*Official* Pak In NZ Thread

[cbuts]

i would rate oram better in all three facts of the game. batting bowling and fielding

 

[Neil Pickup]

i would rate oram better in all three facts of the game. batting bowling and fielding

That's gonna be another "quote-point-and-laugh" by June.

Well, either that or this.

 

[Tim]

Well no, Oram is not better than Flintoff in all areas of the game.

Oram is however a far better fielder, but with the bat I think Flintoff can be more destructive at the moment & is maybe more of a match-winner.
Bowling is fairly even although a bowling average of 45 in tests for Flintoff is not overally teriffic.

 

[marc71178]

Oram is however a far better fielder

Freddie's catching is very good, is Oram better on the ground than catching?

Bowling is fairly even although a bowling average of 45 in tests for Flintoff is not overally teriffic.

And not overally accurate as to how well he's been bowling.

 

[Jono]

I'd rather Oram in my team then Flintoff from what I've seen of both, however by the posts of some people Flintoff seems to be improving. I'll have to wait and see.

 

[Neil Pickup]

If Flintoff got to bowl on the pitches Oram has in NZ, then his average would be much, much lower.

 

[thierry henry]

Oram is a sensation in the field, some of his catches in recent times are among the best I've seen, especially the catch he took to dismiss Harbajhan last summer.

I don't think he is quite up with Flintoff in the hitting stakes (although he is bigger and probably just as strong), but if he plays to potential he can be at least as good as Flintoff as a batsman. As a bowler I'm not sure, they are both pretty similar- big, lumbering, into the wicket medium fast bowlers. Oram must have a lot of potential considering about 5 minutes after he started doing it he was a first change international bowler.

 

[Dougie Rydal]

As an ardent Spurs fans, I think it must be natural to argue with Theirry Henry from ARSEnal, however I think i agree with him.

I beleive Flintoff is the better batsman, and certainly superior in terms of ability to turn a game. I also love Flintoff's agression highlighted when he took his shirt off soccer style while celebrating.

I think Oram is a reasonable cricketer at this stage and I'm sure his best stats come from fixtures in NZ where the tracks seam a bit more.

I believe with more exposure at the top level he will become a world class player, and is the logical successor to Cairns.

 

[Tim]

Flintoff averaged 35 with the ball in 3 tests in New Zealand during the 2001/2002 season.

 

[Tim]

Actually I rate Flintoff as a pretty good slipsman, but Oram is brilliant in the gully & also on the boundary...you'll see that when NZ tour England.

 

[cbuts]

apart from last summer, nz pitches are superior batting pitches than in england. flintoof is more of a slogger where as oram is moer of a true batsmen. as oram gets chances to move up the order we will see this more clearly. he saved our arses with his batting in the first test, and he set up what sould of been a win in the second. oram has turned into a very handy opeening bowler where as flintoff (from what ive seen of him) is nothing more than a 4th seamer. anyway i spose we will see in a few months aye

 

[Craig]

Actually I rate Flintoff as a pretty good slipsman, but Oram is brilliant in the gully & also on the boundary...you'll see that when NZ tour England.

Hamish Marshall seems to be the prefect replacement for Vincent at point.

 

[anzac]

I think you're right Anzac. Hearing all the praise made me wonder if I'd been too hard on a new player facing 10 straight games against the fastest attack in the world. Looking at the papers this morning though has snapped me out of it a bit. "Coming of Age"?

I know it's an easy play on words but geez, it was hardly anything of the sort. No-one can be sure Papps wouldn't be on double or triple his aggregate of 49 after 4 games.

to be honest I can't see them picking Papps while McCullum is batting well - not even as a 'specialist' opener...........

 

[anzac]

i think ur being a bit harsh anzac. i think its been the best decision from nz cricket in a long time - giving cumming the series. many new players struggle not only with self confidence and a fear of failuire when the first come into the team. we have been guilty of getting rid of potentially class players just because they havent had results straight away. marvin attupautu is the classic example of this, today sri lanka woudnt dream of leaving him out of there test team, but the start of his career is a world record for the amount of ducks. i beleive it was 10 in his first 18 tests. australia persisted with steve waugh at the start of his career which was filled with failures. he took about 3 years to get a century.

nz dosent have the playing depth to rotate players like some nations. there are really only about 12-13 plyers up to the standard. i personally believe we need to have a nza team again. get them touring overseas and we might find new players without risking them at the top level

I'd agree that it's been an encouraging sign of confidence from the selectors, but apart from that I wouldn't give you tuppence......IMO the selectors & Cumming have been lucky they have had back to back 5 match series to work with - considering the 'traditional' series was 3 matches I doubt if they would have been able to justify retaining him into a 3rd series based upon his form / return so far........quite frankly I'm astounded that they have so much faith in him as his domestic Limited Overs stats are nothing to justify such as extended run to date - it's not as if he has been far and away the best domestic opener / top order player & dominated the comp (unlike Papps & Fulton this season so far).......so far as I'm concerned he still needs to make another score in the 5th ODI - preferably 50+ b4 I'd even consider retaining him for the RSA series..........

I'd rather they had experimented in this series by trying McCullum opening and give him the 5 matches...........as this then allows for some flexibility re team selection......

part of the problem with past selections IMO is that they had players debuting in pressure situations (eg opening) whereas other nations introduce players lower in the order where it is not quite so make or break - then promote them once they have had a chance to adjust to the higher levels required...........

so far as player depth is concerned how the hell do we know if they don't do anything?????? they stick with basically the same batting line up apart from the opening spot, but change bowlers on a regular basis (presumably because these are the more immediate concerns), however IMO this has allowed a somewhat complacent approach in the middle order, with players able to ride out sub-standard performances as there are no 'experienced' replacements available............as a result of most of the backup batsmen being 'openers'.......eg I doubt if Macca would have been able to get away with some of his performances on this tour alone & still retained his spot if he played for Australia...........same goes for both the Test & ODI squads.......

apparently they have already taken steps to increase the 'A' Team format re both 4 Day & Limited Overs formats, & the first of this program will be a Home series of mised format matches against a Sri Lankan 'A' side just b4 the RSA Tour.......

 

[anzac]

Hamish Marshall seems to be the prefect replacement for Vincent at point.

NZ's new answer to the Jhonty factor in ODIs????

as unfortunately I doubt that he'll get the opportunity to Tour with the Test Squad, and there's probably not enough mid week games to have a chance to force your way into the side unless as a result of injury..........

 

[marc71178]

Flintoff averaged 35 with the ball in 3 tests in New Zealand during the 2001/2002 season.

His bowling has improved a great deal since then.

 

[cbuts]

I'd agree that it's been an encouraging sign of confidence from the selectors, but apart from that I wouldn't give you tuppence......IMO the selectors & Cumming have been lucky they have had back to back 5 match series to work with - considering the 'traditional' series was 3 matches I doubt if they would have been able to justify retaining him into a 3rd series based upon his form / return so far........quite frankly I'm astounded that they have so much faith in him as his domestic Limited Overs stats are nothing to justify such as extended run to date - it's not as if he has been far and away the best domestic opener / top order player & dominated the comp (unlike Papps & Fulton this season so far).......so far as I'm concerned he still needs to make another score in the 5th ODI - preferably 50+ b4 I'd even consider retaining him for the RSA series..........

I'd rather they had experimented in this series by trying McCullum opening and give him the 5 matches...........as this then allows for some flexibility re team selection......

part of the problem with past selections IMO is that they had players debuting in pressure situations (eg opening) whereas other nations introduce players lower in the order where it is not quite so make or break - then promote them once they have had a chance to adjust to the higher levels required...........

so far as player depth is concerned how the hell do we know if they don't do anything?????? they stick with basically the same batting line up apart from the opening spot, but change bowlers on a regular basis (presumably because these are the more immediate concerns), however IMO this has allowed a somewhat complacent approach in the middle order, with players able to ride out sub-standard performances as there are no 'experienced' replacements available............as a result of most of the backup batsmen being 'openers'.......eg I doubt if Macca would have been able to get away with some of his performances on this tour alone & still retained his spot if he played for Australia...........same goes for both the Test & ODI squads.......

apparently they have already taken steps to increase the 'A' Team format re both 4 Day & Limited Overs formats, & the first of this program will be a Home series of mised format matches against a Sri Lankan 'A' side just b4 the RSA Tour.......

we dont have the batters to do taht though. this was shown by the recent tour to pakistan. papps fulton macintosh how and taylor are all big up and commers but they are all still pretty young. macca hasnt been going to bad. i dont see cumming getting dropped for the sa series. particully if we get another good start today.

 

[Tim]

I think Papps & McIntosh are close now to being ready for test cricket..both of them are 24 & have had at least 3 seasons of first class cricket & have shown each season that they're improving.

How could do with another season yet, the same with Fulton & personally I think picking Taylor & Ryder would be a gamble considering they're both only 19 & have had limited FC matches.

 

[Tim]

I think James Marshall could be a bolter for the England tour...arguably he's a better batsmen than Hamish because he's scored more centuries & also a double.
If he works the same way as Hamish does (believing that they're more comfortable at international level because they like the pressure) then he could be very good...and as far as fielding is concerned, he's pretty much equal ability to Hamish.

 

[Tim]

NZ smash 307/8 off 50 overs..brilliant batting.