Black Caps v Pakistan
-
Don't rate Todd Astle's bowling tbh as he is far too slow through the air to be effective at test level. Still, he's played well in domestic cricket for a few seasons now so good on him for fighting hard to get another go.
Didn't see the De Grandhomme seection coming despite being a big fan of his. The guy is a beautiful natural timer of the ball and certainly wouldn't look out of place if given a go. His bowling is very similar to Grant Elliott/Jacob Oram where he bowls in the early to mid 120s and relies heavily on changes of pace. Still very happy to see him given a spot in the squad.
-
@African-Monkey yeah that's how i see colin too - pretty much has to make it as a batsman because that sort of bowling is only infrequently useful in tests.
i was kinda hoping astle was bowling quicker these days too - too easy to use your feet against loopy stuff and less room for error. still, he's taken a lot more wickets than santner at a much better average and strike rate. -
It will be an adjustment for us fans I guess not seeing Guppy out there in the middle and us holding our breath to see if he can get past 30.
Some of the inclusions are unexpected. I know there is a bit of love for Astle and I don't mind him, but there are big question marks about whether he's test level. Does he have the temperament?
It's obvious we are really searching for answers.
I always go into any test match with a bit of optimism no matter where we are at or our last performance and whilst I'd love a test victory, I'm really just wanting to see Boult and Taylor return to the sort of form that has them talked about in the top 5 in the world.
-
I'd imagine it will be de Granhomme and one of Henry (or Wagner) or Astle who will sit out the first test, depending on whether they decide to go with four specialist seamers or three and a spinner.
I'm assuming they've picked de Grandhomme as a back-up allrounder to Neesham given his susceptibility to injury. They need someone who can potentially bat at six and bowl some useful holding overs - presumably he's the best of the contenders who offer that option. Though it seems a bit of a stretch to me that he does.
I think I would have been inclined just to pick the sixth best batsman and if Neesham can't play you go in a little light on bowling. Then again - who knows who the next best batsman is - those who've been talked a bit about - Young, Popli, Mitchell - none of them have done anything with the bat yet this season.
-
-
-
@TeWaio After a series of losses and fairly poor performances from Guppy, I think Hesson has to be seen to do the right thing.
The worrying thing is that Guppy goes back into Plunket Shield and instantly heads the averages. It's not like we've got a battery of batsmen lining up to replace him (or Nicholls).
I suspect we haven't seen the last of Guppy in test cricket - but, for now, he will probably benefit from going away and bullying a few bowlers at the lower level and regaining a bit of confidence.
Who knows - maybe Raval or others will be revelations - but, I somehow doubt it. It's more usual that people with sensational first class records are found out at test level, than people with mediocre first class records excel in tests.
-
Raval has flourished by scoring heavily on the very flat decks/small boundaries that are the Eden Park no.2 and Colin Maiden Park, hence the inflated average.
Guptill just doesn't have it technically to succeed at test level. Unlike Williamson who can defend with soft hands and let the ball come to him, Guptill goes very hard at the ball similar to Jamie How from years gone by. They both look/looked good on the eye when really it is quite the opposite when defending.
-
yeah. i don't think we have anyone better than guptill. i disagree that going back to a lower level and bullying some lesser bowlers is going to help. he needs to learn to change a few things against good players, not get away with issues against less good players.
i think moving him to 5/6 would be a good idea. he's still facing good bowlers, but less immediate new ball. hopefully that would let him get in a bit, get some confidence at that level, then face a 2nd new ball with his eye in and resolve those issues. he already knows he can smash domestic runs. -
I think Guppy's a bit prone to losing confidence - he seems to do OK for a while and then a run of bad scores just sends him into a spiral. Not sure there's a lot he can do at this stage to re-build his technique. I heard Flem say in commentary that he probably just has to accept that he's got weaknesses and limitations and learn to cover them as best he can. Probably right.
AM - I just don't think there's too much point comparing Guppy to Williamson - Kane's going to end up with the best test record for NZ ever.
Guppy's not. Even if we persist on with him till he's in his mid-30s he'll be lucky to end up averaging his age.
The only real question is whether he is better than the alternatives - i.e. is he better than Raval?
To be honest, I think he probably is. But, the time is right to give Raval his chance and let's hope he proves me woefully wrong.
Only problem is, we may end up spending a couple of series proving we're worse off.
-
@Chris-B. The comparison was more of a reason why one succeeds defensively and why one doesn't. Guptill is also a poor leaver of the ball which suggests that he doesn't know where his off stump is. His partner Tom Latham could teach him a thing or 2 in that area. I don't know what moving Guptill to the middle order would do either as he has been tried down there before and looked equally as bad against spin. I think the guy is a terrible test player but didn't mind keeping him in the side as there are no better alternatives and is brilliant in the field - maybe he could be our permanent 12th man.
But yes, it would be nice to see Raval succeed. Hesson will no doubt give him plenty of opportunity to do so which is something I like about his coaching.
-
I expect none of us are too far apart on Guppy's test career these days.
I heard Flem's comments and a light sort of flashed on for me - that sometimes, people just have got what they've got.
Thing about Guppy is that you can compare him to what went before in Fulton and Rutherford - even now he strikes me as more likely to come off than either of those two ever did.
The real challenge in selecting the NZ test team is that you've got Latham, Williamson, Taylor, Watling and Boult that pretty much pick themselves. The selectors' job is to identify the other six players who are going to do enough in support.
Personally, I'd add Santner to the list above and probably Wagner - and I'm presently inclined towards Neesham.
The last guys are the ones you're going to take heat on.
-
@African-Monkey being bad at leaving is less of a fault for a middle order player, so are the hard hands. he's not the best against spin, but then playing in india you get spin after about 3 overs anyway. playing in nz you are likely to face teams with 1 spinner on pitches that don't help them. who have the pakistanis got at the moment?
-
@reprobate Yasir Shah and Zulfiqur Babar are their spinners. Shah is a leggie who can turn the ball a long way but as you pointed out, he may not be suited to our conditions. I feel that Babar who is a left armer would be more suited to our conditions as he isn't as big a turner of the ball but can play a holding role for them as he is more at the batsmen with his accuracy.
-
Picking Raval is a bit of a hail mary. We know that Guptill isn't up to it and we also know that it would be difficult for Raval or anyone else to do any worse. There is a chance that Raval will flourish against good bowling in a way that Guptill hasn't.
