***Official*** New Zealand in England series 2013

[hendrix]

Ok so if we don't change the side, how about some batting order tinkering?

Having McCullum above Brownlie might be all-eggs-in-one-basket suicide, but it might provide an opportunity to have our two most experienced batsmen batting together.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Was slightly surprised Root wasn't man of the match. Two decent innings, application with the bat in both knocks. Certainly showed more with the bat than anyone else and in the final analysis, runs were seemingly harder to come by than wickets. Still, Broad or Southee were also excellent candidates.

 

[Prince EWS]

I actually would've named Anderson MOTM. His first innings bowling effort was every bit as influential to the win as Broad's second innings effort and unlike Broad he actually bowled well and built pressure during the innings he didn't clean up.

 

[Flem274*]

I forgot to add Flynn to my list of batsmen with experience and domestic domination.

If he's fit get Vettori in right away. He fights.

Vettori scews the balance of the team. He's a batting allrounder who consistently plays at number eight and atm doesn't really fit any higher in the order. He's also less likely to take wickets than Bruce Martin so we lose out on bowling. He adds serious steel to the lower order but I believe the cost to the bowling is too much.

I think sometimes people forget just how bad Vettori's bowling was just before his injury. Wasn't penetrative, wasn't tight and his batting went AWOL to boot.

 

[Bahnz]

Was slightly surprised Root wasn't man of the match. Two decent innings, application with the bat in both knocks. Certainly showed more with the bat than anyone else and in the final analysis, runs were seemingly harder to come by than wickets. Still, Broad or Southee were also excellent candidates.

Ultimately, while it would've been tough, 230 was still a gettable total. Broad's spell decisively turned the match, which had swung back and forth, in England's favour. Deserves motm.

 

[hendrix]

yeah had England got to a lead of 300 then you could potentially give a batsman MOTM, but defending 230 (even with a good bowling attack against **** batsmen) easily with that spell...I think it's fair.


Remember how much of an uproar it was when Warner got MOTM in hobart, and that **** scored a century.

Still though, Root is excellent. Exciting player for England.

 

[Bahnz]

I forgot to add Flynn to my list of batsmen with experience and domestic domination.



Vettori scews the balance of the team. He's a batting allrounder who consistently plays at number eight and atm doesn't really fit any higher in the order. He's also less likely to take wickets than Bruce Martin so we lose out on bowling. He adds serious steel to the lower order but I believe the cost to the bowling is too much.

I think sometimes people forget just how bad Vettori's bowling was just before his injury. Wasn't penetrative, wasn't tight and his batting went AWOL to boot.

Look, I know Vettori was bad right before he was injured, but he was playing against SA - a team against whom he has a dreadful record. More generally, Vettori has always picked up 3-4 wickets a match. We only gnash our teeth about him because he's never won New Zealand a test (due to his bizarre habit of taking more wickets in the 1st innings of test matches). But he's still comfortably ahead of Martin, even in terms of wicket taking ability, and he has a decent record in England as well.

If he fully recovered from injury, and got back to playing all three forms, I'd back him to get back to his pre-2012 form. Whether he belongs in the side then is a different question, but he should definitely be picked ahead of any other NZ spinner if we do decide to take one into a test.

 

[Bahnz]

yeah had England got to a lead of 300 then you could potentially give a batsman MOTM, but defending 230 (even with a good bowling attack against **** batsmen) easily with that spell...I think it's fair.


Remember how much of an uproar it was when Warner got MOTM in hobart, and that **** scored a century.

Still though, Root is excellent. Exciting player for England.

I think the uproar with Warner was more due to a player from the losing side being awarded motm. Should never happen, even in a close test match. Had Australia gotten over the line, I don't think anyone would've had any qualms with him receiving the award.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

This is more a question rather than an opinion/criticism, but was it a mistake by Cook to bowl Jimmy and Broad for 22 overs straight??

I understand the game was there for the taking and they were both bowling brilliantly and tbf the next wicket never looked far away. But the start of a ridiculous long summer.......how would a bowler pull up from a spell like that?

I bet Swann was a bit pissed, probably the best wicket he's likely to see all summer and he didn't get a chance on it.

All this talk that gets bantered around these days of controlling work loads.......wasn't any of that going on yesterday. Is 11 overs straight to much or was it the right move while going for the kill??

Try getting the ball off them and they have an extra day off anyway between the tests. The 40 minutes break at lunch means they'd be fresher and neither showed signs of tiredness at the end. All will be well when they skittle the convicts too.

 

[Prince EWS]

Swann was off the field towards the end anyway; probably had a niggle himself.

 

[RxGM]

If he's fit get Vettori in right away. He fights.

He said a month ago that he would not be fit or have played enough cricket in time for the test matches, so he was off to the IPL to get some net practice.

If the pitch is looking particularly flat Jeets is in England and took a 5 for last week ...
Warwickshire v Yorkshire at Birmingham, May 15-17, 2013 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Howe_zat]

I actually would've named Anderson MOTM. His first innings bowling effort was every bit as influential to the win as Broad's second innings effort and unlike Broad he actually bowled well and built pressure during the innings he didn't clean up.

Yeah there comes a point where 70 is just a 70 and you have to recognise the bowlers won the game. And I think Anderson was a better bowler than Broad did in this game. Even in the second innings Anderson bowled better after Taylor was out.

 

[Adders]

I actually would've named Anderson MOTM. His first innings bowling effort was every bit as influential to the win as Broad's second innings effort and unlike Broad he actually bowled well and built pressure during the innings he didn't clean up.

Agreed, definitely by far the better bowler across both innings.

Extremely hypothetical this, but take Jimmy out of the game and England would have lost this test, take Broad out and it might have taken a lot more than 22 overs but there is every chance Jimmy and Swann would have got the job done.........that run chase was always a big ask on that wicket even without Broads heroics.

Still, hard to overlook 7/44 and I also guess his run a ball 26 was pretty defining at the time.

 

[GGG]

Wouldn't drop Fulton. England and South Africa are the two worst places in the world for him to bat.

Horses for courses then surely.

 

[Howe_zat]

Agreed, definitely by far the better bowler across both innings.

Extremely hypothetical this, but take Jimmy out of the game and England would have lost this test, take Broad out and it might have taken a lot more than 22 overs but there is every chance Jimmy and Swann would have got the job done.........that run chase was always a big ask on that wicket even without Broads heroics.

Still, hard to overlook 7/44 and I also guess his run a ball 26 was pretty defining at the time.

Doubt that. I think it was the pair that did 'em in.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I actually would've named Anderson MOTM. His first innings bowling effort was every bit as influential to the win as Broad's second innings effort and unlike Broad he actually bowled well and built pressure during the innings he didn't clean up.

To be fair to Broad, in the context of the game his unbeaten 20-odd could've been a match-turner too. Was probably the difference between NZ chasing just over 200 and nearly 240.

 

[Prince EWS]

To be fair to Broad, in the context of the game his unbeaten 20-odd could've been a match-turner too. Was probably the difference between NZ chasing just over 200 and nearly 240.

Yeah I didn't really take Broad's batting into account tbf.

 

[Bahnz]

Well, apparently Vettori is fit afterall.

Cricket | Daniel Vettori in line for test return | Stuff.co.nz

 

[straw man]

Well, apparently Vettori is fit afterall.

Cricket | Daniel Vettori in line for test return | Stuff.co.nz

shocked face

 

[Scaly piscine]

This is more a question rather than an opinion/criticism, but was it a mistake by Cook to bowl Jimmy and Broad for 22 overs straight??

I understand the game was there for the taking and they were both bowling brilliantly and tbf the next wicket never looked far away. But the start of a ridiculous long summer.......how would a bowler pull up from a spell like that?

I bet Swann was a bit pissed, probably the best wicket he's likely to see all summer and he didn't get a chance on it.

All this talk that gets bantered around these days of controlling work loads.......wasn't any of that going on yesterday. Is 11 overs straight to much or was it the right move while going for the kill??

Most importantly Finn didn't have a chance to bowl total garbage and fluke some more stats padding wickets. So it certainly wasn't a mistake.