41st Match - England v New Zealand

[straw man]

Basically not possible. If Pakistan score 350 batting first they'd need to bowl Bangladesh out for 38 to advance. If Bangladesh bat first it's not even possible at all.

Not that it would be a positive for the side, but in a weird way I think Williamson getting banned would probably help the rest of the batting lineup to bat with a bit more freedom.

They might throw caution to the wind I guess, but there's already ample reason to do that as what they're doing currently is just not working.

Also on another note, I am so ****ing sick of seeing our batsmen caught down the legside.

 

[the big bambino]

England's batting has been getting the attention but its their bowling which is even more impressive. More adaptable to conditions than their batting they have so many options, the opposition is likely to face 50 solid overs without any cheapies to score some easy runs. They also have the variety in spin and pace and within both suits. If somehow Moeen comes back into form they'll be packed with options. I think opponents will have a better chance stopping their batsmen and will have to bat sensibly throughout their innings to beat England. Out of their slump now I think they're favourites to win the cup.

 

[Bahnz]

They might throw caution to the wind I guess, but there's already ample reason to do that as what they're doing currently is just not working.

Also on another note, I am so ****ing sick of seeing our batsmen caught down the legside.

Tbf in Guptill’s case it wasn’t a strangle, he just got undone by Archer’s pace and bounce.

 

[SteveNZ]

Disagree with the "no attempt to rectify it in team selections or tactics" comment.

You might not like the Hesson / Stead selections or tactics over the last two or three seasons, or you might think that the check-and-adjust process has been to slow, but IMHO there have been some plans to try and compete with Aus / Eng / Ind in 300+ run ODI games. E.g. continued selection of a high-risk high-SR opener (Munro), development of Latham into a middle order innings builder against spin, using 2 hard-hitting batting all-rounders to cover 5th bowling option, selection of a leggie alongside Santner.

I can't agree with the Munro part. And nor can I agree with the two hard-hitting batting all-rounders. I love optimism and prefer it to negativity, but the fact that Nicholls was brought in to replace Munro and Todd Astle was played throughout our summer (not a hard-hitting all-rounder) negates what you're saying. And the leggie so happens to be our second best spinner.

I think all those things you just suggested are mere coincidences. The best of what was available.

And the continued selection of Manu, again as much as I like him, I'd compare that to choosing to take an umbrella out in the rain. In the right sort of conditions, when things aren't too wild, it does a very good job. When things are really tough, it doesn't. Yet we've gone into the wet season with the same umbrella.

And even if we said they were picking teams to score 300, the approach on field doesn't mirror it. You have to be prepared to be bowled out for 100 to score 300, yet our mentality screams we need 250 plus and anything else is cream on top. You can't score 300+ when you sit on opposition opening bowlers.

 

[Bahnz]

The one positive is that we’ve got a decent break before the semi. Hopefully the squad can take a little time to reflect on the mistakes being made and go to old trafford with a slightly clearer mind.

 

[mr_mister]

Useless kiwis you had one job

 

[Bahnz]

And the continued selection of Manu, again as much as I like him, I'd compare that to choosing to take an umbrella out in the rain. In the right sort of conditions, when things aren't too wild, it does a very good job. When things are really tough, it doesn't. Yet we've gone into the wet season with the same umbrella.

To some extent I can sympathise with the selectors on the issue of Munro. It's hard to remember now, but he really looked like he'd made it in the early stages of the 17/18 season, with really good innings against India and Australia (albeit in a T20 against the later). And an in-form Munro really would've been a valuable contribution to the side, so I can understand the mindset of backing him as the runs dried up in 2018. But ultimately the selectors (like the rest of the team) seriously lacked decisiveness. The time to bin Munro was quite clearly the India series last summer - going back to him because he hacked his way to a 50 against a miserable SRL side was a ridiculous decision. It robbed Nicholls of much needed match time, and the end result was depressingly predictable.

 

[Bahnz]

My XI for the semi

KW, Guptill, Taylor, Nicholls, Latham, Neesham, CdG, Santner, Henry, Ferguson, Boult

 

[Zinzan]

Hahahaha

Come on mate, who are you kidding?

I did say “white ball cricket”, and no I’m most certainly not kidding!

How could anyone argue otherwise?

England did away with the likes of Broad In ODIs following their last WC debarkle iirc and Southee’s been worse in the last 2-3 years than Broad had been in the year or so prior to his axing.

NZ need to end the Southee whiteball chapter

 

[Burgey]

Tbf in Guptill’s case it wasn’t a strangle, he just got undone by Archer’s pace and bounce.

Yeah it was a strangle - there's no way Archer set out to bowl anything like a hip high ball down leg when he had no fielder in place to suggest there was a plan to get Guptill that way.

 

[Zinzan]

My XI for the semi

KW, Guptill, Taylor, Nicholls, Latham, Neesham, CdG, Santner, Henry, Ferguson, Boult

I was going to respond that 3 is a bit high for Taylor but tbf he’s been batting in the 1st 10 overs anyway so what’s the difference.

As I suspected Nicholls isn’t any better an option than Munro up top, but I’d be tempted to debut with Blundell as a specialist middle order bat because I think he’s mentally strong enough and he’s had success against Starc and co before.

 

[Grasshopper]

If Pakistan score 350 batting first they'd need to bowl Bangladesh out for 38 to advance. If Bangladesh bat first it's not even possible at all.

Quite a bizarre situation really. Pakistan lose the toss and they may as well just pack up and head straight to the airport.

 

[cnerd123]

Taylor and Williamson are so bad between the wickets together they get runout even when they aren't running

Credit to England for putting in two strong performances in a row when they needed it.

I think the recent trend of innings slowing down after explosive starts are down to various factors. The older ball isn't as easy to hit on these pitches, but also teams are all very top-heavy in their batting lineups, and a lot of designated hitters/finishers haven't come off as that often. I think it's fitting that all 4 semi finalists are sides who have arguably had the most effective middle orders this WC so far.

The strike rotation thing is interesting. I think sides have actually bowled very well this WC and that's part of the reason why strike rotation has been hard (and why generally we've seen lower scores than expected). Maybe the dimensions of the fields have something to do with it as well? Smaller grounds so harder to hit the gaps?

 

[The Hutt Rec]

The “random Wellington player getting called up for his first game of the tournament” gambit worked with Woodcock in the SA quarter in 2011, so might as well try it again vs Aus, I reckon.

 

[Spark]

Taylor and Williamson are so bad between the wickets together they get runout even when they aren't running

Credit to England for putting in two strong performances in a row when they needed it.

I think the recent trend of innings slowing down after explosive starts are down to various factors. The older ball isn't as easy to hit on these pitches, but also teams are all very top-heavy in their batting lineups, and a lot of designated hitters/finishers haven't come off as that often. I think it's fitting that all 4 semi finalists are sides who have arguably had the most effective middle orders this WC so far.

The strike rotation thing is interesting. I think sides have actually bowled very well this WC and that's part of the reason why strike rotation has been hard (and why generally we've seen lower scores than expected). Maybe the dimensions of the fields have something to do with it as well? Smaller grounds so harder to hit the gaps?

It's also a skill which is a little out of fashion these days tbf, because of the emphasis on raw power. Gone are the days when you regularly saw the likes of Hussey hitting 50*(30) with maybe two or three boundaries but a dozen+ twos and threes.

 

[Borges]

Useless kiwis you had one job

Their one job is to beat England the next time they meet them; in the final.

 

[cnerd123]

It's also a skill which is a little out of fashion these days tbf, because of the emphasis on raw power. Gone are the days when you regularly saw the likes of Hussey hitting 50*(30) with maybe two or three boundaries but a dozen+ twos and threes.

Yea I wanted to say that, but I'm not sure if that's really the case. Would have to dig up some stats to verify if strike rotation as a skill is down as a whole.

 

[Burgey]

Their one job is to beat England the next time they meet them; in the final.

The final of what? The Rugby WC or the next Champions Trophy?

 

[thierry henry]

I'm feeling very downcast that basically everything has gone wrong in the last 3 games, but the melodramatic negativity in this thread has forced the contrarian in me to start thinking positively lol

Let's put this in perspective- as good as the 2015 CWC was, we NEVER capitalised on it by becoming a consistent, elite ODI team. Did we really have the players to do it? Hell, we went straight over to hapless England after the CWC and let them beat us. The narrative that we have got consistently worse or fallen off a cliff is just fake news imo. Pretty much since 2015 we have always been around 3rd-5th best in the world, won more than we lost but tended to struggle against the top sides. By historical NZ standards we are and have for several years been a good side, but really we were only elite for 1 season when the stars aligned.

We knew that India, England and Australia were better than us coming into the CWC and it turns out they are the only teams above us. We knew we had to ideally win 5 straight games to make the semis, and we did. We beat the likes of WI, SA and Bangladesh who were the other contenders for a semi final spot. Yes, there is an argument that we have only been 5th best and qualified due to the rain out against India, but that depends on whether or not Pakistan would have beaten both Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in what would have been high stakes games - far from a certainty. Fact is we beat who we were supposed to beat, did what we had to do and got into an almost unassailable semi final position.

Our frontline bowling for this tournament has generally been Boult, Henry, Ferguson, Santner- basically the attack most of us have been asking for, so we should be praising the set-up for finally getting the line-up right, and the attack for doing a pretty good job.

We know there are a couple of holes we haven't been able to fill in the batting but we also know that we have Taylor, KW and Guptill. 3 world class bats and an attack that is functioning pretty well. It doesn't make us a better team than the big 3, but it certainly means it's possible we can beat them in a pair of 1-off games. How is this any different to the situation for the last 4 years? I actually feel like the CWC momentum was lost immediately after the Cup and by basically the same coach and players who got us there. Blaming the current lot seems a bit revisionist.

tl;dr we are still a decent ODI team, maybe 4th best in the world, with enough good players to spring an upset and possibly 2 upsets, especially if a bit of luck (which is a thing, and has been against us) goes our way.

......we'll probably bow out meekly in a semi-final again though, in which case we are about the same as the majority of NZ World Cup teams over the years.

Disclaimer: None of this is meant to suggest that we should just accept being 4th best in the world and not try to improve. But stepping back from it, it's not objectively a disaster.

 

[wrongun]

Taylor and Williamson are so bad between the wickets together they get runout even when they aren't running

Credit to England for putting in two strong performances in a row when they needed it.

I think the recent trend of innings slowing down after explosive starts are down to various factors. The older ball isn't as easy to hit on these pitches, but also teams are all very top-heavy in their batting lineups, and a lot of designated hitters/finishers haven't come off as that often. I think it's fitting that all 4 semi finalists are sides who have arguably had the most effective middle orders this WC so far.

The strike rotation thing is interesting. I think sides have actually bowled very well this WC and that's part of the reason why strike rotation has been hard (and why generally we've seen lower scores than expected). Maybe the dimensions of the fields have something to do with it as well? Smaller grounds so harder to hit the gaps?

Thank you for addressing the strike rotation. I feel like Batsmen are so focused on the big hits that they have forsaken just getting singles. It's one of the overlooked skills in batting.... especially when you chase huge totals. While the wickets have slowed down, I feel like one way to gain pace is to use your feet...I'm not saying it will help you tonk it all over the park but it will atleast create doubt in the bowlers mind....even with Bumrah, as excellent as he has been, I don't think he is unhittable if batsmen get innovative. Some of the batting has been top heavy, one dimensional and frustrating. Excellent post btw.