NZ to tour Australia this year?

[Mingster]

If this does go ahead.

I'll be very excited about it.

The likes of Oram, Cairns, Papps, Tuffey having a VB series against Pakistan and Australia would be great.

 

[Linda]

Exactly, as much as I enjoyed the Australia/India competition this summer, without a competitive third team, alot of the matches were practically dead rubbers.

 

[Tim]

I think if NZ can beat South Africa & then do reasonably well in England in the tri-series aswell as the ICC Trophy then next years VB Series could possibly be an absolute classic.

 

[Craig]

NZ should be able to beat WI and they have done well (not last tourament) in the ICC Champs Throphey comps.

 

[Tim]

The promoters will probably be advertising around the fact that Lee, Shoaib & Bond will be playing providing they're all fit.

 

[Richard]

And to think - people will turn-up just because it's said they're all fast (said correctly, of course).
Nothing to do really with the fact that Akhtar and Bond are both superb one-day bowlers when at their best.

 

[Richard]

Partly because Caddick was injured and they dropped Hoggard.

I was surprised they even played Dawson on that wicket, I would of thought they would of gone in with an all seam line up.

Their attack: Silverwood (got injured), Tudor, Harmison, White and Dawson.

Tudor bowled a great ball to Steve Waugh, Harmison got over his home sickness in that Test and White picked up five wickets with a decent ball to Ponting.

I would of kept Hoggard for that Test as it would have suited him and played him instead of Dawson.

"Not changing their minds about dropping Hoggard" was one of the more baffling decisions I've ever seen.
For the second time, Dawson played as a specialist fielder and tail-ender.
Harmison, meanwhile, may have got over his homesickness but it still didn't make him much of a bowler.

 

[marc71178]

Nothing to do really with the fact that Akhtar and Bond are both superb one-day bowlers when at their best.

All 3 named are actually.

 

[Richard]

No, the other one only gets good figures when the batting is poor.
When it's good he gets figures like 8-70, 10-72, 10-82 and 10-84.

 

[marc71178]

So by your definition, just about every side he's ever played has been poor at batting.

Since you've also said that the standards of bowling has dropped and also fielding as well, I wonder why you bother watching what is such an awful game played by terrible players.

 

[Richard]

In the hope that it might get better.
Surely that's incredibly obvious.

 

[raju]

Since you've also said that the standards of bowling has dropped and also fielding as well, I wonder why you bother watching what is such an awful game played by terrible players.

You really think that he bothers watching any game.

 

[Tim]

Richard you would have to be one of the worst armchair critics i've seen.
How you can justify the majority of your arguments when you are relying on scorecards & the odd highlight on the news is beyond me.

 

[Blewy]

Richard seems as though he is one of those people who talks a perfect game of cricket but when he gets a bat in hand he has no idea which side to use...

How can a player with a ODI S/R of under 30 be considered not a good, or a lucky bowler???

hahaha what a joke....

 

[Richard]

You really think that he bothers watching any game.

Blimey, the sarcasm has been dropped. :wow:

 

[Richard]

Richard you would have to be one of the worst armchair critics i've seen.
How you can justify the majority of your arguments when you are relying on scorecards & the odd highlight on the news is beyond me.

I'm not.
I watch any highlights I can get my eyes on.

 

[Richard]

Richard seems as though he is one of those people who talks a perfect game of cricket but when he gets a bat in hand he has no idea which side to use...

Playing ability has nothing to do with analytical ability.

How can a player with a ODI S/R of under 30 be considered not a good, or a lucky bowler???

Because stastics and the scorebook aren't everything.

 

[Mingster]

Because stastics and the scorebook aren't everything.

But your opinion and 'your' stats are?

 

[Swervy]

Richard, why do you beleive that your ANALytical skills are that much better than everyone elses (in previous postings, you appear to say that you appear to do this better than many commentators, journos etc)...have you been trained or qualified in biomechanics,sports science or even data analysis

 

[Richard]

If we didn't believe our opinions were right why on Earth would we bother holding them?
If someone contradicts what you think, clearly you're going to think you're right and they're wrong unless they can provide something to change your opinion.