with a crap List A record but also is injured.

 

[Bahnz]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing of course, but a left-field selection in Ajaz would have been interesting to see. As I've said in these threads before, I wish we'd taken him over on stand-by for Henry given we knew how the Dubai pitch was going to play.

Ajaz in for O'Rourke and Conway in for Smith would have been my play.

Yeah, that would've been a better XI no doubt. Again though, very hard to pick Ajaz in the squad knowing that he's probably only going to be playing in the event we end up playing on a surface that we know is going to rag ahead of time.

 

[James]

I agree that we should've CD's premier spinner in the squad and I pointed that out at the time. However, that's Lennox, not Ajaz, who not only is a 36yo with a crap List A record but also is injured.

Might not have a best List A record yes, but he has form against India as we know, and it's not like he's bowling on Dubai type wickets every week.

 

[Sunil1z]

NZ fans are slightly overanalysing. We would have lost this match if not for Varun Chakravarthy . The thing with mystery bowlers like Varun/Mendis /Malinga is that it takes atleast 5-10 ODIs to get used to their action .
Without Varun,NZ are definitely scoring 280 which would be very difficult total to chase in a final .
Will give credit to Gambhir for keeping Varun only for SENA teams .

 

[ataraxia]

Yeah, that would've been a better XI no doubt. Again though, very hard to pick Ajaz in the squad knowing that he's probably only going to be playing in the event we end up playing on a surface that we know is going to rag ahead of time.

Picking 5 pacers was also overkill though tbh. Even if two of them are injured, the pacers only ended up bowling 20–25 overs a game anyway.

 

[Arachnödouche2.0]

NZ fans are slightly overanalysing.

No! They'd never!

 

[Skyliner]

I guess top level sport is often about fine margins so you are always going to think about how you could have gained that crucial edge over the opposition. You have your available squad resources and you have to make the best of them. So when you think about poor old Smith's contribution to the match and it amounted to a couple of overs of bowling that got carted, that's a potential change right there.

Then there's Will Young and his contributions as a 'super sub'. Psychologically it's a good role for him. Come in with no pressure to try to hold down a spot, just get out there and just do your best on a fill in basis. As soon as you make him a permanent fixture he's back to worrying about keeping his spot again, and mulling over a string of failures.

 

[CricAddict]

One big advantage that India had was that they could plan their squad based on Dubai conditions and pack the squad with spinners. If NZ knew they would qualify for the final and face India in Dubai, they may have taken Ish Sodhi instead of say Nathan Smith or Duffy in their squad. All other teams had to plan their squad for two different conditions while India had to plan for only one.