*Official** New Zealand in England

[luckyeddie]

Just out of interest, when were the last times England actually amassed huge first innings leads against a decent rival?

That's not me trying to be snarky - I don't follow England closely enough to remember I guess.

This one

 

[badgerhair]

His innings helped put England back in the match, along with Geriant Jones' 46. I was impressed by their innings, but both threw their innings away with over aggresive shots.

Oh, having your cake and eating it is common round your way, is it?

It is pretty bloody silly to be impressed with batsmen who display aggression and then criticise them for making a mistake.

I guess Astle's double hundred at Christchurch was quite an impressive innings until he threw it away with an over-aggressive shot.

Are there any aggressive innings which have ended without the batsman "throwing it away"? The manner of their dismissals was almost inevitable - the interesting question was when, not if, it would happen.

Flintoff and Jones could have done anything from fail completely to take the game irreversibly away from NZ. What they actually achieved was to give England a slight edge, which the bowlers then largely failed to capitalise on.

Cheers,

Mike

 

[badgerhair]

Just out of interest, when were the last times England actually amassed huge first innings leads against a decent rival?

How about this one from nine months ago, which is a pretty apposite example.

Cheers,

Mike

 

[tooextracool]

England's bowling figures in New Zealand, 2002:

Name Mat O M R W Ave Best 5 10 SR Econ
MJ Hoggard 3 119.2 34 402 17 23.64 7-63 1 - 42.1 3.36
A Flintoff 3 93 20 313 9 34.77 3-49 - - 62.0 3.36
AF Giles 3 100 20 236 6 39.33 4-103 - - 100.0 2.36

Hoggard definately bowled well, only Caddick with 19 wickets performed better. IMHO Hoggard only bowls well when there is swing, and that is dependent on the conditions. In this morning session he will be at his most dangerous.

hoggard only bowls when when there is movement of the pitch and in the air. hes either too short or too full otherwise and most of what hes bowled in this test so far has been rubbish. i think england should consider dropping him after headingly because the other 2 wickets(trent bridge and oval?) are a lot more batter friendly and hoggard unfriendly

 

[marc71178]

The key in England's innings will be Flintoff.
It's going to be difficult for guys like Hussain & Thorpe who like to get their eye in and take their time to fully come to terms with the pitch, whereas Flintoff will throw the bat at anything and the pitch won't necessarily affect him too badly.

The Flintoff of a while ago might have done that, but he has matured in his shot selection in the last 12 months (ever since he was promoted up to number 5 in ODI's IMO) and he now knows he can't hit everything out of the ground.

Hussain batted very well in the first Innings as well (it took a very good ball to remove him) but if the bounce gets more uneven then we could see more dismissals like Thorpe's.

I think also sometime during this series, Cairns will have one last say with the ball (and be hammered the rest of the time) but I hope it's tommorow.

If it's the get hammered bit, so do I

 

[meatspx]

McCullum batted well, but has a major deficiency that the English should exploit.

He has trouble defending the short-ball that is on off-stump or just outside; anything wider he'll throw the kitchen sink at. He also looks unconvincing when he tries to pull the ball in front of square, and has been dismissed a few times in ODIs because of this (caught in front of square). He's extremely short and pace can trouble him when playing this shot, with the ball hitting the splice of his bat (I'd place a fielder at midwicket on the edge of the circle for the catch).

2 slips, gully, point, thirdman, cover, mid-off, mid-wicket, and fine leg for McCullum's field. Perhaps osmeone can be put in short-leg too, taking out gully.

England should pepper him with short fast straight bowling, same with Richardson.

 

[marc71178]

I saw that and it at first it looked like it came off his arm, not his glove.

No, definite glove - would've been a good decision to give it out (much like the Butcher one was a superb call), but umpires are I guess only human.

For a talented player, he does seem to be over releant on boundaries. He got tied down on his innings of 63, and then threw it away when he fell into Fleming's trap.

His innings helped put England back in the match, along with Geriant Jones' 46. I was impressed by their innings, but both threw their innings away with over aggresive shots.

They'd both scored a lot of runs playing in that manner, and I don't really fault them for continuing to bat like that. Unfortunately C4 had racing on for most of their partnership so I was unable to watch it. Jones dismissal wasn't as bad as Flintoff's IMO, but at the end of the day they both got very good runs and at the time looked to have put the game back in England's control.

However with these 2 evenly-matched sides the game is swinging back and forth regularly...

 

[tooextracool]

Yeah sure the English bowlers have more variety but if that was the case, you'd think they would have been heads & shoulders above NZ in this test..which clearly they haven't.

Clearly Tuffey is struggling for rhythm & Cairns is below test standard now for bowling..I also think NZ's bowling can improve.

not really i think its the english batting that has messed up. i dont think too many of those english wickets fell because of good bowling,bar maybe hussain. most of the other wickets were poor shots.
england definetly has more variety than the NZ bowlers IMO. flintoff is a fast bang it in type bowler, a bit like ntini, harmison has height and plenty of pace, simon jones bowls well with the old ball. i think NZ's attack seems to be all of the same pace with no variety whatsovever.

 

[marc71178]

What did people think of the decision to send in Hoggard as a nightwatchman?

100% the right move. He came in and saw us through to the close, then into the 3rd morning and through the early overs of the New Ball - worked a treat.

IMO England were in a strong position and really I'm sure Nasser Hussain is capable of going to bat out of batting for a few overs and have to established batsmen at the crease, then one established batsman and a tailender.

He is capable of it yes, but why make him do it when he'd then have to do it all again on the next morning - just wasn't worth it!

 

[marc71178]

If Butcher, Hussain, and Thorpe had batted the way they usually do, that 250 lead would have been a formality, but they all stuffed up big time, so it wasn't.

I think that's a bit harsh!

The 2 lefties both got out to balls that kept a bit low off the pitch.

Hussain batted very fluently but then was undone by a super delivery.

None of them "stuffed up" IMO

 

[marc71178]

This one

Oh the day Vaughan got one of the best batsmen out with a cracking delivery.

He also bowled SRT with a decent ball as well...

 

[tooextracool]

The Flintoff of a while ago might have done that, but he has matured in his shot selection in the last 12 months (ever since he was promoted up to number 5 in ODI's IMO) and he now knows he can't hit everything out of the ground.

you think so? the same flintoff who seemed to always find a way to get out to sarwan and then played another ridiculous shot to get out in this test match. i dont think flintoff can go 6 balls without trying to hit a boundary.

 

[marc71178]

you think so? the same flintoff who seemed to always find a way to get out to sarwan and then played another ridiculous shot to get out in this test match. i dont think flintoff can go 6 balls without trying to hit a boundary.

The same Flintoff who is now getting into the 60s and 70s rather than the 20s and 30s, and who played 2 superb innings which were anything but hitting everything over the winter (in SL and the WI)

If he hadn't matured in his shot selection please explain how he's scoring that many more each time now?

 

[tooextracool]

The same Flintoff who is now getting into the 60s and 70s rather than the 20s and 30s, and who played 2 superb innings which were anything but hitting everything over the winter (in SL and the WI)

If he hadn't matured in his shot selection please explain how he's scoring that many more each time now?

he has become a better batsman but if yesterdays innings was any indication he still hasnt become a more patient player. he still hasnt learnt that in test match cricket you dont need to hit a boundary every over!

 

[Tim]

Look, if NZ play conservatively..it'll be a draw. It's time they backed the bowlers to defend 280. Losing is a disappointment, but i'd much prefer they tried to have a go at it rather than post 400 & make Day 5 a bore-fest.

 

[Tim]

Im tipping Chris Martin to be the key player for NZ with the ball. If the bounce stays low then the lefties are going to struggle with his angle.

 

[Craig]

He is capable of it yes, but why make him do it when he'd then have to do it all again on the next morning - just wasn't worth it!

Even though Hoggard halted England's progress?

He has improved his batting out of sight when I first saw him, I wouldnt of had him as a nightwatchman several years back, but credit to him he's improved it. Ashley Giles seems good enough to be a nightwatchman (well he can hold a bat) for me.

 

[Tim]

Giles is into the attack, this could be rewarding or disastrous for England.

 

[Loony BoB]

How does McCullum usually handle spin? If it were Cairns or Oram or maybe Styris, I'd say the spinner might get hit big, but I can't see Richardson doing it and I'm not aware of McCullum taking advantage of spin as of yet.

EDIT: Oh, and I can't fault Hoggard for his nightwatchman performance, I don't think he did anything wrong given his batting average and the fact that he's in the side purely for his bowling ability.

 

[southern man]

McCullum wont do anything rash until he gets his pending century.
He loves spinners and taking them on.