THE MINGSTER said:
Eh....Cumming has scoreed no runs on this tour or did you forget about that?
Sinclair has no footwork and will continue to struggle in international cricket.
Jones technique is suspectible, with Richardson and Jones opening I would rather fall asleep.
Did you actually watch the match this time before making your criticisms?
Nope - can't watch what isn't being shown. Wasn't aware that that was a prerequisit to being able to make some comment or criticism. My views are based upon what I have read from match reports & other comments around the place, as well as what I understand of the game - doesn't mean that anyone has to agree.
So far as my criticism of the tactics regarding the maintaining of the batting order is concerned I don't believe you need to watch the match to make comment / criticism. It seems obvious from past experience that the potential partnerships in the top & middle orders (Jones, Cumming, Sinclair, Harris) were incapable of lifting the run rate to the target required. Only Marshall has shown the ability to stay at the crease & score runs at a decent strike rate, but even he has shown that he is not an explosive scorer who is likely to have a dramtic impact on the RRR. Those are players like McCullum, Cairns, Oram & potentially Canning.
The maintaining of the established batting order did not work in game 3, so why did they think it would do so under similar circumstances in game 5 when none of the lower order were in any form or had much time in the middle? Oram & McCullum had some limited form from the TVS Cup but none of the others.
Leaving the launch until the last 10 overs is fine if the RRR is not too oppressive. The fact that there were 3 avoidable run outs indicates a certain level of desperation, that perhaps could have been avoided by the early introduction of an 'impact' batsman. NZ have shown they were unaffraid to try this in the past with players such as Lance Cairns esp being promoted up the order to score quick runs the keep the RRR in check. Others have been used in variations of this role since then.
Further more it is considered to be a cardinal sin in Limited Overs cricket to bat out your overs in a run chase & still have wickets in hand if you are short of your target. The fact you may have gone helter skelter in the last 10 overs & lost a bunch of wickets means very little if the RRR was approaching double figures by that time. If you do not do something to address the RRR at some earlier stage of your innings you are already in a no win situation from as early as 20 - 30 overs out!!! The gist of my criticism is that they did not even appear to try to do anything different to actually win these games (3 & 5) in their run chase.
True Cumming has not set the batting wolrd alight, but considering the alternatives he appears to have shown enough temperament to be considered for the opening ODI at Home.
If he 'fails' then perhaps McIntosh will get his chance, unless the selectors change their strategy re Astle or the 'qick & early runs'. IMO he has been in the same situation as when Fleming has opened the innings - not enough runs being scored from the other end so has to try to do too much too early to meet the 'quick runs' strategy.
As much as I liked him when he first came onto the scene, Sinclair missed his opportunity on this series, much the same as Harris & Cairns IMO.
Comments re Jones indicate he has the right temperament / patience & stickability for the longer game. I am not advocating for him to open with Richardson, just that he appears to be a viable cover for the opening spot should Richardson or Vincent be injured etc, or even as no3 on a green top if required. Granted he & Richarsdon would not be pretty to watch, but it would be a fairly safe bet they would have a decent chance of seeing off the new ball.
