• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official***Match #32 - New Zealand vs South Africa - November 1st - Pune (D/N)

Athlai

Athlai

Not Terrible
straw man said:
Yeah Latham's batting has been rank awful. I wouldn't give him all the blame for the toss decision - stand-in captain so Stead and Williamson doubtless involved - but haven't been in favour of some of the bowling change decisions either. E.g. slow to bring on Phillips vs Australia, and leaving a heap of part-timer overs to the end vs South Africa instead of sneaking a couple more in during overs 30-40.

#TheSpecialist
Click to expand...
Has been only average with the gloves too
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
Adders said:
Just playing devils advocate here cos not sure the toss decision is as bad as your all making out......without the benefit of hindsight of course.

NZ normally chase well yeah and you've got a pretty decent attack? One of the top 3 sides in the tourney to date........should that side be approaching a game worried about what the opposition might do to them or should they be focused on what they're going to do to the opposition?

Obviously it didn't work out but im feeling it was a confident call and possibly not reasonable to be attracting as much criticism as it is?
Click to expand...
I hear you, but my opinion is that yeah, you do 'worry' about what the opposition is doing. I wouldn't call it worry, but you certainly plan for it. I think it's nuts to proceed any other way. I mean, literally that's who you have to beat to win. This isn't the 100m final or golf, where their influence has very little effect on your performance. To me, 'we focused on what we were doing' is pseudo psychology rubbish in a sport like cricket where what the opposition does is so influential. You literally have analysts with the team for that very reason. If another team looks shaky chasing, then unless it absolutely throws off what you're trying to do and you believe you can adapt, you do that. Just like you bowl off-spinners to LH batsmen, you can base a strategy of batting first or second around a) conditions b) your strengths c) their relative weaknesses or what they may not be as comfortable doing.

And in fairness to everyone, they were saying before the game it would be smarter to bat first. They certainly weren't proven wrong
 
straw man

straw man

Hall of Fame Member
The main problem of course is that, while the batting has failed for the first time this tournament, the bowling is the place we thought we'd get exposed, and we are. We knew we had no depth and any injuries would wreck us, which is starting to happen now. Mega-reliant on Boult + Henry + Santner.

Also a reminder how much we need new-ball wickets. Henry and Boult usually so good at that, but on roads, especially bowling first, we're giving them a tough job and they're not getting the opposition 2-3 down like we want. With Henry injured we need a new-ball wicket taker - not sure who this should be (new swing-bowling Milne?) but it's not Southee.
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
straw man said:
The main problem of course is that, while the batting has failed for the first time this tournament, the bowling is the place we thought we'd get exposed, and we are. We knew we had no depth and any injuries would wreck us, which is starting to happen now. Mega-reliant on Boult + Henry + Santner.

Also a reminder how much we need new-ball wickets. Henry and Boult usually so good at that, but on roads, especially bowling first, we're giving them a tough job and they're not getting the opposition 2-3 down like we want. With Henry injured we need a new-ball wicket taker - not sure who this should be (new swing-bowling Milne?) but it's not Southee.
Click to expand...
Yep I really feel like we need Milne in our XI. But as has been said, we're reticent to rule out Ferguson and Henry, lest they improve enough before the semis (if we get there).
 
P

Punk01

School Boy/Girl Captain
straw man said:
Yeah Latham's batting has been rank awful. I wouldn't give him all the blame for the toss decision - stand-in captain so Stead and Williamson doubtless involved - but haven't been in favour of some of the bowling change decisions either. E.g. slow to bring on Phillips vs Australia, and leaving a heap of part-timer overs to the end vs South Africa instead of sneaking a couple more in during overs 30-40.

#TheSpecialist
Click to expand...
Bro hes been a disaster ,i have been vocal about him since the start as i was following his batting in previous series. hes been very very bad , no strike rotation leading to low SR and gets out easily to spinners nowadays , just eats up balls and puts the team into more trouble, neither scores fast nor provides stability , good for nothing

we needed a backup wicketkeeper honestly
 
FBU

FBU

International Debutant
SA bat first. Want NZ to win the WC but SA to win tomorrow.
Kenneth Viljoen said:
This is their first bad game of the tournament, NZ are a great side they will bounce back. I think they underestimated SA a bit. Don't really think they appreciated how good this SA pace attack is with their decision to bat first ..And of course we've clearly shown in this tournament that we are a nervous side batting second.
Click to expand...
Love the way SA use 5 bowlers only. Jansen ahead of other bowlers taking wickets in the powerplay.
 
straw man

straw man

Hall of Fame Member
Punk01 said:
we needed a backup wicketkeeper honestly
Click to expand...
Too late for that unfortunately. It's been a bit odd the way NZ have jumped between Seifert, Cleaver, Fletcher & Blundell as backup T20/ODI wicketkeeper over the last few years.

The other thing we could really use right now is to play on some pitches where 260 is par. That's long been our strength, even if we've been more competitive on 350 pitches this tournament due largely to Rachin. 260-par pitches give our bowlers something to work with and make the best of our cakey batting. Might even help The Specialist.
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Punk01 said:
Bro hes been a disaster ,i have been vocal about him since the start as i was following his batting in previous series. hes been very very bad , no strike rotation leading to low SR and gets out easily to spinners nowadays , just eats up balls and puts the team into more trouble, neither scores fast nor provides stability , good for nothing

we needed a backup wicketkeeper honestly
Click to expand...
Glenn Phillips can keep

Can imagine you wouldn't want to lose your best bowler though
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
Latham had a miserable World Cup in 2019 then contributed in the final, so I guess I hold out some sort of hope. He has played some vital ODI knocks over the past few years - was great in Pakistan recently - but I guess the nature of these Indian decks not being the lower scoring subcontinent decks we might have thought, he becomes less of an asset.

To me, he should bat 6. There's nothing to recommend him batting above Phillips because in every way Phillips is the better player. And then if he floats below Neesham/Chapman at certain times, so be it. I still don't think teams utilise a floating order as well as they should, or as much as I would have thought they would have by now.
 
wellAlbidarned

wellAlbidarned

International Coach
SteveNZ said:
Latham had a miserable World Cup in 2019 then contributed in the final, so I guess I hold out some sort of hope. He has played some vital ODI knocks over the past few years - was great in Pakistan recently - but I guess the nature of these Indian decks not being the lower scoring subcontinent decks we might have thought, he becomes less of an asset.

To me, he should bat 6. There's nothing to recommend him batting above Phillips because in every way Phillips is the better player. And then if he floats below Neesham/Chapman at certain times, so be it. I still don't think teams utilise a floating order as well as they should, or as much as I would have thought they would have by now.
Click to expand...
I think ripping into the Latham selection too hard is hindsight bias, it seemed very reasonable prior to the tournament. Sometimes you make the right call and it still goes wrong.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
Latham was the correct selection but as I've said before, after the tournament we need to look ahead to 2027. We can always SOS him in 2027 if we don't have an answer by then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top