Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Pretty big problem, it must be said.Flem274* said:
-
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
- Thread starter James
- Start date
Flem274*
123/5
I've been whinging all series that our reserve bench is very poor, and considering there are better players its baffling as well. Maybe if we were the USA we'd pick such an unbalanced squad but come on, Diamanti is not an Oram replacement, Cumming over his career is not a good OD player and Boult, whilst talented, is a dubious and risky call. What if O'Brien and Mils get injured? A seam attack of Southee, Boult, Diamanti, Elliott is rubbish.
Athlai
Not Terrible
TBF to Guptill he accelerated while McCullum did the opposite.
Flem274*
123/5
Guptill was poor, no denying that, he's been poor all series really. I'm only cutting him slack becasue he's 22 and doesn't usually get bogged down like that.
I will say this for Cumming though, whoever picked him a 6 needs a punch in the face. Was completely unfair. He could have made more of it though.
EDIT: The start was fine provided we didn't lose three quick wickets, which we did. It was sensible cricket but we threw it away.
Cummings drop really sealed our fate. If we had White or Fergurson in a bit earlier we had a chance.
Last edited:
pasag
RTDAS
Don't think McCullum should have been playing tbh.
Flem274*
123/5
DWTA. Hopkins would have made matters worse. In saying that, he is the second best keeper in the country that we can pick (Van Wyk is probably the number two).
pasag
RTDAS
It wasn't fine at all really, was too defensive on a flat track against poor bowling and put way too much pressure on the rest of the order.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Chris Nevin is not amused.
Flem274*
123/5
Disagree. We were fine at 69/0 tbh, we just threw it away. you shouldn't fail to get 270 with 30+ overs to play with and ten wickets in hand from there.
But we found a way, as per usual.
Flem274*
123/5
Good. Maybe he'll improve if I piss him off.
To be blunt I don't think he gives two ****s about a furious teenage NZ fanboy thinks though.
Precambrian
Banned
AWTA, that lbw appeal against Ferguson was plumb. Terrible umpiring though in fairness Aussies were nearly home by then. Anyway all in all disappointing back to back losses for NZ, and they'll really need to avoid bull **** selections like Cumming etc to come back and take the trophy at the Gabba.
pasag
RTDAS
Did you watch it?
Flem274*
123/5
Sadly yes.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
When did my thinking change from "240-250 is a par score" to "290-300 is a par score" to "260-270 is a par score?" I mean for some years now we've been spoiled with a stream of never ending scores over 300 but this summer has seen far lower scoring games. In the 1999 World Cup we barely saw a score over 280, so at some point the batting has either excelled or the bowling has been utter garbage for me to change mindsets so quickly.
The retirement of Hayden and Gilchrist may have something to do with it, but I have a feeling it's more than that.
The retirement of Hayden and Gilchrist may have something to do with it, but I have a feeling it's more than that.
Matt79
Hall of Fame Member
The Ferguson lbw was very poor. The only defence that can be offered for the umpire was that the bat hit the pitch very close to when the ball passed the bat, and you can only imagine he heard the second noise and concluded it had taken an edge from the bat on the way through, because otherwise that was one of the worst decisions I've ever seen. I've never heard Ch. 9 commentators laughing bemusedly about a wrong decision that's favoured Australia before.
Precambrian
Banned
Hayden and Gilly both were there in 2008 CB series, and yet we saw generally low scoring games.
Precambrian
Banned
Yeah and that South Australian references left a bad taste even in a known NZ fan like me. Commentators of Ch 9 have touched an all time low indeed. And they are plumbing further.
Matt79
Hall of Fame Member
I found the commentary around that incident kinda funny (as in haha, not peculiar). They didn't try to disguise or justify the bad decision, so I didn't mind them laughing at what was a shocker - what else could you do faced with such a bad call, other than chuck a wobbly.
Admittedly it wasn't my team that had been wronged, so maybe for NZ fans righteous indignation was more the order of the day.
Precambrian
Banned
However you don't pay commentators to sit there and giggle (exactly what Slater did for almost a minute) on a wrong decision. Initially when Slater was brought in, I was actually a fan since it brought some unorthodoxy into the box, but soon I got tired of his oohs aahs giggles.
Matt79
Hall of Fame Member
Well, they're paid to make the television product more appealling to a wider market. The bulk of that is by communicating the technicalities of the game, explaining incidents as they occur, and discussing potential scenarios, but a significant part is also finding the humour in things as they occur, and provide a bit of colour and fun in the broadcast of what is otherwise for some a rather long haul. If only cricket purists who want only serious discussion watched the program it would make no money for the broadcaster.