**Official** New Zealand v Australia

[Ming]

I meant would it of made much of a difference to the final series result...

Bond and Vettori make up 20 overs... what about the other 60%?

Heard of Jacob Oram, Christopher Cairns, Chris Harris and Scott Styris?

 

[_Ed_]

Having said that, we would still have lost the series, but I think every game would have been by less than 50 runs or less than 5 wickets, I would think 4-1 or 3-2 to Australia, maybe even still 5-0 but it would have been so much less one-sided than it was.

 

[Somerset]

In the last match Bond played against Australia he took 6/23 and Oram and adams plus Styris played but Australia won by 98 runs.


Lee took 5/42

That was the one match Oram bowled badly in throughout the whole tournament. Styris has improving as a bowler since then too. Realistically, we should've won though.

 

[Blaze]

In the last match Bond played against Australia he took 6/23 and Oram and adams plus Styris played but Australia won by 98 runs.


Lee took 5/42

That is such a lame call.

In the VB series with Bond on fire NZ won 3/4 games against AUS and the fourth was very close.

 

[Somerset]

Heard of Jacob Oram, Christopher Cairns, Chris Harris and Scott Styris?

Chris Harris is another on the injury list. Traditionally, Australia has stuggled against his slow medium dibbly-dobblies and he would've at least been able to slow the Australians down during the middle stages with Vettori.

 

[Blaze]

Having said that, we would still have lost the series, but I think every game would have been by less than 50 runs or less than 5 wickets, I would think 4-1 or 3-2 to Australia, maybe even still 5-0 but it would have been so much less one-sided than it was.

Agreed

 

[benchmark00]

NZ will never have more depth than Australia. That's a fact based on population alone and playing numbers.
Oram and Styris would have stood a better chance than the likes of Canning, Wilson, Mills and Tuffey that's for sure. Jacob Oram is in the top 10 ODI bowlers in the world, and has a good RPO. Styris has built up an extremely good bowling record recently, and he would have been a far better option than the likes of McMillan, in the middle bowling alongside Vettori.

I seriously cant stand people using that as an excuse... Why arent India the best in the world based solely on that?

Oram, Stryris arent good enough to cause serious problems to the Aussie order on a regular basis.

 

[Somerset]

That is such a lame call.

In the VB series with Bond on fire NZ won 3/4 games against AUS and the fourth was very close.

The fourth we should've won too, Australia were 6/100 with only Michael Bevan and the tail left to score 250. Just goes to show the influence of Bond, doesn't it?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Amazing how people take out so much meaning from rankings when it suits them, when Harmison was ranked no.1 bowler in the World most of the people on here pretty much ignored it, when NZ were ranked 2nd it was taken as gospel.

Possibly because Harmison didn't deserve his ranking but New Zealand did?

 

[Blaze]

I seriously cant stand people using that as an excuse... Why arent India the best in the world based solely on that?

Oram, Stryris arent good enough to cause serious problems to the Aussie order on a regular basis.

You don't get it do you?

They wouldn't have to do anything extraordinary. Just bowl line and length and go for no more than 50 runs each. They would just support Bond and Vettori and do a lot better job than the guys in this series did for NZ

 

[Scallywag]

That is such a lame call.

In the VB series with Bond on fire NZ won 3/4 games against AUS and the fourth was very close.

And lost the next three games they they played against Australia with Bond playing.

 

[Somerset]

I seriously cant stand people using that as an excuse... Why arent India the best in the world based solely on that?

Oram, Stryris arent good enough to cause serious problems to the Aussie order on a regular basis.

The numbers of young cricketers in New Zealand are appalling compared to Australia. It's common sense that the Kiwis will never have enough depth but the best players together can form a more than useful side.

Population doesn't play every part though - facilities must also be an issue, coaching, etc - I'm no expert on how cricket in India is played so can't really comment too much.

Oram and Styris won't cause serious problems - possibly - but with Bond and Vettori, who else are the Australians going to risk going after?

 

[Blaze]

And lost the next three games they they played against Australia with Bond playing.

So what?

He has proven that he is one bowler that can match it with the aussies and with him NZ would have been competitive in this series, still wouldn't have won but competitive

 

[benchmark00]

Why is everyone saying 'if such and such was in form'... the fact is that you cant take that into consideration, Australians had players that werent in the best form also, Gilchrist, Gillespie (imo), Hogg didnt set the world on fire etc etc.

 

[Somerset]

And lost the next three games they they played against Australia with Bond playing.

Considering we beat the world champs three times in a wrong, then came within an inch of embarrassing them to death, I can't see your point.

 

[Blaze]

Why is everyone saying 'if such and such was in form'... the fact is that you cant take that into consideration, Australians had players that werent in the best form also, Gilchrist, Gillespie (imo), Hogg didnt set the world on fire etc etc.

Who is talking about form?

people are talking about Tuffey but he is a lost cause IMO

Injuries are the main talking point and if NZ had had less of them they probably would have been a hell of a lot more competitive

 

[benchmark00]

You don't get it do you?

They wouldn't have to do anything extraordinary. Just bowl line and length and go for no more than 50 runs each. They would just support Bond and Vettori and do a lot better job than the guys in this series did for NZ

UGH... so the Aussies would just let these part timers come in and bowl lovely line a length without doing everything... by this, by gee Australia wouldnt make over 100 in any game! oh this Australian team are absolute rubbish!!!!

 

[Somerset]

Why is everyone saying 'if such and such was in form'... the fact is that you cant take that into consideration, Australians had players that werent in the best form also, Gilchrist, Gillespie (imo), Hogg didnt set the world on fire etc etc.

Tuffey is the only 'such and such' in this case - most Kiwis disagree with him being in the side anyway. The rest were injured and couldn't be involved.

 

[Somerset]

UGH... so the Aussies would just let these part timers come in and bowl lovely line a length without doing everything... by this, by gee Australia wouldnt make over 100 in any game! oh this Australian team are absolute rubbish!!!!

The likes of McMillan, Canning, Hamilton, etc wouldn't be respected because of line and length bowling but the leg side half volleys racing away to the boundary would certainly be unheard of.

 

[benchmark00]

Hypothetical

Australia at full strength Vs NZ at full strength

Everyone in the sides in form.

Australia wins.