*Official* Group B Discussion - South Africa, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, England

[pup11]

Anyone backing England to win the Champions Trophy? Seems possible.

Nope, I don't see them winning this, though I have gotta say they have played some very good cricket to beat teams like Sri Lanka and South Africa, but I think the conditions as well as the opposition helped them out to a certain extent.

They certainly are in with a good chance now, because once you make it into the semis, its ends up being a bit of lottery, but their most likely opponents in the semi-finals would be either Pakistan or Australia/India, and you would back those teams to beat England.

 

[Zinzan]

Haha, you Kiwis don't like criticism of your players huh.

I haven't much interest in the stats of ODI batsmen because they're so easily skewed, but Taylor averages 32.75, SR 79 against test nations minus Bangladesh. Compare to, say, the much-maligned Owais Shah, who after a similar number of matches batting in similar positions averages 31.75, SR 79. I think they're really quite similar players.

The difference is that Taylor is younger, so people expect him to improve. Unfortunately, he's been around for a while now and shown no signs that he's getting any better. The other difference is that Kiwis tend to get behind their players whereas the English tend to criticise theirs heavily and unfairly. Net result, Taylor's overrated and Shah's underrated.

But at least he doesn't run his opposite number out all the time.

I've no problem with criticism & tbh it's not really your criticism of him as a batsman that bothers me, it's the suggestion that he's 'miles' away from being our best limited-over batsman. Not sure what your definition of 'miles' is, but if Ryder is a better batsman as you've suggested (I'd personally have Taylor slightly ahead), its by a smidgen.

Furthermore, your filtering of stats is all good & well, as long you realize & acknowledge pretty much every International batsman that's been around the traps has a inferior record when you remove Bangladesh & other minnows. On that, I reckon you're a tad tough on the Deshies to tag them 'minnow's' based on their improvement in ODI's the last 2 years - particularly at home where Taylor got a 100 against them last year in a series we almost lost when Shakib was wheeling magic on those dry dust-beds.

I definately concede he has his flaws such as his 'hit everything leg-side' mindset, but is that much different than McCullum's premeditated charging down the track every 3rd ball, Guptill's compulsive hooking or Ryder's inability to adjust to a seaming deck? It's not like we have a Tendulkar or a Ponting in the side to compare him with.

 

[Hurricane]

I find Taylor very underwhelming. Don't rate him much higher than someone like Paul Collingwood. If he's your best batsman you're in deep ****.

I rate Taylor as our best followed by Ryder. At one point you could have listed McCullum as one of our best ODI batsman but Moles has counselled him out of being an attacking batsman.

I think you are right that the reason why he is a star for us is that the rest of the batsman are inconsistent. Taylor is our money player. I don't think though that we ever say he is an international super star or anything or that he would walk into any team around the world. I think he might struggle to make some of the line ups for some of the other countries.

By the way if Paul Collingwood wants to come and play for NZ he would be most welcome he would be a valuable contributor for us.

 

[straw man]

Haha, you Kiwis don't like criticism of your players huh.

I haven't much interest in the stats of ODI batsmen because they're so easily skewed, but Taylor averages 32.75, SR 79 against test nations minus Bangladesh. Compare to, say, the much-maligned Owais Shah, who after a similar number of matches batting in similar positions averages 31.75, SR 79. I think they're really quite similar players.

The difference is that Taylor is younger, so people expect him to improve. Unfortunately, he's been around for a while now and shown no signs that he's getting any better. The other difference is that Kiwis tend to get behind their players whereas the English tend to criticise theirs heavily and unfairly. Net result, Taylor's overrated and Shah's underrated.

But at least he doesn't run his partner out all the time.

Haha, yes NZ fans can be a little touchy of criticism of our players. Well, unless you want to criticise Hopkins or Diamanti... then go ahead ;-) (though as has been mentioned it's the selectors at fault - not the players).

Think I remember you saying something similar during the SL test series and I found that Taylor had scored runs against most of the best teams and therefore compared favourably to someone like Ian Bell. Looked at his ODI record but it is less impressive, with more runs against lesser teams and fewer against top teams. You do have a point.

Would contend that Taylor has improved though. Not as much as you could hope for, as shown by his innings against SA where he didn't play his go-to slog sweep and therefore struggled to score. But seems to be a slightly more consistent batsman these days and more mature. He would never have played an innings like the one he did against South Africa a few years ago, which says some good things as well as bad things.

As for the question, who is NZ's best one day bat? I don't think Ryder (600 runs), Guptill (500 runs) or Elliott (500 runs) can be considered as they haven't been around long enough. I like all of them but they won't have been through the ups and downs of form etc that Taylor has; he has nearly 2000 runs. Therefore it's down to him or McCullum as best bat and Taylor wins hands down.

 

[straw man]

From the Stuff website

Vettori was happy to report that Ian Butler was better after an intestinal infection and would be available for selection as a logical replacement for Tuffey.

Radio Sport today reported Ryder's place is likely to be taken by Gareth Hopkins with Martin Guptill moving up to open.

It had been hoped that Ryder's replacement, Aaron Redmond, would be in South Africa in time to play, but that now seems unlikely. The Otago opener has been hit by travel delays as he rushes from Australia to join his Kiwi teammates. Coach Andy Moles today said Redmond was not due to join the team until about seven hours before the match started. "He will look at how he is when he gets off the flight but it would be a hard ask for him to travel with jet leg then play such a big game," Moles told Radio Sport. "I suspect it will be too big an ask for him. He would have been flying for over 24 hours because he's been held up by bad weather."

Moles confirmed it was likely Guptill would be promoted to open, with Neil Broom also shifting up the order and Hopkins, the team's backup wicketkeeper, possibly used as a specialist batsman at No 7.

Hopkins

 

[Zinzan]

From the Stuff website



Hopkins

FFS, is he seriously the only batting option left? I'd have had McGlashan ahead of Hopkin as the back-up keeper for a start.

 

[straw man]

FFS, is he seriously the only batting option left? I'd have had McGlashan ahead of Hopkin as the back-up keeper for a start.

Yep, at least McGlashan has managed a half century in an international match. ****kins has done precisely nothing. I would back Diamanti to slog more runs than him and Patel to be generally more useful. Cannot believe this. Starting to hope for rain

Will happily take back everything I've said about ****kins if he scores a meaningful 50+. Pigs might fly.

 

[GGG]

Tuffey out with a injury, although I don't think we loss to much with Butler.

 

[GGG]

From the Stuff website



Hopkins

Is Moles blind, dumb or stupid?

 

[James]

Surely it's time for Diamanti to be given a go and the chance to show what he can do on the international stage.

After all, he batted well in his only appearance for the Kiwis so far.

Cricket Web Stats Spider - Scorecard - New Zealand in Australia: 5th match, 2008/09

I would have picked Franklin too when Oram was injuried but what was the point of picking Diamanti in the squad in first place if he's not going to be used when injuries occur?

 

[Zinzan]

Surely it's time for Diamanti to be given a go and the chance to show what he can do on the international stage.

After all, he batted well in his only appearance for the Kiwis so far.

Cricket Web Stats Spider - Scorecard - New Zealand in Australia: 5th match, 2008/09

I would have picked Franklin too when Oram was injuried but what was the point of picking Diamanti in the squad in first place if he's not going to be used when injuries occur?

Got to be a better option than Hopkins, at least he can clear the ropes

 

[Zinzan]

Fellas reckon it works for or against NZ the fact England know they're already through?

 

[straw man]

Fellas reckon it works for or against NZ the fact England know they're already through?

Really not sure. General wisdom is that they won't care as much, but on the other hand they'll be relaxed and just able to play with no pressure which might be an advantage.

If it's tight I think we'll win - it's just the lingering issue of a big batting collapse that is a problem.

 

[Zinzan]

Really not sure. General wisdom is that they won't care as much, but on the other hand they'll be relaxed and just able to play with no pressure which might be an advantage.

If it's tight I think we'll win - it's just the lingering issue of a big batting collapse that is a problem.

Yeah, I agree..difficult to know with Cricket, as like you say being that little bit relaxed may work to their advantage. If it was a rugby game, I'd generally back the team having to win.

 

[DIRK-NANNES]

So about what time will the 2nd innings start? I need some sleep so I'll only be able to watch that part.

EDIT: 5am?

 

[Meridio]

Surely it's time for Diamanti to be given a go and the chance to show what he can do on the international stage.

After all, he batted well in his only appearance for the Kiwis so far.

Cricket Web Stats Spider - Scorecard - New Zealand in Australia: 5th match, 2008/09

I would have picked Franklin too when Oram was injuried but what was the point of picking Diamanti in the squad in first place if he's not going to be used when injuries occur?

I wouldn't pay the slightest bit of attention to that one innings he played. Looked like a rabbit in the headlights. Managed a couple of streaky boundaries and maybe slogged one out of the middle of the bat, but in general he looked absolutely clueless.

That said though, he can feel very stiff about being in the original squad selection and then not getting a chance when there's a whole bunch of injuries. As you say, there seems to have been no point whatsoever in selecting him.

 

[Zinzan]

I wouldn't pay the slightest bit of attention to that one innings he played. Looked like a rabbit in the headlights. Managed a couple of streaky boundaries and maybe slogged one out of the middle of the bat, but in general he looked absolutely clueless.

That said though, he can feel very stiff about being in the original squad selection and then not getting a chance when there's a whole bunch of injuries. As you say, there seems to have been no point whatsoever in selecting him.

Agree with all of that, but it's still six one way, half dozen the next when your talking Hopkins vs. Diamanti

 

[inbox24]

Don't worry South African fans, with England still in the tourney, you guys still have a shot at glory.

 

[James]

That said though, he can feel very stiff about being in the original squad selection and then not getting a chance when there's a whole bunch of injuries. As you say, there seems to have been no point whatsoever in selecting him.

Yeah that's exactly my point.

Whether he looked like a a rabbit or not in his first innings in international cricket, I would have thought he deserves the chance to show what he can do.

 

[GGG]

plus he can bowl a few, I really don't see how they can pick Hopkins over him, maybe a injury as well?