-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
NZ squad
- Thread starter straw man
- Start date
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Just a hint of Flem's anti-Ronchi bias showing through here. Ronchi should definitely be batting ahead of Neesham at least. However, I don't think any of the batting positioning outside of the top 4 is going to matter too much. KW, Guptill, McCullum and Taylor are our only 4 batsmen that are proven at building big LO innings. If we lose all of them inside the first 10 overs, I really don't think the exact order of the rest of the batsmen is likely to make that big a difference.
KW, Guptill, McCullum, Taylor, Anderson, Ronchi, Neesham/Munro, NcCullum, Southee, Hira, McC/Boult
Flem274*
123/5
I like how everyone has jumped on my order of the 5-7 which was written at random (keeper at 7 is becoming convention even if they can float around a bit - watling is a better test batsman than anderson but he still gets listed at 7) as me having a dig at ronchi rather than my gajillion posts blatantly calling him a one paced inconsistent bowl of icing back when people were suggesting him for the test team, or when i barracked for watling in the odi side ahead of him.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Really? I thought people had been calling you out on your irrational hatred of Ronchi for ages...ftr I still reckon that in the short term Ronchi would probably do better in the test match no. 6 spot than any domestic batsman not named Ryder.
Magrat Garlick
Global Moderator
Cricket Max finishing out of the podiumYeah, agree with that.
In other news, this is awesome.
KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
Flem274*
123/5
that's more of a relfection of the quality of our domestic batsmen rather than Ronchi's quality. i would also take brownlie and latham ahead of him off the top of my head.
i don't hate him, i just don't think he's better than watling, cut out to be a specialist test batsman, or should have been allowed to play for NZ in the first place.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, looks like it's not being televised period...
Cricket: Work to do after T20 loss - Sport - NZ Herald News
Incidentally, not great signs for NZ in the first warm-up game. We really seem to struggle with the bat in Bangladesh conditions, more so than in India which is strange as you'd think sub-continent conditions are effectively the same. Ryder is obviously a huge loss in this format as one of those x-factor players of which form & pitch conditions are close to irrelevant. For me B-Mac needs to step-up to open (as opposed to 3) and Williamson can be there as a kind of a floater (depending on what happens), if at all.
I'm clutching at straws here, but if NZ were going into this tournament with Ryder, Vettori & Milne as options, I'd give us a genuine chance. Without them we have no top-class spin options (sorry NcCullum & Hira), no genuine pace options and are thin in terms of explosive top-order batsmen. That coupled with the fact we struggle in Bangladesh conditions at the best of times doesn't fill me with much confidence or expectations this time around.
Hurricane
Hall of Fame Member
AWTA - wouldn't even play Kane - there is no place for a consolidator or anchor man in T20 and I reckon the 50 he will score off 43 balls in one game will be too slow in the scheme of things.
We have a raft of middle order batsman/sloggers and should play all of them instead.
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
You guys are seriously overratting Ronchi's batsmanship based on one good domestic season. Throughout his (long) career he's always been very much a pinch hitter.
There are at least 3 guys who'd be better as test number 6 batsmen than him.
For a start, the status quo in Anderson is better. Flynn would also be better. Neesham is nowhere near a test number 6 yet but i'd say he's about the same level as Ronchi.
Even Guptill would probably be better.
There are at least 3 guys who'd be better as test number 6 batsmen than him.
For a start, the status quo in Anderson is better. Flynn would also be better. Neesham is nowhere near a test number 6 yet but i'd say he's about the same level as Ronchi.
Even Guptill would probably be better.