India v Sri Lanka

[Rik]

I beg to differ .... First of all NZ lost to Sri Lanka in their opening match by quite a margin where the lanken batsman has no worries in dealing with NZ bowlers (except maybe Bond).

NZ bowling has nothing major to write home about .. even Canada and Bangladesh scored almost 200 against them. Where NZ has improved is in their new aggressive batting through Fleming, Styris, Astle, Cairns. India seems to be the more balenced team of the two.

Not surprising that you begged to differ...my post was commenting on my opinion on yours...

 

[anzac]

IMO SL screwed up at the toss & should have batted - their bowling strength is slow / spin & they should have backed their bowlers to exploit the slower conditions to frustrate the Indian batsmen.

A problem with flamboyant batting attacks is they can lack the discipline required for a large run chase & self destruct (as SL did), which is why the NZ effort v Canada was impressive.

India's performance was impressive & their bowling attack has looked so much better with Srinath back in the side - I think he has given the other seamers (Nehra) the leadership / example they lacked earlier in the NZ tour.

It will be a good game v NZ with plenty of scores to be settled. NZ have only lost v SL & that was primarily as a result of misreading the pitch & the subsequent selection & tactical errors - this is not likely to happen again.

Since that match NZ has defeated WI & SA quite easily, which IMO are better results than India's victories over ENG & PAK, (WI had defeated India in ODI series on batting tracks & SA had humbled both PAK & SL, whereas ENG had been dominated by AUS).

NZ are still the equal of AUS in the fielding stakes & India will not have the same luxury as they did v SL.

I don't think India can get much better than where they are at now - the bowlers are doing well but are unlikely to get any better, whereas NZ have yet to hit their straps and put a complete performance together - but they are improving with every match.

The AUS v NZ match today will be a good indicator as to what form NZ are in, & IMO Fleming's Captaincy is another factor in NZ's favour & one that the opposition need to factor into their gameplan/s to combat.

 

[Tim]

Well thats true anzac.

If you look at the NZ bowlers..Bond averages 23, Adams 25, Oram 28 & Mills 22. Thats not an average bowling attack.
And you'd have to say that none of them apart from Oram have had any form so far in this World Cup, so form for some of those bowlers is surely around the corner.

 

[Tim]

I forgot Tuffey who averages 28 aswell..but he's not in the equation for the rest of this tournament I believe.
And then theres Cairns who averages 31, probably a bit higher than he should have achieved.

And then even Paul Hitchcock was left out of the squad & he has a bowling average of 22.

So to say that NZ bowling attack these days is ordinary is rather laughable considering some of the others around.

 

[full_length]

A problem with flamboyant batting attacks is they can lack the discipline required for a large run chase & self destruct (as SL did), which is why the NZ effort v Canada was impressive.

India's performance was impressive & their bowling attack has looked so much better with Srinath back in the side - I think he has given the other seamers (Nehra) the leadership / example they lacked earlier in the NZ tour.

It will be a good game v NZ with plenty of scores to be settled. NZ have only lost v SL & that was primarily as a result of misreading the pitch & the subsequent selection & tactical errors - this is not likely to happen again.

Since that match NZ has defeated WI & SA quite easily, which IMO are better results than India's victories over ENG & PAK, (WI had defeated India in ODI series on batting tracks & SA had humbled both PAK & SL, whereas ENG had been dominated by AUS).

NZ are still the equal of AUS in the fielding stakes & India will not have the same luxury as they did v SL.

I don't think India can get much better than where they are at now - the bowlers are doing well but are unlikely to get any better, whereas NZ have yet to hit their straps and put a complete performance together - but they are improving with every match.

The AUS v NZ match today will be a good indicator as to what form NZ are in, & IMO Fleming's Captaincy is another factor in NZ's favour & one that the opposition need to factor into their gameplan/s to combat.

Both teams have plenty to prove due to the last series.

The match is just a few days away. I'm waiting for it eagerly. India have lots to play for though we're already in the semifinals. I wish though that it was a do or die match for us as well. Then I'd back India to well and truly trounce NZ. Even now, I expect us to beat the kiwis convincingly.

As for NZ's result against SA and WI being better than INdia's results against Pak and England, that's hogwash
India beat the teams they played, and so did NZ. Further NZ didnt play England or Pakistan. I could claim NZ lost to Pak quite convincingly in Pakistan, and are more or less even with England and so our 'results are better'. But it's bs.
:rolleyes:

 

[full_length]

"I forgot Tuffey who averages 28 aswell..but he's not in the equation for the rest of this tournament I believe.
:"

Perhaps because he isnt playing in NZ. His ODI averages away and neutral are 56 and 43 respectively.

Hitchcock has played only 8 matches.

Cairns is a proven bowler.
Bond and Oram seem to be pretty good too, especially Bond.

Vettori is nothing special either.

So yes, NZ have a competent bowling attack- but not anywhere as good as you seem to suggest.

 

[Rik]

Vettori is nothing special either.

No only the best orthodox finger spinner in the world...:rolleyes:

He doesn't take a lot of wickets in ODIs but he's very good at keeping the runs down.

 

[anzac]

that's streatching it a bit.......

I was referring to the merits of the wins in this WC when compared to the lead in form of the opposition. WI & SA were 2 'form' sides (esp as SA were at Home & NZ had not previously won a ODI in SA), whereas ENG & PAK did not have the same 'form' coming into the WC.

Your arguement is hardly applicable to bring up the ENG & PAK series from 12 months ago. But I will be magnanimous & allow you to do so if you wish, to which my reply would be NZ comprehensively beat India in the most recent Test & ODI series 2-0 & 5-2 respectively. Current 'head to head' tends to favour NZ.

As I said - todays match V Aus will be a better indication.

:P

 

[full_length]

Your arguement is hardly applicable to bring up the ENG & PAK series from 12 months ago. But I will be magnanimous & allow you to do so if you wish, to which my reply would be NZ comprehensively beat India in the most recent Test & ODI series 2-0 & 5-2 respectively. Current 'head to head' tends to favour NZ.

Now that would atleast be an arguement. What you said earlier was crap. India just played England, Pakistan, Zimbabwe and SL beat all these teams soundly, and were thrashed by Australia. NZ played and beat SA and WI and lost to SL.
It's a ridiculous arguement to say that NZ's results were better than India's because WI beat India :rolleyes:
How about SL beat NZ and we thrashed SL?

Head to head comparisons make more sense.


I noticed your pathetic dig at the subcontinent pitches on the other thread.
You dont have a leg to stand on given the recent series where we managed to defend a total of 99.
That's why I am watching out for this match with keen interest to see if you are half the side outside those shockers that we played on in NZ.

 

[full_length]

"No only the best orthodox finger spinner in the world..."

How about the best six foot bespectacled Kiwi under 25 orthodox finger spinner in the world :rolleyes:

He's not an effective bowler IMO. I have seen him quite a few times, and at best he can only keep runs down.

 

[anzac]

last post was in reply to FL.....

& yes I agree with Rik re Vettori - not as flamboyant or an attacking weapon as others, but that is not his function in the side.

Tactics - something NZ are better at than most, whereas India (amongst others) seem to rely upon brilliant individual performances.

Direct comparison time...

Batting - NZ = 7, India = 9
Bowling - NZ = 7, India = 5
Fielding - NZ = 8, India = 6
Captaincy - NZ = 9, India = 6
Tactics - NZ = 8, India = 6
Pressure - NZ = 8, India = 5

If the World Class individuals in the Indian side are not allowed to produce the goods - they get beaten.

:P

 

[full_length]

OK I am not going to bother with this one.
You keep clutching at straws with half arguements. First the great bowlers, then the comments on how you can improve but India cannot, then the pitches (drop in kiwi pitches..maybe you'll win), and now tactics and some silly arbitrary points comparison :rolleyes:

 

[full_length]

As for Vettori, his role is what? to save runs? and why's that?

Unlike you I didnt call anyone crap, and not Vettori either.
He's definitely ordinary. He is saving runs because he's not penetrative enough to pick wickets, not because NZ has an attacking bowler at the other end.

 

[anzac]

Now that would atleast be an arguement. What you said earlier was crap. India just played England, Pakistan, Zimbabwe and SL beat all these teams soundly, and were thrashed by Australia. NZ played and beat SA and WI and lost to SL.
It's a ridiculous arguement to say that NZ's results were better than India's because WI beat India :rolleyes:
How about SL beat NZ and we thrashed SL?

Head to head comparisons make more sense.


I noticed your pathetic dig at the subcontinent pitches on the other thread.
You dont have a leg to stand on given the recent series where we managed to defend a total of 99.
That's why I am watching out for this match with keen interest to see if you are half the side outside those shockers that we played on in NZ.

I've already said NZ got it wrong going into the SL match - if they had known the pitches were going to be so different batting 2nd they would have selected slower bowlers to take the pace off & batted first. Similarly Hitchcock possibly would have been selected in the squad ahead of the likes of Tuffey.

The subsequent NZ wins v WI & SA were everybit as easy as India's v ENG & PAK - just not as flamboyant. You just don't want to accept that SA & WI were in better 'form' coming into the WC than ENG or PAK. IMO the Indian loss to AUS was more comprehensive than the NZ loss to SL.

So far as the SL loss to India I've also said that IMO SL got it wrong, just as NZ did against SL.

So far as the recent NZ pitches are concerned yes they were not up to standard, but no less so than some of the crap served up in past tours to the sub continent - a taste of your own back perhaps????

Funnily enough if you look at the Test ratings on the Home page NZ has a better rating Away than at Home. Yes I know we are now in ODI but it gives some indication as to the character of this NZ team - and what's India's Away record like - 20+ years?????

 

[Tim]

well lets not go & get all high & mighty. We can resume this conversation after NZ plays India on Friday.

 

[anzac]

yeah - sorry......a bit off topic there

just enjoying a little game of 'point - counter point' :saint:

 

[krkode]

Why is the Kiwi bowling considered so much better than the Indian bowling?

ok, compared to Australia or Pakistan the Indian bowling might do little good, but compared to NZ, personally, I think the Indian bowling is better.

Srinath, Khan, Nehra make a better bunch than Bond, Tuffey and Adams/Oram, i think.
In fact, I wouldn't hesitate to say Srinath is better than any Kiwi bowler currently on the team. :wow:

I sorta agree with your fielding and captaincy ratings, anzac, but I have no idea how you judge these:

Tactics - NZ = 8, India = 6
Pressure - NZ = 8, India = 5

 

[krkode]

I think England was in quite good form, indeed. If it wasn't for their forfeit against Zimbabwe, they would have a very high chance of being where Zimbabwe is right now.

And personally, I think, the way it is right now, a partially in form Pakistani side is as good as a little-more-in-form West Indian side.
Pakistan depend a lot on Anwar, the windies depend a lot on Lara. Pakistan atleast have the likes of Akram and Waqar and Akhtar. The windie pace department isn't so special, but Vasbert Drakes has been quite a find.

 

[masterblaster]

Im just really glad that India have peaked at the right time, they're showing unity within themselves, and each player knows his role, and what they should be doing. And everyone now is performing consistently (barring Dinesh Mongia and Kaif).

Their fielding looked really good, their bowling is getting better and better, and Sachin is on fire. So things are looking good.

 

[marc71178]

I was referring to the merits of the wins in this WC when compared to the lead in form of the opposition.

But you said England had been thrashed by Australia when they played India?

When they played India, they'd a 100% record, and they showed against Australia that their not that bad a side.

India's win over England did owe something to the conditions, but they still exploited them superbly, and outplayed a side that was (and still is IMO) in good form.