There is no depth in New Zealand cricket. It's all good and well to say that when Bond and Tuffey are in the team, but look what happens when they aren't. Just look at the lack of top-order options around. Who actually averages more than 40 in any form of NZ domestic cricket (that isn't set in the NZ side)? Fulton, Sinclair...I'm struggling. I hope there is more but I'm not about to go through the stats. Sure the pitches aren't all that great at times but surely a few more top-order players can do better.Darrin said:The depth that keeps being talked about on here is not quite there-never has been. I heard it described once well by Allen Macca- the cricket and league commentator saying 'Australia have a depth of talented players, we have SOME talented players'. I think that is well said.
Nathan Astle has scored 9 test centuries and 13 or 14 ODI centuries, we just cant afford to throw all that away because of some lofty notion or the latest theory thats been going the rounds. In my opinion, and i have always been a big Astle fan he happens to be our second best batsmen.
Yeah, ideally Sinclair would be at 4. However he looks set to open against Sri Lanka.Will Scarlet said:Not a bad team but I'd have How opening with Fleming, Sinclair at 4, Astle at 5, and McCullum at 6. Thus, leaving Styris out as he is not an all-rounder in test matches. And as was already said, "Five bowlers is enough".
If you need part-time bowlers to rest the strike bowlers, then How and Fulton could potentially fill this. Not really there to break partnerships, as Styris doesn't.
I think you'll find very few CW posters are putting Ryder, Taylor etc. in their test sides, but personally I enjoy hearing people speculate about where players are on the food chain. IMO it's one of the pleasures of site like this that you can discuss alternatives, even ones that may seem pretty unconventional.Darrin said:You guys keep banging on about players like mcintosh, gaffeney, cumming, ryder, taylor-the list goes on. But just because you score a century once in a while or show some 'promise' does not make you close to test consideration. What we need from those players is a greater maturity, knowing how to score a century, knowing how to get through difficult spells at the crease rather than flailing the bat and giving it away. Let me state that most of the players mentioned are talented but are young and have not matured yet.
The depth that keeps being talked about on here is not quite there-never has been. I heard it described once well by Allen Macca- the cricket and league commentator saying 'Australia have a depth of talented players, we have SOME talented players'. I think that is well said.
But don't forget everyone has to start somewhere. Coming in with the very big shoes of guys like Martin Crowe and Andrew Jones to fill, Astle made his NZ debut as a 23 y.o. with two FC centuries to his name.Darrin said:Nathan Astle has scored 9 test centuries and 13 or 14 ODI centuries, we just cant afford to throw all that away because of some lofty notion or the latest theory thats been going the rounds.
yeah, not so much in the bowling department though IMOTim said:I certainly haven't been suggesting we've got depth in domestic cricket...but I do think we've got more raw talent coming through than we've ever had.
I was only referring to Test matches atm..................shaka said:The good thing about Astle is whenever he gets an odi century, NZ wins the match. One cannot let that go
Out of interest, what do you put that down to?Tim said:I certainly haven't been suggesting we've got depth in domestic cricket...but I do think we've got more raw talent coming through than we've ever had.
But how big an issue is that really?Tim said:Spin is a huge concern...
ordinarily I'd tend to agree - my ideal is to have talented / promising players developed at State & 'A' levels, and then introduced to the big time via a squad spot on a tour to play midweek games etc...........however most test series nowadays seem abbreviated affairs with few warm up matches & the 'test' players need these as much as anyone.........Darrin said:You guys keep banging on about players like mcintosh, gaffeney, cumming, ryder, taylor-the list goes on. But just because you score a century once in a while or show some 'promise' does not make you close to test consideration. What we need from those players is a greater maturity, knowing how to score a century, knowing how to get through difficult spells at the crease rather than flailing the bat and giving it away. Let me state that most of the players mentioned are talented but are young and have not matured yet.
possibly our 2nd best because we do not have many 'proper' batsmen in the side??????????Darrin said:Nathan Astle has scored 9 test centuries and 13 or 14 ODI centuries, we just cant afford to throw all that away because of some lofty notion or the latest theory thats been going the rounds. In my opinion, and i have always been a big Astle fan he happens to be our second best batsmen.