CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh



  • @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback

    You raise some valid points

    According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's

    Southee
    Mat 39
    Inns 39
    Overs 334.3
    Mdns 20
    Runs 1912
    Wkts 45
    BBI 6/65
    Ave 42.48
    Econ 5.71
    SR 44.6
    4 7
    5 2

    Henry
    Mat 35
    Overs 317.0
    Mdns 18
    Runs 1714
    Wkts 70
    BBI 5/30
    Ave 24.48
    Econ 5.40
    SR 27.1
    4 6
    5 2

    I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.

    Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.

    Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.

    Also his Economy rate is higher.

    Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.

    As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?

    Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"

    At the death and in hard spots? A lot more than henry.

    Can you give us some specific examples please ? cos from where I'm sitting Henrys stats speak for themselves in comparison, namely getting wickets at nearly twenty runs cheaper each time.

    I have already addressed the stats argument.

    That's not what I asked though. Just seems to me you're pumping a guy who's best years are behind him.



  • @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback

    You raise some valid points

    According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's

    Southee
    Mat 39
    Inns 39
    Overs 334.3
    Mdns 20
    Runs 1912
    Wkts 45
    BBI 6/65
    Ave 42.48
    Econ 5.71
    SR 44.6
    4 7
    5 2

    Henry
    Mat 35
    Overs 317.0
    Mdns 18
    Runs 1714
    Wkts 70
    BBI 5/30
    Ave 24.48
    Econ 5.40
    SR 27.1
    4 6
    5 2

    I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.

    Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.

    Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.

    Also his Economy rate is higher.

    Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.

    As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?

    Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"

    At the death and in hard spots? A lot more than henry.

    Can you give us some specific examples please ? cos from where I'm sitting Henrys stats speak for themselves in comparison, namely getting wickets at nearly twenty runs cheaper each time.

    I have already addressed the stats argument.

    That's not what I asked though. Just seems to me you're pumping a guy who's best years are behind him.

    Yes I am sure that is how it appears to you. Luckily you are not really my target of discussion.



  • @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback

    You raise some valid points

    According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's

    Southee
    Mat 39
    Inns 39
    Overs 334.3
    Mdns 20
    Runs 1912
    Wkts 45
    BBI 6/65
    Ave 42.48
    Econ 5.71
    SR 44.6
    4 7
    5 2

    Henry
    Mat 35
    Overs 317.0
    Mdns 18
    Runs 1714
    Wkts 70
    BBI 5/30
    Ave 24.48
    Econ 5.40
    SR 27.1
    4 6
    5 2

    I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.

    Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.

    Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.

    Also his Economy rate is higher.

    Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.

    As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?

    Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"

    At the death and in hard spots? A lot more than henry.

    Can you give us some specific examples please ? cos from where I'm sitting Henrys stats speak for themselves in comparison, namely getting wickets at nearly twenty runs cheaper each time.

    I have already addressed the stats argument.

    That's not what I asked though. Just seems to me you're pumping a guy who's best years are behind him.

    Yes I am sure that is how it appears to you. Luckily you are not really my target of discussion.

    Well you do get like that when people don't agree with you aye 🙂



  • @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback

    You raise some valid points

    According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's

    Southee
    Mat 39
    Inns 39
    Overs 334.3
    Mdns 20
    Runs 1912
    Wkts 45
    BBI 6/65
    Ave 42.48
    Econ 5.71
    SR 44.6
    4 7
    5 2

    Henry
    Mat 35
    Overs 317.0
    Mdns 18
    Runs 1714
    Wkts 70
    BBI 5/30
    Ave 24.48
    Econ 5.40
    SR 27.1
    4 6
    5 2

    I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.

    Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.

    Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.

    Also his Economy rate is higher.

    Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.

    As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?

    Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"

    At the death and in hard spots? A lot more than henry.

    Can you give us some specific examples please ? cos from where I'm sitting Henrys stats speak for themselves in comparison, namely getting wickets at nearly twenty runs cheaper each time.

    I have already addressed the stats argument.

    That's not what I asked though. Just seems to me you're pumping a guy who's best years are behind him.

    Yes I am sure that is how it appears to you. Luckily you are not really my target of discussion.

    Well you do get like that when people don't agree with you aye 🙂

    Nope, @dogmeat didn't agree with me, it is mainly the facile nature of your points that doesnt interest me.



  • @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @MN5 said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @dogmeat said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback

    You raise some valid points

    According to Statsguru since the last World Cup Southee and Henry have the following stats opening the bowling in ODI's

    Southee
    Mat 39
    Inns 39
    Overs 334.3
    Mdns 20
    Runs 1912
    Wkts 45
    BBI 6/65
    Ave 42.48
    Econ 5.71
    SR 44.6
    4 7
    5 2

    Henry
    Mat 35
    Overs 317.0
    Mdns 18
    Runs 1714
    Wkts 70
    BBI 5/30
    Ave 24.48
    Econ 5.40
    SR 27.1
    4 6
    5 2

    I haven't the time to go bone deep into who the opposition were but giving it as much context as I ca easily both guys have bowled a similar number of overs. Henry has taken a lot more wickets with a slightly better economy rate and a much better strike rate.

    Given cricket is a game of statistics I certainly think there is an argument to use Henry as a strike bowler at the start of an innings, even though I concede I wouldn't want to see him bowling at the death.

    Massive difference. Southees stats are horrific for someone who is basically living off reputation.

    Also his Economy rate is higher.

    Henry is averaging two wickets a match. I’ll take that thanks, that outweighs any shortcomings, real or imagined.

    As i said. Context matters. Southee often bowls at tough times. Henry never does. Have you ever seen Henry bowl us out of a hole? Or even be asked to?

    Well no, but to quote Eddie Murphy...."What has Southee done for us lately ?"

    At the death and in hard spots? A lot more than henry.

    Can you give us some specific examples please ? cos from where I'm sitting Henrys stats speak for themselves in comparison, namely getting wickets at nearly twenty runs cheaper each time.

    I have already addressed the stats argument.

    That's not what I asked though. Just seems to me you're pumping a guy who's best years are behind him.

    Yes I am sure that is how it appears to you. Luckily you are not really my target of discussion.

    Well you do get like that when people don't agree with you aye 🙂

    Nope, @dogmeat didn't agree with me, it is mainly the facile nature of your points that doesnt interest me.

    Using stats and results to illustrate a point ?

    Well there goes any cricket related conversations on here then !



  • @Baron-Silas-Greenback I agree with you on the context part. Henry's death bowling is a problem, and is the key reason he hasn't been a mainstay in the side despite his stats.

    It's a case of Henry's opening spells vs Southee's later innings spells (with a focus on keeping the RPO down in the later stages).

    At this point I prefer we go hard at the top and knock off their best players early - that's our best chance IMO. Because despite Southee's superior range of variations, I don't think it will be enough to stop Aus 2 down in the 40th over from posting an ungettable total.



  • @No-Quarter said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback I agree with you on the context part. Henry's death bowling is a problem, and is the key reason he hasn't been a mainstay in the side despite his stats.

    It's a case of Henry's opening spells vs Southee's later innings spells (with a focus on keeping the RPO down in the later stages).

    At this point I prefer we go hard at the top and knock off their best players early - that's our best chance IMO. Because despite Southee's superior range of variations, I don't think it will be enough to stop Aus 2 down in the 40th over from posting an ungettable total.

    I don't disagree Henry has his faults and this conversation probably wouldn't even be happening four years ago but promoting Southee over him for a few intangibles just doesn't seem the answer.

    If Henry bowls out 10 on the trot and grabs a couple or three wickets as he has done then what is the problem ?



  • If it really comes down to it, most of the time Southee is going to be of quite a bit more use to us than de Grandhomme.

    It's sort of nice having Colin sitting low in the batting order and thinking "he can ice this" or "this run rate's not beyond Colin", but when push comes to shove and we really need him, he's probably about as likely to pull a Coulter Nile as a latter day Luke Ronchi.

    So maybe we should just play Timmy AND Matt.



  • @Chris-B said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    If it really comes down to it, most of the time Southee is going to be of quite a bit more use to us than de Grandhomme.

    It's sort of nice having Colin sitting low in the batting order and thinking "he can ice this" or "this run rate's not beyond Colin", but when push comes to shove and we really need him, he's probably about as likely to pull a Coulter Nile as a latter day Luke Ronchi.

    So maybe we should just play Timmy AND Matt.

    ( shudders )



  • @No-Quarter said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback I agree with you on the context part. Henry's death bowling is a problem, and is the key reason he hasn't been a mainstay in the side despite his stats.

    It's a case of Henry's opening spells vs Southee's later innings spells (with a focus on keeping the RPO down in the later stages).

    At this point I prefer we go hard at the top and knock off their best players early - that's our best chance IMO. Because despite Southee's superior range of variations, I don't think it will be enough to stop Aus 2 down in the 40th over from posting an ungettable total.

    I think Henry is better at the top, mainly due to consistency. Southee is more lethal when is he is on.
    So I can disgaree but understand with you point.
    It just isnt close once we get past the innings start. We are foreced to bwoel our 5/6th option waaaay more than we should because one of our supposed frontline bowlers just cannot bowl effectively under late innings pressure.



  • @Chris-B said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    If it really comes down to it, most of the time Southee is going to be of quite a bit more use to us than de Grandhomme.

    It's sort of nice having Colin sitting low in the batting order and thinking "he can ice this" or "this run rate's not beyond Colin", but when push comes to shove and we really need him, he's probably about as likely to pull a Coulter Nile as a latter day Luke Ronchi.

    So maybe we should just play Timmy AND Matt.

    Why can't we have both? That solves this debate. Southee has the ability to ice the cake as well, I'm not convinced CdG is worth the gamble any more than Munro, he rarely comes off. We really do have a problem with our 5th bowler as well given Neesh consistently sprays it around.

    Stead I hope you're reading this.



  • @No-Quarter said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Chris-B said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    If it really comes down to it, most of the time Southee is going to be of quite a bit more use to us than de Grandhomme.

    It's sort of nice having Colin sitting low in the batting order and thinking "he can ice this" or "this run rate's not beyond Colin", but when push comes to shove and we really need him, he's probably about as likely to pull a Coulter Nile as a latter day Luke Ronchi.

    So maybe we should just play Timmy AND Matt.

    Why can't we have both? That solves this debate. Southee has the ability to ice the cake as well, I'm not convinced CdG is worth the gamble any more than Munro, he rarely comes off. We really do have a problem with our 5th bowler as well given Neesh consistently sprays it around.

    Stead I hope you're reading this.

    Geez if you're a Black Cap and your names Colin you really are on the fern shit list.......



  • Fair to say the only reason Henry is in the frame and is close to being a certainty in the team is post 2015 Southee has fallen away badly completed to pre 2015.
    Stats don’t lie, since taking the 7for vs the Poms in that game he’s struggled to take wickets.
    Averaging over 40 is not going to help any team.
    Not sure if it’s an age thing or simply loss of form. But he’s definitely no longer deserving of an automatic spot in the team.



  • Colin bighouse has given us two vital wickets so far, very well done him

    Munro averaging 70odd, could this be a stellar world cup for our 2 much maligned Colin's?

    So far very good



  • @No-Quarter said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    @Chris-B said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    If it really comes down to it, most of the time Southee is going to be of quite a bit more use to us than de Grandhomme.

    It's sort of nice having Colin sitting low in the batting order and thinking "he can ice this" or "this run rate's not beyond Colin", but when push comes to shove and we really need him, he's probably about as likely to pull a Coulter Nile as a latter day Luke Ronchi.

    So maybe we should just play Timmy AND Matt.

    Why can't we have both? That solves this debate. Southee has the ability to ice the cake as well, I'm not convinced CdG is worth the gamble any more than Munro, he rarely comes off. We really do have a problem with our 5th bowler as well given Neesh consistently sprays it around.

    Stead I hope you're reading this.

    Henry is probably just as useful with the bat at 7 or 8 than CdG..... down the selection rabbit hole we go



  • @Siam said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    Colin bighouse has given us two vital wickets so far, very well done him

    Munro averaging 70odd, could this be a stellar world cup for our 2 much maligned Colin's?

    So far very good

    He choked like a dog batting vs the Bangles. When he meekly chipped a ball between two fielders I knew he was going to bottle it



  • @Siam said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    Colin bighouse has given us two vital wickets so far, very well done him

    Munro averaging 70odd, could this be a stellar world cup for our 2 much maligned Colin's?

    So far very good

    Colin "The Big Man"! We need him to be.

    Problem with the Colins is that they're sort of the same player - gambit players who might come off but probably won't - we can probably afford one of them, but not both.

    On the other hand, we're not really good enough to win this Cup by playing conservatively - we need to roll the dice and risk going down in flames.

    It is interesting that Munro is trying to rein himself in, but I'm still pretty sure that Bumrah and Woakes have his number, and Mitch Starc will find it in the phone book.



  • @Virgil said in CWC Game #2 Black Caps vs Bangladesh:

    Averaging over 40 is not going to help any team.
    .

    It would, but only if that was his batting average.



  • @canefan thought Neesham's dismissal was the worst. He's far too old to be turning an easy win into a maybe



  • I agree with the above, have Henry AND Southee to cover opening + death bowling, and mug off Colin bigman. Henry/Southee will together probably produce as many runs in the last 5-7overs slogging, and if CDG comes in with 15 overs+ to bat we're probably screwed at that point anyway.

    I reckon our best team is:

    1. Guppy
    2. Nicholls
    3. Kane
    4. Rossco
    5. Latham (wk)
    6. Neesham
    7. Satnav
    8. Southee
    9. Henry
    10. Ferguson
    11. Boult

Log in to reply