***Official*** India in New Zealand 2013/14

[Blocky]

Pujara is better than Kohli.

Has been, but won't be at the end of their respective careers.

 

[hendrix]

solely because they have Jadeja and Ashwin

they will only have one of Jadeja or Ashwin, and it's likely to be Jadeja.

 

[hendrix]

Has been, but won't be at the end of their respective careers.

Their first class records are pretty consistent with where they stand at test level. Pujara still has yet to tick the box of a successful tour of Australia, which Kohli has ticked, but everything else indicates that Pujara is the superior test batsman.

They're both bloody good though.

 

[Bahnz]

Yeah I do. Ashwin was dropped for Jadeja for India's last Test match and Jadeja bowled really well; I can't really see them reversing that now, particularly given Jadeja has also scored runs on this tour. The only way I can see Ashwin playing the first Test is if they play five bowlers.

The only reason I could think of for them playing Ashwin is that they think his carrom ball might be effective against Taylor. Taylor had enormous difficulty picking Narine earlier in the season, and was still only reading Ashwin off the pitch during the ODI's.

 

[Blocky]

Their first class records are pretty consistent with where they stand at test level. Pujara still has yet to tick the box of a successful tour of Australia, which Kohli has ticked, but everything else indicates that Pujara is the superior test batsman.

They're both bloody good though.

I think this tour will show whether or not Pujara is a traditional home track bully or someone who will forge a respectable "away from home" average. He did perform pretty well in South Africa to be fair to him and so far he's been much better at the test level than pretty much any other Indian not named Vinod Kambli at the start of his test career, but there are some flaws that people are starting to work out so it will come down to whether or not he's good enough to adapt and get better.

Kohli on the other hand, supernatural timing and an ability to score big and quick. I think as he matures to 28-30 - he'll peak like the greats of the last decade did (i.e Ponting, Tendulkar, Kallis who all averaged in excess of 70 for decent portions of their career)

 

[hendrix]

The only reason I could think of for them playing Ashwin is that they think his carrom ball might be effective against Taylor. Taylor had enormous difficulty picking Narine earlier in the season, and was still only reading Ashwin off the pitch during the ODI's.

I know we like to write of Narine because he doesn't have a good test record, but he bowled absolutely beautifully in Hamilton. He was turning his stock ball a lot, and his carom ball also got major turn.

I'm not sure that Ashwin will be as good, or that he'll get the same turning conditions that we had in Hamilton.

 

[hendrix]

I think this tour will show whether or not Pujara is a traditional home track bully or someone who will forge a respectable "away from home" average. He did perform pretty well in South Africa to be fair to him and so far he's been much better at the test level than pretty much any other Indian not named Vinod Kambli at the start of his test career, but there are some flaws that people are starting to work out so it will come down to whether or not he's good enough to adapt and get better.

Kohli on the other hand, supernatural timing and an ability to score big and quick. I think as he matures to 28-30 - he'll peak like the greats of the last decade did (i.e Ponting, Tendulkar, Kallis who all averaged in excess of 70 for decent portions of their career)

My observations having watched them both pretty closely:

Kohli is the superior stroke-maker and will probably do better on fast pitches when the ball comes onto the bat nicely and where there's big value for scoring shots - basically, Kohli will have a good record in Australia, and probably West Indies.

Pujara on the other hand plays the ball especially late and will thus be better in seaming and swinging conditions or places where the ball holds up in the pitch and doesn't come on to the bat so nicely. I.E. England, and the old school NZ pitches which we don't see any more.

 

[RxGM]

I heard that they are using the same wicket that was used for the England test. It has been back in its tray for a year and is ready to go again.

 

[Days of Grace]

So it's another road, then.

**** me we are numptys. Every other test nation in the world prepares pitches that suit their own bowlers, but good ole' little New Zealand will prepare any pitch you like. God forbid we are seen to be trying to dictate terms to the opposition.

 

[hendrix]

Nah, i'm happy with that, tbh. I'd much rather that we neutralise their seamers.

 

[Jono]

Yeah I really don't get this from NZ fans. I understand that people will think that a greentop will prevent India scoring 600 - fine. But why bring Zak and Shami into the game? Your pace bowlers are more used to bowling on your wickets, flat or not.

Look how the Indian pace bowlers went in the 1st innings of the first test vs. SA when there was life in the pitch. Check out how they went in the 2nd when it flattened out a bit, and in the 2nd test when the pitch was flat.

Other than a bit of bounce, you really shouldn't want it doing too much (seam or cracks).

 

[Blocky]

Yeah I really don't get this from NZ fans. I understand that people will think that a greentop will prevent India scoring 600 - fine. But why bring Zak and Shami into the game? Your pace bowlers are more used to bowling on your wickets, flat or not.

Look how the Indian pace bowlers went in the 1st innings of the first test vs. SA when there was life in the pitch. Check out how they went in the 2nd when it flattened out a bit, and in the 2nd test when the pitch was flat.

Other than a bit of bounce, you really shouldn't want it doing too much (seam or cracks).

Because mostly, the wickets that our first class cricket is played on have no semblance or representation to recent wickets we've been producing at the first class level. So we have no real advantage playing at home versus playing away, because the pitches are as foreign to our batsmen as they are the international players. It's why you see people like Crowe, Smith and others complain about the ground staff in NZ and even go as far to indicate that they're acting on orders from NZC to produce pitches that suit the opposition.

Personally, our players should be capable against the swinging ball considering our conditions offer as much swing and bounce as England. I also think we should move to the Duke cricket ball seeing how much our bowlers loved it in England and also because it will make converting back to the Kooka or other balls around much easier for our batsmen when it doesn't swing and bounce so viciously for so long.

 

[Jono]

I can't speak for preparing wickets for other teams, but preparing a seaming track isn't always the best way to beat India. Of course NZ may beat India on such a wicket. But Australia flogged India (albeit with its ageing stars not its current new crop) with tracks that had a bit of bounce and were relatively quickish. Not tracks that moved all over the place. Don't see why NZ couldn't do the same.

If you make a pitch move a bit like the first 3 days or so of Johannesburg, you really bring India's bowlers into the game. Of course you bring NZ's bowlers too, but imo NZ will win this series by putting runs on the board. India's bowlers have been toothless of late when there is nothing in the pitch. If NZ bat well on a regular track with some bounce, they pretty much can't lose the test, and have every chance of India's new batsmen collapsing still (see 2nd test vs. South Africa).

 

[Blocky]

I can't speak for preparing wickets for other teams, but preparing a seaming track isn't always the best way to beat India. Of course NZ may beat India on such a wicket. But Australia flogged India (albeit with its ageing stars not its current new crop) with tracks that had a bit of bounce and were relatively quickish. Not tracks that moved all over the place. Don't see why NZ couldn't do the same.

If you make a pitch move a bit like the first 3 days or so of Johannesburg, you really bring India's bowlers into the game. Of course you bring NZ's bowlers too, but imo NZ will win this series by putting runs on the board. India's bowlers have been toothless of late when there is nothing in the pitch. If NZ bat well on a regular track with some bounce, they pretty much can't lose the test, and have every chance of India's new batsmen collapsing still (see 2nd test vs. South Africa).

Major problem in NZ is that we don't produce those wickets, on occasion we have - I think back to the glory days of the Hamilton wicket but mostly, pace and bounce can't be produced in NZ. Swing and seam can be and whats more, we have a truck tonne of bowlers who would exploit that

Just quietly, you give me Boult, Wagner, Anderson and Southee and I'll stack them up against any seam attack that doesn't include Steyn and Philander and expect them to perform better, which comes down to a batsmanship game, NZ have shown in recent history that they can shoot out sides quicker than they get shot out (Hobart, the chances against England at home, etc) therefore to produce the highest chance of victory, I still think a seaming wicket is our best option.

 

[straw man]

Go review his spells in the West Indies when he first got picked, he consistently beat the bat, troubled the batsman and in many peoples eyes, was our best pace bowler on tour without getting the rewards. Also review his performances against England where he rushed players like Bell, Trott and Pietersen and more often than not was the one to get their wicket. Like I said before, he's trying too hard to bowl quick which means he's scrambling his seam, losing control and trying to play a role that McCullum seems to want him to play. He's also not getting to bowl the long spells that he's used to bowling at domestic, he's a guy who likes to bowl as many as twelve in a spell, he's getting four to six.

His performances at domestic merit him being in the test squad and as I pointed out, statistically he's not performing any worse than most of the players we've tried in their first few seasons, he's also part of a bowling unit that has looked as effective (the three seamers) as anyone has since Bond last played, so I think ultimately, he deserves another couple series. You can see also by the faith shown in him by McCullum and Hesson that they like him in the side.

Don't give me homework please, I didn't see a great deal of Wagner's bowling in the West Indies 18 months ago but I have seen plenty of him since then and it mostly has not been particularly impressive. When I see Wagner hurry a good batsman as he does indeed do every so often, or bowl a ripping wicket-taking ball to take Pietersen or Chanderpaul's wicket, instead of making me think how good he is it makes me frustrated that he bowls a whole lot of filth in between and doesn't seem to be aware of what it is that makes him successful some days and not others, and how to replicate it. I don't actually think we're in disagreement on Wagner apart from that you're forecasting he's going to go through a step-change and become significantly better and I'm saying I think that's unlikely. It happened for Southee who knocked a massive 15-20 runs off his test bowling average but that's the exception rather than the rule - and Southee always had the physical attributes to be a very good bowler while it's much harder for Wagner.

As others have said, Wagner deserves an extended run in the NZ side on the basis of domestic performances. He has been barely passable at international level but is definitely in my side for the India series and I guess by default the tour of the West Indies. However I will be extremely disappointed if one of the numerous promising young (and not so young but injury-delayed like Bennett, McClenaghan) bowlers is not operating at a level just a little shy of Southee and Boult in the next 12-24 months - at least able to average 30 in tests. Unless Wagner improves significantly he's going to be overtaken. It will require a leap of faith from the selectors at some point but it absolutely has to happen.

The challenge for Wagner, starting now, is to retain the aggression and the bit of old-ball swing that characterises his bowling, but also be much more accurate, more consistent, make judicious use of the short ball without it going to his head, bowl different ways depending on the match situation and generally just be all-round a smarter cricketer.

 

[Hurricane]

so it's another road, then.

**** me we are numptys. Every other test nation in the world prepares pitches that suit their own bowlers, but good ole' little new zealand will prepare any pitch you like. God forbid we are seen to be trying to dictate terms to the opposition.

awta

 

[Jono]

Just quietly, you give me Boult, Wagner, Anderson and Southee and I'll stack them up against any seam attack that doesn't include Steyn and Philander and expect them to perform better.

Yep, so you have a far superior pace attack. Don't even it up by making the wicket green.

I get your point though that a flat track with NO bounce is not good NZ. Fair enough.

 

[Hurricane]

Major problem in NZ is that we don't produce those wickets, on occasion we have - I think back to the glory days of the Hamilton wicket but mostly, pace and bounce can't be produced in NZ. Swing and seam can be and whats more, we have a truck tonne of bowlers who would exploit that

Just quietly, you give me Boult, Wagner, Anderson and Southee and I'll stack them up against any seam attack that doesn't include Steyn and Philander and expect them to perform better, which comes down to a batsmanship game, NZ have shown in recent history that they can shoot out sides quicker than they get shot out (Hobart, the chances against England at home, etc) therefore to produce the highest chance of victory, I still think a seaming wicket is our best option.

awta

and disagree to Jono's post for the reasons you have given.

 

[benchmark00]

\

Just quietly, you give me Boult, Wagner, Anderson and Southee and I'll stack them up against any seam attack that doesn't include Steyn and Philander and expect them to perform better.

fmd

 

[Jono]

awta

and disagree to Jono's post for the reasons you have given.

Yeah fair enough. If NZ can't produce a track with bounce and speed - i.e. its either seaming or a pure road - then its trickier because you don't want to give Kohli or Pujara an Adelaide track.