Cricket: NZ vs England
-
-
@gt12 said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
Wow, so Watling is heads and shoulders in our top team then. Good on that man.
The only question you'd have to ask as the selector is whether you want Watling who will dig you out if your top order is in trouble or Baz coming in at 300/5 and torching a bowling attack that's been worn down.
For all normal purposes, Watling is a dream keeper. Almost like clockwork you can rely on him to dig us out of a hole. The only weakness is that he doesn't seem comfortable coming out when we're already in a dominant position. I think it doesn't suit his game and as a result of his selflessness he tries to play a different way to try and progress the game and in doesn't work for him.
For a side with an all time top 6, Baz just slips in because we're much less likely to need a rescue job. For any real selection, Watling is the man for the job.
-
-
@Godder said in Cricket: NZ vs England
I'd pick Watling for a batting keeper, but if I was selecting a technical keeper with no regard to batting, I'd pick Smith.
I used to think upon those lines, but in the cold light of day Smith's keeping to spinners (as opposed to dibbly dobblies) was nothing better than average which was why Lees was always in the picture as an alternative. Watling is technically proficient enough to stand up to the medium pacers as he has, while his keeping in the sub-continent and UAE has been more than serviceable. For pure technical aptitude and athleticism, I'd actually choose Parore over Smith, because then you remove the fluffbunny factor.
-
-
@Siam said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
I can't remember Baz ever not performing with gloves.
CWC 2003 Super Six elimination game against India.
I'm probably the biggest Baz knocker out there but he was always pretty solid with the gloves. He kept well to Vettori, and aside from Bond who he only kept to very early in his career he never really had to deal with anyone who bowled with any real pace or turn.
The late 00s, early 10s side would have been better served with him keeping more if his back allowed.
-
@Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@gt12 said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
Wow, so Watling is heads and shoulders in our top team then. Good on that man.
The only question you'd have to ask as the selector is whether you want Watling who will dig you out if your top order is in trouble or Baz coming in at 300/5 and torching a bowling attack that's been worn down.
For all normal purposes, Watling is a dream keeper. Almost like clockwork you can rely on him to dig us out of a hole. The only weakness is that he doesn't seem comfortable coming out when we're already in a dominant position. I think it doesn't suit his game and as a result of his selflessness he tries to play a different way to try and progress the game and in doesn't work for him.
For a side with an all time top 6, Baz just slips in because we're much less likely to need a rescue job. For any real selection, Watling is the man for the job.
I'd go with Watling.
If we have our all time top 6, we would be playing against the all time top bowlers from others teams too.
We will definitely find ourselves in trouble against all time test bowlers from other nations.BJ averages 43.10 as designated keeper, compared to Baz with 34.18
-
@mimic said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@gt12 said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
Wow, so Watling is heads and shoulders in our top team then. Good on that man.
The only question you'd have to ask as the selector is whether you want Watling who will dig you out if your top order is in trouble or Baz coming in at 300/5 and torching a bowling attack that's been worn down.
For all normal purposes, Watling is a dream keeper. Almost like clockwork you can rely on him to dig us out of a hole. The only weakness is that he doesn't seem comfortable coming out when we're already in a dominant position. I think it doesn't suit his game and as a result of his selflessness he tries to play a different way to try and progress the game and in doesn't work for him.
For a side with an all time top 6, Baz just slips in because we're much less likely to need a rescue job. For any real selection, Watling is the man for the job.
I'd go with Watling.
If we have our all time top 6, we would be playing against the all time top bowlers from others teams too.
We will definitely find ourselves in trouble against all time test bowlers from other nations.Fair enough. I don't think there's any black cap with a more complex legacy to assess than Baz, except maybe Chris Cairns.
-
So Jofra is actually really really quick and outer radar was just making him look slow and disinterested.
How did our guys speeds stack up against Archer? Weren't they similar? So if Archer is actually bowling at 150 clicks when the radar says 130 how unbelievably quick woul Lochie Ferguson be with a "proper" radar...
Or was he struggling with having to grind through a test match.
Seeme quite an articulate and personable bloke but can't escape the feeling he was over hyped, over bowled and over here.
JOFRA ARCHER: Those Kiwi speed guns were definitely faulty
JOFRA ARCHER: I've enjoyed my first tour with England, but it's safe to say I'm very much looking forward to the trip to South Africa. The guys tell me the pitches have more pace and bounce there.
-
@booboo said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
So Jofra is actually really really quick and outer radar was just making him look slow and disinterested.
How did our guys speeds stack up against Archer? Weren't they similar? So if Archer is actually bowling at 150 clicks when the radar says 130 how unbelievably quick woul Lochie Ferguson be with a "proper" radar...
Or was he struggling with having to grind through a test match.
Seeme quite an articulate and personable bloke but can't escape the feeling he was over hyped, over bowled and over here.
JOFRA ARCHER: Those Kiwi speed guns were definitely faulty
JOFRA ARCHER: I've enjoyed my first tour with England, but it's safe to say I'm very much looking forward to the trip to South Africa. The guys tell me the pitches have more pace and bounce there.
Our radar guns being slow isn't a new one. I've heard that from plenty of kiwi bowlers too.
Doesn't really stack up when you had Archer breaking the 150 mark during the test series though (does he reckon that was 160+?)
-
I always thought the Aussie ones were quick. I remember Ponting being clocked at 130!
-
I think it depends on the method used.If clocked out of the hand with a radar you will get a much higher reading than off the pitch. If (as I think most TV stats are now, it is the calc of time and distance between release and bat (or crease) then it will depend on the length being bowled and the hardness of the pitch.
-
The reality is that despite all those stats the only time we have had a series win is when we have had a bowler firing at their peak (ably supported).
I can't see us getting 20 wickets at a reasonable cost without one bowler really singing. A Bond or Paddles in this lineup would be the icing on the cake. -
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
I always thought the Aussie ones were quick. I remember Ponting being clocked at 130!
A commentator a year or two back said that they have 3 guns. The Aussies were using the fastest one, others like us use the middle one. So yeah, method used is a big factor.
You really would think that they would standardise things. It should be the same between bowlers in the same test, but that could also be worldwide.
-
-
@booboo Yeah they were. He was also bowling at the same speed (or faster) as the Aussies in the ashes wasn't he? Depends how they measure. It seems that the Aussies and Poms might be overstating things a bit and we aren't talking it up so much.
-
@Bovidae said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
After the hype before the tour started Archer ended up with 2-209 in the series. The Duke ball and juicy pitches obviously make a big difference.
Besides a couple of hostile spells to Smith, he was a bit meh in the Ashes.
