**Official** Pakistan v New Zealand in the UAE 2014

[NZTailender]

I like the wagner move and I think he can feel aggrieved for being left out to begin with (what if anything did we learn from the Windies tour)

Neesham may not be very good but he can't be dropped just yet. And I haven't really heard anyone justify to my satisfaction why Rutherford is in the squad (notwithstanding his A team form)

Neesham is an odd one...did not actually think he'd step up with a century in the WIndies so he may be one of those semi-unpredictable, Jacob Oram type of player who'd pull a century seemingly out of nowhere. Doesn't inspire confidence in the reliable performer department, though his career has just begun. I would've thought it harsh not having him in the first test but since his bowling seems to be more innocent in the UAE than anywhere else he's played I wouldn't be clamouring to keep him in the side. I think Ronchi would end up putting more runs on the board, given a chance.

 

[Blocky]

From what I've seen, I'd say Neesham has more potential as an out and out test batsman than Corey Anderson has. He has a much more compact technique and seems to have a much better ability to bat time. They're just so alike, it's a shame neither of them are more in the Chris Cairns mould and neither of them seem likely to develop into it either.

 

[hendrix]

Come on guys, Neesham is 10x more likely to score runs against spin on slow wickets than an in-touch Rutherford, let alone one that hasn't played any cricket.

 

[Mike5181]

Hesson's generally been pretty good at giving guys a decent run in the side. I doubt Jimmy will be dropped.

 

[NZTailender]

From what I've seen, I'd say Neesham has more potential as an out and out test batsman than Corey Anderson has. He has a much more compact technique and seems to have a much better ability to bat time. They're just so alike, it's a shame neither of them are more in the Chris Cairns mould and neither of them seem likely to develop into it either.

It's interesting because a few months ago you'd think Corey would be more value with the bat and Neesham with the ball, but it's pretty much reversed now. Although I think Neesham just needs an extra dimension to his bowling. More seam movement, a clever slower ball, something in a variety sense that made guys like Astle and McMillan partnership breakers. He's unlikely to run through a side and get a 5fer but the ability to get 1 or 2 crucial wickets and he's gold.

 

[Kippax]

Come on guys, Neesham is 10x more likely to score runs against spin on slow wickets than an in-touch Rutherford, let alone one that hasn't played any cricket.

Yeah I don't see what will really change re: Rutherford. McCullum didn't say it was just a matter of more time to get Rutherford's fitness right.

 

[NZTailender]

Hesson's generally been pretty good at giving guys a decent run in the side. I doubt Jimmy will be dropped.

Then why no Wagner?

 

[NZTailender]

Yeah I don't see what will really change re: Rutherford. McCullum didn't say it was just a matter of more time to get Rutherford's fitness right.

Hmm just read the Cricinfo article where Hesson says they might not tinker since these guys have got a feel for the conditions.

 

[Hurricane]

From what I've seen, I'd say Neesham has more potential as an out and out test batsman than Corey Anderson has. He has a much more compact technique and seems to have a much better ability to bat time. They're just so alike, it's a shame neither of them are more in the Chris Cairns mould and neither of them seem likely to develop into it either.

Corey > Neesham at batting and bowling.

The only caveat I put on that is the basin reserve test. Corey decided it was a mine field and started slogging. And the Indians were giggling while he was batting. It was palpable and you could hear it on the bank.
Jimmy came out and batted like a batsman and showed him up.

However what sells me on Corey is the 48 he got in this first dig (and I know he should have gotten more) and a fighting 40 against a rampant (WW to like this post) Narine iirc - he just willed himself not to get out and he didn't. Corey is determination personified. When I was trialling for the reps as an 11 year old they told us you needed the three D's. Determination, Dedication, and Devotion. Corey at least has the first D and you can't teach that. He is one of the reasons I am so proud of this current outfit.

 

[Mike5181]

Then why no Wagner?

Get him in there, I agree.

I'm still annoyed they played Bracewell instead of him in the that first test against Bangladesh.

 

[Blocky]

It's interesting because a few months ago you'd think Corey would be more value with the bat and Neesham with the ball, but it's pretty much reversed now. Although I think Neesham just needs an extra dimension to his bowling. More seam movement, a clever slower ball, something in a variety sense that made guys like Astle and McMillan partnership breakers. He's unlikely to run through a side and get a 5fer but the ability to get 1 or 2 crucial wickets and he's gold.

The raw talent is there, he can bowl 140kmh, he's got height on his side too.

 

[Blocky]

Corey > Neesham at batting and bowling.

The only caveat I put on that is the basin reserve test. Corey decided it was a mine field and started slogging. And the Indians were giggling while he was batting. It was palpable and you could hear it on the bank.
Jimmy came out and batted like a batsman and showed him up.

However what sells me on Corey is the 48 he got in this first dig (and I know he should have gotten more) and a fighting 40 against a rampant (WW to like this post) Narine iirc - he just willed himself not to get out and he didn't. Corey is determination personified. When I was trialling for the reps as an 11 year old they told us you needed the three D's. Determination, Dedication, and Devotion. Corey at least has the first D and you can't teach that. He is one of the reasons I am so proud of this current outfit.

Disagree completely, I think if you're talking limited overs cricket, Corey is a better batsman but ultimately Neesham is a much more accomplished test batsman than Anderson - he has more range and although he was sawn off twice early, I think he'll turn it around in the next game if he plays. Anderson will always be one of those guys who could go to an effortless 50 but like you said, when the heat was on and we needed someone to step in and make an innings count, Neesham was there to work with Watling and he's shown since then it wasn't a fluke.

Bowling wise, Corey has managed to get himself in shape and is bowling much better, personally I felt he was more threatening than Southee or Boult in the first match.

 

[Hurricane]

Disagree completely, I think if you're talking limited overs cricket, Corey is a better batsman but ultimately Neesham is a much more accomplished test batsman than Anderson - he has more range and although he was sawn off twice early, I think he'll turn it around in the next game if he plays. Anderson will always be one of those guys who could go to an effortless 50 but like you said, when the heat was on and we needed someone to step in and make an innings count, Neesham was there to work with Watling and he's shown since then it wasn't a fluke.

Bowling wise, Corey has managed to get himself in shape and is bowling much better, personally I felt he was more threatening than Southee or Boult in the first match.

i guess part of what shapes my opinion is Corey has a higher FC average - and he just looks like the dog you want in a scrap. I can't help feeling some of those Windies knocks by Jimmy were "just one of those days when everything clicks'. I would like to see him do it again to win me over.

 

[Blocky]

i guess part of what shapes my opinion is Corey has a higher FC average - and he just looks like the dog you want in a scrap. I can't help feeling some of those Windies knocks by Jimmy were "just one of those days when everything clicks'. I would like to see him do it again to win me over.

Corey has a higher average by a single run and considering that Neesham until very recently was lower order batsman for Otago. Anderson was seen as a much better batting talent but Neesham since then has usurped him in the longer format, look at how settled Neesham has looked in most of his innings at test level.

We really need one (or both) of them to develop their bowling into a capable fourth seamer role while also being both capable of a top six position. There is no reason we can't play the both of them, but both of them need to be 35-40 average batsman and 30-35 average bowlers.

 

[hendrix]

I like both of them and think that they could both be 35-40 average batsmen. I would say that they'll probably average 35-40 with the ball too. But considering I don't see any young middle order batsmen around the country pushing for their spots I think their bowling is somewhat superfluous in terms of their ability to stay in the team (although it would be great for a team point of view if they could develop, obviously).

 

[Hurricane]

Corey has a higher average by a single run and considering that Neesham until very recently was lower order batsman for Otago. Anderson was seen as a much better batting talent but Neesham since then has usurped him in the longer format, look at how settled Neesham has looked in most of his innings at test level.

We really need one (or both) of them to develop their bowling into a capable fourth seamer role while also being both capable of a top six position. There is no reason we can't play the both of them, but both of them need to be 35-40 average batsman and 30-35 average bowlers.

That's the problem with FC averages - they include test averages which have favoured Neesham. Last year the difference was ten runs.

 

[Blocky]

You you try not misrepresenting what I said? I was saying he needs as many overs under his belt as possible, and my suggestion was to get him playing in county cricket. That is completely different to how you've decided to represent what I'm saying.

No county is going to take him on, basically I don't think ND would persist in playing him had he not been selected either because he's simply not performing for them either... so this dream land seems to perpetuate the concept that "Sodhi needs overs, he'll only get them for NZ, so lets keep selecting him"

 

[Blocky]

That's the problem with FC averages - they include test averages which have favoured Neesham. Last year the difference was ten runs.

Right... but wouldn't you rather assess someone on their test performance rather than first class? And as I said, Neesham very rarely batted above eight for Otago prior to maybe 18 months ago, since then he's had more of a chance to bat, he's scored more test runs than Anderson despite playing three less tests. And technique wise, he's a lot more comfortable than Anderson appears... the other thing I like about Neesham is that he seems to be able to kick on from a nice/pleasant forty into a tonne, which is something Anderson has struggled with since he was 16.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

No county is going to take him on, basically I don't think ND would persist in playing him had he not been selected either because he's simply not performing for them either... so this dream land seems to perpetuate the concept that "Sodhi needs overs, he'll only get them for NZ, so lets keep selecting him"

I suppose no county would take on Guptill either. Give Bracewell the call and he'll take anything Kiwi. Kieran Noema-Barnett could go pretty well in English conditions; especially April-June, but I don't think he's a better player than Sodhi.

 

[Hurricane]

Blackcaps Player ratings

I am going to do one of these after each test. A pak fan can do Pakistan.

Latham 10 (if I could give him higher I would - I don't care that he failed second dig, I approve of the shot he got out to 2nd dig - although with his high standards he will wait for a fuller
one next time)
McCullum 5 - while usually I make jokes about a captain that uses short covers instead of a second slip in this case - while Pak were piling on 500 runs it looked proactive and probably stopped the fielders from either falling asleep or wishing they were at home instead of on the field. Good attitude in the 2nd dig for batting and good on him for putting his hand up to open
Wiliamson - 0 two soft dismissals
Taylor 2 - higher score than williamson as the bowler got him out to a degree in both digs. He gets those deliveries twenty runs later and he would have kept them out. Despite his run of no ducks he is an edgy starter more so against spin.
Anderson - 7 good fighting knocks - good bowling. He is more than a 4th seamer.
Neesham 1 - didn't see him bat tbf but the scorebook is not kind to him
Watling 3 - OK first dig knock - his missed stumping was unacceptable
Craig 0 - looked loose whenever I was watching and I got the impression that brendon started to favour Ish over him as the game progressed.
Southee 7 - Don't care about his batting that is not what he is in the side for. I don't care that he didn't get any wickets although that is his job. Whenevr I watched his was hitting good areas this was just a roady road.
Sodhi - 5 - Outbowled Craig and I genuinely thought he improved in this game.
You may wonder why I gave Southee more points. The answer is I thought Tim bowled better than Ish. Even though Ish was at his best ever.
Boult 6 - see Comments on Southee above