Cricket: NZ vs England
-
@kev said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@westcoastie the difference with Aust. bowlers is they are all 6 foot 5 and can bowl good line and length. Our fasts are usually shorter guys who spray it around and get carted. If they were that good they would be dominating more in domestic cricket. Test cricket is often about not losing the match by being shit. You can come back into play with a good session here and there and by bowling well at the end of an innings. If we were being aggressive we would have cut Santner - he may come into play in the 2nd innings, but hard to see.
I agree that it was Ferguson or Santner not Ferguson or Southee. Ferguson looks like he might be legit unlike some of our previous quicks. I'm looking forward to seeing his first test. I think he should be a fourth quick so that Kane can deploy him strategically rather than asking him to replace one our openers.
-
Watching this test is reminding me how much I like our commentary team.
I wonder how many of them will (or are available to) shift across to Spark.
Ian Smith pretty much definitely not, because he has rugby and overseas commentary options with Sky - and has pretty much already said how disappointed he'll be to not be doing it.
-
-
@Bovidae said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
Timmy giving the middle finger to TSF.
It's a well tested process that every time we bag the fuck out of Southee he starts performing.
-
@No-Quarter said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@Bovidae said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
Timmy giving the middle finger to TSF.
It's a well tested process that every time we bag the fuck out of Southee he starts performing.
We should bag him before every series then!
-
-
-
-
-
@Bovidae Actually, you'll probably be right about that - Sumo, anyway. Although maybe he'll be the continuity guy a la Richie Benaud/Mark Nicholas.
You'd think quite a lot of the Sky cricket guys will be available to shift across, because what else are they going to do?
-
any NZ openers coming through on the domestic scene? Im sure Raval will blunt the ball (part of his role) get a start and then fail to convert another start.. and then drop a few more catches when in the field.
Broads first over showed a lot of movement, he could create some carnage here, so perhaps getting a start might be difficult? time will tell i guess
-
@bayimports Raval's fine at the top of the order. Couldn't care less if he doesn't kick on, as long as he sees off the new ball especially as it took years and years post Richardson to find 2 guys capable of doing it, and no, our options at the top of the order are very very limited in domestic cricket, so bad that Guptill and Rutherford remain in contention should injuries hit.
-
@African-Monkey said in Cricket: NZ vs England:
@bayimports Raval's fine at the top of the order. Couldn't care less if he doesn't kick on, as long as he sees off the new ball especially as it took years and years post Richardson to find 2 guys capable of doing it, and no, our options at the top of the order are very very limited in domestic cricket, so bad that Guptill and Rutherford remain in contention should injuries hit.
He is only fine if the alternatives are shit, we shouldn't always accept mediocrity. However if Guppy and Hamish are next in line..then yes cupboard is still bare.
-
@bayimports Bit unfair on Raval to describe him as mediocre but we'll agree to disagree on that on. He's definitely up to test standard as an opening bat, something that has been a rarity in NZ cricket in the 21st century and plays a big part in making the middle order's job a lot easier.
