*Official* England in New Zealand 2019

[The Hutt Rec]

True, it seems weird to carry Blundell as the sole back up batsman on so many tours, and then when an injury happens, go back to Rutherford.

 

[NZTailender]

Sounds like the England side for the first test is all but decided except for the last bowling spot.

Woakes v SCurran - hardly a great choice at least bowling wise.

Neither looks like taking wickets away from home - and they have the records to back it up.

Woakes was ineffective in his only test in NZ. Granted a small sample size but I remember him looking decidedly average.

When you consider his overseas average is 38 runs worse than his home average, I'd give the gig to Curran.

 

[NZTailender]

True, it seems weird to carry Blundell as the sole back up batsman on so many tours, and then when an injury happens, go back to Rutherford.

It's unfathomable. The only explanation I can think of is Rutherford is a left hander.

 

[Immenso]

It's unfathomable. The only explanation I can think of is Rutherford is a left hander.

I think the explanation was a mix of cost-cutting ./ sqaud size. Plus they were sub-continental tours.

 

[Immenso]

On the next-in-line discussion. If it was a short term injury. I'd be OK with Rutherford being the opener replacement. I don't think he'd be a raging success, I'd expect no more than a streaky averaging 20ish sort of run. While his test record is poor, his NZ A and (NZ XI) record is fantastic. He is trapped in the purgatory of being too good for domestics, good enough for NZ A, but not test class. If it was a long term injury, like a 6 month plus cruciate type of thing, then Seiffert would be my opener

If we're talking a Raval loss of form, then I'd probably just persist with an out-of-sorts Raval (like we gave Rutherford and Fulton plenty of rope) with the liklihood that Ravindra is in a position to success when Raval's rope runs out (2 years). Ravindra hasn't even got a FC ton yet, though, so let's not get ahead of ourselves. Otherwise Seiffert if Ravindra still not ready.

Seiffert and Will Young are in the middle order Taylor replacement play-off. Seiffert also my current injury replacement for anywhere from 3 to 6 while WIll Young is out.

Phillips needs to score runs at NZ A level before I'd consider him. He should get 3 upcoming opportunities this summer to do this. His NZ A FC record is poor (His NZ A List A record is good).

Seiffert could IMO make a good fist of it anywhere from 1 to 7, depending on where he settles and specialises. Impressed with him after his initial poor start to senior career.

I would never, ever move Nicholls. Wouldn't want to jinx it.

 

[Blain]

Rutherford better not play for KW.. We all know he has a flawed game, has been tried, failed, he's seriously inconsistent still at domestic cricket.

Give some youth a chance. Blundell has been back up so much seems to play little cricket. I guess he deserves first crack. He seems to scores hundreds relatively often, and a lot of failures in between. Seifert is being turned into a T20 player by NZC, he won't be there. Ravindra is too fresh. Tom Bruce has a good FC record, but I think he's seen as only a white ball cricketer..

 

[NZTailender]

I think the explanation was a mix of cost-cutting ./ sqaud size. Plus they were sub-continental tours.

I meant for this tour.

For the T20 game in SL I didn't have a problem with it. Rutherford is a decent T20 player.

 

[nzfan]

If Rutherford's name has been dropped by stuff likely he will get a call in. No doubt someone must have leaked that out.

Otherwise they will play Tom Blundell I'm quite sure given he's carried drinks for nearly a year now.

I don't think Seifert is being seen as a red ball cricketer yet. I think they seriously think Ravindra is going to arrive. If you ask me, I think both his batting and bowling is good enough for international cricket. It's possible if part timers weren't bowling he could have likely had 4 or 5 first class 100s? He came close many times from memory. I also dig up whom he got out to and I see a line up of part timers that have got him since NZ A in UAE. He hasn't had a lot of experience but there are some talents that don't necessarily have to prove much before they are picked up. Happens all the time in sub continent and now in England as well. The performances have to be weighed in relative to pitches, bowlers etc. Sometimes lesser bowlers end up getting good batsmen rather than otherwise. Put them against the best and they perform. If they are consistently selecting Ravindra for NZ A, it's natural they rate him. I don't think they will worry about his stats. For now of course they are not going to play him but after this summer, I am quite sure he will play from next season.

All I'm hoping for is Kane to play, it's been a while since I saw him get a big one in test cricket. Just want to watch him bat against the best attacks.

 

[jcas0167]

Seifert is playing as a batsman for NZ A in the warm-up game against England. His hundred opening the batting for ND against Canterbury a few weeks ago would have boosted his red-ball stocks too. The selectors may be reluctant to bring in a debutant against Archer & co, but if he fires in the NZA game who knows?

 

[straw man]

Seifert didn't have a great FC season last season - 259 runs at 32 - which surely counts against him. Mixed bag in NZ A matches too, though that's true for every next-in-line batsman bar Young which is exactly our problem. It's good that Seifert's started this season well for ND and is batting at 3 or opening.

Phillips scored 610 runs at 75 in PS which is , usually batting 4, though like Seifert he failed in NZ A tours. Think he's seen as fairly loose so batting at 3 v England would require him to ride his luck.
Would be happy with Phillips or Blundell or another middle order batsman slotting in lower if we were talking moving Taylor from 5 years ago up to bat at 3, though that's less likely to work these days. Nicholls would be as well equipped as anyone to do it, though we're potentially sacrificing a lot of runs at 5 that he's been earning, so the substitute at 5 would need to excel.

Rutherford is probably a tad better than Worker and Brownlie (who seems to have declined a bit) but yeah, think he's only moderately improved on the problems that plagued his game in 2013-2015. Other Aaron Redmond/Peter Fulton type picks are Hay or Murdoch, but I think we're not so short of youth talent that we should be looking at them.

Basically we need Williamson to stay fit and Young to hurry up and return to FC cricket, because every other option is a thumb suck - when does Young return?

But if you put pressure on me to pick one for the first England test, I think I'd take a punt on Phillips.

 

[Flem274*]

Hay is the best possible reserve opener, especially for covering a short term issue. He would also be my choice for a kane injury cover at 3. Nicholls aint a 3

 

[straw man]

Nicholls is pretty tight these days, until he gets overconfident and tries punching through the offside with hands out in front of his body (which does genuinely earn him runs though also goes wrong sometimes). In the entire country I reckon he would be the single most likely guy to score test runs at 3 after Williamson.

That doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea though, as he's also good at scoring centuries at 5.

 

[Immenso]

Seifert didn't have a great FC season last season - 259 runs at 32 - which surely counts against him. Mixed bag in NZ A matches too, though that's true for every next-in-line batsman bar Young which is exactly our problem. It's good that Seifert's started this season well for ND and is batting at 3 or opening.

Phillips scored 610 runs at 75 in PS which is , usually batting 4, though like Seifert he failed in NZ A tours. Think he's seen as fairly loose so batting at 3 v England would require him to ride his luck.
Would be happy with Phillips or Blundell or another middle order batsman slotting in lower if we were talking moving Taylor from 5 years ago up to bat at 3, though that's less likely to work these days. Nicholls would be as well equipped as anyone to do it, though we're potentially sacrificing a lot of runs at 5 that he's been earning, so the substitute at 5 would need to excel.

Rutherford is probably a tad better than Worker and Brownlie (who seems to have declined a bit) but yeah, think he's only moderately improved on the problems that plagued his game in 2013-2015. Other Aaron Redmond/Peter Fulton type picks are Hay or Murdoch, but I think we're not so short of youth talent that we should be looking at them.

Basically we need Williamson to be stay fit and Young to hurry up and return to FC cricket, because every other option is a thumb suck - when does that happen?

But if you put pressure on me to pick one for the first England test, I think I'd take a punt on Phillips.

Woah, what's this about Seifert being failed in NZ A tours?

I started to take Seiffert seriously after his A tour to India. Head, shoulders and shoulders again the best player on that tour.

 

[straw man]

iirc was the least bad batsman on that NZ A tour, which is not the same as 'good'. Didn't perform in the more recent NZ A tour of UAE. Could probably look up more figures but not right now.

 

[Immenso]

iirc was the least bad batsman on that NZ A tour, which is not the same as 'good'. Didn't perform in the more recent NZ A tour of UAE. Could probably look up more figures but not right now.

His record for ND and NZ A is pretty identical. Averages 35 for NZ A and 39 for ND.

His tour of the UAE was one match; 26 and a duck.

Maybe your mixing List A games in your memory.

 

[nzfan]

I think the selectors must have already locked in the team, aren't they announcing the team tomorrow? So the 3 day game is fairly inconsequential other than providing England with some good practice. I'd have gone the Aussie way, don't give them good teams to play against. Just give them a team like the last one. We still have more than decent cricketers at first class level. If this game is not being used for selection then we have made a mistake providing England with a very good team to play against.

 

[NZTailender]

I think the selectors must have already locked in the team, aren't they announcing the team tomorrow? So the 3 day game is fairly inconsequential other than providing England with some good practice. I'd have gone the Aussie way, don't give them good teams to play against. Just give them a team like the last one. We still have more than decent cricketers at first class level. If this game is not being used for selection then we have made a mistake providing England with a very good team to play against.

I mean, yeah, but I think our fringe players are sorely lacking in international exposure. They mostly play against each other in Plunket Shield, only a few players get county gigs (usually ex-internationals anyway).

 

[straw man]

His record for ND and NZ A is pretty identical. Averages 35 for NZ A and 39 for ND.

His tour of the UAE was one match; 26 and a duck.

Maybe your mixing List A games in your memory.

That NZ A tour of India he scored 35*, 14, 44*, 9 in the four-dayers - numbers that are ok but it's not like it was big runs.

He's clearly a good prospect who is young, adaptable, can biff runs in T20, can reign it in up the order in NZ in FC (one-dayers not so much) and has shown a few promising signs against spin overseas... but he needs to do that for longer and more to be the slam dunk next top order batsman backup.

 

[straw man]

I think the selectors must have already locked in the team, aren't they announcing the team tomorrow? So the 3 day game is fairly inconsequential other than providing England with some good practice. I'd have gone the Aussie way, don't give them good teams to play against. Just give them a team like the last one. We still have more than decent cricketers at first class level. If this game is not being used for selection then we have made a mistake providing England with a very good team to play against.

One good reason not to do this is the below:

I mean, yeah, but I think our fringe players are sorely lacking in international exposure. They mostly play against each other in Plunket Shield, only a few players get county gigs (usually ex-internationals anyway).

… and the second is that it's a weak thing to do.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Seifert didn't have a great FC season last season - 259 runs at 32 - which surely counts against him. Mixed bag in NZ A matches too, though that's true for every next-in-line batsman bar Young which is exactly our problem. It's good that Seifert's started this season well for ND and is batting at 3 or opening.

Phillips scored 610 runs at 75 in PS which is , usually batting 4, though like Seifert he failed in NZ A tours. Think he's seen as fairly loose so batting at 3 v England would require him to ride his luck.
Would be happy with Phillips or Blundell or another middle order batsman slotting in lower if we were talking moving Taylor from 5 years ago up to bat at 3, though that's less likely to work these days. Nicholls would be as well equipped as anyone to do it, though we're potentially sacrificing a lot of runs at 5 that he's been earning, so the substitute at 5 would need to excel.

Rutherford is probably a tad better than Worker and Brownlie (who seems to have declined a bit) but yeah, think he's only moderately improved on the problems that plagued his game in 2013-2015. Other Aaron Redmond/Peter Fulton type picks are Hay or Murdoch, but I think we're not so short of youth talent that we should be looking at them.

Basically we need Williamson to stay fit and Young to hurry up and return to FC cricket, because every other option is a thumb suck - when does Young return?

But if you put pressure on me to pick one for the first England test, I think I'd take a punt on Phillips.

Lol if it’s Worker then I quit