*Official* Tri Series (Ind, NZ, Aus) Thread

[Mister Wright]

Don't worry Kiwi fans, I'm sure Richard will find a way for you guys winning. I mean Symonds was dropped early and that should have terminated his innings right there and then...right?

My hat goes off to Clarke, I thought everything said about him was just hype, but I have to give it to him, great knock!

These selectors make controversial decisions - but they always pay off.

 

[Eclipse]

Clark is sooooo the next gun young batsman in International cricket.

I would still give him another year or so before we introduce him to test cricket though.

He is definatly good enough ATM but he would benifit from a season or two more experiance in the Pura Cup.

 

[V Reddy]

Wow 12 pages for a single match:O . As Linda put it, great commentary especially for people like me who missed the match .

 

[anzac]

sounds like it was one of those classical NZ V OZ matches that went down to the wire again, and again NZ conspired to loose the game at the death to the calm heads of the Aussies......

at least the NZ lower order can feel better about how they fought back this time, esp Oram & McCullam who both posted their best ODI scores and showed signs of why they had been thought so highly of for some time....

well bowled by Tuffey to take 4/30, although Oram appears to have struggled.....

I can't believe that the selectors have again got Vincent playing 2 roles - opening in Tests & now No3 in ODIs (well yes I can believe it!) - what happens when Astle is fit again to take his place at No3 - do they drop Vincent or move him to opener?

The team selection continues to be a problem & they have committed themselves to having to use Nevin as they are a batsman short, and Nevin has as more experience opening than anyone else in the team. I'm against using McCullam to open until he gets more confidence going - I think the selectors butchered him, Vincent & Franklin in the VB series in OZ last tour there.

IMO they should open with Vincent as that is where he plays in Tests - and tell him to settle in for the long haul to anchor the innings to try & get him to play the same innings as he did v India in Christchurch (although he was overshadowed by Bond's hitting at the death). Fine him for trying to play those damn stupid improv strokes b4 he gets set to the pitch & bowling.

Harris & Nevin should both find this their last tours - Adams, Hitchcock or Mills should be in for Harris depending on the pitch (even Butler?). Time for some specialist batsmen at the top of the order b4 sacrificing / exposing the middle & lower order 'allrounders'.

 

[marc71178]

Clarke's bowled 2 overs for 14 runs. I guess he's a big scalp hunter, back up by the theory that New Zealand are playing like a crappier unit than usual. Give him a decent target and it'll be beautifully flighted, hit halfway up middle and off!

Right, so Clarke didn't get any wickets because the batsmen weren't good enough for him then - I've heard it all now!

 

[marc71178]

With Bond in the side, everyone from 1 to 11 can bat. I believe McCullum is the next in line for the Test team.

Depends on your definition of "bat"

Yes, he's a handy number 11 - but for me bat means he could go out there and hit a fifty or so with support.

 

[marc71178]

I think Vettori is batting well enough to replace Harris in the side as a #7..I mean if NZ can't find anyone better than Harris, then why not? Vettori scores more runs than him & is a better ODI bowler.

Vettori's average of 10 is a bit small to go in at number 7 though?

From what I've seen and heard of him, he maybe good as a pinch hitter, but not as a number 7.

 

[marc71178]

I must say New Zealand made a fantastic comeback helped alot by Australia's 38 extra's.

Erm, since most of the extras came at the start of the innings, I think you're wrong to say they helped the comeback.

Maybe, shock, horror, the batsmen made the comeback on their own?

 

[marc71178]

There must be somthing happening of the seam I cant beleve Styris could clean bowl Ponting otherwise.

Hmm, yes, he's a very good player Ponting, but give the Kiwi's some credit - as Tim said, it sounds like a decent ball that Ponting didn't deal with properly - so you blame the pitch!

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The McCullum catch wasn't easy... but still should have been taken...

Lou Vincent... dropping symonds... hindsight eh..

For an international standard 'keeper, that should have been taken comfortably. It wasn't easy, but you have to catch that.

Lou Vincent..... in and out..... turning point...

Tuffey has had a fine year!

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Hmm, yes, he's a very good player Ponting, but give the Kiwi's some credit - as Tim said, it sounds like a decent ball that Ponting didn't deal with properly - so you blame the pitch!

That said, a bowler of Styris' pace on Indian wickets wouldn't knock Ponting's stumps too often.

 

[marc71178]

That said, a bowler of Styris' pace on Indian wickets wouldn't knock Ponting's stumps too often.

But why is it automatically the conditions, and not a mistake by Ponting or a good ball by Styris?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

But why is it automatically the conditions, and not a mistake by Ponting or a good ball by Styris?

Aussies don't make mistakes , so it was either the pitch or Styris.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Right, so Clarke didn't get any wickets because the batsmen weren't good enough for him then - I've heard it all now!

Well Tendulkar always comes to the party against the Aussies! It's possible...

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

2003 Australian ODI Rankings (as of Australia vs. New Zealand, 5th match of tri-series in Poona [3.11.03])

Batting
No.1: Ricky Ponting - 1492@64.86
No.2: Adam Gilchrist - 1397@51.74
No.3: Damien Martyn - 1288@99.07
No.4: Mathew Hayden - 1124@46.83
No.5: Andrew Symonds - 975@65.00
No.6: Michael Bevan - 732@56.30
No.7: Darren Lehmann - 682@75.77
No.8: Michael Clarke - 472@118.00
No.9: Brad Hogg - 333@37.00
No.10: Andy Bichel - 296@42.28
No.11: Jimmy Maher - 141@17.62
No.12: Ian Harvey - 119@14.87
No.13: Shane Watson - 59@59.00
No.14: Brett Lee - 58@7.25
No.15: Nathan Hauritz - 19@19.00
No.16: Brad Williams - 13@ n/a
No.17: Jason Gillespie - 8@ n/a
No.18: Glenn McGrath - 8@ n/a
No.19: Nathan Bracken - 4@ n/a
No.20: Shane Warne - 0@0.00

Bowling
No.1: Brett Lee - 1282@53.41
No.2: Andy Bichel - 1056@42.24
No.3: Brad Hogg - 897@34.50
No.4: Glenn McGrath - 877@46.15
No.5: Ian Harvey - 553@36.86
No.6: Jason Gillespie - 517@47.00
No.7: Brad Williams - 492@49.20
No.8: Nathan Bracken - 413@68.83
No.9: Darren Lehmann - 237@21.54
No.10: Andrew Symonds - 220@12.22
No.11: Shane Watson - 141@28.20
No.12: Michael Clarke - 139@34.75
No.13: Shane Warne - 85@42.50
No.14: Nathan Hauritz - 47@15.66
No.15: Damien Martyn - 21@7.00

Michael Bevan went up from No.7 to No.6 in the batting rankings, Darren Lehmann has dropped to No.7 from No.6.

In the Bowling rankings, Brad Williams has gone from No.8 to No.7 passing Nathan Bracken who has dropped from No.7 to No.8.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

The game was vey close, a nail bitter between Australia & NZ. Clarke, Bevan, Symonds & Williams played well for Australia. For NZ; Tuffey, Oram & McCullum played well.

NZ fought back well but the mighty Aussies thankfully won

 

[marc71178]

Any chance of keeping those ratings in just one thread, rather than posting them all over the place?

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

Depends on your definition of "bat"

Well I think that it depends with what from of cricket you are playing.

For example, look at say from 7 to 11th batsmen.

In ODI's I would classify somebody who can bat (7-11th) if they are in the last 10 overs to be able to either hit 25 runs off say 20 balls. Or for them to be able to rotate the strike (at a run a ball) to a batsman who may be past a hundred who then could attack.

In Tests, I would classify somebody who can bat (7-11th) if they can either score with a strike rate of at least 65.00 and who is able to efectively rotate the strike to a reconigsed batsman without having dramatically slowed down play.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

Any chance of keeping those ratings in just one thread, rather than posting them all over the place?

Ok I'll keep them in one thread.

 

[marc71178]

In Tests, I would classify somebody who can bat (7-11th) if they can either score with a strike rate of at least 65.00 and who is able to efectively rotate the strike to a reconigsed batsman without having dramatically slowed down play.

Why the obsession with quick scoring - Test's are allocated 5 days or 450 overs to be played in.

One of the best tail-end innings in recent times was Hoggard, and he spent a hell of a long time blocking!