Black Caps vs Bangles
-
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
The only potential change to the test team that I can see would be Neesham or Anderson in for CdGh and then only if one of those is fully fit and firing.
The No. 5 eggs are in the Nicholls basket and I can't seem them being tipped out after he just made his highest test score unless Anderson or Neesham do something extraordinary in the meantime.
This is something that I don't really get.
Neesham: 10 tests, 2x 100s, 4x 50s, Average 37.94
Nicholls, 11 tests, 4x 50s, Average 31.33Neesham has two tons.. And he hasn't played against the Zimbots and the Bangas, so coulnd't pad his average like Henry has..
Nicholls innings of 76 against Steyn/Philander/Rabada has carried him this far.. -
@mimic - Yeah - I was also particularly impressed with how well Neesham went in the first round of the Chappell-Hadlee when we needed him to bat at No. 4.
I think Hesson mainly has a philosophy that once you're in the team you get a decent go to prove yourself (or not). I like it better than when Sir Paddles was in charge and he chopped and changed every test in his efforts to pull rabbits out of hats, so I'm not going to be too critical. But Jimmy seems to be someone who's been caught in an eddy within this selection philosophy - in part due to injuries.
-
@mimic said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
The only potential change to the test team that I can see would be Neesham or Anderson in for CdGh and then only if one of those is fully fit and firing.
The No. 5 eggs are in the Nicholls basket and I can't seem them being tipped out after he just made his highest test score unless Anderson or Neesham do something extraordinary in the meantime.
This is something that I don't really get.
Neesham: 10 tests, 2x 100s, 4x 50s, Average 37.94
Nicholls, 11 tests, 4x 50s, Average 31.33Neesham has two tons.. And he hasn't played against the Zimbots and the Bangas, so coulnd't pad his average like Henry has..
Nicholls innings of 76 against Steyn/Philander/Rabada has carried him this far..Neesham's main problem is he's made of glass
-
@mariner4life said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
as good a place as any to put this
the India v England 3-match ODI series just wrapped up, won 2-1 by India. What a fucking run-fest. All 6 innings well in excess of 300, with the total runs scored 2,090, and an average score of 348. 10 batsmen averaged more than 55. Only 1 bowler went for less than 6 an over (jadeja). As far as i can tell, that's a record runs total for a 3 match series.
A bit like when we last played the poms over there.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/743919.html
Those middle 3 games 'only' totaled 2,060 runs - but one was a Duckworth Lewis game, one the poms were bowled out in 45 overs and the other they got the runs with five overs to spare. Probably missed at least 150 runs.
-
@canefan said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@mimic said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
The only potential change to the test team that I can see would be Neesham or Anderson in for CdGh and then only if one of those is fully fit and firing.
The No. 5 eggs are in the Nicholls basket and I can't seem them being tipped out after he just made his highest test score unless Anderson or Neesham do something extraordinary in the meantime.
This is something that I don't really get.
Neesham: 10 tests, 2x 100s, 4x 50s, Average 37.94
Nicholls, 11 tests, 4x 50s, Average 31.33Neesham has two tons.. And he hasn't played against the Zimbots and the Bangas, so coulnd't pad his average like Henry has..
Nicholls innings of 76 against Steyn/Philander/Rabada has carried him this far..Neesham's main problem is he's made of glass
....and as an all rounder he's also judged on some less than impressive bowling returns and perhaps the misconception that his batting average has been boosted by some luck ?
( mind you 'can't get a test 50' Doug Bracewell is an all rounder as well apparently )
-
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@mariner4life said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
as good a place as any to put this
the India v England 3-match ODI series just wrapped up, won 2-1 by India. What a fucking run-fest. All 6 innings well in excess of 300, with the total runs scored 2,090, and an average score of 348. 10 batsmen averaged more than 55. Only 1 bowler went for less than 6 an over (jadeja). As far as i can tell, that's a record runs total for a 3 match series.
A bit like when we last played the poms over there.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/743919.html
Those middle 3 games 'only' totaled 2,060 runs - but one was a Duckworth Lewis game, one the poms were bowled out in 45 overs and the other they got the runs with five overs to spare. Probably missed at least 150 runs.
That whole series was awesome. 1-1 in the tests played at a frantic pace, followed by a bunch of outrageous ODIs. All after the CWC where you'd expect there would be a bit of a hangover.
I think we really do miss Baz's captaincy. It's early days for Kane and he's not doing much wrong, but the way Baz led the team was awesome - IMO our best ever captain.
-
@Rapido said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@hydro11 said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@Rapido said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
Agree @Chris-B, I just hope they aren't look at Santner through Vettori-tainted glasses. He's got talent but right now he doesn't have the stats to back that up. I really like Ish as a bowler so would like to see him given another go if his form warrants it.
What stats are you talking about here? Assume FC bowling record?
Because at international level his record is good, but more importantly he's fulfilling the role they want; a spinner with control on generally non spin friendly pitches.
Batting average of 26 and bowling average of 38 isn't very good. It is probably good enough, however. Todd Astle is probably who I would pick if we wanted a spinner to bowl more overs. The truth is our pitches just don't suit the spinners very much.
For an NZ spinner? Seriously you think a test bowling average of 38 isn't good enough for an NZ spinner?
I'd take that at the end of his career tbh, but I hope for better. Let alone now while he's still a pup.
But at best it would be mid to low 30s (a.k.a John Bracewell, Vettori, H Howarty etc) if using historic precedents.
No. I said it isn't very good but is probably good enough for a New Zealand spinner. Big difference with Vettori is that Vettori could bowl all day. There is a big difference between averaging 38 bowling 10 overs a game and averaging 38 bowling 50 overs a game.
Mostly I would be disappointed if Santner could only average 26 with the bat. I think he is better than that. The real hope was that Santner would be good enough to bat 6. If Santner is good enough to bat 6 then you can pick a bowling all rounder at 8 and pick four genuine quicks. If Santner is at 8 then maybe you have to pick a batting all rounder like Munro and you only have 3 quicks.
-
@Rapido said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
Yeah, he's in the "not quite a good enough batsmen, not quite a good enough bowler" category at the moment. I think you really need to command your place in at least one of those disciplines to be an asset to the team. Otherwise the 6 batsmen / keeper / 4 bowlers would be my preference.
He has undoubted talent though, so I can see why they are persevering with him. IMO he needs to command the number 6 spot in the lineup if he wants to be in the team long-term, as I don't think he will ever be a big wicket taker.
There's no persevering. He's nailing his bowling role.
In his 5 tests at home he is only bowling about 20 overs per game. If your team is bowling 200 overs in a test then that isn't good enough. Vettori averaged 40 overs per game at home over his career. That's not nailing your role.
With Vettori we could pick a team like this: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/518947.html. Of course we got smashed but we only needed 4 bowlers partly that was because Vettori could bowl so many overs. We got away with just 4 quicks the next week in Hobart but i don't think that would have worked long term. Then when South Africa came (http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/520603.html) we could play Vettori at 6 and pick 4 bowlers.
If Santner doesn't improve then you are limiting your options into how you configure your team. Having a genuine all rounder means you can do different things.
-
I'm not much of a Santner fan at this stage of his career, in any form of the game. I think his batting is overrated because he played confidently against Australia on test debut. He's done less than fuck all since. He's not a wicket taker and if he can't average 30+ in any form of the game with the bat to add another string to his bow then it's hard to justify his selection over Sodhi.
Meanwhile, I'm pleased to read there's a good chance Latham will take the gloves in the ODIs vs Australia. I called for this a year ago (either he or Nicholls). It's great for the balance of the side, especially with such a dodgy middle order as it means we can play Broom, Munro, Neesham and de Grandhomme at 5/6/7/8 in a real quantity over quality scenario, then Southee, Boult and either Henry or Ferguson (I'd flag Santner for this series on a bunch of small grounds given you can't rely on him picking up wickets to justify probably getting tonked, and utilise Kane if spin is desperately required).
-
Not much love for Santner.
I'm in the opposite camp - I think he's an outstanding prospect and I'm delighted we've got him and that he's being picked. I'd pick Santner instead of Munro in Shark's line-up for the 1st Chappell-Hadlee.
Agree on picking Latham with the gloves though - not as a permanent solution, but for this series.
-
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
Not much love for Santner.
I'm in the opposite camp - I think he's an outstanding prospect and I'm delighted we've got him and that he's being picked. I'd pick Santner instead of Munro in Shark's line-up for the 1st Chappell-Hadlee.
Agree on picking Latham with the gloves though - not as a permanent solution, but for this series.
Me three! I think what they are doing with him is going to set him up to be a great NZ cricketer
-
@shark said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
I'm not much of a Santner fan at this stage of his career, in any form of the game. I think his batting is overrated because he played confidently against Australia on test debut. He's done less than fuck all since. He's not a wicket taker and if he can't average 30+ in any form of the game with the bat to add another string to his bow then it's hard to justify his selection over Sodhi.
Meanwhile, I'm pleased to read there's a good chance Latham will take the gloves in the ODIs vs Australia. I called for this a year ago (either he or Nicholls). It's great for the balance of the side, especially with such a dodgy middle order as it means we can play Broom, Munro, Neesham and de Grandhomme at 5/6/7/8 in a real quantity over quality scenario, then Southee, Boult and either Henry or Ferguson (I'd flag Santner for this series on a bunch of small grounds given you can't rely on him picking up wickets to justify probably getting tonked, and utilise Kane if spin is desperately required).
Hard to argue with any of this. It's also worth pointing out Sodhi is no mug with the bat which helps.
-
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
Not much love for Santner.
I'm in the opposite camp - I think he's an outstanding prospect and I'm delighted we've got him and that he's being picked. I'd pick Santner instead of Munro in Shark's line-up for the 1st Chappell-Hadlee.
Agree on picking Latham with the gloves though - not as a permanent solution, but for this series.
Where do you see him slotting in long-term? Personally I think 6, but his batting doesn't warrant it at the moment. If he is at 8 then he needs to take a lot more wickets, otherwise it puts a lot of pressure on our other 3 front line bowlers to take 20 wickets.
Problem at the moment is we have a bunch of spinners that average around 40 in first class. Santner and Ish are the youngest at 24, so are probably worth investing the most into. Santner has more potential to score runs (though Ish is no mug), and Ish has more potential to take wickets given he gets a lot more turn (though his record to date suggests otherwise).
The other alternative is to not play a spinner, but unless the wicket is a real seamer and the game is unlikely to go 5 days I don't see that as a viable option.
-
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
Not much love for Santner.
I'm in the opposite camp - I think he's an outstanding prospect and I'm delighted we've got him and that he's being picked. I'd pick Santner instead of Munro in Shark's line-up for the 1st Chappell-Hadlee.
Agree on picking Latham with the gloves though - not as a permanent solution, but for this series.
Where do you see him slotting in long-term? Personally I think 6, but his batting doesn't warrant it at the moment. If he is at 8 then he needs to take a lot more wickets, otherwise it puts a lot of pressure on our other 3 front line bowlers to take 20 wickets.
Problem at the moment is we have a bunch of spinners that average around 40 in first class. Santner and Ish are the youngest at 24, so are probably worth investing the most into. Santner has more potential to score runs (though Ish is no mug), and Ish has more potential to take wickets given he gets a lot more turn (though his record to date suggests otherwise).
The other alternative is to not play a spinner, but unless the wicket is a real seamer and the game is unlikely to go 5 days I don't see that as a viable option.
That's what I've argued. Why play a spinner if he isn't test class at the expense of a seamer who is ? ( please note I say 'test class'....'world class' is an extremely rare commodity in a New Zealand cricketer )
-
@MN5 because it's arguable that 4th seamer we play is test class any way.
The kid seems to have ability, but it's how to get him experienced enough to be useful without affecting team performance that's the tough question. Send him for a first class season in India.
We seem to have a few "not quite good enough" players in our sides at the moment.
-
@MN5 said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
@Chris-B. said in Black Caps vs Bangles:
Not much love for Santner.
I'm in the opposite camp - I think he's an outstanding prospect and I'm delighted we've got him and that he's being picked. I'd pick Santner instead of Munro in Shark's line-up for the 1st Chappell-Hadlee.
Agree on picking Latham with the gloves though - not as a permanent solution, but for this series.
Where do you see him slotting in long-term? Personally I think 6, but his batting doesn't warrant it at the moment. If he is at 8 then he needs to take a lot more wickets, otherwise it puts a lot of pressure on our other 3 front line bowlers to take 20 wickets.
Problem at the moment is we have a bunch of spinners that average around 40 in first class. Santner and Ish are the youngest at 24, so are probably worth investing the most into. Santner has more potential to score runs (though Ish is no mug), and Ish has more potential to take wickets given he gets a lot more turn (though his record to date suggests otherwise).
The other alternative is to not play a spinner, but unless the wicket is a real seamer and the game is unlikely to go 5 days I don't see that as a viable option.
That's what I've argued. Why play a spinner if he isn't test class at the expense of a seamer who is ? ( please note I say 'test class'....'world class' is an extremely rare commodity in a New Zealand cricketer )
Agreed MN5. In tests I'd much rather play Neesham as a batting all-rounder and fourth seamer who might pick up a couple of wickets, than fart about with Santner who can't justify a position as a batting all-rounder or wicket taking spinner. Unless it was a real turner. And in ODIs I think it's ball-tearingly obvious that Sodhi is the man based on performances against Australia last summer and more recently his outstanding BBL cameo.
-
I'm a big admirer of what Vettori managed to achieve. In tests he excelled with the bat and in fact punched well above his weight in terms of ability and carved out a fantastic record thanks to his fearsome dedication to the cause. With the ball he was always tidy, very occasionally took a large haul and maybe once or twice he won a game for us. But his large wicket tally was largely by virtue of his longevity in the game. Comparisons to Vettori are hardly aiming for the stars though.
