*Official* Australia tour of New Zealand Feb-Mar 2024

[Spark]

I know what you are getting at, but there's no such thing as a flawless wicketkeeper...its all about who will make the least mistakes over 5 long days, who is the best at taking a ground ball fired in from the fence for a runout, who keeps best to Lyon, who sets the slips best, etc etc etc. Carey has already proven terrific picking when to go to DRS...an underrated talent these days. When he says go upstairs they do it. It all adds up.
The English team is NOW much better with Foakes in it. They should have woken up to their stupidity of a shoddy keeper very early during the Ashes. It cost them dearly.
Batting form is fleeting. If you pick the 3rd best keeper that is in decent batting form, what are you left with when that new guys form inevitably drops off ? Now you are playing your 3rd best gloveman costing matches giving you nothing with the bat....a roundabout of guys getting dropped.

Carey has played 30 tests and proven so far a very good gloveman. No, i dont see him as "great" but that type of term usually comes with time and a win/loss ratio. To me he's definitely worth persisting with in tests. I watched Ian Healy miss chances but some people forget he was human too. Healy was top class. His 25-32 (???) avge was enough at 7 for me. Lucky for Aust a freak then came along.
Carey is excellent to Lyon, as Healy was to Warne. It takes time to make a name for yourself though.
I'd rate Foakes the #1 with Carey a close #2 in the world right now based purely on gloves. I would not drop either after a recent run of outs with the bat. The poms need to replace Bairstow to take advantage of Foakes with a better middle order bat.... but Bairstow is mates with coach and captain. They are dumber than hammered **** and we like it that way.

As if 150 years of evidence wasnt enough for some, 2023 once again showed why you must always pick your best glove man, not a lesser guy with a slightly better batting average. 10 runs is NEVER worth a drop catch or missed runout/stumping. A good glove man makes you those 10 runs in saved sundries alone.
A stable number 7 is a vital ingredient to why Australia wins so many test matches. I dont want to fk with that.

The thing is though, we've had this discussion many times over the last few years. People defended Tim Paine on the basis that he was a world class wicketkeeper (he wasn't) and that made up for the fact he had two, count 'em, two, FC hundreds. Then he was gone, albeit for non-performance related reasons (frankly he should never have gotten the gig in the first place but that's neither here nor there), and then we picked Carey, who apparently was the worse keeper, but the better batsman, and guess what? He proved, at least for a few years, to be a significant upgrade.

But the way he has batted in the last years has obviated that. Selection accountability alone demands that there be pressure on his place after the sort of shots he's played to get out lately when the team has needed him to stand up. It could easily be that Inglis is just as capable a gloveman as Carey in the conditions; we don't know. There's no grounds for assuming we'd be taking a Bairstow level risk when these are established full time keepers for their state teams.

 

[Spark]

And to reiterate, it's really not about numbers. It's about the way he's batting. If he was averaging 30-odd - as he is now - but hanging around for 50 or 60 balls an innings and putting a really high price on his wicket in each and every innings and hanging around with the top order batsmen or scrounging out valuable runs with the bowlers, I would actually be perfectly satisfied. This is actually what people think about when they think about the valuable keeper batsman who still averages low 30s. But instead he's panning it straight to one of six million short cover fieldsmen and **** like that when the team really needs him to hang around. That is unacceptable and the sort of performance that should see consequences at selection times.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

I see in the post game analysis, Southee has defended the SP's performance - blaming the wind for his slower-than-expected speed. Odd that Cummins and Starc both managed to get over 140km/h with regularity AND that it was barely blowing a wind at all on day 1. That's is the most pathetic excuse I've heard in a long time.

Also hasn't ruled out Wagner (!) getting the call-up to replace O'Rourke. Sounds like they have no intention of looking for an alternative option.

 

[Spikey]

yeah **** tim paine

 

[Spikey]

im sorry what are we discussing

 

[Starfighter]

Oh for sure, I was weighing in on the ideological chat it moved to.

No idea how good Inglis is, but if he's competent with the gloves then he's worth a run.

Inglis was arguably level with Carey with the gloves several years ago but Carey is now comfortably ahead. If anything Inglis has gotten worse, I wouldn't say he's any better than Bairstow, he's appalling to spin. Should be in the T20 side as he's got plenty of strokes (if not good judgement) and a good strike rate, probably the One Day side but I wouldn't be comfortable with him as test keeper.

It doesn't help that he's been in the white ball squads but his FC batting hasn't come on at all. Pierson is now ahead on average and is a much better keeper, though somehow Pierson's batting doesn't have the 'vibe' of transferring to internationals.

 

[trundler]

Maybe Bancroft should open and keep.

It's a horribly taxing double role but no one wants to he fair to Bancroft.

Do this and play Hardie at 7.

 

[anonymouskefe]

I see in the post game analysis, Southee has defended the SP's performance - blaming the wind for his slower-than-expected speed. Odd that Cummins and Starc both managed to get over 140km/h with regularity AND that it was barely blowing a wind at all on day 1. That's is the most pathetic excuse I've heard in a long time.

Also hasn't ruled out Wagner (!) getting the call-up to replace O'Rourke. Sounds like they have no intention of looking for an alternative option.

even saw O’Rourke clocked at 145.5

 

[ataraxia]

And to reiterate, it's really not about numbers. It's about the way he's batting. If he was averaging 30-odd - as he is now - but hanging around for 50 or 60 balls an innings and putting a really high price on his wicket in each and every innings and hanging around with the top order batsmen or scrounging out valuable runs with the bowlers, I would actually be perfectly satisfied. This is actually what people think about when they think about the valuable keeper batsman who still averages low 30s. But instead he's panning it straight to one of six million short cover fieldsmen and **** like that when the team really needs him to hang around. That is unacceptable and the sort of performance that should see consequences at selection times.

It is funny how Carey and Foakes average exactly the same but one feels mediocre and the other quite impactful. We place a high expectation on what the aggressive keeper-bat should average, I think because often their scores are wanker runs.

 

[East Bay Ray]

The thing is though, we've had this discussion many times over the last few years. People defended Tim Paine on the basis that he was a world class wicketkeeper (he wasn't) and that made up for the fact he had two, count 'em, two, FC hundreds. Then he was gone, albeit for non-performance related reasons (frankly he should never have gotten the gig in the first place but that's neither here nor there), and then we picked Carey, who apparently was the worse keeper, but the better batsman, and guess what? He proved, at least for a few years, to be a significant upgrade.

But the way he has batted in the last years has obviated that. Selection accountability alone demands that there be pressure on his place after the sort of shots he's played to get out lately when the team has needed him to stand up. It could easily be that Inglis is just as capable a gloveman as Carey in the conditions; we don't know. There's no grounds for assuming we'd be taking a Bairstow level risk when these are established full time keepers for their state teams.

Sure, i;ve had the exact same convo many times as well. It is always an important discussion, but really should arise when his form with the gloves is down...drops a couple during a test or fails to get the bails off. Having the discussion everytime a guy batting 7 with a 30 average is down a bit on batting form is a recipe for an eternal roundabout of selections.
Put it this way....
Marnus is in the team for ONE thing only. If he doesnt make runs. then i'm perfectly fine with him dropped on form.
Carey is also in the team for ONE thing only....plus for BONUS runs. In particular PARTNERSHIP runs with (hopefuly) a middle order batsman. I know this to be true because if his glove work wasn't up to scratch he'd be dropped very very fast....so when he's a bit out of form with the bat he gets a hall pass from me coz he is still performing well in his role. White ball cricket is a different matter altogether.
If a batsman like Smith/Marnus/Head drifts out of form we tend to give them a fair bit of time. That is the normal way for Aust. Stability.....so if a keeper is performing well with the gloves i'm never going to throw him to the dogs just because his batting avge is down a tad recently.

2 Fifties and a 38 in his last 7 digs sounds better than most top and middle order English bats.

I'm not even close to seeing any issue with Carey's spot.

 

[Spark]

In particular PARTNERSHIP runs with (hopefuly) a middle order batsman

This is the root of my complaint though! He's not doing that. Instead he's getting out in really stupid ways 50% of the time, being technically exposed most of the rest of the time and occasionally whacking his way to an okay-ish score. The team needs more from him than that. If nothing else, he needs to be able to hang around.

 

[The_CricketUmpire]

You know what also costs us matches? Batting collapses when manageable situations where 2 or 3 wickets falling for 20 runs suddenly turns into 5 or 6 wickets falling for 50 runs. Given the last year of cricket I certainly know which one of those problems is more of a concern for the team right now.

How do you even know Inglis is that bad behind the stumps anyway? I certainly haven't seen anything to suggest Matthew Wade or Bairstow levels of ineptitude there. We're not splitting hairs between a guy averaging 32 or 35, the guy is batting like a #8 or #9 right now - and one of the mindless slogger types at that - and it's causing huge problems for the team. We have absolutely no stability in the lower middle order and it's one of the biggest reasons we're starting to be collapse-happy again.



Like I said I don't think Carey is in Healy's class as a keeper anyway. He's good but not that good and it doesn't excuse - even more than his results - his total lack of application and game sense at the crease. The two shots he played in this game to get out are totally unacceptable. Better players have lost their spots for less.

I agree

 

[straw man]

After a thorough review, the takeaway points for NZ are:
- Don't pick Kuggeleijn. Just don't.
- Try not to have two consecutive terrible panicky brainless sessions where you lose the match.

 

[East Bay Ray]

Inglis was arguably level with Carey with the gloves several years ago but Carey is now comfortably ahead. If anything Inglis has gotten worse, I wouldn't say he's any better than Bairstow, he's appalling to spin. Should be in the T20 side as he's got plenty of strokes (if not good judgement) and a good strike rate, probably the One Day side but I wouldn't be comfortable with him as test keeper.

It doesn't help that he's been in the white ball squads but his FC batting hasn't come on at all. Pierson is now ahead on average and is a much better keeper, though somehow Pierson's batting doesn't have the 'vibe' of transferring to internationals.

Yepp. 100%
If you want to drop a w/keeper based purely on very recent batting form, you really do need to have a replacement you believe will do a better job.

 

[anonymouskefe]

Starting think Conway was a bigger loss than I first thought could see him scoring runs against that attack as he’s genuinely world class couldn’t see young doubt much. Hopefully he’s a chance for hagley

 

[morgieb]

Tim Southee is an AI confirmed.

But yeah, add a few "obviously"s and that'll be it

It's staggering that he's still captain when he arguably shouldn't even be in the team. At a minimum Henry, O'Rourke and (yeah I know he's injured but....) Jamieson are better bowlers, and that's before considering some of the ones on the outside looking in like Sears and Smith. And then you've got spinners to worry about on turning decks....

And it would matter less if he was, y'know, actually a good leader. But he's not.

 

[East Bay Ray]

This is the root of my complaint though! He's not doing that. Instead he's getting out in really stupid ways 50% of the time, being technically exposed most of the rest of the time and occasionally whacking his way to an okay-ish score. The team needs more from him than that. If nothing else, he needs to be able to hang around.

Sure. I agree in part. Its just i reckon you're way too harsh.
2 fifties and a 38 in 7 innings from your Number 7, who has hardly put a foot wrong with the gloves....and you feel strongly about replacing him with somebody/anybody that hasn't shown himself to be any better ?? Just a hunch someone else might do a better job ? or you just feel like giving someone else a crack at it ?

Agree that the entire top and middle order seem to be playing some dumb shots lately...and yepp, more from Carey would be nice.

 

[SteveNZ]

After a thorough review, the takeaway points for NZ are:
- Don't pick Kuggeleijn. Just don't.
- Try not to have two consecutive terrible panicky brainless sessions where you lose the match.

Yep, with you on the first. I won't hold my breath, however.

And have plans for each bowler, as to how we're going to deny them wickets. We don't even need to score at 4s, just occupy the crease, make them work hard and force them to find other ways to dismiss us. Mitchell did that (if you ignore the reverse sweeps to Lyon), and got through that tough period, but anyone else refused to today. Between here and Hagley, some semblance of a plan to combat Lyon, to wear down Cummins, how to battle through any short ball barrage would be a step forward.

 

[SteveNZ]

And it would matter less if he was, y'know, actually a good leader. But he's not.

And he never was going to be. Never shown any leadership potential, benefitted from being Baz's mate for a long time. The inconsistencies across his career show that he's not a leader, not a guy to follow into the trenches. He's not intelligent. Not well spoken. His batting approach sucks. Great bowler for big periods in his career, but not a captain's A-hole.

It's hard to see where the next captain is going to come from. Latham is flat out making the team, right now. Mitchell, maybe - would that bring a more hardened approach? Let his dad coach, too - can't be worse than the mug in charge

 

[East Bay Ray]

And have plans for each bowler, as to how we're going to deny them wickets. We don't even need to score at 4s, just occupy the crease, make them work hard and force them to find other ways to dismiss us. Mitchell did that (if you ignore the reverse sweeps to Lyon), and got through that tough period, but anyone else refused to today. Between here and Hagley, some semblance of a plan to combat Lyon, to wear down Cummins, how to battle through any short ball barrage would be a step forward.

I nearly spat my coffee this morning when i saw Mitchell ( i think) try to reverse sweep a very full ball off the stumps from just his 2nd or 3rd ball out there...on a deck that he knows is bouncy and taking spin.
I think it was Mitchell (??) Either way...WTF ??? There was even a guy down at deep third man just waiting for it....IFFFF he did actually get plenty of it.