***Official*** New Zealand tour of Zimbabwe and South Africa 2016

[Zinzan]

Anyone watching when Nicholls was batting?

 

[Zinzan]

Williamson out (again). No hundred.

Yup, he's had 9 ODI 90s & been out 7 times in the 90s in internationals since 2015.

Not the worst problem to have tbf, but it does seem to faze him more than some.

 

[Howsie]

Yup, he's had 9 ODI 90s & been out 7 times in the 90s in internationals since 2015.

Not the worst problem to have tbf, but it does seem to faze him more than some.

Meh, ODI's is him 90 percent of the time looking to hit out. No big problem. Tests would be a whole different matter, Cremer was troubling him for a decent period though.

 

[Zinzan]

Like I said, there's worse problems to have.

Cremer was quite impressive from what I saw, and was unlucky not to dismiss him 10 runs earlier.

 

[Howsie]

Anyone watching when Nicholls was batting?

Yep, he looked okay. But look what he was up against. I'd be surprised if he makes it to our home summer tbh, seven foreign tests, can't see him making it to Pakistan in December.

 

[hendrix]

Where are the highlights, Kip?

 

[Zinzan]

Yep, he looked okay. But look what he was up against. I'd be surprised if he makes it to our home summer tbh, seven foreign tests, can't see him making it to Pakistan in December.

Honestly think with the tour-squad we have there, we'd probably be better giving Raval a crack at the top and move Guptill down to 5. Not necessarily big on dropping Guptill down, nor do I think he really deserves a return to the 5 spot, but I'd give him more chance of succeeding against SA than Nicholls. But, I suppose it's fair enough to give Nicholls the 2nd test at this stage.

 

[hendrix]

Nicholls needs a fair go in the middle order.

 

[_Ed_]

Yeah, this is only his third test. And he got 59 on debut against Australia. At least give him the whole tour.

 

[SteveNZ]

Well played Tom.

Quite impressed with how these two have played - only Zimbabwe and all, but with a docile pitch, poor bowling attack and a small first innings it's the kind of situation where it can be all too easy and you lose concentration/try to over-attack. Good to see they've been positive but not reckless.

Well played - the cynic in me continues to say that it should've been a big hundred for Tom. The shot he played to get out was a 'I've got my hundred, that'll do' sort of shot and the sort of mental error that is in his game. He's got to exhibit his ability to bat for longer periods and this was the perfect opportunity.

 

[SteveNZ]

Nicholls needs a fair go in the middle order.

He does, but if we're a year down the track and he hasn't contributed...and neither has Gup in the position to which we're all pretty comfortable that he's not suited to...why not look at Gup if he's the best fit for the #5 spot? Because we know he'll score more FC runs than anyone else, hands down. Do we just say nah you used all your gos up trying to be an opener? I wouldn't. Unless there's a suitable candidate, for which some are not exactly raising their hand up super high, I'd give him a go.

 

[Zinzan]

Yeah, this is only his third test. And he got 59 on debut against Australia. At least give him the whole tour.

More a case of how he looked technically against Australia in those 4 innings rather than the fact he managed a 50 on one of them.

 

[Zinzan]

He does, but if we're a year down the track and he hasn't contributed...and neither has Gup in the position to which we're all pretty comfortable that he's not suited to...why not look at Gup if he's the best fit for the #5 spot? Because we know he'll score more FC runs than anyone else, hands down. Do we just say nah you used all your gos up trying to be an opener? I wouldn't. Unless there's a suitable candidate, for which some are not exactly raising their hand up super high, I'd give him a go.

It's not the silliest idea by any means. One thing we do know is Guptill just doesn't have the game to be anywhere close to being a successful opener against decent attacks, so yeah if Nicholls isn't the answer at 5, I don't have a problem with Guptill dropping down. Who knows, it could actually solve two problems for us.

 

[Hurricane]

If he doesn't work at #5 after failing at opening, then we can try him at #6, and if that doesn't work we can try number 7.

 

[SteveNZ]

It's not the silliest idea by any means. One thing we do know is Guptill just doesn't have the game to be anywhere close to being a successful opener against decent attacks, so yeah if Nicholls isn't the answer at 5, I don't have a problem with Guptill dropping down. Who knows, it could actually solve two problems for us.

Yeah, everyone knows I am a big fan of Gup's but I'd lay the mortgage on him not scoring runs v SA, India and any other good opposition we have in the next 12-18 months.

I just feel like Gup has suffered from the deficiencies of our Test game, pushed as a round peg into a square hole that needs plugging by an actual cubed object (I tried to go Kippax on it there but lacked the vocabulary). He's always been a #5, and I believe would have more Test centuries (v decent opposition) and a better record there. So don't worry about 6 and 7, those are all-rounder/WK spots in the modern game. I still honestly think the best for him, and more importantly the team, is to have him at 5. I know it's a small sample size and that includes a Test v Bangladesh, but there was nothing in Gup's 3 Tests at #5 to suggest he should bat anywhere else.

I don't rate Nicholls as a Test 5 but he has the right to the next 12 months to show that he might be one.

 

[Kippax]

If he doesn't work at #5 after failing at opening, then we can try him at #6, and if that doesn't work we can try number 7.

They already have tried him once at No. 6. The very nimble and highly dexterous play of spin every Aucklander wants from their future Test No. 5 was on display.

 

[Kippax]

 

[Kippax]

 

[SteveNZ]

They already have tried him once at No. 6. The very nimble and highly dexterous play of spin every Aucklander wants from their future Test No. 5 was on display.

Well, then. Two nuts from an at-his-peak Swann that would've got most people, especially the first - which then led to the overcovering on the 2nd. It's actually a fair point, given Nicholls has already shown himself to be a better accumulator against spin than Gup. But how much great spin is our #5 going to face over the next 24 months? One tour?

And hey, if we're getting a #5 who reverse sweeps with one run to his name, why can't it be Manu? I mean, this FC record is streets better, right?

 

[Kippax]

Once again with you Aucklanders demanding a more voluminous video catalogue from Kippax, of all people. How about you come up with some evidence of Guptill looking surprisingly nimble and dexterous for us.

Aucklanders are always too rushed to engage in such frippery, with the harsh economics demanding they hail to the Big Abacus.