What is the reason for such inconsistency? When he came into the NZ side for the first time, he was hailed as a natural successor to Martin Crowe, high praise that. He has always seemed an elegant and wonderfully talented player, but woefully inconsistent. His captaincy has been exceptional, but he still has some way to go to fulfil his potential as a batsman. Hope he does though, one of my favourite batsmen. Hope he doesn't do it in the Ind-NZ match however...:duh:Tim said:Well the fact is, is that if Fleming was consistent he'd be way up in the batting ratings for both ODI & Tests.
He is such a good batsman, but he's just struggled to put good scores together.
It really is frustrating seeing such a natural talent like him go to waste, hopefully we get 3 or 4 good years out of him.
NZ need to win every match in the SS if they don't want to be at the mercy of the result in the Ken-Zim match. India have already qualified for the semis and NZ will be desperate for a win so.....I have to say it all depends on India's intensity going into the match. If India gives a performance like the one against SL, they would be the clear favourites.anzac said:I am looking forward to NZ V India as potentially being the best match of the Super Sixes. It will be crucial enough as it is, let alone if NZ need a win to reach the semis!
At this stage I am reasonably confident that NZ can win the match as they are masters at strangling the opposition - the same tactics worked v India in the ICC Trophey when NZ won the title - India & Ganguly got frustrated into self destructing.
NZ need a good performance V Australia, particularly from the bowlers.
![]()
I beg to differ.krkode said:I think the Indian bowling has improved much since that ICC final. They were just helpless to the wrath of Cairns on that day.:wow:
True that they were outthought and outplayed in that game - but Cairns was just one barrier that they could not possibly pass. 250 isn't that bad of a score, but with Cairns out there, it was made bad. That's all I was saying :Panzac said:I beg to differ.
Cairns finished off the job that was started by NZ in the field by restricting the total posted by India. India was out thought by Fleming & Co & got strangled in their batting & they broke in the field. Pressure was the key in that game - NZ applied it & India were'nt able to handle it.
![]()
Well, comparing to third party teams to justify a result between two other teams is no fair way of comparison. India just crushed a team (Sri Lanka) that NZ lost to. What does that say?Rik said:You want proof that NZ could quite easily brush off India? Just look here http://uk.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/WORLD_CUPS/WC2003/SCORECARDS/SUPSIX/AUS_NZ_WC2003_ODI-SUPSIX5_11MAR2003.html#current
It shows a dominant side that refuses to be beaten, and an NZ side that couldn't maintain the pressure - nothing there to suggest NZ could quite easily brush off Aus!Rik said:You want proof that NZ could quite easily brush off India? Just look here http://uk.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/WORLD_CUPS/WC2003/SCORECARDS/SUPSIX/AUS_NZ_WC2003_ODI-SUPSIX5_11MAR2003.html#current
Right, so to prove that you use a post I posted when Australia were 84-7 to talk about India? You really do seem desperate to pick a fight with me if your going to use that to start an arguement. Don't bother, I'm not interisted.marc71178 said:It shows a dominant side that refuses to be beaten, and an NZ side that couldn't maintain the pressure - nothing there to suggest NZ could quite easily brush off Aus!