*Official* New Zealand vs Pakistan 2022/23

[Kenneth Viljoen]

In this scenario the overs are not lost because of light, they’re lost because the teams don’t get the overs in within the required times. The only thing required to ensure a full game is just enforcement of the existing rules.

Exactly! But according to the rules the umpires werent in the wrong either , because in Test Cricket on the final day you can bowl as many overs as you like , you can bowl 150 overs in a day provided it's done before cut off time so whose gonna reprimand the umpires when they aren't forced to consider game conditions just the cutoff time itself ? Even if the umpires can see a team is 5 overs behind where they should be on day 5 they won't be too stressed cause if Badlight happens they can always tell the fielding team to bowl their spinners then that should take the over rate to where it should be then unfortunately it's too dark everybody go home .. It's always been at the fans expense so even this scenario we lose , the same applies to rain delays ..We waste too much time thinking we will get a result that is a fair outcome in 5 days but that's not the point, we should be making Test cricket as best as it can be in terms of viewing quality .

 

[thierry henry]

Yeah rain is rain and dark is dark. I’m not too fussed about watching cricket in shitty conditions. Making teams bowl 15 overs an hour is the better way to get a full game in without playing a compromised game in unfair conditions. I’d suggest making the sanctions more and more severe until teams just have no choice but to bowl their overs in time…. but in practice fans whinge about that too

 

[honestbharani]

I am not sure if I have seen a series recently where neither team wanted to win so less. The only aggressive thing NZ did all series was the declaration yesterday and the only aggressive thing Pak did all series was the Sarfraz-Salman partnership today.

Neither team deserved to win here. Which I guess makes it a less desirable default state "neither team deserve to lose" situation. Just meh.

 

[honestbharani]

Naseem is quality though. Glad one of my two big calls straight after the international cricket covid break is working out.


Imam
Shafique/whoever
Saud
Babar (c)
Sarfraz (vc)
Rizwan
Salman / Faheem
Wasim
Shaheen
Naseem
Abrar


A base of a good side in conditions where it doesn't help spin so much.


But of course, Pak being Pak will find a way to mess this up too.

 

[Kenneth Viljoen]

Naseem is quality though. Glad one of my two big calls straight after the international cricket covid break is working out.


Imam
Shafique/whoever
Saud
Babar (c)
Sarfraz (vc)
Rizwan
Salman / Faheem
Wasim
Shaheen
Naseem
Abrar


A base of a good side in conditions where it doesn't help spin so much.


But of course, Pak being Pak will find a way to mess this up too.

Why doesn't Shadab Khan play test cricket ? He's young , international experience,good bowler can bat and an excellent fielder

 

[andruid]

We could have had a 3rd test match

 

[Nintendo]

Weird series, especially if you compare it to Australia's efforts here 6 months ago. Australia won 1-0 while NZ drew 0-0, but I reckon if you go off of the first 2 test's of each series NZ performed better than AUS.

 

[straw man]

What even is this result

 

[Daemon]

Just caught up and literally cannot believe my eyes at the over where Naseem bombed a six and a four while trying to save the game

I wonder what Shannon Gabriel thinks of that

 

[cnerd123]

Yeah rain is rain and dark is dark. I’m not too fussed about watching cricket in ****ty conditions. Making teams bowl 15 overs an hour is the better way to get a full game in without playing a compromised game in unfair conditions. I’d suggest making the sanctions more and more severe until teams just have no choice but to bowl their overs in time…. but in practice fans whinge about that too

Tbf there are sometimes games scheduled where you can tell right away, just by looking at the climate and hours of play, that you won't get the entire quota of overs in. This has happened many times before.

It's just that the belief that the value a certain game of Test cricket can somehow be measured in volume of balls bowled that is bizarre. A game that lasts 450 overs isn't automatically better or 'more value for money' than game that lasts 300 overs. A great game is one that produces great drama, regardless of if it takes 2 days or 5 days.

It's also the belief that a game of Test cricket is not as good if a team doesn't win that's also wrong. This draw was immensely more entertaining than any of Australia's wins this summer (or indeed, some of Pakistan's losses). The fact that you can get such an exciting drawn games is why Test cricket is so beautiful.

If someone doesn't get that, and immediately moans about 'value for money' or 'this is why kids don't watch' when they don't get exactly 90 overs bowled in a day, then I have to question if they even understand Test cricket to begin with.

 

[SteveNZ]

I know his figures won't reflect it, but I thought Matt Henry took a big step forward yesterday. He bowled really well, with great persistence yesterday in conditions that in no way suited him, and eventually got a wicket that could have helped win the Test. Southee seems to back him as well, which is great (Henry has long been a starry-eyed fan of Tim)

On the flip side, where are we at with Ajaz...5 wickets at over 60s while Ish took 13 at 25s. Ajaz not trusted to bowl much on the final day at all, with major foot marks to bowl into. Ish making a career resurrection, Bracewell taking wickets and scoring runs (albeit very shaky ones), I can't see Ajaz finding a spot in the England Test series, and potentially being pushed back to a Will Somerville 'picked as third spinner in Asia' role. A really disappointing slide for him from Mumbai, and you'd have to say the selectors have blood on their hands too for their lack of faith and investment in him after the 10-for.

 

[Skyliner]

Dramatic draw sees Black Caps miss chance at series victory over Pakistan

New Zealand were one wicket away from a series victory over Pakistan when bad light ended the second test.

i.stuff.co.nz

‘Under new captain Tim Southee, the tourists had periods of hesitancy and caution when more aggression may have rewarded them with a clean sweep of the series as England had managed prior.’

———

 

[Skyliner]

On the batting front, certain batters continue to only score heavily on very flat decks / Hagley Oval, while others seem to be seriously struggling in any conditions.
With an ageing pace attack & utter confusion surrounding the spin option/s, and an ultra-conservative mindset, NZ look set for a period of ongoing decline. Hope they prove me wrong - but the side has now gone six tests without a win and are certainly not improving. Not sure what can be done. The coach cruises on haplessly, while changing the captain was akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic - utterly ineffectual, and probably only of value in that it took some pressure off Kane.

 

[SteveNZ]

You don't hope they prove you wrong for a second, old bean.

 

[Binkley]

It was interesting watching the interaction between Sodhi and Southee in the highlights this morning. When Sodhi bowled Imam his immediate reaction was to turn away from the batsman, run over to Southee and the two had a huge hug. The ND team-mates seem to have a pretty great relationship, which I reckon means we will see more of Sodhi in future test sides.

 

[Binkley]

Also, my eyes can barely focus this morning after spending a large chunk of the night lying in the spare bed staring at the tiny images on my cell-phone.

 

[Starfighter]

Boooooooo

I was hoping to be able to snark about Pakistan losing three consecutive home series.

 

[thierry henry]

Tbf there are sometimes games scheduled where you can tell right away, just by looking at the climate and hours of play, that you won't get the entire quota of overs in. This has happened many times before.

It's just that the belief that the value a certain game of Test cricket can somehow be measured in volume of balls bowled that is bizarre. A game that lasts 450 overs isn't automatically better or 'more value for money' than game that lasts 300 overs. A great game is one that produces great drama, regardless of if it takes 2 days or 5 days.

It's also the belief that a game of Test cricket is not as good if a team doesn't win that's also wrong. This draw was immensely more entertaining than any of Australia's wins this summer (or indeed, some of Pakistan's losses). The fact that you can get such an exciting drawn games is why Test cricket is so beautiful.

If someone doesn't get that, and immediately moans about 'value for money' or 'this is why kids don't watch' when they don't get exactly 90 overs bowled in a day, then I have to question if they even understand Test cricket to begin with.

Oh absolutely. There’s no magic in 450 overs - it’s just, those are the agreed rules set down before the test starts. A long test is not inherently better than a short test, but the rules/playing conditions are relevant to things like declaring and setting a target, based on a minimum number of overs remaining which are set down and stated and part of the rules of the contest.

I can’t understand when people complain about players going off for bad light or rain because those are actual tangible things that legitimately mess up the game as a contest if you try to play through them. Tests being shortened for a variety of factors is absolutely part of the game and the strategy of it. I just don’t see how a mandatory number of overs not being bowled (e.g. by a fielding team in the 4th innings who is going to lose if they don’t stall - not saying that’s what happened here) is in the same category as bad light or rain.

Like, in what other sport can you just choose to play so slowly that you don’t meet the basic conditions of the match and, despite it being against the rules, there’s no in-game penalty available for it? But then, I kinda agree that this can also be seen as part of the inherent wonderful weirdness of test cricket

 

[ataraxia]

Amazing finish – one more over would have made it even better, would Naseem have gone after Macewell? NZ's option to choose to draw at any time is unfair IMO, but it does mean that targeting a single over can be an actually viable strategy which is cool.

The tactics against Sarfaraz/Agha were horrendous though, in hindsight. We weren't in immediate danger; they still needed what 4.5 an over accounting for bad light? Absolutely should have gone for the win, just needed to get one of them. At least push mid-on and mid-off up 4 steps ffs. And sad that Ajaz' last overs in tests were bowling straight down the right (wrong) side of the pitch. More aggressive bowling and we would have most likely have won IMO.

Shades of the Bay Oval 2020 Boxing Day test – Naseem was the winning wicket that time, survived this time.

 

[thierry henry]

The more I think about that last day’s play the more confused I feel about how I should feel. Stayed up until 2am for a week to see both sides fall about 10 minutes short of a series win. All of the different permutations with the declaration, the light, both teams at different times trying to win and then trying to draw, how we should’ve won in a canter when we had them 5 down but how they should’ve won in a canter when they needed 40-odd off about 10 overs and how the threat of bad light threw them off track. And then add to that how half way through day 5 of the first test we were in a great position to win too.

At the risk of impinging on @cnerd123 territory I guess it’s all part of the wonder of test cricket. It’s gonna **** up my whole day just going over and over all of the different aspects of what just happened and trying to make sense of it.

(In my world this is supposed to be a positive post btw)