**Official** New Zealand in South Africa

[jcas0167]

You'd rather play with 10 players than select Franklin, Munro or Guptill?

Oops, Munro would slot in at 7.

I guess no one agrees with my suggestion of Brownlie at 3 against England? I think Williamson would be better suited to come in and face Swann or Panesar. Also, I have concerns about Williamson poking at balls outside off stump.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

The only way Williamson is going to sort out his problems outside off against the new ball is at 3, pushing him down the order will just paper over the cracks.

 

[Prince EWS]

The only way Williamson is going to sort out his problems outside off against the new ball is at 3, pushing him down the order will just paper over the cracks.

Yep, exactly. His big problem at the moment is that back foot punch he plays; he doesn't get his foot across properly and isn't in control of the shot at all. It's Sinclair-esque. It's probably not an ideal shot in South Africa in general - he should probably be looking to either cut, play down the ground or leave those balls - but if he's going to play it then he needs to move his back foot further across so he's got more control over the shot. Even when he got bowled by Robbie P he was playing that same shot -vertical bat but square off the back foot.

Running away from the problem isn't going to be good for either him or New Zealand Cricket; he just needs to just do some technical work on that particular shot. To me it just seems far too rare for someone like Kane who overall does seem to be suited to batting three and has the ability to do it to actually come through in New Zealand to waste. It's going to be a lot easier to find more fives and sixes. He just needs to work through it.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

Oops, Munro would slot in at 7.

I guess no one agrees with my suggestion of Brownlie at 3 against England? I think Williamson would be better suited to come in and face Swann or Panesar. Also, I have concerns about Williamson poking at balls outside off stump.

You realize that Swann or Panesar are probably going to be brought into the attack around the 15-20 over mark, so #3 is as likely to face spin as #5

 

[jcas0167]

The only way Williamson is going to sort out his problems outside off against the new ball is at 3, pushing him down the order will just paper over the cracks.

True, but for the purposes of this series I think you'd maximise both Williamson & Brownlie's strengths by switching them. He can continue to work on it. He's only 22, if you look at Australia they kept guys like Ponting in the middle order until they were a bit older before shifting them to 3.

 

[Prince EWS]

Panesar's not going to be playing.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Australia actually had decent alternatives for the number three slot though. With us, someone's gotta do it and the best man for that is Kane. I'm not convinced enough about Brownlie against the seaming ball to chuck him up to three anyway.

 

[Bahnz]

So what are we looking for from them tonight? At this stage, it's too much to expect that we take the game into the last day, or make SA bat again. Still, I'm hoping for a century by one of Watling or Bronwlie, and that overall we lose by less than an innings and 100. Probably expecting too much.

 

[jcas0167]

So what are we looking for from them tonight? At this stage, it's too much to expect that we take the game into the last day, or make SA bat again. Still, I'm hoping for a century by one of Watling or Bronwlie, and that overall we lose by less than an innings and 100. Probably expecting too much.

I'm hoping they promote Boult ahead of Patel & Wagner. Whatever happens, I'm really happy for Watling that after missing out last year through injury he's now showing his class at test level.

I remember his test debut against Pakistan when he opened the batting and was leading NZ to victory when rain wiped out the final session. He was 60 not out and looking good for a ton.

 

[Immenso]

So what are we looking for from them tonight? At this stage, it's too much to expect that we take the game into the last day, or make SA bat again. Still, I'm hoping for a century by one of Watling or Bronwlie, and that overall we lose by less than an innings and 100. Probably expecting too much.

If they make it the second new ball, I will be interested in how they handle it. Brownlie got out first over of new ball in Cape Town. That, and how Munro goes, is really the only thing of interest to me really.

 

[Mike5181]

1. Martin Guptill
2. Brendon McCullum
3. Kane Williamson
4. Ross Taylor
5. Dean Brownlie
6. BJ Watling
7. Luke Ronchi+
8. Daniel Vettori
9. Doug Bracewell
10. Tim Southee
11. Trent Boult

I think we have to focus on getting as many players in their best positions as we can. We just have to live with Guptill, or some other sub-par player as opener for now because moving other players up the order isn't worth it. Watling's an option, but I'd prefer we kept him down at six if Ronchi's going to be in the team. Moving him up the order could potentially ruin him, and he already failed there just last year. I originally pushed Flynn as the guy who could be used as an opener, but I think his performances have been so bad that it's just no longer an option anymore. I do hate the idea of having three seamers + Vettori, but I don't think we have much of a choice at the moment. Our results are so bad that just simply getting our best test cricketers in their best positions should be our priority. I heard Doull say Ryder was unlikely for the England series which is a shame.

 

[Mike5181]

So what are we looking for from them tonight? At this stage, it's too much to expect that we take the game into the last day, or make SA bat again. Still, I'm hoping for a century by one of Watling or Bronwlie, and that overall we lose by less than an innings and 100. Probably expecting too much.

I'm with you there. I'd be relatively happy if one of the two scored a century.

 

[jcas0167]

I second Mike5181's XI.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

make Ronchi open as punishment for moving to australia. That side's good but I'd drop Guptill for another seamer. The only way we're ever going to win games is stacking our bowling.

 

[Prince EWS]

1. Martin Guptill
2. Brendon McCullum
3. Kane Williamson
4. Ross Taylor
5. Dean Brownlie
6. BJ Watling
7. Luke Ronchi+
8. Daniel Vettori
9. Doug Bracewell
10. Tim Southee
11. Trent Boult

I think we have to focus on getting as many players in their best positions as we can. We just have to live with Guptill, or some other sub-par player as opener for now because moving other players up the order isn't worth it. Watling's an option, but I'd prefer we kept him down at six if Ronchi's going to be in the team. Moving him up the order could potentially ruin him, and he already failed there just last year. I originally pushed Flynn as the guy who could be used as an opener, but I think his performances have been so bad that it's just no longer an option anymore. I do hate the idea of having three seamers + Vettori, but I don't think we have much of a choice at the moment. Our results are so bad that just simply getting our best test cricketers in their best positions should be our priority. I heard Doull say Ryder was unlikely for the England series which is a shame.

Yeah, I tend to agree. I'd push Vettori up to seven and not bother about Ronchi if I was confident in a fourth seamer option but I'm not at the moment. Wouldn't be adverse to Milne if they thought he was fit for it. I think Vettori is doubtful for the series anyway though.

Quietly hoping for Sinclair to hit a vintage double ton when the PS starts up again; that'd put the cat amongst the pigeons.

 

[Bahnz]

1. Martin Guptill
2. Brendon McCullum
3. Kane Williamson
4. Ross Taylor
5. Dean Brownlie
6. BJ Watling
7. Luke Ronchi+
8. Daniel Vettori
9. Doug Bracewell
10. Tim Southee
11. Trent Boult

I think we have to focus on getting as many players in their best positions as we can. We just have to live with Guptill, or some other sub-par player as opener for now because moving other players up the order isn't worth it. Watling's an option, but I'd prefer we kept him down at six if Ronchi's going to be in the team. Moving him up the order could potentially ruin him, and he already failed there just last year. I originally pushed Flynn as the guy who could be used as an opener, but I think his performances have been so bad that it's just no longer an option anymore. I do hate the idea of having three seamers + Vettori, but I don't think we have much of a choice at the moment. Our results are so bad that just simply getting our best test cricketers in their best positions should be our priority. I heard Doull say Ryder was unlikely for the England series which is a shame.

I'd drop Guptill for anyone at this point. Hell, I'd even take Redmond or Papps over him at this point, they'll probably at least scrap out an average in the high teens. He's a complete and utter mess - technically and mentally, and he won't be helped by continually being humiliated by top class pacers. Leave him out of the tests against England, and let him go and play a full season of county cricket (it really seemed to help him last year - if only for a little while).

Otherwise I agree with that team (with Martin in for Vettori, if he's not fit). Regarding Ryder, given that Doull's been in South Africa for the past month, I doubt he's basing that opinion on anything more than John Buchanan's comments from during the X-mas break (which were themselves based on nothing more than Ryder's laissez faire batting style). Nonetheless, I tend to think that he's probably right. Ryder won't be keen on coming back into a team environment that's as toxic as the current one, and he probably figures that he'll pick up either an IPL or a county cricket contract, which will fund him through till next year.

 

[Bahnz]

Yeah, I tend to agree. I'd push Vettori up to seven and not bother about Ronchi if I was confident in a fourth seamer option but I'm not at the moment. Wouldn't be adverse to Milne if they thought he was fit for it. I think Vettori is doubtful for the series anyway though.

Quietly hoping for Sinclair to hit a vintage double ton when the PS starts up again; that'd put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Haha! Would love to see Skippy thrust into the opener's spot in a desperate attempt to paper over the team's weaknesses. Would be an epic nostalgia trip.

 

[Blain]

I think Mikes side is a good one, but with no 5th bowler I'm unconvinced. Williamson is an okay bowler, but I don't think he could step up and bowl 15 overs (let alone not being called for chucking).

 

[Prince EWS]

Haha! Would love to see Skippy thrust into the opener's spot in a desperate attempt to paper over the team's weaknesses. Would be an epic nostalgia trip.

I've been vocal in my opinion that Watling doesn't deserve to be sacrificed as opener after having his role changed so often, and my opinion that Williamson shouldn't be moved from #3, but if I decided to be a tactically biased **** and let go of those opinions..

1. Watling
2. McCullum
3. Sinclair
4. Taylor
5. Williamson
6. Brownlie
7. Ronchi

Lets do this

 

[_Ed_]

I second Mike5181's XI.

Yep, me too, although I'm not convinced Vettori will be there.