***Official**** Sri Lanka in New Zealand 2014/2015

[Dan]

lol, Sad what lengths people now have to take to include Taylor in the ATG NZ side.

Personally, I'd have Fleming ahead of Taylor for his captaincy

1. Sutcliffe
2. Richardson
3. Williamson
4. Crowe
5. Fleming *
6. Cairns
7. McCullum (k)
8. Vettori
9. Hadlee
10. Southee
11. Bond

I don't think Fleming's captaincy is all that valuable with McCullum in the side, and KW likely to captain for a long time (and I have faith that he'd be very, very good at it).

Taylor averages 46 in Test cricket, in a country where nobody has averaged 50+ over a meaningful period of Tests. Unless we consider Donnelly/Dempster as genuine ATG XI candidates, Taylor's certainly in the top 5 or 6 middle order Test batsmen in New Zealand history. No matter how you spin it, he's in contention.

You prefer the extra bowling option or Fleming for his captaincy, fair call. I'd probably go for Reid in that position as he provides the fifth bowler option. But IMO you can't act as if Taylor deserves to be nowhere near the conversation.

 

[hendrix]

Sl don't deserve a sporting declaration. They're hoping their batsmen somehow pull of a chase. Grind them down.

yup. There aren't many occasions that a team not trying to take 20 wickets deserve to win a Test.

Can't believe you lot aren't fussed about a test win. Poverty mentality, will forever be outside the top four in the test rankings.

Had too many wins lately tbh.

Also, our draw against India gave me more joy than any of our wins. Seriously.

 

[cnerd123]

Wickets by subcontinent teams in test cricket on 6 Jan 2015: 0

Please calculate how many balls SC teams have bowled in Tests in 2015 and ow man wickets they have taken. Should be a wonderful stat.

 

[Blocky]

My username should tell you I'm a Fleming man but he's not a better player than Taylor.

You're a long lost cause though so whatever.

edit: where the **** is Turner?

Agree that Taylor's batting is better than Fleming's batting to date, but by the end of their careers it may not be. Fleming for me is the better slip fielder and as much as I rate Crowe's tactical ability, he's not a great man manager where as Fleming was superb at it. I'm always going Richardson ahead of Turner and Sutcliffe stands out alone. Williamson at this point in his career is already our best #3 of all time and is only getting better.

In my view, 6 through 11 select themselves. If Baz plays another 4-5 years as a #5 batsman and continues to play as well as he has and captain as well as he has, he probably ends up as our #5 - likewise BJ could end up our keeper.

 

[Flem274*]

The bigger crime is leaving out Glenn Turner. Jesus.

 

[NZTailender]

I don't think Fleming's captaincy is all that valuable with McCullum in the side, and KW likely to captain for a long time (and I have faith that he'd be very, very good at it).

Taylor averages 46 in Test cricket, in a country where nobody has averaged 50+ over a meaningful period of Tests. Unless we consider Donnelly/Dempster as genuine ATG XI candidates, Taylor's certainly in the top 5 or 6 middle order Test batsmen in New Zealand history. No matter how you spin it, he's in contention.

You prefer the extra bowling option or Fleming for his captaincy, fair call. I'd probably go for Reid in that position as he provides the fifth bowler option. But IMO you can't act as if Taylor deserves to be nowhere near the conversation.

You could almost make an argument for Fleming at #3. Large amount of innings batted there, majority of his centuries at a 1:2 100/50 split at an average of 47.

 

[Blocky]

I don't think Fleming's captaincy is all that valuable with McCullum in the side, and KW likely to captain for a long time (and I have faith that he'd be very, very good at it).

Taylor averages 46 in Test cricket , in a country where nobody has averaged 50+ over a meaningful period of Tests. Unless we consider Donnelly/Dempster as genuine ATG XI candidates, Taylor's certainly in the top 5 or 6 middle order Test batsmen in New Zealand history. No matter how you spin it, he's in contention.

You prefer the extra bowling option or Fleming for his captaincy, fair call. I'd probably go for Reid in that position as he provides the fifth bowler option. But IMO you can't act as if Taylor deserves to be nowhere near the conversation.

Taylor CURRENTLY averages 45 in test cricket, but is on a downward slope. He's definitely in the conversation, anyone averaging 40+ for NZ would be.

But I'm also extrapolating somewhat, I simply don't believe that Taylor will ever refind the peak he had and I think he'll end up with a low forties average. I think Baz will end up plus forty, Williamson could manage plus 50.

 

[Flem274*]

Agree that Taylor's batting is better than Fleming's batting to date, but by the end of their careers it may not be. Fleming for me is the better slip fielder and as much as I rate Crowe's tactical ability, he's not a great man manager where as Fleming was superb at it. I'm always going Richardson ahead of Turner and Sutcliffe stands out alone. Williamson at this point in his career is already our best #3 of all time and is only getting better.

In my view, 6 through 11 select themselves. If Baz plays another 4-5 years as a #5 batsman and continues to play as well as he has and captain as well as he has, he probably ends up as our #5 - likewise BJ could end up our keeper.

I don't see Baz playing much longer. Baz the batsman will be remembered for great knocks but also for not achieving what he should have. A career of two halves.

 

[Blocky]

The bigger crime is leaving out Glenn Turner. Jesus.

Turner vs Rigor.

Rigor got more starts and maintained his average through usually getting runs.
Turner scored a number of massive knocks which helped his average out.

I select teams based on their likely performance, not their peak performance - otherwise you're selecting Bryan Young as an opener due to his 274, Sinclair due to his 214, etc etc etc.

Could possibly argue against Sutcliffe for Turner or Rigor though, truth be told. I just like Sutcliffe because he was the first guy from NZ who did anything decent over a career.

 

[Blocky]

But 6 through 11, realistically if Baz isn't selected for his batting, he has to be our keeper until BJ has been around with the gloves as long as Baz was. Cairns has to be our #6, Vettori has to be in the side, Hadlee and Bond too, which leaves Southee as the maybe call, with a number of other guys in the mix but again, I think by the end of his career Southee will be a clear pick.

 

[Flem274*]

1. Turner 2. Sutcliffe 3. Crowe 4. Williamson 5. Taylor 6. Reid 7. McCullum the keeper 8. Hadlee 9. Taylor 10. Bond 11. Cowie

1. Wright 2. Richardson 3. Jones 4. Fleming 5. McCullum the batsman 6. Oram 7. Watling 8. Cairns 9. Vettori 10. Southee 11. Boult

imo

Not going to keep other countries awake at night but two good teams.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

The curiosity of the moment:

Martin Crowe career average: 45.36
Kane Williamson right now: 45.18

 

[Flem274*]

But 6 through 11, realistically if Baz isn't selected for his batting, he has to be our keeper until BJ has been around with the gloves as long as Baz was. Cairns has to be our #6, Vettori has to be in the side, Hadlee and Bond too, which leaves Southee as the maybe call, with a number of other guys in the mix but again, I think by the end of his career Southee will be a clear pick.

So you're picking Southee and excluding Taylor based on extrapolation but picking Richardson based on supposed more consistent performance.

Right.

 

[NZTailender]

stfu Smithy, talking about Walliamson's HS and potential double-hundy. Such a jinx.

 

[Dan]

Taylor CURRENTLY averages 45 in test cricket, but is on a downward slope. He's definitely in the conversation, anyone averaging 40+ for NZ would be.

But I'm also extrapolating somewhat, I simply don't believe that Taylor will ever refind the peak he had and I think he'll end up with a low forties average. I think Baz will end up plus forty, Williamson could manage plus 50.

Well if he's in the conversation, it's hardly "sad lengths" to name Taylor in the XI based on performance to date. It'd be "sad lengths" if someone tried to argue Suresh Raina was an ATG Test batsman, or attempted to construct a case that Martin Guptill should make the NZ ATG XI.

I'm not going to speculate on how Taylor is going to perform over the next few years, nor do his projected future performances devalue what he's actually achieved in his career so far.

 

[viriya]

In this dire time to be a SL cricket fan, I'd like to point out that BJ's innings was chanceless compared to Kane's, but Kane is getting all the ATG NZ XI adulation.

That little **** should've gotten out yesterday!

 

[Blocky]

So you're picking Southee and excluding Taylor based on extrapolation but picking Richardson based on supposed more consistent performance.

Right.

Taylor's going downhill at a rate of knots, he's also had the precious position of four - you tell me any other NZ batsman averaging mid forties in the modern era as an opening batsman and I'll select them.

 

[hendrix]

It's actually fine for Blocky to select whomever he wants in his NZ ATG XI - he can prefer Wagner over Hadlee if he wants to.

Some of the justification would work out better with a simple "I subjectively think this guy is the better player".

I personally have often felt that McCullum>Taylor, at least for a lot of time during their careers. But I'm quite happy to concede that Taylor has had better output, played better knocks and generally actually been the better batsmen by most ways that we choose to measure the stick.

I think it's quite reasonable to claim that McCullum has had a more difficult career in where he's batted for the team and the relative strengths of the sides in which they've played.

 

[Blocky]

In this dire time to be an SL cricket fan, I'd like to point out that BJ's innings was chanceless compared to Kane's, but Kane is getting all the ATG NZ XI adulation.

That little **** should've gotten out yesterday!

Agree with this, having a discussion with others about how lucky Williamson is as a cricketer and how many let offs he gets in games.

Watling on the other hand, solid as anything.

 

[Blocky]

It's actually fine for Blocky to select whomever he wants in his NZ ATG XI - he can prefer Wagner over Hadlee if he wants to.

Some of the justification would work out better with a simple "I subjectively think this guy is the better player".

I personally have often felt that McCullum>Taylor, at least for a lot of time during their careers. But I'm quite happy to concede that Taylor has had better output, played better knocks and generally actually been the better batsmen by most ways that we choose to measure the stick.

I think it's quite reasonable to claim that McCullum has had a more difficult career in where he's batted for the team and the relative strengths of the sides in which they've played.

Better knocks I'd have to say goes to McCullum now. Also the point you make about McCullum playing in a number of positions for the team should also be taken into consideration for Fleming who did the same thing. Fleming would've been best suited to being a #4 batsman, but played himself in opener and three because we had no one else.

But the most effective batsman in NZ history is actually Williamson in terms of hundreds to winning results.