Cricket: NZ vs Aus
-
I agree with Coney that you need to prepare properly for a tour. I just don't think it would have mattered here. We didn't really become better as the tour went on. Australia were just too good in these conditions. I think we should be disappointed - most of our best batsmen got a few starts but no really big scores from them. Reality is that we needed someone to stand up like Labuschagne did.
@hydro11 man for man they are much better team, the extra pace their bowlers generated had our batsman struggling with the extra bounce as well compared to out bowlers who did not look threatening..Wagner bowled with a ton of heart,but their were lot of deliveries that the batsmen did not have to play at and that was a common theme.
-
@Snowy said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
That is true for sure, but doesn't change anything that we have been saying about the systems, or Erasmus for that matter. He is poor, or corrupt / biased. You decide.
Well it's clearly the latter. As has been thoroughly demonstrated on this thread, he's underpaid and has an easy target - the 'nice guys' of international cricket.
Having acquired his mark, he's set about making millions through a genius scheme where he is giving key batsmen out LBW, but ONLY when the ball is just clipping the outside of the stumps.
While some think he's just not very good, the truth is he's so incredibly good that he can pick the exact part of the stump the ball is hitting. While Latham and Kane trudge back to the pavilion, Marais knows his devious plan has landed him another big sum of cash, presumably from a dodgy indian bookie.
But this conspiracy doesn't stop at cricket. No, my friend, far from it. Marais is in cahoots with a close friend and countryman: Jaco Peyper, who manages to do the same thing in every Bledisloe game he's ever assigned. Does he make howling bad calls? No. But he tips the scales ever so slightly any time he can. This time, though, the shoe is on the other foot and it's Australia who is on the receiving end.
If Marais and Jaco didn't have the global sports media on the payroll we'd know about this in an instance. Winger and I are on the case, though, and will reveal the ugly truth to the world in the coming weeks. Stay tuned.
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
where he is giving key batsmen out LBW, but ONLY when the ball is just clipping the outside of the stumps.
Which he shouldn't be doing. Those should be not out from the on field call.
The basic tenet being that the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman. Which makes him poor or corrupt. Your decision, as I said.
-
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
I'll tip an Australian win, but a tied series or a Kiwi win wouldn't shock me
we're no chance. I don't think we'll win a game. 2-0 to Australia
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
I'll tip an Australian win, but a tied series or a Kiwi win wouldn't shock me
we're no chance. I don't think we'll win a game. 2-0 to Australia
Shit, I over-estimated us
-
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
where he is giving key batsmen out LBW, but ONLY when the ball is just clipping the outside of the stumps.
Which he shouldn't be doing. Those should be not out from the on field call.
The basic tenet being that the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman. Which makes him poor or corrupt. Your decision, as I said.
@Snowy (whispering)...i don't think there's actually any official mention of benefit of the doubt in any binding laws or documents...
I'm led to believe it's a brilliant rule of thumb dreamt up years ago, probably to adequately school all umpires back in the day. Stinks of something W.G. would proclaim.
Sorry snowy. But I did get umpired by Aleem once....didn't trust him all game mate
-
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
where he is giving key batsmen out LBW, but ONLY when the ball is just clipping the outside of the stumps.
Which he shouldn't be doing. Those should be not out from the on field call.
The basic tenet being that the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman. Which makes him poor or corrupt. Your decision, as I said.
@Snowy said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
where he is giving key batsmen out LBW, but ONLY when the ball is just clipping the outside of the stumps.
Which he shouldn't be doing. Those should be not out from the on field call.
The basic tenet being that the benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman. Which makes him poor or corrupt. Your decision, as I said.
I'm not opposed to the benefit of the doubt going to the umpire. As @barbarian said, they weren't great decisions, but they weren't howlers. The 'that mark could have come from anywhere'was a howler.
Jeez, we played so badly this tour
-
Thank fuck its over. Now we need to clear out heads before the Indians arrive. I'm with @Chris-B. We need to figure out how to use this experience to make our batsmen better rather than clearing the decks because for the most part there are our best players.
-
Thank fuck its over. Now we need to clear out heads before the Indians arrive. I'm with @Chris-B. We need to figure out how to use this experience to make our batsmen better rather than clearing the decks because for the most part there are our best players.
@Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Thank fuck its over. Now we need to clear out heads before the Indians arrive. I'm with @Chris-B. We need to figure out how to use this experience to make our batsmen better rather than clearing the decks because for the most part there are our best players.
They just need to learn how to spell D.I.S.C.I.P.L.I.N.E. know what it means and demonstrate it when they walk out to the middle
-
@mariner4life Macca was our batting coach for five years under Hesson. The man was a coaching genius!
And he had a test batting average of 38.5. Worthy!
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@mariner4life Macca was our batting coach for five years under Hesson. The man was a coaching genius!
And he had a test batting average of 38.5. Worthy!
Worthy if you’re a number 7 or 8...
-
The bloke who hailed this as the best Black Caps side to go to Australia should give himself uppercuts for life.
A much better comparison would be with the 94/95 Black Caps side for meek capitulations and ineffectual bowling.
@Donsteppa said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
The bloke who hailed this as the best Black Caps side to go to Australia should give himself uppercuts for life.
A much better comparison would be with the 94/95 Black Caps side for meek capitulations and ineffectual bowling.
What really really shits is that we were, or at least should have been.
I mean 6 of this XI are either solid first choices for a NZ All Time Test XI or are damn close too it.
Latham
Williamson
Taylor
Watling
Southee
Boult(You can throw Wags into that mix now ... we loves Wags)
Superstars by NZ standards.
Sure there were weaknesses, a second opener and a proper spinner.
But the other batsman is in the "very good" tier, and the all rounder is at least adequate.
Super disappointing to be as badly outclassed as we were.
It's been years since we've been embarrassed like that. The 45 all out v SA?
This deserves All Black loss reaction, analysis and vitriol. Does Gary Stead have a race horse we can split on?
-
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@mariner4life Macca was our batting coach for five years under Hesson. The man was a coaching genius!
And he had a test batting average of 38.5. Worthy!
Worthy if you’re a number 7 or 8...
@ACT-Crusader said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@mariner4life Macca was our batting coach for five years under Hesson. The man was a coaching genius!
And he had a test batting average of 38.5. Worthy!
Worthy if you’re a number 7 or 8...
Or are from New Zealand:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/newzealand/engine/records/batting/highest_career_batting_average.html?class=1;id=5;type=team -
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
I'll tip an Australian win, but a tied series or a Kiwi win wouldn't shock me
we're no chance. I don't think we'll win a game. 2-0 to Australia
Shit, I over-estimated us
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
I'll tip an Australian win, but a tied series or a Kiwi win wouldn't shock me
we're no chance. I don't think we'll win a game. 2-0 to Australia
Shit, I over-estimated us
Me too
-
Thank fuck its over. Now we need to clear out heads before the Indians arrive. I'm with @Chris-B. We need to figure out how to use this experience to make our batsmen better rather than clearing the decks because for the most part there are our best players.
@Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Thank fuck its over. Now we need to clear out heads before the Indians arrive. I'm with @Chris-B. We need to figure out how to use this experience to make our batsmen better rather than clearing the decks because for the most part there are our best players.
Oh great. India.
-
@Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Thank fuck its over. Now we need to clear out heads before the Indians arrive. I'm with @Chris-B. We need to figure out how to use this experience to make our batsmen better rather than clearing the decks because for the most part there are our best players.
Oh great. India.
@booboo said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Thank fuck its over. Now we need to clear out heads before the Indians arrive. I'm with @Chris-B. We need to figure out how to use this experience to make our batsmen better rather than clearing the decks because for the most part there are our best players.
Oh great. India.
At least it's at home. And its unseasonably cold and windy at the moment
-
Two thoughts:
- 38.4 is an awesome average for NZ batsman.
- Erasmus is past his useby
-
@westcoastie said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
The one positive is (so long as we don't put it down as a one-off aberration) is that every single deficiency we have has been exposed.
Actually, I largely disagree with your last comment. Far too often in our cricket history we've been routed by Australia, come home with our tails between our legs, dropped a bunch of players and replaced them with people who are worse.
So, while the Aussies have exposed our deficiencies when confronted with fairly extreme pace and bounce, I think the selectors should almost totally disregard this series when picking our future teams.
We have some work-ons, but harsh reality is that unless we uncover our own versions of Cummins, Starc et al, we are not going to seriously compete with this Aussie team on Australian pitches.
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@westcoastie said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
The one positive is (so long as we don't put it down as a one-off aberration) is that every single deficiency we have has been exposed.
Actually, I largely disagree with your last comment. Far too often in our cricket history we've been routed by Australia, come home with our tails between our legs, dropped a bunch of players and replaced them with people who are worse.
So, while the Aussies have exposed our deficiencies when confronted with fairly extreme pace and bounce, I think the selectors should almost totally disregard this series when picking our future teams.
We have some work-ons, but harsh reality is that unless we uncover our own versions of Cummins, Starc et al, we are not going to seriously compete with this Aussie team on Australian pitches.
I didn't say we have to drop a bunch of players - now we know our weaknesses - we need to correct them. Can't handle pace - sort it. Develop some capable spin bowlers. Build our next gen. of pace bowlers. Find a bottle of mental fortitude and drink that stuff!
-
@booboo said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Two thoughts:
- 38.4 is an awesome average for NZ batsman.
And that’s part of the problem....
-
This is undoubtedly the best NZ team to have toured Aussie since the 80s, but I think it's shown that bowlers win you games, batsmen decide margins. I'd trade Kane for Paddles in a heartbeat.
@Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
This is undoubtedly the best NZ team to have toured Aussie since the 80s, but I think it's shown that bowlers win you games, batsmen decide margins. I'd trade Kane for Paddles in a heartbeat.
Hard to argue with that.
-
Even the 93/94 NZ tourists put a top score on the board that was well above 256.
When you win in Australia your top players front with performances like 188, or 9-52. Our big names this time fronted with nothing.
Who would have picked Tom Blundell to be our one and only centurion of the series?
-
@Snowy @barbarian Re DRS the 1/2 ball thing for me is the key. Which makes the "it's there to eliminate the shockers argument" a bit of a sham IMO. The technology isn't perfect so to have it show the ball barely clipping a stump to me should mean the decision is not out.
This isn't really sour grapes. Our batsmen were shite and the Aussie bowling attack, Cummins in particular, were far too good - but globally umpiring standards are pretty fucking woeful and anything that improves them has to be to the benefit of the game.
In terms of the series - well we certainly had more than our fair share of bad luck with injuries, illness, lack of preparation etc but that doesn't come even close to excusing a woeful performance. I'm the most disappointed by a NZ side I ever have been and I've been watching 50 years.
Yes the Aussie attack was intimidating and relentless. Yes we probably could have rolled them 12 months ago, but yes we were bereft of ideas on how to adjust and showed a serious lack of commitment.
I'm very wary of being a keyboard warrior criticising someone for a lack of fight facing thunderbolts from the safety of my sofa, but I have seen far more limited players over the years stick around for a lot longer simply because they were determined to sell their wicket dearly. This lot seemed to mentally give up way too soon. A bit more of Chatfield's "its the only way he was going to get me out" attitude against Peter Lever would have gone a long way towards making the losses more palatable.
