-
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
- Thread starter Craig
- Start date
Mingster
State Regular
Yeah I haven't seen it till now...anzac said:well I must say that I am surprised that this post has been here for nearly 24 hours and no one has made a comment let alone taken me to task over the 2nd option..............perhaps Mingster hasn't seen it yet!!!!
the reality is that Macca likes to bat on the slow / low sort of wickets & would have to change his style to deal with the extra pace & bounce he would face as an opener...............
McMillan will be there in the Test team unless someone can force him out.
We can't take Wiseman, he's a waste.
oh I agree that you have to have someone who wants to open...........& apply themselves accordingly rather than think it's just going to happen...............Macca missed a golden opportunity in the WC IMO...............Kent said:
I haven't heard anything here about Fleming opening in Tests - what's the 'logic' behind it - who's he meant to replace???? Perrsonally the idea sucks..................
the problem with NZ Test openers ATM is that they seem to be unable to keep the scoreboard ticking over & rotate the strike, let alone score quickly - Flem tries to accelerate the run rate too soon in his innings b4 he is 'in',and gets out..........
Papps needs to be given some more time to establish himself b4 any thought should be given to a 'replacement'....IMO Richardson is in just as vulnerable position based upon the summer so far - he's not scoring and he's not sticking around to provide a backbone..............
I agree that it is likely that both Astle & Macca will be selected and be a part of the starting lineups.............
As I've mentioned several times in other threads, Braces made some pretty strong statements when he took over the reigns regarding selection policy regarding form, fitness & application, as well as fitting into the role required for the team - as opposed to any individual considerations, bottom line the team benefit is foremost to player considerations.............he made broad hints that he was not happy with the way some of these issues had been addressed, and that some players needed a shake up.......
This tour will be his 3rd series in charge and I'm waiting to see him put his words into action...........there has been some attempts to address the more pressing matters within the team regarding opening & seam attack, and he has also had an impact on the ODI selections & strategies..........
IMO the action thus far has mainly concerned the 'fringe' areas, and the only 'senior' players to have 'suffered' have been Vincent & now Hart.........I have made no secret of my opinion regarding several of the other 'senior' players regarding performances, and I think player injuries / fitness should not be overlooked too hastily as per his comments..........
As I've mentioned several times in other threads, Braces made some pretty strong statements when he took over the reigns regarding selection policy regarding form, fitness & application, as well as fitting into the role required for the team - as opposed to any individual considerations, bottom line the team benefit is foremost to player considerations.............he made broad hints that he was not happy with the way some of these issues had been addressed, and that some players needed a shake up.......
This tour will be his 3rd series in charge and I'm waiting to see him put his words into action...........there has been some attempts to address the more pressing matters within the team regarding opening & seam attack, and he has also had an impact on the ODI selections & strategies..........
IMO the action thus far has mainly concerned the 'fringe' areas, and the only 'senior' players to have 'suffered' have been Vincent & now Hart.........I have made no secret of my opinion regarding several of the other 'senior' players regarding performances, and I think player injuries / fitness should not be overlooked too hastily as per his comments..........
This is chiefly Martin Crowe's idea (latched onto by others) for making the top 8 as potent as possible - the theory being that NZ have to select and bat boldly to improve their test win ratio. He doesn't want to see Papps and Richardson crawling along and letting bowlers work into a rythym, and thinks if Astle's fit then they are fighting for the same anchor role.anzac said:
Crowe's top 5:
Richardson/Papps
Fleming
Styris
Astle
McMillan
Personally I'm not convinced this will work in England, with the Duke balls swinging in sharply to Fleming's pads. No offence to Marty the batting mentor, but Hoggard could make our skipper his bunny in that situation.
However, there have already been some developments which support Crowe's idea. Braces has stated McCullum is likely to bat at #6 long-term, meaning if Astle and Macca both play, you'd think something now has to give higher up. Even if Cairns retires, Bracewell says Oram will take over the #7 spot.
Last edited:
ok I understand the theory, however IMO you have to have the right players to execute it...............
IMO some of the dismissals in the RSA series were as a result of players looking to try and dominate b4 they were 'in' - Flem & Styris...........you then need at least 1 player in the line up who is capable of holding the batting together....my current arguement is that we do not as most of our players are hitters who prefer to feel bat on ball.........the problem with that is then you can leave yourself open to a batting collapse like we saw v PAK..............
if they want to increase the scoring rate & bat more aggressively then they are going to have to make the tough decision re Richardson IMO..............admittedly he has a brilliant average & provides the backbone for the innings, but IMO if this is to become the batting strategy then he is too slow as an opener (did I hear someone say Edgar???)..........and he does not convert enough of his scores into decent tons...............
I doubt they will make any changes for this series to England as they will want Papps to be able to settle in to show what he can offer.........
I'm also a bit worried that you also need to be able to complement the batting with your bowling attack, both in terms of wicket taking and containment...............worst cast scenario you score a quickfire 300 odd & are bowled out inside Day 1, then you can't bowl the opposition out and they put on 550 over the next 2 days & you go into Day 4 250 behind with a ODI style batting lineup & no one to hold it together...........if you don't self destruct but can only repeat your 1st innings efforts then the opposition are chasing less than 100 on Day 5................
they want to copy the Aussie play book but they need to mke sure they have the right mix of skills & disciplines..............as a strategy I agree with what they are trying to do - quick run scoring advances the game & creates extra time for you to bowl at the opposition - provided you can post a decent score quickly...........
IMO some of the dismissals in the RSA series were as a result of players looking to try and dominate b4 they were 'in' - Flem & Styris...........you then need at least 1 player in the line up who is capable of holding the batting together....my current arguement is that we do not as most of our players are hitters who prefer to feel bat on ball.........the problem with that is then you can leave yourself open to a batting collapse like we saw v PAK..............
if they want to increase the scoring rate & bat more aggressively then they are going to have to make the tough decision re Richardson IMO..............admittedly he has a brilliant average & provides the backbone for the innings, but IMO if this is to become the batting strategy then he is too slow as an opener (did I hear someone say Edgar???)..........and he does not convert enough of his scores into decent tons...............
I doubt they will make any changes for this series to England as they will want Papps to be able to settle in to show what he can offer.........
I'm also a bit worried that you also need to be able to complement the batting with your bowling attack, both in terms of wicket taking and containment...............worst cast scenario you score a quickfire 300 odd & are bowled out inside Day 1, then you can't bowl the opposition out and they put on 550 over the next 2 days & you go into Day 4 250 behind with a ODI style batting lineup & no one to hold it together...........if you don't self destruct but can only repeat your 1st innings efforts then the opposition are chasing less than 100 on Day 5................
they want to copy the Aussie play book but they need to mke sure they have the right mix of skills & disciplines..............as a strategy I agree with what they are trying to do - quick run scoring advances the game & creates extra time for you to bowl at the opposition - provided you can post a decent score quickly...........
Loony BoB
International Captain
Regarding Richardson - So you think we should finish off with our first successful-looking opening partners in over a decade?
I think whatever NZ is doing right now, they're doing it well. To draw a series against SA, even at home, is quite an achievement. And I personally think even a win over Aussie on their turf is possible at the moment - but we'll have to see about that. I wouldn't put my money on it... but I think we'd have a fair chance.
Of course, maybe I'm just ****y. xD
I think whatever NZ is doing right now, they're doing it well. To draw a series against SA, even at home, is quite an achievement. And I personally think even a win over Aussie on their turf is possible at the moment - but we'll have to see about that. I wouldn't put my money on it... but I think we'd have a fair chance.
Of course, maybe I'm just ****y. xD
Papps doing his forward-shuffle at the WACA...yikes! He'll have to work hard on his game before then IMO.
That's one tour I might consider opening with Fleming actually, although someone who looks like he could be excellent in Aussie/SA conditions is Jamie How. As a tremendous back-foot strokemaker, if he's smart he'll transfer to Canterbury so he can use them more often.
That's one tour I might consider opening with Fleming actually, although someone who looks like he could be excellent in Aussie/SA conditions is Jamie How. As a tremendous back-foot strokemaker, if he's smart he'll transfer to Canterbury so he can use them more often.
Last edited:
You can keep both openers, but it looks like there has to be some kind of equally headline-grabbing decision made.anzac said:
Either McMillan will be dropped with his last test score being 82, Astle will be available but not played for the first time since the mid-90's, or Fleming will open.
Last edited:
Was it a clue or wishful thinking when Bracewell offered his thoughts on why Brendon McCullum would stay at No 6 for the England tour?
"We've got a pretty offensive top order in terms of (Scott) Styris, (Nathan) Astle, (Craig) McMillan. Then you follow that up with Cairns, (Jacob) Oram and McCullum and somebody's got to stabilise it."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2865537a10133,00.html
"We've got a pretty offensive top order in terms of (Scott) Styris, (Nathan) Astle, (Craig) McMillan. Then you follow that up with Cairns, (Jacob) Oram and McCullum and somebody's got to stabilise it."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2865537a10133,00.html
Last edited:
only in relation to this theory of accelerated scoring - IMO I'd rather see another opener with Papps who can score quicker & rotate the strike as opposed to have Fleming move up to open.....Loony BoB said:
if Papps can find his scoring form then we may not need to make any changes - Richardson can anchor the innings while Papps goes for it - much like Sehwag & Chopra do for IND.............
I'd still prefer to see a Dravid type player in the middle order tho' .........we have Flem for this role provided he doesn't try to dominate too early ..............
Kent said:
yeah but McCullum???????????????
from what I've seen he's as aggressive as any of the aforementioned - definately likes to feel bat on ball................from what I saw v RSA Oram played sensibly enough & I'd have thought that having him bat at No7 with only the tail to follow would be wasting his batting.............
I agree with that Anzac.
Bracewell may not say it publicly, but I think the real reason he wants McCullum at #6 is to trick him into thinking like he's a star batsman at this level. "Fake it 'til you make it".
If it works Oram will be the perfect #7 to replace Cairns, and psychologically other nations won't think NZ have the look of an early tail.
McCullum really dominated attacks at age group level, but since then all the focus has been on whether his glovework is up to it. Hopefully this makes it clear that any Parore-like underachievement with the bat will be unacceptable.
Bracewell may not say it publicly, but I think the real reason he wants McCullum at #6 is to trick him into thinking like he's a star batsman at this level. "Fake it 'til you make it".
If it works Oram will be the perfect #7 to replace Cairns, and psychologically other nations won't think NZ have the look of an early tail.
McCullum really dominated attacks at age group level, but since then all the focus has been on whether his glovework is up to it. Hopefully this makes it clear that any Parore-like underachievement with the bat will be unacceptable.
Cairns currently bats at 6, or has done until this move to promote McCullum.............
personally I think Oram is more of a batsman than McCullum - from what I have seen McCullum is more like a smash & grab merchant - puts the runs on quickly but doesn't stay at the crease too long..............(somebody please tell me I'm wrong).........
I guess I'm just worried about the potential lack of discipline in the batting - esp with only 5 specialists..........
personally I think Oram is more of a batsman than McCullum - from what I have seen McCullum is more like a smash & grab merchant - puts the runs on quickly but doesn't stay at the crease too long..............(somebody please tell me I'm wrong).........
I guess I'm just worried about the potential lack of discipline in the batting - esp with only 5 specialists..........
I understand from what has been said that in the post Cairns era that McCullum will bat at 6 & Oram at 7..............my question is then does batting your allrounder at 7 really merit the qualification as allrounder?????
the problem with Oram is that he is not a bowling allrounder in the traditional sence, in that he is not a 'strike' bowler but rather a 'containing' bowler - hence his low wicket returns..........
The 'traditional' team lineup is 6 specialist batsmen, 'keeper & 4 specialist bowlers - eg Australia.........with Gilchrist at 7 as a 'keeping allrounder. Cairns bats at 6 as a genuine allrounder (as does Flintoff) & with Oram to bat at 7 I don't think this is a genuine allrounder's position, as it is only 1 spot above the traditional specialist bowling 'tail'. For mind if he is batting this low in the order he should be considered a bowling specialist who can bat a bit, as opposed to an allrounder............
this then raises issues regarding the bowling attack.........esp in a 'traditional' 3 seam & 1 spin option..........with Bond on the comeback you currently have Tuffey, Oram, Bond & C Martin as your premier seam options - do you drop 1 of them or do your leave out your spin option, particularly if the current spin option is only functioning as a containment bowler as well????
IMO Oram's long term future in int cricket will be as a batting allrounder (if he can continue to develop), as opposed to being a bowling allrounder...........which again begs the question is McCullum a better batsman????????
and for the England series does this mean that the batting will have Cairns at 6, McCullum 7, Oram 8???? in which case who do you leave out of your bowling attack from Bond, Vettori, Tuffey & C Martin as there are only 3 bowling options left?????
the problem with Oram is that he is not a bowling allrounder in the traditional sence, in that he is not a 'strike' bowler but rather a 'containing' bowler - hence his low wicket returns..........
The 'traditional' team lineup is 6 specialist batsmen, 'keeper & 4 specialist bowlers - eg Australia.........with Gilchrist at 7 as a 'keeping allrounder. Cairns bats at 6 as a genuine allrounder (as does Flintoff) & with Oram to bat at 7 I don't think this is a genuine allrounder's position, as it is only 1 spot above the traditional specialist bowling 'tail'. For mind if he is batting this low in the order he should be considered a bowling specialist who can bat a bit, as opposed to an allrounder............
this then raises issues regarding the bowling attack.........esp in a 'traditional' 3 seam & 1 spin option..........with Bond on the comeback you currently have Tuffey, Oram, Bond & C Martin as your premier seam options - do you drop 1 of them or do your leave out your spin option, particularly if the current spin option is only functioning as a containment bowler as well????
IMO Oram's long term future in int cricket will be as a batting allrounder (if he can continue to develop), as opposed to being a bowling allrounder...........which again begs the question is McCullum a better batsman????????
and for the England series does this mean that the batting will have Cairns at 6, McCullum 7, Oram 8???? in which case who do you leave out of your bowling attack from Bond, Vettori, Tuffey & C Martin as there are only 3 bowling options left?????
badgerhair
U19 Vice-Captain
Against RSA, McCullum batted 6, Cairns 7 and Oram 8. Since Vettori has forgotten how to take wickets and spinners are virtually useless in England anyway before July, I'd have thought the answer to the second question was obvious.anzac said:
and for the England series does this mean that the batting will have Cairns at 6, McCullum 7, Oram 8???? in which case who do you leave out of your bowling attack from Bond, Vettori, Tuffey & C Martin as there are only 3 bowling options left?????
Cheers,
Mike
Mingster
State Regular
McCullum isn't a smash hitter like you said. He has a better technique than Oram when facing the second new ball. That is why McCullum has been promoted to 6, to face off the second new ball for Oram and Cairns. Oram will get his chance higher up the order soon when Cairns retires.anzac said:Cairns currently bats at 6, or has done until this move to promote McCullum.............
personally I think Oram is more of a batsman than McCullum - from what I have seen McCullum is more like a smash & grab merchant - puts the runs on quickly but doesn't stay at the crease too long..............(somebody please tell me I'm wrong).........
I guess I'm just worried about the potential lack of discipline in the batting - esp with only 5 specialists..........
Mingster
State Regular
OK, so totally out of nowhere, and from a particularly good bowling series' from Oram against pak and Sa, you think that he doesn't have a bowling future? What? Oram contains, but it doesn't mean that he can't take wickets as well. He relished the opportunity with the new ball in the SA series, and did the job quite well.anzac said:I understand from what has been said that in the post Cairns era that McCullum will bat at 6 & Oram at 7..............my question is then does batting your allrounder at 7 really merit the qualification as allrounder?????
the problem with Oram is that he is not a bowling allrounder in the traditional sence, in that he is not a 'strike' bowler but rather a 'containing' bowler - hence his low wicket returns..........
The 'traditional' team lineup is 6 specialist batsmen, 'keeper & 4 specialist bowlers - eg Australia.........with Gilchrist at 7 as a 'keeping allrounder. Cairns bats at 6 as a genuine allrounder (as does Flintoff) & with Oram to bat at 7 I don't think this is a genuine allrounder's position, as it is only 1 spot above the traditional specialist bowling 'tail'. For mind if he is batting this low in the order he should be considered a bowling specialist who can bat a bit, as opposed to an allrounder............
this then raises issues regarding the bowling attack.........esp in a 'traditional' 3 seam & 1 spin option..........with Bond on the comeback you currently have Tuffey, Oram, Bond & C Martin as your premier seam options - do you drop 1 of them or do your leave out your spin option, particularly if the current spin option is only functioning as a containment bowler as well????
IMO Oram's long term future in int cricket will be as a batting allrounder (if he can continue to develop), as opposed to being a bowling allrounder...........which again begs the question is McCullum a better batsman????????
and for the England series does this mean that the batting will have Cairns at 6, McCullum 7, Oram 8???? in which case who do you leave out of your bowling attack from Bond, Vettori, Tuffey & C Martin as there are only 3 bowling options left?????
So if Cairns is forced to bat down to 11, in your method, he is regarded as a tailender even though he has a batting average in the 30s?