RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Dark, but lol
NZC's Moral DilemmaWeakening the team while also potentially creating a PR problem by selecting a guy who is on the nose doesn’t seem like the smartest move
I was going to include this in my previous post but erred on the side of attacking a straw man because Stead responded to a comment about selecting Kuggleijn with:NZC's Moral Dilemma
The moral cost of selecting someone who doesn't have a central contract for a Test match (note that they're still happy to select Boult for T20s and ODIs) is apparently higher than selecting someone who admits not to know what 'no' means.
Can't help but feel by not making the SOS call he was making a moral decision, considering neither of the replacements are centrally contracted. Duffy, sure, he can be considered a potential player in some ways, but Kuggleijn has moved into that Rutherford/Broom part of his career where he's only getting a call as a fall back on a seasoned player, rather than someone who has a genuine chance of winning a contract in the next round.That's not my job, I guess, to do that," he responded when asked of the moral issues around the matter.
I was wondering about whether “contracted players only” is a blanket selection policy so thanks for clarifyingOn one hand, being contracted means something and foregoing that contract means you don't get the same advantages of being a sure thing for selection.
On the flipside, you should be fielding your strongest side 100% of the time and Boult makes the test team any day of the week. We're hit by injuries and other delays to the main players so he should be getting that call just as much as any fringe player. Steads decision not to call up Boult was because he wanted to give preference to contracted players - which is bull****, since both Duffy and Kuggleijn aren't contracted Black Caps.
It can't be in this case because they've run out of contracted players.I was wondering about whether “contracted players only” is a blanket selection policy so thanks for clarifying
wait what?It can't be in this case because they've run out of contracted players.
I kind of get why white ball stuff may be treated differently - Tests are more of a privilege - but they also recently played Boult in the UAE Tests without a contract anyway. The whole thing is weird.
Macewell WAGNote that Southee has confirmed Tickner's in the starting XI, so it's between Duffy and Kuggeleijn for the final spot in the line-up. (https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/crick...k-caps-test-debut-against-england-at-bay-oval)
EDIT: Stuff are picking
Latham
Conway
Williamson
Nicholls
Mitchell
Blundell
Bracewell, M
Southee
Wagner
Duffy
Tickner
Which is an incredibly long tail, starting at Michael Bracewell. I can't help but think they'll be looking to Kuggeleijn to provide some batting reinforcement. With Tickner in, you're looking at a tail with 3 #10s and 1 #11, really. It's about the only time that I hope they're massively overconfident about Bracewell's batting ability.