*Official** New Zealand in England

[anzac]

So go for a batsman who can fill in spin!

exactly - 4 specialist bowlers (including your primary allrounders), and back up options from a 6 man batting lineup including spin........as per the Aussies - (their back up weakness is they only have spin as their backup options - no swing / seam slow / medium pace)...........

 

[Tim]

Thats why I think if Styris can bowl spin as well as Bracewell says he can..NZ can then leave Vettori out if he's not playing well..rather than playing him just because we need variety in the attack, regardless of his form.

I don't think we'll see Styris bowling spin in internationals until he trials it for Northern Districts, I think.

 

[anzac]

Kent, where are you reading or hearing all this stuff about Bond not playing any matches? From what I've read they reckon he could be a started for the 2nd test.

I seriously doubt Bracewell would have wasted a spot in the touring squad if they had doubted whether Bond would play any games at all.

From other reports i've read, he's progressed along better than NZ Cricket had hoped for & the chances of him playing in the test series are increasing by the day.

I get the same indications as Kent from the reports on the NZ cricket site - when the squad was announced there was a report that they were looking to Bond as a longer term recovery with the prospect he may be brought back slowly with the ODI series in mind....hence part of the reasoning behind my rants at the squad selection & numbers..........

unfortunately not having access to domestic news etc means that we can be behind the times so far as any up to date info is concerned.............

 

[anzac]

Thats why I think if Styris can bowl spin as well as Bracewell says he can..NZ can then leave Vettori out if he's not playing well..rather than playing him just because we need variety in the attack, regardless of his form.

I don't think we'll see Styris bowling spin in internationals until he trials it for Northern Districts, I think.

hadn't heard this b4 - puts a new slant / option on things so far as team selections goes.....

if Styris can bowl spin & Bracewell thinks it is up to the job, then this will help him cement his place in the batting lineup................likewise if he is as good as Bracewell thinks then why not use him - if it does not work then he can be taken off - otherwise he could be a 'surprise' weapon - get the batsmen out thru surprise as much as quality bowling......

 

[Tim]

On a happier note..I read at stuff.co.nz that Bond has apparently added the out-swinger to his weaponary.

That makes him extremely dangerous, as apparently Ashley Ross believes Bond will have lost none of his pace but he now has the ability to bowl both in-swingers and out-swingers at 150 km's.

 

[anzac]

Cairns at 8 and Oram at 9 is not realistic IMO, basically because NZ need to start taking 20 wickets more than once a year. I was very disappointed to see both Styris and Bracewell speak out about the Basin being too hard and fast (I couldn't picture Steve Waugh telling off the Perth groundsmen for providing a fair surface, even if his side lost by an innings).

McCullum is all but confirmed at #6, and Bracewell has stated "a batsman will be disappointed" when they reach Lords. He also mentioned in that story that he'll have no qualms considering Fleming for one of the opening spots.

I agre that NZ needs a bowling attack capable of taking 20 wickets, but you do this by selecting the best 'strike' bowlers - not by picking 3 'containing' bowlers who only take a wicket or two and then dropping a batsman to make room for another bowler because your 4th bowler is a spin option that you may not need and is not taking wickets.............

Bond & Martin are the proven 'strike' options, Cairns was able to remove the tail by the end of the RSA series, Tuffey & Oram primarily get their wickets thru pressure & line & length / bounce as opposed to genuine wicket taking deliveries (primarily because of their pace being low 130s)....Vettori just isn't taking wickets..........

I agree re The Basin - I thought it was the intention of NZCC to produce pitches where the batsmen can play strokes off consistant pace & bounce, and the bowlers are also encouraged to use this to attack........to give them the benefit of the doubt I assume they mean that the wicket was better suited to RSA than NZ at this stage of the team development, rather than calling for a return to the slow / low pitches...........

unless he is able to put together an average in the 40s to prove me wrong then I don't see McCullum as a genuine no6...........esp after this series when Cairns is no longer a consideration.............so far as batting goes Gilchrist has to be the bench mark for 'keepers and the Aussies have him cemented at 7 despite S Waugh's retirement making no6 available - they have maintained 6 specialist batsmen in their side as they want that depth to be able to maintain their attacking batting strategy........

to me it's an indication that the NZ policy will be to play only 5 specialist batsmen and they prefer McCullum at 6 ahead of Oram because of his experience as opener...............IMO they do not have enough specialist batting in the team if they intend to 'advance the game' like the Aussies as reported.........not having a 6th batsman means that you are quickly in trouble if you loose your no3 / 4 cheaply, as did happen in the RSA series - Styris 'saved' the innings in the 2nd Test, but could not repeat in the 3rd...........similarly Sinclair resurected the 1st innings in the 3rd test but was unable to go on with it & the lower order were unable to repeat their 2nd test performances...........

IMO the problem with "allrounders" around the lower order (Cairns, McCullum, Oram, Vettori), is that should not be relied upon for a regular sizeable contribution to the score, such as what was achieved v RSA - to me that was an ideal situation that should not be relied upon - just as easily you can have the reverse as per the PAK series..........

the bulk of your innings should be achieved by your top & middle order batsmen - the lower order contribution is more likely to be around 20 odd runs each with 1 substantial innings if you are lucky........

I am aware that NZ's batting 'strength' has been in it's middle & lower orders and the depth at which contributions can be made - however despite the 'success' of the NZ lower order IMO this is NOT a formula for winning tests or series if your top & middle orders are not contributing each innings.....for one thing it indicates that the opposition were at least on top of your specialist batting, and you are relying upon your allrounders & bowlers to contribute your runs as well as take your wickets - why not then just select a top order & have the rest as 'allrounders'????????

 

[anzac]

On a happier note..I read at stuff.co.nz that Bond has apparently added the out-swinger to his weaponary.

That makes him extremely dangerous, as apparently Ashley Ross believes Bond will have lost none of his pace but he now has the ability to bowl both in-swingers and out-swingers at 150 km's.

 

[Kent]

Although I said that might be a possibility on here a while back, let's not start wetting ourselves about some kind of +20kph version of Simon Doull or anything!

Even if he believes it, IMO it was unfair for Ashley Ross to publicly place that much expectation on Bond's return. These guys were billing Vettori as "new and improved" when they altered his technique, so forgive me for being a bit cynical.

Tim - here's the story Anzac and I read about Bond playing the tests being "an absolute bonus". Of course, there's a chance Bracewell has been given reasons to feel more optimistic since it was written.

http://www.nzcricket.co.nz/display.aspx?pri=1&cid=1568

 

[Kent]

unless he is able to put together an average in the 40s to prove me wrong then I don't see McCullum as a genuine no6...........esp after this series when Cairns is no longer a consideration.............so far as batting goes Gilchrist has to be the bench mark for 'keepers and the Aussies have him cemented at 7 despite S Waugh's retirement making no6 available - they have maintained 6 specialist batsmen in their side as they want that depth to be able to maintain their attacking batting strategy........

to me it's an indication that the NZ policy will be to play only 5 specialist batsmen and they prefer McCullum at 6 ahead of Oram because of his experience as opener...............IMO they do not have enough specialist batting in the team if they intend to 'advance the game' like the Aussies as reported.........not having a 6th batsman means that you are quickly in trouble if you loose your no3 / 4 cheaply, as did happen in the RSA series - Styris 'saved' the innings in the 2nd Test, but could not repeat in the 3rd...........similarly Sinclair resurected the 1st innings in the 3rd test but was unable to go on with it & the lower order were unable to repeat their 2nd test performances...........

Didn't Gilchrist score a big ton at #3 recently? Perhaps it's the Aussies who have been getting it wrong!

Anyway, IMO Gilchrist bats at 7 because he hunts boundaries and dislikes playing any other way. With an average well over 50 he has the credentials to bat higher, but it's not like Australia have had much trouble taking 20 wickets in recent times. In contrast, NZ must just about lead the world in draw % over the last few years.

McCullum brings more of a Dean Jones moxie to the crease than a brutal power game, and I think I can see Bracewell's vision of him thriving on a challenge, as well as adding momentum with quick running, or given his role as a domestic opener, seeing off the second new ball. Like you I'm not 100% convinced, but I can see enough merit in the idea to give it a chance for a series.

Besides, unless we go back to an unreliable Sinclair or McMillan to be our 6th batsman in the post-Cairns era, the young specialists of McCullum's age weren't noted for having any more promise at age-group level than McCullum was himself.

I could see Ross Taylor at #6 in a year or two perhaps, but I think grooming McCullum into a sort of Alec Stewart role would be their preferred option. Whether McCullum's technique allows them to do that at international level remains to be seen, but his scores as a teenager suggest he's certainly got a better eye than most.

 

[Tim]

Fair points there Kent.

It'll be interesting to see who NZ opts for at #6 once Cairns retires. Will it be another batsmen or an allrounder? personally I can't see another all-rounder in NZ (apart from Oram) who is capable of holding down #6 at international level. Players like Matt Walker, Tama Canning etc are probably more #7, #8, #9 batsmen. Jeff Wilson is a name a few people have forgotten..but I have doubts that he could bat at #6..certainly worth a go though at #7 or #8 if he gets over injury problems.

I think if Astle's knee holds out then it'll be Macca & Skippy fighting for #6 although i'd like to see perhaps a Ross Taylor or the like coming in as I think there's enough experience in that top order to allow for it.

Perhaps NZ should follow the Australian way & pick a batsmen regardless of where he bats at Provincial level to bat at #6. I'd be looking strongly at Peter Fulton..probably after next season though.

I hope Jesse Ryder gets over his discipline problems because he is a sensational batsman and could really be the attacking type of player needed at the top of the order to spark a test match into life.
From what I've seen of Ryder, he has a similar no-fear approach to that of some of the the Indian batsmen. He'll have a go at anything 9 times out of 10 & if he doesn't pay off so be it. That may frustrate the public, but when it does come off..a big quickfire innings could potentially win the match.

 

[Kent]

I agree re The Basin - I thought it was the intention of NZCC to produce pitches where the batsmen can play strokes off consistant pace & bounce, and the bowlers are also encouraged to use this to attack........to give them the benefit of the doubt I assume they mean that the wicket was better suited to RSA than NZ at this stage of the team development, rather than calling for a return to the slow / low pitches...........

You're right they were only unhappy because they were playing SA, but to me that's ridiculous. You can't tell groundsmen that you want a belter one season then a dustbowl the next, and there are some serious questions about whether it's wise even if you could. Look at the variations at some of Australia's test venues - why don't the Aussies get upset when Perth has more bounce or the SCG turns?

Basically my take on it is that the BC's were smugly crowing about how they were hammering the #2 ranked team in the world, then SA struck a surface on which they could show glimpses of why they achieved that, and the BC's suddenly cry foul.

Amazingly the players were dismayed by the pitch leaving them exposed, rather than dismayed at their own weaknesses and inability to adapt. Where have I heard that one before! After all the "same for both sides" stuff from Fleming and Martin Crowe when we hosted the Indians, I'm sure Ganguly would get a chuckle out of this article by what could easily be his new pal, Sunjay Styris....

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2864115a2201,00.html

 

[Neil Pickup]

Nicky Boje managed eight wickets in that last test, but in reality he actually got none of us out. All eight dismissals came from poor shots or bad options. That's why we lost.

Now I know where Richard's gone. He's ghost-writing Styris' diary.

 

[Tim]

What worries me is that in recent times..NZ have shown absolutely no respect to weak spinners like Nicky Boje & also Dirk Viljoen a few years back who embarassed us. Yet against Warne, Murali & Harbhajan they've done really well.

There's no doubt that in the Wellington test, NZ targeted Boje & it all came to pieces...I expect that they won't be changing their minds on targeting Giles or Batty.
So come the end of June, I would not be surprised to see Giles or Batty taking a few wickets with Styris, McCullum, McMillan etc eyeing the boundary rope at long off.

 

[Kent]

Now I know where Richard's gone. He's ghost-writing Styris' diary.

Heck, Richard is still missing? All sarcasm aside, that's a bit of a worry I would've thought.

 

[Tim]

Its not unusual for people to go MIA when they've taken a hammering from other forum users.
But If Richard does happen to read this, I hope he returns.

 

[luckyeddie]

Its not unusual for people to go MIA when they've taken a hammering from other forum users.
But If Richard does happen to read this, I hope he returns.

I think that goes for most of us (well, the more mature ones like me ) because although he has some ideas which are unconventional or novel, he is still very knowledgable about the game.

 

[Tim]

It appears that technically NZ have taken 16 players to England.

Matthew Sinclair is already there playing in the Norwich league & Michael Mason is also about to set off for a club.

Financially NZ Cricket have probably saved themselves quite a few dollars by sending two players to league cricket rather than keeping them with the squad. At least this way both Sinclair & Mason are playing cricket rather than the likely option of none at all if they were with the Black Caps.

 

[Kent]

I'm England's best, claims Caddick

By Matt Hughes, Evening Standard
29 April 2004

Given Steve Harmison's heroics in the Caribbean, it is no surprise Andy Caddick believes there is one English bowler who stands head and shoulders above his contemporaries. The trouble is it's not the Durham paceman he rates as the best around ... it's himself.

These are bold words coming from someone who has not played a Test for 16 months and who spent much of the winter flat on his back suffering from a prolapsed disc. But Caddick, who was forced to take morphine to numb the pain, has never shrunk with the violets and believes he is now fit enough to plot an international return.

Caddick said: "I'm still the best bowler in the country as far as I'm concerned and am fitter than ever. I've got 15 years' cricketing experience and 10 at Test level, whereas the boys playing at the moment are at the start of their careers. They've got a lot to learn and have a lot of cricket ahead of them.

"When I'm on song and firing on all cylinders, I'm the best there is. There's no one in England who can match my figures and I hope to use that experience to get back into the squad. That's a realistic goal and I should be able to achieve it. I don't think I'm an old hand and it'd be nice to get to the 300-wicket mark."

rest of article



I really hope Caddick gets picked, just to add the extra spice I'll need to keep my resolve well into the cold winter nights ahead. I'll soon forget sleep if we start smashing him!

 

[luckyeddie]

Me too.

I think that the Kiwi with the FA Cup ears still has a lot to offer English cricket - and if he makes a comeback, there's a little fellow in the cupboard who might do so too.

<quack> who are you talking to?

Nobody

<quack> Some of them are

 

[tooextracool]

I'm England's best, claims Caddick

By Matt Hughes, Evening Standard
29 April 2004

Given Steve Harmison's heroics in the Caribbean, it is no surprise Andy Caddick believes there is one English bowler who stands head and shoulders above his contemporaries. The trouble is it's not the Durham paceman he rates as the best around ... it's himself.

These are bold words coming from someone who has not played a Test for 16 months and who spent much of the winter flat on his back suffering from a prolapsed disc. But Caddick, who was forced to take morphine to numb the pain, has never shrunk with the violets and believes he is now fit enough to plot an international return.

Caddick said: "I'm still the best bowler in the country as far as I'm concerned and am fitter than ever. I've got 15 years' cricketing experience and 10 at Test level, whereas the boys playing at the moment are at the start of their careers. They've got a lot to learn and have a lot of cricket ahead of them.

"When I'm on song and firing on all cylinders, I'm the best there is. There's no one in England who can match my figures and I hope to use that experience to get back into the squad. That's a realistic goal and I should be able to achieve it. I don't think I'm an old hand and it'd be nice to get to the 300-wicket mark."

rest of article



I really hope Caddick gets picked, just to add the extra spice I'll need to keep my resolve well into the cold winter nights ahead. I'll soon forget sleep if we start smashing him!

didnt he also once say that he knew more about pace bowling than wasim and waqar?