• 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 England

Days of Grace

International Captain
Shah looks to be a fairly gun batsman, Rich. If you don't want him, I'm sure the black caps would have him.

If Oram comes back next game, who will he replace? Logic would say Hopkins. He hasn't shown much with the bat and Elliott has basically cemeted his spot in the team for a good season (I can see him replacing Styris actually).

McCullum (wk)
How
Taylor
Styris (score some runs!!)
Flynn
Elliott
Oram
Vettori
Mills
Southee
Gillespie.

All of a sudden, that team doesn't look half bad.

After this tour, maybe:

McCullum (wk)
Ryder
How
Taylor
Styris
Elliott
Oram
Franklin
Vettori (c)
Mills
Southee

Gun. 8 bowling options too.
 

Raghav

International Vice-Captain
Fantastic match..... Tim Southee.... you are the player for the future. Lets preserve atleast him....we lost Geoff Allott, Shane Bond and many good bowlers...atleast we save him ...

What a Captaincy from Vettori? Stunning fielding effort by kiwis....good allround effort

Vettori: Nice to hear your message in the press. Go for the series win. I knwo NZ can do that from here....

Elliot: You are needed badly for NZ now. Play well in the next two matches and you will be the man of the series....
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Shah looks to be a fairly gun batsman, Rich. If you don't want him, I'm sure the black caps would have him.
In the longer form he's an excellent batsman, but he's not in the shorter form and never has been despite multiple opportunities. NZ might well give him a try but I'll tell you now - there's next to no chance he'd do better than the likes of Fulton, Taylor, etc. Unless he were to do an Elliott. Who, BTW, is also probably better than him. But it is only a single knock so far - Shah got 28* and 62 in his first 2 ODI innings as well.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Thing is its SP and for whatever reason, he can never seem to give NZ credit (at least this is my impression since I started lurking on the forum during the CB series last year) so I decided to point out that we actualy did play well at times.
It's a waste of time, really. Kiwi posters do it pretty regularly, there's a whole massive back catalog of examples.

He only ever praises players from Durham as a rule, with occasional remarks toward those from other teams who are obviously too good to trash.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I think this match counts for nothing when looking at how a batsman is performing. It was obviously a difficult pitch to play on demonstrated by both teams low scores.
It certainly wasn't an easy pitch to bat on against the seamers, but that doesn't mean most batsmen weren't at fault for their dismissal on both sides. The only batsmen all day who were genuinely got out in any way were Wright and Shah (who are both crap anyway, though admittedly the former rather more so than the latter).

McCullum - decent ball that he didn't elevate enough and you'd expect him to do so really.
How - crap ball that he'd smash 29 times out of 30 or so.
Styris - harmless short delivery that he somehow managed to glove.
Taylor - straight ball, missed.
Flynn - woeful Full-Toss that he somehow managed to sky.
Hopkins - first a short ball cut to point and dropped, then another short ball pulled to fine-leg.
Vettori - first a harmless ball outside off that he somehow edged and was dropped, then another harmless ball that he simply gave catching practice to long-on.
Elliott, Southee and Mills - obviously just skying ones when the slog was on, fair enough, that happens.
Pietersen - poor ball, would put away 29 times out of 30 if not more, somehow straight to mid-wicket.
Bell - woeful ball, managed to hit straight to point.
Bopara - basically exactly the same as Bell.
Ambrose - played at one he should've left under those circumstances.
Swann - read Pietersen
Collingwood - straight ball, missed.
Broad - caught down leg-side, always poor.
Tremlett - skying one when the game was almost up, obviously no real expectations there anyway.

Really, there was one hell of a lot of very, very, very poor batting yesterday. Yes, the bowling was in areas that made scoring difficult quite often, and if the wickets had come from decent (if not wicket-taking) balls you could say fair enough. But so many of them came from out-and-out bad deliveries. Had the batting been good on both sides, we might well have seen 250+ scores against that sort of bowling.

Thing is, though, many of these players have done little or nothing to suggest they're good ODI batsmen either yet or recently. How (basically 3 excellent knocks in 13 and little besides), Styris (recent form very poor), Flynn, Hopkins, Bell and Bopara fit this description. Plus Wright and Shah who were genuinely got out by good deliveries. Then there were some tailenders \ lower-order batsmen (Vettori, Swann, Broad) who are obviously not people who you can expect runs from regularly even though they're not hopeless.

Only Pietersen and Taylor are class ODI batsmen who should be doing far better than their abysmal dismissals yesterday.
 

Flem274*

123/5
The problem with Shah is he's at five or six all the time and he's a top order player. We saw what happened when we tried to turn Peter Fulton into a finisher, the same is happening to poor Shah.

Elliots batting, whilst its his best part, ironically won't be the main advantage he provides. If we go in with McCullum opening and Oram at six and Elliott at seven then his bowling will be the main factor. With six bowlers we can afford to give him a few overs in the middle of the innings and see how he goes or alternatively if somebody is getting tonked we have a semi-frontline bowler as the sixth option. Plus he'll hopefully make a handy number seven bat. I find it interesting that he's been noted by I think it was Waddle earlier in the season as a player who stands up when no one else does. Worked last night and if what the forgotten commentator said was true then we could develop an infuriating foursome of Elliott, Vettori, Franklin and Mills.

OK I'll shut up and summarise: Elliott reminds me of Styris in his early days. Though obviously he shouldn't be expected to make the transformation into a top order batsman that Styris made. Would be nice if it happened though.
 

Flem274*

123/5
.Thing is, though, many of these players have done little or nothing to suggest they're good ODI batsmen either yet or recently. How (basically 3 excellent knocks in 13 and little besides)
Still struggling to admit you're wrong about How I see. :p

And try 6 fifties and 1 brilliant hundred in 23 games (off the top of my head.) And yes I included Bangladesh, its a boring waste of time factoring in semi-ODI class teams, dropped catches, ya mother etc.:p
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Nah, it's not. Fortunately How hasn't had any let-offs though. It's only substandard teams that distort the picture.

As I say, he's played 3 excellent innings in the 13 ODI innings against ODI-class teams since his recall last SH summer. He was poor before then. But he's also had 10 more where he's done not-much.

It's not actually a case of admitting I'm wrong about How - I don't recall ever bagging him as a ODI batsman on CW. But he's not done a great deal even since his recall, in which time he's been far better than he was in his first stint.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
The problem with Shah is he's at five or six all the time and he's a top order player. We saw what happened when we tried to turn Peter Fulton into a finisher, the same is happening to poor Shah.
Let's remember what happened when Shah batted in the top-order now, shall we...?
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Or possibly, just possibly, apart from the great NZ collapse, England were outplayed by a side that played better cricket?
Less worse cricket is how I'd describe it.

Are you now giving credit to NZ for getting wickets through rubbish deliveries being hit or guided straight to a fielder? Because between that and the odd clueless prod at the ball that pretty much covers England's first seven dismissals.
 

PhoenixFire

International Coach
Agreed. England were pathetic yesterday, we gifted NZ nearly all of our wickets and NZ gifted us most of theirs TBH. NZ are still a poor side TBH.
 

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Nah, it's not. Fortunately How hasn't had any let-offs though. It's only substandard teams that distort the picture.

As I say, he's played 3 excellent innings in the 13 ODI innings against ODI-class teams since his recall last SH summer. He was poor before then. But he's also had 10 more where he's done not-much.

It's not actually a case of admitting I'm wrong about How - I don't recall ever bagging him as a ODI batsman on CW. But he's not done a great deal even since his recall, in which time he's been far better than he was in his first stint.
Haha, you're a deadset joke sometimes.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Haha, you're a deadset joke sometimes.
So are several other people, infinitely more so than I, yet you don't say a thing about them.

Not that that post was a joke, obviously, else I'd not have made it. Everything I said there was 100% true.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Pretty much nothing I said there was an opinion. I've already said - I don't currently have all that much of an opinion of How as a ODI player, he hasn't quite played enough.

My previous post simply stated a few facts.
 

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
So are several other people, infinitely more so than I, yet you don't say a thing about them.

Not that that post was a joke, obviously, else I'd not have made it. Everything I said there was 100% true.
Thing is Richard you're an intelligent and you clearly have knowledge of cricket. But some of the opinions you hold on the game are downright ludicrous most of the time.

Take being called out as a compliment. I don't bother with people whose posts I don't care much for.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
What sort of things, in relation to that post which produced above reply?

As I say, I didn't really express any opinion on How in that previous post. That's why I find it odd in this case.
 

andruid

Cricketer Of The Year
Question, why are England making a habit of teasing whatever Irish player is in form with 12th man duties?

Ed Joyce,
Eoin Morgan,
William Portefield
:-O
 

Lord Flasheart

Cricket Spectator
Let's take a look at England:

- they are playing a team that has been extremely weakened due to retirements, injuries and the ICL.

- they are playing at home.

- they should be 2-1 down if it wasn't for some cynical tactics and the incompetence of two umpires who were afraid of upsetting the home crowd.

- their only consistent matchwinner is as South African as aparthied.

- they arrogantly expect to beat a side who thumped them 3-1 a few months ago and who are placed higher than them in the rankings.

Let's all laugh at England :laugh:
 

Top