-
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* New Zealand in Australia 2019/20
- Thread starter Starfighter
- Start date
GotSpin
Hall of Fame Member
We won't drop Kohli in the slips as much as England (I hope)
quincywagstaff
International Debutant
There are still a fair few issues with Australia's batting imo. After a bright start Burns should have had a better season than he did and hasn't advanced his cause. Similarly with Wade who still looks like the stop-gap middle order bat he did at the start of his summer.
Head gets treated harshly by selectors and media types and I think he advanced his case a bit this summer (he's at least ahead of Wade now) but as that Sydney innings showed he can be worked out a bit too easily still.
Head gets treated harshly by selectors and media types and I think he advanced his case a bit this summer (he's at least ahead of Wade now) but as that Sydney innings showed he can be worked out a bit too easily still.
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
tbf our top order will likely fold for 6 runs so
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Series ratings:
Warner 6 - a strange series from him. Didn't make a score over 50 until a downhill skiing ton this innings, yet his first innings were some kind of contributions (I don't think 40's are completely useless from an opener) and actually looked in decent form throughout....just kept on getting out.
Burns 3 - not great. When there was pressure on him he basically did nothing. Did a little bit better in the second innings but still he's been unconvincing as I suspected against decent bowling. At least Warner seems to play better with him in the side which might save his spot.
Labuschagne 9 - just amazing. Two big match defining tons in 3 Tests, and basically played the way we expect from Smith.
Smith 7 - lots of talk about Wagner having the wood on him, but realistically this was only a bad series by Smith's standards. He still managed a couple of really important knocks here and especially at the MCG and dug in hard despite not really looking in top nick throughout.
Wade 4 - tried hard, but looked like the batsman that everyone thought he was before his massive hot streak. Didn't make a score of substance. Probably should be dumped.
Head 7 - still not completely sold on him, but his century at the MCG was very good and he also had an innings of substance in Perth. He is definitely still a handy 5/6.
Paine 7 - can't really ask for much more, his innings at the MCG was excellent given the conditions and made contributions in the other two Tests. Also captained and kept very well.
Cummins 9 - he's just very very good. Never looked far from taking wickets and his MCG spell first innings was one for the ages.
Starc 8 - was brilliant in Perth. Probably didn't bowl quite as well at the MCG but wasn't terrible, and did well here.
Lyon 9 - his best series in ages. Did especially well on two grounds where he's traditionally struggled (MCG/SCG). His record against New Zealand given conditions in both countries is ridiculous.
Hazlewood N/A - can't argue with a bowling average of 0. Perfect series
Pattinson 8 - was brilliant at the MCG, especially in the second innings where he destroyed the New Zealand top order. Less good at the SCG but still bowled OK.
Latham 4 - did at least dig in for a couple of starts, but still a pretty disappointing series given he was one of New Zealand's senior batsmen. Never really looked comfortable throughout.
Raval 2 - awful at Perth. A little bit better in Sydney, but simply put didn't really look up to it, and I think that is his international career.
Williamson 2 - very disappointing all round, just never got going and looked vulnerable no matter what he did.
Taylor 4 - one great innings where did manage to successfully attack on a difficult pitch, but basically nothing else. At least he got to play a Test at the MCG/SCG before he retired.
Nicholls 3 - just didn't do enough, and wasted his one good start. Somehow I feel like his bubble has burst.
Watling 4 - tried hard, but couldn't really get the momentum going and it felt inevitable that Australia would bowl a peach at him. Kept well.
de Grandhomme 5 - IMO actually did his job with the ball, and while his batting was frustrating he still made more starts than most of his contemporaries. Not terrible.
Santner 1 - urgh. I thought containing spinners (which is an over-rated role in Test cricket anyway) were supposed to contain. His batting was pretty inept too and struggled massively against the short ball. Should have played his last Test.
Southee 6 - for all the talk about him, his stats actually ended up being rather good. Did bowl pretty well at Perth, even if he came across as being a poor man's Wagner in some regard. Does anyone know what the hell happened to see him this Test, though?
Wagner 9 - New Zealand's best player by the size of the Pacific Ocean. Basically carried the attack for most of the series, and looked the only one that knew how to make breakthroughs. Was the main reason Australia's batting was merely good rather than incredible. Heaven help New Zealand if he breaks down.
Ferguson 1 - pretty badly mismanaged and unlucky to break down, but wasn't doing good even before he broke down.
Blundell 7 - still not convinced he's the right option opening and that ton would've come in handy more in the second innings
Boult 1 - just didn't look right. Probably shouldn't have played.
Phillips 5 - did have a fair share of luck, but a decent 50 nonetheless. Will be good.
Astle 4 - not great, but definitely looked better than Santner/Somerville, was actually threatening at times. There was worse.
Somerville 2 - given he actually had experience bowling in Australia before, was pretty disappointing here. Just wasn't good enough.
Henry 3 - improved a little bit as the match went on but still, not good. Should probably have played his last Test.
Warner 6 - a strange series from him. Didn't make a score over 50 until a downhill skiing ton this innings, yet his first innings were some kind of contributions (I don't think 40's are completely useless from an opener) and actually looked in decent form throughout....just kept on getting out.
Burns 3 - not great. When there was pressure on him he basically did nothing. Did a little bit better in the second innings but still he's been unconvincing as I suspected against decent bowling. At least Warner seems to play better with him in the side which might save his spot.
Labuschagne 9 - just amazing. Two big match defining tons in 3 Tests, and basically played the way we expect from Smith.
Smith 7 - lots of talk about Wagner having the wood on him, but realistically this was only a bad series by Smith's standards. He still managed a couple of really important knocks here and especially at the MCG and dug in hard despite not really looking in top nick throughout.
Wade 4 - tried hard, but looked like the batsman that everyone thought he was before his massive hot streak. Didn't make a score of substance. Probably should be dumped.
Head 7 - still not completely sold on him, but his century at the MCG was very good and he also had an innings of substance in Perth. He is definitely still a handy 5/6.
Paine 7 - can't really ask for much more, his innings at the MCG was excellent given the conditions and made contributions in the other two Tests. Also captained and kept very well.
Cummins 9 - he's just very very good. Never looked far from taking wickets and his MCG spell first innings was one for the ages.
Starc 8 - was brilliant in Perth. Probably didn't bowl quite as well at the MCG but wasn't terrible, and did well here.
Lyon 9 - his best series in ages. Did especially well on two grounds where he's traditionally struggled (MCG/SCG). His record against New Zealand given conditions in both countries is ridiculous.
Hazlewood N/A - can't argue with a bowling average of 0. Perfect series
Pattinson 8 - was brilliant at the MCG, especially in the second innings where he destroyed the New Zealand top order. Less good at the SCG but still bowled OK.
Latham 4 - did at least dig in for a couple of starts, but still a pretty disappointing series given he was one of New Zealand's senior batsmen. Never really looked comfortable throughout.
Raval 2 - awful at Perth. A little bit better in Sydney, but simply put didn't really look up to it, and I think that is his international career.
Williamson 2 - very disappointing all round, just never got going and looked vulnerable no matter what he did.
Taylor 4 - one great innings where did manage to successfully attack on a difficult pitch, but basically nothing else. At least he got to play a Test at the MCG/SCG before he retired.
Nicholls 3 - just didn't do enough, and wasted his one good start. Somehow I feel like his bubble has burst.
Watling 4 - tried hard, but couldn't really get the momentum going and it felt inevitable that Australia would bowl a peach at him. Kept well.
de Grandhomme 5 - IMO actually did his job with the ball, and while his batting was frustrating he still made more starts than most of his contemporaries. Not terrible.
Santner 1 - urgh. I thought containing spinners (which is an over-rated role in Test cricket anyway) were supposed to contain. His batting was pretty inept too and struggled massively against the short ball. Should have played his last Test.
Southee 6 - for all the talk about him, his stats actually ended up being rather good. Did bowl pretty well at Perth, even if he came across as being a poor man's Wagner in some regard. Does anyone know what the hell happened to see him this Test, though?
Wagner 9 - New Zealand's best player by the size of the Pacific Ocean. Basically carried the attack for most of the series, and looked the only one that knew how to make breakthroughs. Was the main reason Australia's batting was merely good rather than incredible. Heaven help New Zealand if he breaks down.
Ferguson 1 - pretty badly mismanaged and unlucky to break down, but wasn't doing good even before he broke down.
Blundell 7 - still not convinced he's the right option opening and that ton would've come in handy more in the second innings
Boult 1 - just didn't look right. Probably shouldn't have played.
Phillips 5 - did have a fair share of luck, but a decent 50 nonetheless. Will be good.
Astle 4 - not great, but definitely looked better than Santner/Somerville, was actually threatening at times. There was worse.
Somerville 2 - given he actually had experience bowling in Australia before, was pretty disappointing here. Just wasn't good enough.
Henry 3 - improved a little bit as the match went on but still, not good. Should probably have played his last Test.
GotSpin
Hall of Fame Member
At least we'll be there
Last edited:
ImpatientLime
International Regular
Moss
International Captain
Mostly agree with the ratings but would give Latham at least a point extra for handling captaincy duties at Sydney well (at least during the first half) in the face of so much chaos. Thought he was coming to grips finally with batting in Australia at Sydney till that soft dismissal and a 50-50 call in the second innings. Someone needs to help sort out his footwork, fell at least on a couple of occasions to fuller deliveries when he didn't properly get to the pitch of the ball.
RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Here's a thought: Latham as permanent skip
sunilz
International Regular
Had Bradman not been Australian, Stephen might have also claimed that Smith is better than Bradman.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Haven't managed to catch much of this series.
Australia played very well and have the makings of a fantastic team. Superb pace and spin bowling and batting.
Disappointing from NZ's point of view. I do think we tend to get spooked when playing Australia. Some rather questionable selections after what had been a period of consistency. Questionable shot selection.
Australia played very well and have the makings of a fantastic team. Superb pace and spin bowling and batting.
Disappointing from NZ's point of view. I do think we tend to get spooked when playing Australia. Some rather questionable selections after what had been a period of consistency. Questionable shot selection.
Last edited:
wellAlbidarned
International Coach
nah that was a great example of our bowling not being good enough. Was swinging and nipping all over the place. Should've rolled them for 200-300 max within the day. Too many free leaves outside off. If we'd batted first reckon we'd have been rolled for under 100 and we'd be asking the opposite question.
Meridio
International Regular
Right then. Having actually largely not been too down in the dumps about this series, despite our performance - I suspect mainly because of having bigger things to care about, in my own life and around the world atm - I did get pretty pissed off at our capitulation yesterday. It's been like a performance from the bad old days of 10 years ago, where we'd have one or two minor positives in a series where in general we'd been flogged. The most disappointing thing about it is that we're a much better team than we were back then, and have performed well around the world under pressure in difficult conditions, yet here we just crumbled. And yes, I know Australia are good, their bowling attack in particular, and in their own backyard they're extremely hard to beat at the best of times, but we simply didn't turn up, and most annoyingly, I think a lot of our problems have been self-inflicted:
- we went straight from a dead flat pitch in Hamilton against England to a day-night test in Perth with only a few days preparation and without a single warmup game. On a hiding to nothing from the start.
- we then had 10 days between tests and only had one game scheduled for that time, against essentially a Victorian second XI. And one day of that was cancelled. WTF. Why didn't we have a proper competitive 4 day game in that time? Or two 3 dayers? Give our batsmen the opportunity to get more used to extra bounce, and gain a bit of confidence, and get a few more overs into Boult..
- why tf we picked a squad for two series at one time is still beyond me. Backed ourselves into a corner.
- debuting Ferguson after he'd barely bowled any overs in the month previous. Sure, it's unlucky he broke down, and maybe he would have anyway if he'd played against England, but it's poor planning and doesn't help.
- persevering with Santner for far too long. Essentially picking a spinner for his batting when he has known issues against the short ball. Completely muddled thinking.
- Southee non selection fiasco in the third test. Yeah, he was poor at Melbourne. But after you've just lost Williamson and Boult (plus Nicholls) from your previous team why are you throwing away the experience from one of your other senior players - for the sake of an extra 5km/h from someone who averaged 45 at Test level? It does reek of problems off the field.
We definitely had some bad luck here - the toss in Perth (and, less crucially, the toss in Sydney after we'd picked two spinners), marginal lbw decisions on key players, Labuschagne's outside edges never going to hand, particularly in Melbourne, the injuries/illnesses - but we've just mentally fallen to pieces. Has been a problem against Australia for a long time, and with the fighting ability we've shown as a team in the last couple of years, I really expected better. Not necessarily to win, but to compete. Think there were signs of psyching ourselves out - e.g. Southee getting involved in all the childish bullshit Wade gets up to - and I do speculate that there's been divisions in the camp about how to play. As much as it's a cliche to blame the coach every time something goes wrong, some of our selections and tactics have been a bit suspect for a while, but it's been papered over by individuals performing well. We've been very, very conservative in our approach to selection, and while that's preferable to the constant chop-and-change of previous regimes I think we've been too fixed in our thinking, and have missed clear opportunities to develop a few more players.
Don't have particularly high hopes for the India series, given we barely play any red ball cricket between now and then. Think it would be a good idea to give Williamson a break from some of the limited overs stuff. Seems likely Blundell will stay as opener, but is that really the right move? He played brilliantly at the MCG by following a very clear game plan of leaving everything outside off, waiting for something straight or short that he could pull, but that's probably not his natural game and we might get more out of him in the middle order. Don't know who else you can pick though.
cbf doing any series rankings for players but obvs Wagner was our best comfortably, while for Aus there's still question marks around Burns, Wade, and maybe Head, but even they had their moments and the rest all played pretty well.
- we went straight from a dead flat pitch in Hamilton against England to a day-night test in Perth with only a few days preparation and without a single warmup game. On a hiding to nothing from the start.
- we then had 10 days between tests and only had one game scheduled for that time, against essentially a Victorian second XI. And one day of that was cancelled. WTF. Why didn't we have a proper competitive 4 day game in that time? Or two 3 dayers? Give our batsmen the opportunity to get more used to extra bounce, and gain a bit of confidence, and get a few more overs into Boult..
- why tf we picked a squad for two series at one time is still beyond me. Backed ourselves into a corner.
- debuting Ferguson after he'd barely bowled any overs in the month previous. Sure, it's unlucky he broke down, and maybe he would have anyway if he'd played against England, but it's poor planning and doesn't help.
- persevering with Santner for far too long. Essentially picking a spinner for his batting when he has known issues against the short ball. Completely muddled thinking.
- Southee non selection fiasco in the third test. Yeah, he was poor at Melbourne. But after you've just lost Williamson and Boult (plus Nicholls) from your previous team why are you throwing away the experience from one of your other senior players - for the sake of an extra 5km/h from someone who averaged 45 at Test level? It does reek of problems off the field.
We definitely had some bad luck here - the toss in Perth (and, less crucially, the toss in Sydney after we'd picked two spinners), marginal lbw decisions on key players, Labuschagne's outside edges never going to hand, particularly in Melbourne, the injuries/illnesses - but we've just mentally fallen to pieces. Has been a problem against Australia for a long time, and with the fighting ability we've shown as a team in the last couple of years, I really expected better. Not necessarily to win, but to compete. Think there were signs of psyching ourselves out - e.g. Southee getting involved in all the childish bullshit Wade gets up to - and I do speculate that there's been divisions in the camp about how to play. As much as it's a cliche to blame the coach every time something goes wrong, some of our selections and tactics have been a bit suspect for a while, but it's been papered over by individuals performing well. We've been very, very conservative in our approach to selection, and while that's preferable to the constant chop-and-change of previous regimes I think we've been too fixed in our thinking, and have missed clear opportunities to develop a few more players.
Don't have particularly high hopes for the India series, given we barely play any red ball cricket between now and then. Think it would be a good idea to give Williamson a break from some of the limited overs stuff. Seems likely Blundell will stay as opener, but is that really the right move? He played brilliantly at the MCG by following a very clear game plan of leaving everything outside off, waiting for something straight or short that he could pull, but that's probably not his natural game and we might get more out of him in the middle order. Don't know who else you can pick though.
cbf doing any series rankings for players but obvs Wagner was our best comfortably, while for Aus there's still question marks around Burns, Wade, and maybe Head, but even they had their moments and the rest all played pretty well.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Who took more wickets in the last Ashes series in England?
