*Official* New Zealand 'A' v Sri Lanka 'A'

[Tim]

The fact that we're even beating this S.L 'B' side so convincingly is quite an achievement anyway..its likely that 5 years ago we would well and truly have been thumped by this side.

 

[anzac]

And besides, all the blokes performing for NZ have basically proven that they can't handle international cricket too well, so it's all a bit inflating and misleading this series IMO.

C Martin was part of that 1st match & did well enough v RSA after 2 years out of Test cricket................some of the other guys are about getting consistency of performance back into their game.....

micky mouse or not IMO the theory behind 'A' teams is not just about the results, but about exposure & experience at a higher level...........

while in this instance the SRL 'A' team may not qualify as a higher level, they are providing some match fitness for the prospective squad members for selection to England post local domestic comp.........& I think this is reflected in some of the NZL selections & rotations..........

some of these guys will make the touring squads & I don't mind if they have some form & confidence as well as match practise - they get little enough of it on Tours these days.........

 

[Craig]

Well those who preform get their chances to go to England increase.

It's basically IMO a play-off for the final three spots in the England tour squad and IMO Astle and Bond are certainties to go.

If these people have played international cricket didnt do so well first time around and are preforming I have no problems with them getting back in.

They can look at Hayden, Martyn, Langer, Butcher, Laxman who didnt so well first time up and look at them now.

They may not be as talented as those five or as good but they can look for them inspiration.

 

[Mingster]

Its actually only a 14-man squad.

So Wiseman, Sinclair, Butler, Mason, Franklin will all be competing for one place.

 

[marc71178]

I think it's time players, teams & whoever else got over trying to use the defence of having to play in alien conditions...it's professional sport, you've got to get on with it.

I disagree - the beauty of Cricket is it's diversity of conditions and they do play a part.

An inexperienced team is not expected to be able to cope with things wildly different from what they're used to.

 

[marc71178]

SRL 'A' teams have had a few series over the past season - probably more than anyone else, & so if they have had any sort of consistency in selection the players should have experienced a variety of conditions

They toured Kenya in October, and before that their last tour was in 2000 - hardly a great deal of experience there.

 

[marc71178]

I don't see why S.L needed to keep 20+ players at home either..but it's there choice.

Probably the fact that they have a series against Australia which requires their best 5 day and 1 day players?

 

[Tim]

I know that Marc!..it's just that I don't think they needed to keep 20+ players back (if it was that many)

I reckon they would have only kept around 12 players back in Sri Lanka.

 

[anzac]

They toured Kenya in October, and before that their last tour was in 2000 - hardly a great deal of experience there.

looking at Wisden I see SRL 'A' had 3 tours in 2003 alone - RSA, Kenya & India...............

8D

 

[Tim]

S.L 'A' also went to Pakistan during 2002/2003..they have also been to Kenya twice since 2001.

 

[marc71178]

I know that Marc!..it's just that I don't think they needed to keep 20+ players back (if it was that many)

I reckon they would have only kept around 12 players back in Sri Lanka.

11 Test players (not all of whom play ODI's) so you need the ODI specialists, then some back-up.

Retaining just 12 would've been Cricketing suicide.

 

[marc71178]

looking at Wisden I see SRL 'A' had 3 tours in 2003 alone - RSA, Kenya & India...............

Looking at Cricinfo told a different story!

Sorry, but I never realised it could be wrong!

 

[anzac]

Looking at Cricinfo told a different story!

Sorry, but I never realised it could be wrong!

that's where I got it too - I just called it by it's new 1st name....(or I was too tired to call it by it's 'proper' name....)

I had a bugger of a job trying to find anything on 'A' matches until I went into their match archives and looked season by season........

unless the series were scheduled and fell thru'..........

 

[marc71178]

I went through SL and then "Other Tours"

 

[Tim]

I did the same thing Marc & got the same results as Anzac.

 

[marc71178]

I see what happened - I went Miscellaneous Tours, rather than All Tours - for some reason some Tours don't count as Tests, One Days or Miscellaneous :duh:

 

[Craig]

Looks like Shane Bond will play for New Zealand 'A' in the Third 'Test'.

 

[Tim]

I don't think so. They've been talking about bringing him in for the ODI's that start on the 4th of April I think.

 

[anzac]

the last thing they want to do to Bond is what has happened to Lee & Astle - brought back too soon (even if Astle didn't make it to the match)!!!!!

with Tuffey having to be rested and no guarantee that he will be 100% for England (talk of having an Op????), then we can not afford to push Bond too early and end up being without both on the tour..............

 

[anzac]

it would appear that the 'A' team is in need of 2 seamers for their 3rd 4 day game (Butler injured & Mason likely to play in the 3rd Test v RSA)..........

any discussion on likely replacements to partner Franklin & Mills??????????

what chances Walker will get a start & someone like Wilson or Scott or Gillespie, or are they more likely to go for experience like Walmsly??????