West Indies tour of NZ
-
@KiwiMurph said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Santner is a hell of a cricketer - he does it all.
A modern day Daniel Vettori...
-
@Cyclops said in West Indies tour of NZ:
After so many years of commentators wanking on about how big a hitter Santner was, and then having to watch him nurdle his way to 11 off 17 or something daft, he's finally living up to the billing this summer.
I was watching and thinking the same thing.
Got plenty of mockery, but delivering on the promise now.
-
Amazing effort. I knew he was there and there abouts but to get the absolute top ranking is incredible.
When you consider none of Crowe, Taylor or KW ever made it that makes it even more special. All three of them have had moments in the past where I thought they would have been there.......
Such a valuable member of the team, his "steady the ship" qualities are a massive asset ( also ranked 8th in the most important format )
-
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
-
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blundell at 6 exposes us .
Blundell at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Blundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
-
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blunder at 6 exposes us .
Blunder at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Bundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
You make a good point.
Do they look at Young or ( shudders at the potential response on here ) Nicholls in the top six, jettison Smith, move everyone down one and rely on Ravindra and Mitchell for those pesky overs before the new ball ?
That would leave us one pace bowler short in my opinion but 7 Blundell and 8 Santner do look a lot better in those positions.
-
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blunder at 6 exposes us .
Blunder at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Bundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
Do they look at Young or ( shudders at the potential response on here ) Nicholls in the top six, jettison Smith and move everyone down one and rely on Ravindra and Mitchell for overs before the new ball ?
That would leave us one pace bowler short in my opinion but 7 Blundell and 8 Santner do look a lot better in those positions.
Yeah I think its between a rock in a hard place which way they go.
Smith as a 4th Seamer and not really a bat seems wasted.
They have 4 frontline bowlers with out Smith I would back them to do the job and eat up some over with Ravindra and Mitchell if needed.
Nicholls or Young doesn't matter but I think Nicholls might score some more runs.And I like the insurance policy of extra runs.
I think The Windies are not the sort of team to rack up 500 to expose our bowlers.
We really need to develop a real allrounder at 6. -
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blunder at 6 exposes us .
Blunder at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Bundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
Do they look at Young or ( shudders at the potential response on here ) Nicholls in the top six, jettison Smith and move everyone down one and rely on Ravindra and Mitchell for overs before the new ball ?
That would leave us one pace bowler short in my opinion but 7 Blundell and 8 Santner do look a lot better in those positions.
Yeah I think its between a rock in a hard place which way they go.
Smith as a 4th Seamer and not really a bat seems wasted.
They have 4 frontline bowlers with out Smith I would back them to do the job and eat up some over with Ravindra and Mitchell if needed.
Nicholls or Young doesn't matter but I think Nicholls might score some more runs.And I like the insurance policy of extra runs.
I think The Windies are not the sort of team to rack up 500 to expose our bowlers.
We really need to develop a real allrounder at 6.Yeah the Windies have been in the country awhile, I can see them really fading particularly if they struggle in the first test. I honestly don't think they'll provide enough of a challenge for any selection inbalances to be an issue.
An all rounder is a bit of a luxury and not always compulsory at test level. Can't remember who said it on here but if you have six and four top notch specialists respectively plus a keeper they're not always needed.
-
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blunder at 6 exposes us .
Blunder at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Bundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
Do they look at Young or ( shudders at the potential response on here ) Nicholls in the top six, jettison Smith and move everyone down one and rely on Ravindra and Mitchell for overs before the new ball ?
That would leave us one pace bowler short in my opinion but 7 Blundell and 8 Santner do look a lot better in those positions.
Yeah I think its between a rock in a hard place which way they go.
Smith as a 4th Seamer and not really a bat seems wasted.
They have 4 frontline bowlers with out Smith I would back them to do the job and eat up some over with Ravindra and Mitchell if needed.
Nicholls or Young doesn't matter but I think Nicholls might score some more runs.And I like the insurance policy of extra runs.
I think The Windies are not the sort of team to rack up 500 to expose our bowlers.
We really need to develop a real allrounder at 6.Yeah the Windies have been in the country awhile, I can see them really fading particularly if they struggle in the first test. I honestly don't think they'll provide enough of a challenge for any selection inbalances to be an issue.
An all rounder is a bit of a luxury and not always compulsory at test level. Can't remember who said it on here but if you have six and four top notch specialists respectively plus a keeper they're not always needed.
Then that leaves out Smith for a 6th batsmen as I was saying.
Many a team as been exposed against strong batting sides with 4 frontline bowler though.
I have been on the receiving end of that. -
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blunder at 6 exposes us .
Blunder at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Bundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
Do they look at Young or ( shudders at the potential response on here ) Nicholls in the top six, jettison Smith and move everyone down one and rely on Ravindra and Mitchell for overs before the new ball ?
That would leave us one pace bowler short in my opinion but 7 Blundell and 8 Santner do look a lot better in those positions.
Yeah I think its between a rock in a hard place which way they go.
Smith as a 4th Seamer and not really a bat seems wasted.
They have 4 frontline bowlers with out Smith I would back them to do the job and eat up some over with Ravindra and Mitchell if needed.
Nicholls or Young doesn't matter but I think Nicholls might score some more runs.And I like the insurance policy of extra runs.
I think The Windies are not the sort of team to rack up 500 to expose our bowlers.
We really need to develop a real allrounder at 6.Yeah the Windies have been in the country awhile, I can see them really fading particularly if they struggle in the first test. I honestly don't think they'll provide enough of a challenge for any selection inbalances to be an issue.
An all rounder is a bit of a luxury and not always compulsory at test level. Can't remember who said it on here but if you have six and four top notch specialists respectively plus a keeper they're not always needed.
Then that leaves out Smith for a 6th batsmen as I was saying.
Many a team as been exposed against strong batting sides with 4 frontline bowler though.
I have been on the receiving end of that.Fair call.
The most oustanding teams I can think of ( 80s Windies, 2000s Aussies ) never had a true all rounder. Just really dominant specialists plus some bowlers who could bat a bit when needed ( the late Malcolm Marshall and the late Warnie spring to mind )
....and Jamieson and Henry can both hold a bat pretty well at this level.
-
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blunder at 6 exposes us .
Blunder at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Bundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
Do they look at Young or ( shudders at the potential response on here ) Nicholls in the top six, jettison Smith and move everyone down one and rely on Ravindra and Mitchell for overs before the new ball ?
That would leave us one pace bowler short in my opinion but 7 Blundell and 8 Santner do look a lot better in those positions.
Yeah I think its between a rock in a hard place which way they go.
Smith as a 4th Seamer and not really a bat seems wasted.
They have 4 frontline bowlers with out Smith I would back them to do the job and eat up some over with Ravindra and Mitchell if needed.
Nicholls or Young doesn't matter but I think Nicholls might score some more runs.And I like the insurance policy of extra runs.
I think The Windies are not the sort of team to rack up 500 to expose our bowlers.
We really need to develop a real allrounder at 6.Yeah the Windies have been in the country awhile, I can see them really fading particularly if they struggle in the first test. I honestly don't think they'll provide enough of a challenge for any selection inbalances to be an issue.
An all rounder is a bit of a luxury and not always compulsory at test level. Can't remember who said it on here but if you have six and four top notch specialists respectively plus a keeper they're not always needed.
Then that leaves out Smith for a 6th batsmen as I was saying.
Many a team as been exposed against strong batting sides with 4 frontline bowler though.
I have been on the receiving end of that.Fair call.
The most oustanding teams I can think of ( 80s Windies, 2000s Aussies ) never had a true all rounder. Just really dominant specialists plus some bowlers who could bat a bit when needed ( the late Malcolm Marshall and the late Warnie spring to mind )
....and Jamieson and Henry can both hold a bat pretty well at this level.
For me 6 bats and 4 frontline bowlers plus two part timers is better balanced for this series.
-
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blunder at 6 exposes us .
Blunder at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Bundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
Do they look at Young or ( shudders at the potential response on here ) Nicholls in the top six, jettison Smith and move everyone down one and rely on Ravindra and Mitchell for overs before the new ball ?
That would leave us one pace bowler short in my opinion but 7 Blundell and 8 Santner do look a lot better in those positions.
Yeah I think its between a rock in a hard place which way they go.
Smith as a 4th Seamer and not really a bat seems wasted.
They have 4 frontline bowlers with out Smith I would back them to do the job and eat up some over with Ravindra and Mitchell if needed.
Nicholls or Young doesn't matter but I think Nicholls might score some more runs.And I like the insurance policy of extra runs.
I think The Windies are not the sort of team to rack up 500 to expose our bowlers.
We really need to develop a real allrounder at 6.Yeah the Windies have been in the country awhile, I can see them really fading particularly if they struggle in the first test. I honestly don't think they'll provide enough of a challenge for any selection inbalances to be an issue.
An all rounder is a bit of a luxury and not always compulsory at test level. Can't remember who said it on here but if you have six and four top notch specialists respectively plus a keeper they're not always needed.
Then that leaves out Smith for a 6th batsmen as I was saying.
Many a team as been exposed against strong batting sides with 4 frontline bowler though.
I have been on the receiving end of that.Fair call.
The most oustanding teams I can think of ( 80s Windies, 2000s Aussies ) never had a true all rounder. Just really dominant specialists plus some bowlers who could bat a bit when needed ( the late Malcolm Marshall and the late Warnie spring to mind )
....and Jamieson and Henry can both hold a bat pretty well at this level.
For me 6 bats and 4 frontline bowlers plus two part timers is better balanced for this series.
Sounds good to me. Just gotta decide if Young or Nicholls gets that final spot.
-
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blunder at 6 exposes us .
Blunder at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Bundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
Do they look at Young or ( shudders at the potential response on here ) Nicholls in the top six, jettison Smith and move everyone down one and rely on Ravindra and Mitchell for overs before the new ball ?
That would leave us one pace bowler short in my opinion but 7 Blundell and 8 Santner do look a lot better in those positions.
Yeah I think its between a rock in a hard place which way they go.
Smith as a 4th Seamer and not really a bat seems wasted.
They have 4 frontline bowlers with out Smith I would back them to do the job and eat up some over with Ravindra and Mitchell if needed.
Nicholls or Young doesn't matter but I think Nicholls might score some more runs.And I like the insurance policy of extra runs.
I think The Windies are not the sort of team to rack up 500 to expose our bowlers.
We really need to develop a real allrounder at 6.Yeah the Windies have been in the country awhile, I can see them really fading particularly if they struggle in the first test. I honestly don't think they'll provide enough of a challenge for any selection inbalances to be an issue.
An all rounder is a bit of a luxury and not always compulsory at test level. Can't remember who said it on here but if you have six and four top notch specialists respectively plus a keeper they're not always needed.
Then that leaves out Smith for a 6th batsmen as I was saying.
Many a team as been exposed against strong batting sides with 4 frontline bowler though.
I have been on the receiving end of that.Fair call.
The most oustanding teams I can think of ( 80s Windies, 2000s Aussies ) never had a true all rounder. Just really dominant specialists plus some bowlers who could bat a bit when needed ( the late Malcolm Marshall and the late Warnie spring to mind )
....and Jamieson and Henry can both hold a bat pretty well at this level.
For me 6 bats and 4 frontline bowlers plus two part timers is better balanced for this series.
Sounds good to me. Just gotta decide if Young or Nicholls gets that final spot.
If O'Rouke is fit which he may not stress fractures are complicated that's a very good Pace trio.
-
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:
@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is it too early to have a crack at a likely test team for the series ? I might have a go.......
Latham
Conway
KW
Ravindra
Mitchell
Blundell
Santner
Smith
Jamieson
Henry
O'RourkeConway has gotten runs albeit in the other formats when his career looked in danger of being over and Young still hasn't fired quite like he should have by now. I don't think there's room for both of them.
KW/Ravindra/Mitchell pick themselves despite Henry Nicholls getting 150 not out in his last test.
Blundell doesn't seem to have much of a challenger as keeper.
Santner has made every post a winner which I wouldn't have said in the past. Phillips coming back from injury.
Smith there as batting insurance and 4th seamer. Its tough to leave out Foulkes given how he went in his one and only test, but then again like Nicholls that was "only" against Zimbabwe.
If that pace trio can stay fit they will cause the Windies no end of trouble in home conditions.
Windies have been more than competitive and enjoyable to watch in the shorter formats but anything less than a 3-0 hammering shouldn't be an option in the test series.
I would make a couple of changes Santner batting and 7 and Blunder at 6 exposes us .
Blunder at 7 and Santner at 8 looks better to me.
We do lack a real all rounder option at 6 Smith , his batting is not up to batting that high.
The question if you do that is who replaces Smith if it's a batsmen are we happy to use Ravindra as the 5th bowler and Mitchells Meds as further back up.
Hay for me is a lot better gloveman than Bundell and bats every bit as good as Blundell especially these days.I think Blundell at 6 is one wkt away from massive collapse.
Do they look at Young or ( shudders at the potential response on here ) Nicholls in the top six, jettison Smith and move everyone down one and rely on Ravindra and Mitchell for overs before the new ball ?
That would leave us one pace bowler short in my opinion but 7 Blundell and 8 Santner do look a lot better in those positions.
Yeah I think its between a rock in a hard place which way they go.
Smith as a 4th Seamer and not really a bat seems wasted.
They have 4 frontline bowlers with out Smith I would back them to do the job and eat up some over with Ravindra and Mitchell if needed.
Nicholls or Young doesn't matter but I think Nicholls might score some more runs.And I like the insurance policy of extra runs.
I think The Windies are not the sort of team to rack up 500 to expose our bowlers.
We really need to develop a real allrounder at 6.Yeah the Windies have been in the country awhile, I can see them really fading particularly if they struggle in the first test. I honestly don't think they'll provide enough of a challenge for any selection inbalances to be an issue.
An all rounder is a bit of a luxury and not always compulsory at test level. Can't remember who said it on here but if you have six and four top notch specialists respectively plus a keeper they're not always needed.
Then that leaves out Smith for a 6th batsmen as I was saying.
Many a team as been exposed against strong batting sides with 4 frontline bowler though.
I have been on the receiving end of that.Fair call.
The most oustanding teams I can think of ( 80s Windies, 2000s Aussies ) never had a true all rounder. Just really dominant specialists plus some bowlers who could bat a bit when needed ( the late Malcolm Marshall and the late Warnie spring to mind )
....and Jamieson and Henry can both hold a bat pretty well at this level.
For me 6 bats and 4 frontline bowlers plus two part timers is better balanced for this series.
Sounds good to me. Just gotta decide if Young or Nicholls gets that final spot.
If O'Rouke is fit which he may not stress fractures are complicated that's a very good Pace trio.
Ah shit, just got Jamieson back too !
If he's no go then Foulkes gets in for his second test.
-
Yeah I definitely think Hay deserves a run keeping. Blundell has being doing well in ford trophy though so I suspect he'll get another chance.
I've seen a few articles talking up Max Chu but the little bits of him I've seen (mostly super smash) weren't amazing.
-
@Cyclops said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Yeah I definitely think Hay deserves a run keeping. Blundell has being doing well in ford trophy though so I suspect he'll get another chance.
I've seen a few articles talking up Max Chu but the little bits of him I've seen (mostly super smash) weren't amazing.
He is the incumbent and while the Black Caps aren't a patch on the All Blacks these days in terms of not dropping guys I think the hundred he got against England was well overdue. Hopefully this will see him improve his batting form as keepers who don't contribute with the bat are an absolute relic of the past.
-
Is Shamar Joseph touring?
-
@African-Monkey said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Is Shamar Joseph touring?
He was not in the 20/20 or ODI squads.
I have not seen the test squad as yet.
