**Official** New Zealand in Australia Thread

[bryce]

i thought they would of been targeting the whole team instead of one specific player, new zealand have also set a target - for their lower order to put on 100 runs in each innings, wouldn't mind seeing it happening !

 

[meatspx]

Sinclair is a hit & miss player.
He's scored 2 double centuries, and a 150 against South Africa. If plays & misses alot, but when he gets in he can pile on the runs. If the Aussies target him on and just outside the off-stump with good fast bowling then he will struggle to survive.

 

[Tim]

I see Warne, McGrath & Hayden indentified the same 3 key player I did: Fleming, Astle & Vettori.

What on earth was Bracewell thinking when he suggested Australia was no place to blood an 'A' player...he picked Marshall ahead of McMillan in the first place! He obviously had a vision in his sleep late last week that suddenly told him that Marshall was going to be a bunny for Warne.

Then he goes & suggests McMillan is a fighter which is so far from the truth it's not funny. If McMillan was a fighter he'd have a far more impressive record against the tougher nations.

Im not sure if NZ are going to hatch one of the greatest master plans of all time or what...but they're certainly doing a good job of keeping it a secret so far.

 

[marc71178]

i thought they would of been targeting the whole team instead of one specific player, new zealand have also set a target - for their lower order to put on 100 runs in each innings, wouldn't mind seeing it happening !

What do they define as the lower order though?

If they're aiming for 100 it must IMO be last 3 wickets.

 

[Mr Casson]

What do they define as the lower order though?

If they're aiming for 100 it must IMO be last 3 wickets.

The whole NZ batting line-up is a lower order!

Well, NZ has a longer lower order than most, and in the past it doesn't seem to have been too bad, so they should be hoping for more than 100 runs out of it.

 

[Tim]

No it's not! against most sides NZ's top order can hold it's own.
We've got 4 or 5 batsmen averaging over 35 which I wouldn't call that bad to be honest.

 

[Mr Casson]

No it's not! against most sides NZ's top order can hold it's own.
We've got 4 or 5 batsmen averaging over 35 which I wouldn't call that bad to be honest.

OK, my bad, they have a top order and a lower order and nothing else.

 

[Kent]

WTF?!

Chris Martin and Kyle Mills are in the XI!

Richardson
Sinclair
Fleming
Styris
Astle
McMillan
Oram
McCullum
Vettori
Mills
Martin

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Well, I'd be inclined to change the bowling attack, considering they submitted a first innings lead (and subsequent defeat) to NSW.

And NSW, minus Katich and Clarke on national duty (admittedly Katich will be back), are not a strong batting lineup.

 

[Tim]

Well I thought we would have had Butler in that team. Im not totally convinced NZ have got any idea how to go about preparing for a test match at the moment....we seem to be about as flat-footed as South Africa are.

 

[Dydl]

Not to mention that in the 1st innings, Jason Krejza got 50odd! He is a tailender. Lee got 33, pretty high scores considering their oponent.

Can anyone confirm why New South Wales played New Zealand? I am thinking that it was because NSW had a bye-I am almost 100% sure, but can anyone confirm it?

 

[Tim]

I don't really believe it was entirely the bowler's fault against NSW...both times the batsmen failed to put up a score of any substance for the bowlers to really charge in without worrying about the amount of runs on the board.

I see Matt Hayden has said that he'd prefer to play against Bond & Tuffey mainly due to the fact that the Australians are under more pressure to score runs against the current NZ attack....I feel that could play into our hands if we bowl smart.

 

[bryce]

yes i was expecting butler to be included aswell.
if kyle mills has poor test match i think it may be is last for some time and i can't see him being too successful(if at all) against the aussies, no doubt martin has been chosen for his ability to bowl to the left hander's and fair enough that he's been given his chance on a fast wicket which he said he is keen to bowl on, but hold on no franklin ? i know his pace might be a bit 'pedestrian' but he has a very good test match record and should be given shot in the first test IMO.

 

[bryce]

Not to mention that in the 1st innings, Jason Krejza got 50odd! He is a tailender.

i was under the impression krezja was an up and coming allrounder, may be wrong though.....

 

[Kent]

but hold on no franklin ? i know his pace might be a bit 'pedestrian' but he has a very good test match record and should be given shot in the first test IMO.

Franklin's picked up a last minute injury. The curse strikes again...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/other_international/4015129.stm

 

[Kent]

I am intrested in your views of Sinclair.

Sinclair is definitely an enigma.

Like McMillan he stubbornly believes in his natural methods, but it got to the stage where you'd turn the selection process into a farce if he wasn't in the BCs right now. The weight of runs he scored on the A tour of SA (admittedly on true pitches with no great threat from spin) was too much to ignore.

His footwork is minimal and he can look awful at times when the ball is moving, but then again you could say similar things about Trescothick.

 

[bryce]

Franklin's picked up a last minute injury. The curse strikes again...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/other_international/4015129.stm

i was gonna say, would of been a bit too radical for my liking

 

[Kent]

What on earth was Bracewell thinking when he suggested Australia was no place to blood an 'A' player...he picked Marshall ahead of McMillan in the first place! He obviously had a vision in his sleep late last week that suddenly told him that Marshall was going to be a bunny for Warne.

Then he goes & suggests McMillan is a fighter which is so far from the truth it's not funny. If McMillan was a fighter he'd have a far more impressive record against the tougher nations.

I'm pretty sure Bracewell is starting to baffle himself with his own BS theories. I think Andrew McLean was a lot more perceptive than he realised when he compared Bracewell to John Mitchell.

The build-up to the first Test has produced an unusual mix of theories laced with fact and fantasy. John Bracewell, the New Zealand coach, is a zany thinker who has stumbled on the debatable discovery that Australia are vulnerable the longer a Test lasts. On the fifth day, he reckons, they win 33% of matches.

At first listen the idea may sound plausible. Australia's record in fourth-innings chases was exposed again two weeks ago at Mumbai, when it joined the SCG, The Oval and Headingley as venues of chaotic collapses. But this team scores so quickly and bowls so aggressively that since 2001 the final day has been redundant 20 times.

"What's our record like on the third and fourth day?" Ricky Ponting asked to challenge Bracewell's research. "That's a strange one. If we're in a position to win a Test on the fifth day I'm backing our side." Australia have lost five of 27 matches on the final day since 2001, so Bracewell's claim might be as light-hearted as the giggle Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath gave Ponting when they publicly targeted Stephen Fleming and Nathan Astle.

http://usa.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/NOV/103420_AUS_17NOV2004.html

 

[meatspx]

What a cop out. Mills might get some swing on the first morning IF we bowl first - but that's it.

He'll more than likely get smashed. This is a joke to include him in the XI over Butler. Selections like this test your faith as a supporter of the national side, I don't like to see continuos screw ups in the selection process - it's already helped cost us a 3-0 hammering at the hands of England.

 

[JASON]

I think Hamish Marshall should be picked instead of crash, bang McMillan who is not a reliable bat IMO.

I hope the Test lasts its full course and both Teams get their chances !!(Instead of Australia getting a massive lead )

My prediction is a close Test, but Australia to win .

Warne to get most wickets in the Test . Lehman to score a hundred, Fleming a hundred for NZ.
Vettori to be in the wickets, with Franklin.