New Zealand Off Season 2014

[Bahnz]

I understand where you're coming from, but even if Boult has a succesful career and takes 300+ wickets at 29/30 apiece (which is roughly what I expect of him), I'd still take Bond ahead of him, just because he offers something that no other New Zealand bowler in history has - raw pace. For that reason his place in my ATG side is pretty much unshakeable (unless Adam Milne comes good and averages sub-28 in test cricket). Cowie's place is a bit more vulnerable to Boult, but I was swayed by this brilliant piece to include him in my side

Cricket Web - Features: The Auckland Bull

 

[Mike5181]

I only subscribe to the longevity argument against a player when I think there's still a question mark over his ability. I never had such issues with Bond. The guy wasn't a fraud. It was sad to see him play as few test matches as he did, but almost every international the guy played, he looked like a genuine great. I've never seen a New Zealand bowler come close to that level of skill/talent, or have that same aura of greatness. I also think the difference between him and someone like Martin Donnelly is that Bond still played well over twice as many test matches, and had an ATG ODI career too. I know people don't like bringing other formats into it, but Bond legitimately destroyed the greatest ODI team of all-time numerous times. There's plenty of footage available on Youtube etc of his performances, unlike some of the earlier players like Donnelly/Cowie, so I think his legacy will remain intact as the years go by. I struggle to see any current NZ bowler surpassing him, although I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong.

 

[Dan]

Dempster
Sutcliffe
Williamson *
Taylor
Crowe
McCullum +
Cairns
Vettori
Hadlee
Southee
Bond

 

[Bahnz]

I also think the difference between him and someone like Martin Donnelly is that Bond still played well over twice as many test matches, and had an ATG ODI career too. I know people don't like bringing other formats into it, but Bond legitimately destroyed the greatest ODI team of all-time numerous times.

Yeah, this. A lot of Bond's top ODI performances would've ripped apart batting line-ups in test cricket as well, especially his two 6-wicket hauls against Australia and India. While it shouldn't be taken as definitive proof of his brilliance, it does help to show that his performances during his 18 tests weren't a flash in the pan.

 

[Bahnz]

Dempster
Sutcliffe
Williamson *
Taylor
Crowe
McCullum +
Cairns
Vettori
Hadlee
Southee
Bond

What would Hesson's ATG XI be?

 

[Dan]

What would Hesson's ATG XI be?

McCullum as captain, no Taylor or Watling, Ronchi 'keeping.

 

[Bahnz]

McCullum as captain, no Taylor or Watling, Ronchi 'keeping.

Not even to open?

 

[Flem274*]

I think he was superb, and I include him in my eleven and would never call him a fraud, but I do question myself if it would be right to include him despite the gaps in his record and his injury prone nature ahead of someone who gave New Zealand excellent service over a longer period of time.

I think he would fend off a 28/29 average bowler in the eyes of most people, but say Boult continues his recent 25/26 career average for his career (or anyone really), then it gets interesting.

Plus there is an argument for penalising him because of his injuries. Unlike Cowie he had plenty of opportunities to play lots of tests, but his body let him down, the poor bugger.

Bond walks into the ODI team at a leisurely stroll and still will in 50 years.

 

[Flem274*]

McCullum as captain, no Taylor or Watling, Ronchi 'keeping.

Not even to open?

Devcich opens

 

[hendrix]

Your record is the best indicator of what you're likely to do in the next match. It's not a predictor, but it becomes more and more accurate the more you play.

I have no doubt that Bond was a better bowler than Boult. He doesn't need a more comprehensive record for me to predict that he'd perform better than Boult.

 

[Athlai]

Your record is the best indicator of what you're likely to do in the next match. It's not a predictor, but it becomes more and more accurate the more you play.

I have no doubt that Bond was a better bowler than Boult. He doesn't need a more comprehensive record for me to predict that he'd perform better than Boult.

To get an "accurate" record of Bond you'd also need to include all the Tests that we played during his career. He might be the better bowler on the occassion he is fit to play but if he is only fit 40% of the time, that matters.

 

[Mike5181]

That whole ICL thing was an annoying part of Bond's career. He lost a year and a half from memory.

 

[Flem274*]

Your record is the best indicator of what you're likely to do in the next match. It's not a predictor, but it becomes more and more accurate the more you play.

I have no doubt that Bond was a better bowler than Boult. He doesn't need a more comprehensive record for me to predict that he'd perform better than Boult.

That's the thing though. If you approach it from a longevity means more perspective (and whenever I'm feeling brave enough to open the ATG threads it is a common one) then Bond falls down. If Boult finishes with 80 tests to his name and his record is impressive, you would be more confident in him bowling to his record than the 18 test Bond. Trent Boult is 24 years old and has already played more tests than Shane Bond played in almost a decade. Barring absolute disaster he will pass Bond's wicket tally in this series.

I'm in no doubt Bond is a better bowler than what Boult has shown so far. That's no slight on Boult since a left armer who can swing the ball miles both ways at 140kph is someone any NZ side wants. Both bowlers automatically walk into any team NZ has ever fielded. However, in ten years there should be some good chat between those who want to pick the best or most talented and skilled players and those who judge based on who had the better career, because barring a catastrophic decline Boult will have a better test career than Bond and will hopefully go down in history as one half of a world class bowling combination.

 

[Bahnz]

That whole ICL thing was an annoying part of Bond's career. He lost a year and a half from memory.

Yeah, but there were rumours circulating that he was considering retiring from test cricket even before he signed up to the ICL. I reckon he wouldn't have played many more tests if he'd been available during that period.

 

[Athlai]

Yeah, but there were rumours circulating that he was considering retiring from test cricket even before he signed up to the ICL. I reckon he wouldn't have played many more tests if he'd been available during that period.

Considering he played a Test after all of that I think you're wrong.

 

[Hurricane]

aWTA with athlai - the interviews I saw with him - talk about the lengths he went to secure assurances from NZC he could still play internationally.

 

[Flem274*]

i think his book is on my shelf, and it has the answer.

i cbf checking though.

 

[Hurricane]

i think his book is on my shelf, and it has the answer.

i cbf checking though.

Also when was the last time you did your yearly analysis for us. You compare the blackcaps batsman's FC averages against their test averages. May be worth doing at the end of this series. Neesham will b off the scale obvs. But would be interesting to look at how peeps like Corey Anderson have faired.

 

[Kippax]

 

[ohnoitsyou]

WASP!

You would never pick that someone who's better to watch than a Mark Waugh or Lara would be so mind boggingly stupid