Black Caps v India
-
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v India:
@westcoastie You tell me who it is then!
Neesham's definitely in my team - just a question of whether he bats 6 or 7.
Agree. Ok how about this: Latham goes up, Nicholls to 5, Anderson and Neesham at 6 and 7 then four bowlers. If we can't get a decent total among that top 7 with some dregs from 8-11 then why bother playing the game.
@shark said in Black Caps v India:
@Chris-B said in Black Caps v India:
@westcoastie You tell me who it is then!
Neesham's definitely in my team - just a question of whether he bats 6 or 7.
Agree. Ok how about this: Latham goes up, Nicholls to 5, Anderson and Neesham at 6 and 7 then four bowlers. If we can't get a decent total among that top 7 with some dregs from 8-11 then why bother playing the game.
I wouldn't mind that. It' not too dissimilar to my idea of Neesham and de Grandhomme.
Reality is that we're not going to win the CWC, but we might be able to burgle it. Probably relies on Guppy, Little Kane and Rossco playing out of their skins on a given day and ending up 320/5 - with a few lesser lights chipping in a few handy runs.
It's why I'm not really averse to having a slogger in the team. If Munro, for example, opened and scored 30 off 15, he'd have done his job (and better than Baz).
-
We are still using the strategy developed by Macca and Munro is there to perform his role, getting us off to a flying start. The problem is Munro is nowhere near as good as Macca
-
who's the most in-form middle order/closer type on the NZ ODI circuit. Thats our #6. Neesham at 7 seems right.
8 & 9, is Bracewell and then whoever our best spinner is. Unless we play two spinners then its no Bracewell with Santner and Sodhi there.
10 & 11 is Fergusson and Boult. -
who's the most in-form middle order/closer type on the NZ ODI circuit. Thats our #6. Neesham at 7 seems right.
8 & 9, is Bracewell and then whoever our best spinner is. Unless we play two spinners then its no Bracewell with Santner and Sodhi there.
10 & 11 is Fergusson and Boult.@westcoastie said in Black Caps v India:
who's the most in-form middle order/closer type on the NZ ODI circuit. Thats our #6. Neesham at 7 seems right.
Problem with that is that your first guy (to bat at #6) is also Neesham!
Would be great if we could wave a wand and some junior Martin Crowe would appear from domestic cricket - but, the gulf in class is so big that anyone who comes up to international level always struggles for a while - even Little Kane.
-
@westcoastie said in Black Caps v India:
who's the most in-form middle order/closer type on the NZ ODI circuit. Thats our #6. Neesham at 7 seems right.
Problem with that is that your first guy (to bat at #6) is also Neesham!
Would be great if we could wave a wand and some junior Martin Crowe would appear from domestic cricket - but, the gulf in class is so big that anyone who comes up to international level always struggles for a while - even Little Kane.
-
well, that was very very one sided. Congrats to India - they are rapidly becoming the dominant team in Cricket, and likely to stay dominant for a long time. Very impressed with their quality in all three facets of the game. The rest of the world will struggle to consistently beat them I suspect.
To the BC's - get better. Go away, get better, and we may have an outsider's chance in England
-
If we had a fully fit unit (I mean, never gonna happen, but this is theoretical), I'd stick with my Anderson / Neesham 6/7 power hitting axis as suggested above, after Latham, Guppy, Kane, Rosco and Nicholls.
This leaves four spots for bowlers with Neesham / Anderson / Kane to share some overs. Boult is a given and I'd take a fully fit Milne over Ferguson in that express change bowler role. My other opening bowler would be Henry (record speaks for itself, he just needs games).
There is so much mixed opinion on playing two genuine spinners in England but I'd just play Sodhi as our attacking spinner.
So my 'ideal world' line-up would be Latham, Guptill, Kane, Rosco, Nicholls, Anderson, Neesham, Milne, Henry, Sodhi, Boult.
7 bowling options, batting to 7 followed by two bowlers who bat a bit (remember them both banging away against SL approx three years ago?)
Other squaddies would be Southee, Santner, Bracewell/de Grandhomme (I can't separate them!) and Seifert.
-
@Chris-B even little Kane...
debut test century in India?
But your point remains, our domestic scene ain't no finishing school
@Siam said in Black Caps v India:
@Chris-B even little Kane...
debut test century in India?
But your point remains, our domestic scene ain't no finishing school
And despite that great start - after 10 tests he had a sub-30 batting average.
-
If we had a fully fit unit (I mean, never gonna happen, but this is theoretical), I'd stick with my Anderson / Neesham 6/7 power hitting axis as suggested above, after Latham, Guppy, Kane, Rosco and Nicholls.
This leaves four spots for bowlers with Neesham / Anderson / Kane to share some overs. Boult is a given and I'd take a fully fit Milne over Ferguson in that express change bowler role. My other opening bowler would be Henry (record speaks for itself, he just needs games).
There is so much mixed opinion on playing two genuine spinners in England but I'd just play Sodhi as our attacking spinner.
So my 'ideal world' line-up would be Latham, Guptill, Kane, Rosco, Nicholls, Anderson, Neesham, Milne, Henry, Sodhi, Boult.
7 bowling options, batting to 7 followed by two bowlers who bat a bit (remember them both banging away against SL approx three years ago?)
Other squaddies would be Southee, Santner, Bracewell/de Grandhomme (I can't separate them!) and Seifert.
@shark I could live with your XI and XV and it won't be far away - though injuries will likely put paid to Anderson and Milne.
I'm not sold on Matt Henry, because he can't really bowl at the death, so I'd play Ferguson instead of him and have two fast options. Matt wouldn't make my XV is everyone was available.
I'd play Santner ahead of Ish, because Ish struggles to bowl six good balls in an over - plus Santner is a much better batsman.
I guess Seifert is as good as anyone as a back up keeper, but he's looked pretty ordinary with bat and gloves. Is that Craig Cachopa NZ eligible?
-
I'm fully on @shark 's bandwagon. Munro has to be gone.
Problem is, now the series pressure is off, I bet he carves as India have gone home (Kohli) and then it's T20
@Hooroo said in Black Caps v India:
I'm fully on @shark 's bandwagon. Munro has to be gone.
Problem is, now the series pressure is off, I bet he carves as India have gone home (Kohli) and then it's T20
I'm on that bandwagon too - but, it seems the selectors aren't.
Neesham and Todd Astle come into the squad - and Doug Bracewell and Ish Sodhi go home.
I suppose on the plus side, Munro hasn't been the worst so far in this series - that's Guptill (or de Grandhomme depending how you look at it). And Henry Nicholls needs a boot up the arse for having marginally worse stats than Munro, as well!
Best we can do with this squad is: Guptill, Latham, Kane, Rossco, Nicholls, Neesham, de Grandhomme, Santner, Boult - plus two of Southee/Ferguson/Astle/Henry depending on the pitch.
-
If we had a fully fit unit (I mean, never gonna happen, but this is theoretical), I'd stick with my Anderson / Neesham 6/7 power hitting axis as suggested above, after Latham, Guppy, Kane, Rosco and Nicholls.
This leaves four spots for bowlers with Neesham / Anderson / Kane to share some overs. Boult is a given and I'd take a fully fit Milne over Ferguson in that express change bowler role. My other opening bowler would be Henry (record speaks for itself, he just needs games).
There is so much mixed opinion on playing two genuine spinners in England but I'd just play Sodhi as our attacking spinner.
So my 'ideal world' line-up would be Latham, Guptill, Kane, Rosco, Nicholls, Anderson, Neesham, Milne, Henry, Sodhi, Boult.
7 bowling options, batting to 7 followed by two bowlers who bat a bit (remember them both banging away against SL approx three years ago?)
Other squaddies would be Southee, Santner, Bracewell/de Grandhomme (I can't separate them!) and Seifert.
@shark said in Black Caps v India:
If we had a fully fit unit (I mean, never gonna happen, but this is theoretical), I'd stick with my Anderson / Neesham 6/7 power hitting axis as suggested above, after Latham, Guppy, Kane, Rosco and Nicholls.
This leaves four spots for bowlers with Neesham / Anderson / Kane to share some overs. Boult is a given and I'd take a fully fit Milne over Ferguson in that express change bowler role. My other opening bowler would be Henry (record speaks for itself, he just needs games).
There is so much mixed opinion on playing two genuine spinners in England but I'd just play Sodhi as our attacking spinner.
So my 'ideal world' line-up would be Latham, Guptill, Kane, Rosco, Nicholls, Anderson, Neesham, Milne, Henry, Sodhi, Boult.
7 bowling options, batting to 7 followed by two bowlers who bat a bit (remember them both banging away against SL approx three years ago?)
Other squaddies would be Southee, Santner, Bracewell/de Grandhomme (I can't separate them!) and Seifert.
I love the look of that team except for maybe Santner in there which I agree is ironic considering some of my bagging of him.
Neesh/Anderson would be amazing if they both had blinders.
-
The only problem with Latham opening is he is our best player against spin, and has looked pretty comfortable against India in the middle overs despite not kicking on with his starts. If that is going to be a factor in England then it may be worth leaving him in the middle order.
Still, I think it's pretty clear (well it has been for ever really) that Munro is not much chop against a good quality bowling lineup. If we are serious about going all the way then he's not the answer, we at least need someone that can build an innings.
-
The only problem with Latham opening is he is our best player against spin, and has looked pretty comfortable against India in the middle overs despite not kicking on with his starts. If that is going to be a factor in England then it may be worth leaving him in the middle order.
Still, I think it's pretty clear (well it has been for ever really) that Munro is not much chop against a good quality bowling lineup. If we are serious about going all the way then he's not the answer, we at least need someone that can build an innings.
@No-Quarter said in Black Caps v India:
The only problem with Latham opening is he is our best player against spin, and has looked pretty comfortable against India in the middle overs despite not kicking on with his starts. If that is going to be a factor in England then it may be worth leaving him in the middle order.
That's a key point.
Also, it's a small sample, but he hasn't been a roaring success as a keeper opening the batting...
-
@Siam said in Black Caps v India:
@Chris-B even little Kane...
debut test century in India?
But your point remains, our domestic scene ain't no finishing school
And despite that great start - after 10 tests he had a sub-30 batting average.
-
I've bagged out the Indians in the past. Like, a lot. Their team was massively over-rated by their dominance at home, but then they sucked on the road.
Those days are well gone. That attack they have assembled is fucking classy. This summer, in Aus and in NZ, they have won games by regularly taking wickets throughout innings. They are able to build pressure with consistent plans; they have seamers with genuine pace; and of course the ubiquitous classy Indian spinners.
They are then backed up by a strong, if not dominant, batting lineup (led by a genuine star in Kohli) who are benefiting from the attack not putting them under too much pressure. Fuckers have learned to field as well.
It's been a nice little romp through Australasia for them this summer, and a great warm up for later in the year.
Watching yesterday it was amazing to watch two of our best ever batsmen get frustrated as the Indian's just gave them nothing.
Amazing to see an Indian team come here, take 3 times as many wickets as us, and then run down our meagre totals without anyone racking up a big score.
-
Re Henry, if his strength is taking the new ball and his second and third spells are suspect, then why not open the bowling with him and as long as he's going ok, give him a 6-7 over opening spell? Then as part of my side he may ot need to bowl the rest of his allocated overs given we'd have 7 options. Hell, you only need three frontliners to bowl their full complement and the other four share 20 overs!
-
I've bagged out the Indians in the past. Like, a lot. Their team was massively over-rated by their dominance at home, but then they sucked on the road.
Those days are well gone. That attack they have assembled is fucking classy. This summer, in Aus and in NZ, they have won games by regularly taking wickets throughout innings. They are able to build pressure with consistent plans; they have seamers with genuine pace; and of course the ubiquitous classy Indian spinners.
They are then backed up by a strong, if not dominant, batting lineup (led by a genuine star in Kohli) who are benefiting from the attack not putting them under too much pressure. Fuckers have learned to field as well.
It's been a nice little romp through Australasia for them this summer, and a great warm up for later in the year.
Watching yesterday it was amazing to watch two of our best ever batsmen get frustrated as the Indian's just gave them nothing.
Amazing to see an Indian team come here, take 3 times as many wickets as us, and then run down our meagre totals without anyone racking up a big score.
@mariner4life yep, and their "squad players " put out winning performances as well, no passengers at all in their squads.
Also they have 2 teenagers destined for greatness that haven't yet played a game.
For years everyone knew there were some undiscovered cricket freaks in Indian population and it was surmised that the caste system would render these people unable to get to the top.
I wonder if the IPL has contributed to illuminating this pool of talent.Like you said, get used to this dominance!
