***Official** Sri Lanka in New Zealand

[NZTailender]

When was the last time Vincent scored runs?

In tests? His past few scores were, like, over 200, 30, 93...


In FC? Averaged over 40 in England.

Will need to score heavily in NZ domestic though...

 

[Sir Redman]

Sinclair deserves his spot for mine. He's been, along with Peter Fulton, the most dominant batsman in NZ domestic cricket for the last 3 or 4 seasons at least. When he was recalled into the squad a couple of years ago he didn't do too badly either, scoring a fair few fifties, most of which were while he was being played out of position as an opener. Since he was recalled vs South Africa in 2003/2004 he's got scores of 74, 21, 76, 23, 69, 0, 0 and 2 (265 runs @ 33.1) which, while not brilliant, is not too bad. When you consider the leniency shown to players in the past such as Craig McMillan, and more recently Hamish Marshall, he's been quite harshly treated. He's always been the scapegoat after a poor series, especially against Australia.

I've always been a staunch supporter of Nathan Astle, since he's been our most consistent century-maker (while others have been guilty of getting out for 70 or 80), but I'm starting to wonder if his time is up in the test arena. Jesse Ryder is pushing very hard for selection (I'm wondering if his arrogant brat reputation earned a few seasons ago is counting against him), as is Peter Fulton. But for god's sake I hope they don't chuck either of them into the opening position. Stick with Cumming and How for a while at least (though of course with our test schedule Cumming will probably be into his 40s by the time our next test series comes along) and when Papps recovers and scores runs domestically he can be considered.

With regard to the bowlers, I rate Michael Mason. Very McGrath-esque, though he has been known to lose his run-up and fall apart on occasion. He's been a very consistent performer domestically as well, and contrary to popular opinion domestic pitches in NZ are not all minefields where all you have to do is bowl the ball somewhere near the right position and it will seam six inches. Look at the number of centuries scored in the last 4 seasons or so compared to what it was like in the 90s.

I know that Ian O'Brien has been taking a fair few wickets for Wellington recently, but from what we saw of him during that Australian tour he looked totally pedestrian. Would have definately preferred the selectors to have gone with Gillespie.

For the first test I'd go with:

1) Cumming
2) How
3) Sinclair
4) Fleming
5) Astle
6) Oram
7) McCullum
8) Vettori
9) Franklin
10) Bond
11) Mason

Martin & O'Brien missing out for mine. Seeing as Martin does the same thing Bond does (swing the ball into right handers) but is 5 or 10 k's slower, less accurate and looks completely innocuous if the ball isn't swinging, he doesn't make it. Mind you, Bond will probably get injured at the eleventh hour and so we'll be back to Martin and Franklin openign the bowling again (sigh). Mason gets in because he's a different style of bowler, giving our attack a more rounded look - we'd have a genuine quick (Bond), a left-armer (Franklin), an accurate pacer (Mason) and with anything extra provided by Oram or Astle if needed. Vettori's not going to take many wickets, especially on NZ pitches against Sri Lankan batsman, but his batting is extremely valuable and he's never going to get dropped anyway.

Oh, and one other thing - you don't go resting your best players from Test matches. Especially against non-minnow nations. If NZ cricket want to keep Bond in cotton wool, then he can miss half the games in the VB Series, because that means jack in the grand scheme of things. He'll still have plenty of ODI matches to prepare for the World Cup, what with the 5 SL ODIs, half the VB Series and the Chappell-Hadlee Trophy, so there's no need to run him into the ground in the VB Series if we're that concerned about him.

That's all folks. (Takes breath).

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Pleasantly surprised to see that Sky Sports are broadcasting this series live in the Uk.

 

[Perm]

Probably more recently than the last time Astle did.

Trust me, if I had a choice between Astle and Vincent/Marshall/Fulton I wouldn't pick Astle. But seeing as how it is only a 2 test series the selectors don't have to make those tough calls.

 

[Bahnz]

Trust me, if I had a choice between Astle and Vincent/Marshall/Fulton I wouldn't pick Astle. But seeing as how it is only a 2 test series the selectors don't have to make those tough calls.

Why wouldn't you pick Nathan Astle? In his last 15 test matches his average has been pretty steady at around 38, alongside his career average, and it was only lowered by the shocking batting conditions on offer in last autumn's tour of South Africa. His bowling is also a useful addition to the side. He normally picks up a wicket or two per match and helps keep the pressure on, so that other bowlers can get wickets. He may be nearing the end of his career, but he shouldn't be tossed aside just because there are a couple of young promising players coming through.

 

[Perm]

I think Marshall and Fulton are more deserving of a spot in the test side that Nathan Astle at the moment, sure he's a great player in ODI's and showed that last year but I would've liked to see some more experimentation with the middle order and introducing a little bit of youth, especially since these guys have scored heavily in domestic cricket.

 

[chaminda_00]

Fulton equals the biggest wasted oppurtunity in NZ cricket. A class batsmen and has the potential to be really world class, but until NZ make some tough choices infront of guys like Sinclair, Astle and Styris they will be ones that suffer. I find it a joke to suggest that Sinclair deserves his spot because his been batting well in domestic cricket. For the last 3-4 seasons his been the best domestic batsmen in NZ, by some margin and still can't get selected. The fact that it seems his only position is as an opener is also a joke. Really he should be the 2nd guy picked in the middle order after Fleming. As a Lankan fan im so happy his not in the side and you gone back to Astle and SInclair.

 

[Sir Redman]

Yep, agree that Fulton could turn out to be a wasted opportunity. He's scored heavily for Canterbury and on NZ A tours, and looked to be establishing himself in the middle order last year. He's got a few technical problems though, and that is why Bracewell's decision to open with him was probably his worst in a long line of blunders. His subsequent failure up there might have left a lasting impression on the selectors and could damage his chances in the future. Can't have done his confidence any good either.

 

[silentstriker]

A) This two test BS needs to end between established test nations
B) I don't know who to root for. Someone help me out.

 

[Sir Redman]

A) This two test BS needs to end between established test nations
B) I don't know who to root for. Someone help me out.

A) Agreed; &
B) NZ, obviously

 

[Bahnz]

I think Marshall and Fulton are more deserving of a spot in the test side that Nathan Astle at the moment, sure he's a great player in ODI's and showed that last year but I would've liked to see some more experimentation with the middle order and introducing a little bit of youth, especially since these guys have scored heavily in domestic cricket.

I agree that Marshall should be in the side, but Fulton to me looked like a player with some severe technical restrictions, and I don't have any great problem with his ommission. He looked woeful in the Champions Trophy, and hasn't managed any significant scores since his introduction last January. I hate to say it, but he looks out of his depth at international level.

 

[_Ed_]

A) This two test BS needs to end between established test nations

NZ is an established test nation? Actually now that you mention it I do vaguely remember a time when we played tests regularly...thanks for reminding me.

 

[Dick Rockett]

I agree that Marshall should be in the side, but Fulton to me looked like a player with some severe technical restrictions, and I don't have any great problem with his ommission. He looked woeful in the Champions Trophy, and hasn't managed any significant scores since his introduction last January. I hate to say it, but he looks out of his depth at international level.

You're making such a call based on one ordinary series away to RSA and two or three bad innings at the CT? If you were a national selector there'd be no team left.

Actually, I wish you were a selector, then I might get the call-up.

 

[chaminda_00]

A) This two test BS needs to end between established test nations
B) I don't know who to root for. Someone help me out.

A) Its a joke
B) Sri Lanka, we only got like four Lankan on this fourm. The more support the better.

 

[Perm]

This rubbish about Fulton and not knowing where his off stump is quite frankly a worry. He obviously knows where it is becasue look at the runs he has scored in domsetic and ODI cricket. Sure he looked woeful in the Champions Trophy and was forced up the order in South Africa which was never going to work. He'll come back strongly I hope.

Originally Posted by silentstriker
A) This two test BS needs to end between established test nations
B) I don't know who to root for. Someone help me out.

A) It's crazy, but NZ have never really valued test cricket.
B) I'm semi conflicted aswell, I want the Black Caps to do well but I really want to see Tharanga and Maharoof perform brilliantly.

 

[Bahnz]

You're making such a call based on one ordinary series away to RSA and two or three bad innings at the CT? If you were a national selector there'd be no team left.

Actually, I wish you were a selector, then I might get the call-up.

Actually, I base my decision on the fact that after his introduction against Sri Lanka last year, he's scored 120 runs at an average of 15. Believe, I was really hopeful about two meter Peter when he first arrived on the scene, this time last year. But since his initial success, I've seen very little to suggest that he'll be able to make it at the international level in the long run. At the very least, he needs to go back and score some more domestic runs, and work his way back into form, before having another go at international cricket.

 

[James]

Actually, I base my decision on the fact that after his introduction against Sri Lanka last year, he's scored 120 runs at an average of 15. Believe, I was really hopeful about two meter Peter when he first arrived on the scene, this time last year. But since his initial success, I've seen very little to suggest that he'll be able to make it at the international level in the long run. At the very least, he needs to go back and score some more domestic runs, and work his way back into form, before having another go at international cricket.

Can you check your email please mate.

 

[Dick Rockett]

Actually, I base my decision on the fact that after his introduction against Sri Lanka last year, he's scored 120 runs at an average of 15. Believe, I was really hopeful about two meter Peter when he first arrived on the scene, this time last year. But since his initial success, I've seen very little to suggest that he'll be able to make it at the international level in the long run. At the very least, he needs to go back and score some more domestic runs, and work his way back into form, before having another go at international cricket.

I don't deny he's been unimpressive in that time, but given the dearth of cricket our national team has had, you're hardly giving him a decent chance.

 

[Will Scarlet]

Fulton just out of form at present

I think it's a joke that Fulton and other NZ batsmen were so heavily criticised for their form in the Champion's Trophy; most of them had not played first class cricket since March. Only Fleming, Marshall, Vincent, Styris, and Franklin had played any significant cricket since last summer and people are surprised when they appear rusty in a high-profile tournement.

I believe Fulton, Ryder, How, and Taylor will all prove their class by the time the and Chappell/ Hadlee series begins. Fulton has worked his way into form in previous seasons. Hopefully Gillespie will continue his good form with the ball and be considered for international selection.

I find it hard to believe that Chris Martin is even in consideration for international selection. His form in recent seasons, including the current, has been aweful.

I was happy to see Sinclair selected ahead of Marshall, though good on HM for his 153 for ND. And I hope that he, How, and Cumming are given a fair chance this time.

 

[Perm]

I am also perplexed at why the selectors went for Chris Martin ahead of Mark Gillespie, who has been bowling reasonably well and returning good figures. Loyalty I suppose.