Blackcaps v Sri Lanka
-
Let’s forget the short stuff for awhile and remember we have a test starting tomorrow.
Is Bracewell straight in the team as a replacement for Wags ?
Does Nicholls get another shot ?
I could be completely wrong but I can easily see this SL team crumbling after their heartbreaking loss and get absolutely hammered this test to be honest.
@MN5 said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
Let’s forget the short stuff for awhile and remember we have a test starting tomorrow.
Is Bracewell straight in the team as a replacement for Wags ?
Does Nicholls get another shot ?
I could be completely wrong but I can easily see this SL team crumbling after their heartbreaking loss and get absolutely hammered this test to be honest.
I’ll take this one, this is up there with my bold prediction of David Tua knocking Shane Cameron out in the 2nd round.
KW amazing, gets the average to 54.89 ( better than any Indian batsman in history, fuck you bloody ), Nicholls with a career saving knock ( as someone said in a couple of years after a run of shit scores people will be saying “but remember the unbeaten double hundred in Wellington?” ) and enough decent support from the rest.
Will Wags come back ? When will Jamieson come back ?
Tickner did well and Bracewell D did okish…..but I can see them get absolutely pummelled when the conditions aren’t helping.
Henry proved he’s a better player than his record.
Southee finished them when he needed to.
Bracewell M did enough to be persevered with.
Conway quietly achieved as he often does.
Not sure how Blundells keeping was.
Nice to end the home summer with three consecutive wins I must say, the last one being an absolute hiding after two nail biters was a wonderful touch.
-
It’s a shame that Timmy gave that one over to Mitchell in the first innings, otherwise we would’ve had each of our bowlers take wickets in both innings.
@ACT-Crusader said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
It’s a shame that Timmy gave that one over to Mitchell in the first innings, otherwise we would’ve had each of our bowlers take wickets in both innings.
Not only that he’ll get a ride to the top of Mt Vic in a limo as tradition dictates.
-
Umpiring seemed very good this test and the last.
Our reviews, on the other hand, were more what I feared from Southee. Very gritty performance, but 200 overs in the field must make you wonder about following on still.
@nzzp said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
Umpiring seemed very good this test and the last.
Our reviews, on the other hand, were more what I feared from Southee. Very gritty performance, but 200 overs in the field must make you wonder about following on still.
Absolutely, I'm not a fan of the follow on, but the weather dictated our decision there. Great effort to get the win given that. Nice way to finish the summer.
-
@MN5 said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
There's gotta be at least 50 prior matches where we've been on the wrong side of this statistic.
-
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
-
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
Not going to happen with the current thinking.
NZ are following the Australian Test team selection policies under Greg Chappell from a few years back.
That was not selecting players until they have had 5/6 years at least of First Class Cricket.
Michael Hussey era of Australian Cricket you were selected at 27 or 28 onwards with a heap First class experience under your belt,The theory being you could handle Test Cricket quicker easier with the experience.
NZ are following the same policy you can see it the players bought into the test squad ,and the real telling factor they are using this model is their A sides being selected on mostly that criteria. -
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
Not going to happen with the current thinking.
NZ are following the Australian Test team selection policies under Greg Chappell from a few years back.
That was not selecting players until they have had 5/6 years at least of First Class Cricket.
Michael Hussey era of Australian Cricket you were selected at 27 or 28 onwards with a heap First class experience under your belt,The theory being you could handle Test Cricket quicker easier with the experience.
NZ are following the same policy you can see it the players bought into the test squad ,and the real telling factor they are using this model is their A sides being selected on mostly that criteria.@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
Not going to happen with the current thinking.
NZ are following the Australian Test team selection policies under Greg Chappell from a few years back.
That was not selecting players until they have had 5/6 years at least of First Class Cricket.
Michael Hussey era of Australian Cricket you were selected at 27 or 28 onwards with a heap First class experience under your belt,The theory being you could handle Test Cricket quicker easier with the experience.
NZ are following the same policy you can see it the players bought into the test squad ,and the real telling factor they are using this model is their A sides being selected on mostly that criteria.Yeah. I don't think picking an old team of over 30s really matches up with the model you describe above.
-
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
Not going to happen with the current thinking.
NZ are following the Australian Test team selection policies under Greg Chappell from a few years back.
That was not selecting players until they have had 5/6 years at least of First Class Cricket.
Michael Hussey era of Australian Cricket you were selected at 27 or 28 onwards with a heap First class experience under your belt,The theory being you could handle Test Cricket quicker easier with the experience.
NZ are following the same policy you can see it the players bought into the test squad ,and the real telling factor they are using this model is their A sides being selected on mostly that criteria.Yeah. I don't think picking an old team of over 30s really matches up with the model you describe above.
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
Not going to happen with the current thinking.
NZ are following the Australian Test team selection policies under Greg Chappell from a few years back.
That was not selecting players until they have had 5/6 years at least of First Class Cricket.
Michael Hussey era of Australian Cricket you were selected at 27 or 28 onwards with a heap First class experience under your belt,The theory being you could handle Test Cricket quicker easier with the experience.
NZ are following the same policy you can see it the players bought into the test squad ,and the real telling factor they are using this model is their A sides being selected on mostly that criteria.Yeah. I don't think picking an old team of over 30s really matches up with the model you describe above.
It is exactly what was happening here in Australia.
-
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
Not going to happen with the current thinking.
NZ are following the Australian Test team selection policies under Greg Chappell from a few years back.
That was not selecting players until they have had 5/6 years at least of First Class Cricket.
Michael Hussey era of Australian Cricket you were selected at 27 or 28 onwards with a heap First class experience under your belt,The theory being you could handle Test Cricket quicker easier with the experience.
NZ are following the same policy you can see it the players bought into the test squad ,and the real telling factor they are using this model is their A sides being selected on mostly that criteria.Yeah. I don't think picking an old team of over 30s really matches up with the model you describe above.
It is exactly what was happening here in Australia.
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
Not going to happen with the current thinking.
NZ are following the Australian Test team selection policies under Greg Chappell from a few years back.
That was not selecting players until they have had 5/6 years at least of First Class Cricket.
Michael Hussey era of Australian Cricket you were selected at 27 or 28 onwards with a heap First class experience under your belt,The theory being you could handle Test Cricket quicker easier with the experience.
NZ are following the same policy you can see it the players bought into the test squad ,and the real telling factor they are using this model is their A sides being selected on mostly that criteria.Yeah. I don't think picking an old team of over 30s really matches up with the model you describe above.
It is exactly what was happening here in Australia.
I guess that depends what you mean by "27 or 28 onwards". If that mean 30 to 34 year olds in the A team ready to play test cricket at 37 to 38, then yes, that is technically 'onwards'.
But, to be less pithy, and making a serious point:
Getting players ready to be able to play test cricket at 27/28 should be the aim, except for the truely generational talents, who will be ahead of that curve.I'm not sure if what you are describing about the Australian system under Chappell is something you see as a good thing, and to be replicated.
My opinion, is that yes, that is a good thing to replicate in theory.
But, I'm not sure if the theory and reality matched. Or if it was just plain generational quirks. But mention of Hussey ...
The Australian team reached a point from about 2008 or 2009 until 2012ish or even 2013 where Hussey was the last of the line. Both Ponting and Hussey stayed on way too long in the Australian test team. And Australia's batting was shit by their historical standards.
Was this because they had a golden generation of batting (or a generation and a half in Australia's case) and the next generation was just not very good (Fergusson, Mikkelson etc). Or had they been stifled because they had been selecting an 'A' team of 30 year old Husseys equivalents for too long? I don't know, my mastermind topic will not be "Australian 'A' teams of the late 2000s".
I see similarities with NZ's generations. And, heck, we can't be choosers, we need to take our generation when it comes along - and cherish it. But, I don't think we need to cherish so many of that that same generation's C grade players (which is what this NZ 'A' team is made up of once you strip out the 20 odd blackcaps, franchise free-agents, and the IPL players, of that same age bracket) by selecting so many of them for an 'A" squad. Some is fine, 8 to 10 is too much.
-
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
Not going to happen with the current thinking.
NZ are following the Australian Test team selection policies under Greg Chappell from a few years back.
That was not selecting players until they have had 5/6 years at least of First Class Cricket.
Michael Hussey era of Australian Cricket you were selected at 27 or 28 onwards with a heap First class experience under your belt,The theory being you could handle Test Cricket quicker easier with the experience.
NZ are following the same policy you can see it the players bought into the test squad ,and the real telling factor they are using this model is their A sides being selected on mostly that criteria.Yeah. I don't think picking an old team of over 30s really matches up with the model you describe above.
It is exactly what was happening here in Australia.
I guess that depends what you mean by "27 or 28 onwards". If that mean 30 to 34 year olds in the A team ready to play test cricket at 37 to 38, then yes, that is technically 'onwards'.
But, to be less pithy, and making a serious point:
Getting players ready to be able to play test cricket at 27/28 should be the aim, except for the truely generational talents, who will be ahead of that curve.I'm not sure if what you are describing about the Australian system under Chappell is something you see as a good thing, and to be replicated.
My opinion, is that yes, that is a good thing to replicate in theory.
But, I'm not sure if the theory and reality matched. Or if it was just plain generational quirks. But mention of Hussey ...
The Australian team reached a point from about 2008 or 2009 until 2012ish or even 2013 where Hussey was the last of the line. Both Ponting and Hussey stayed on way too long in the Australian test team. And Australia's batting was shit by their historical standards.
Was this because they had a golden generation of batting (or a generation and a half in Australia's case) and the next generation was just not very good (Fergusson, Mikkelson etc). Or had they been stifled because they had been selecting an 'A' team of 30 year old Husseys equivalents for too long? I don't know, my mastermind topic will not be "Australian 'A' teams of the late 2000s".
I see similarities with NZ's generations. And, heck, we can't be choosers, we need to take our generation when it comes along - and cherish it. But, I don't think we need to cherish so many of that that same generation's C grade players (which is what this NZ 'A' team is made up of once you strip out the 20 odd blackcaps, franchise free-agents, and the IPL players, of that same age bracket) by selecting so many of them for an 'A" squad. Some is fine, 8 to 10 is too much.
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Chris said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
@Rapido said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
NZC, with the highest median age team in cricket history, for all nations, ever.
Have just named an A team with 7 of the 15 also over 30. Again, the did similar in September when NZ 'A" toured India.
(plus 4 late-20s, and just 4 youngsters).
Someone needs to be held accountable for the continuity planning. The current guys are storing up a huge problem for the successors.
Terrible.
There are reason why we will have quite a lot of over 30s in this particular team (the IPL, plus blackcaps white ball commitments are concurrent meaning some 'A' guys are getting elevated above this team, plus some injuries, plus the golden generation bulge being followed by the shit generation).
But there is a difference between "quite a lot", and "some".Some young risks needed to be sprinkled among those old guys.
Not going to happen with the current thinking.
NZ are following the Australian Test team selection policies under Greg Chappell from a few years back.
That was not selecting players until they have had 5/6 years at least of First Class Cricket.
Michael Hussey era of Australian Cricket you were selected at 27 or 28 onwards with a heap First class experience under your belt,The theory being you could handle Test Cricket quicker easier with the experience.
NZ are following the same policy you can see it the players bought into the test squad ,and the real telling factor they are using this model is their A sides being selected on mostly that criteria.Yeah. I don't think picking an old team of over 30s really matches up with the model you describe above.
It is exactly what was happening here in Australia.
I guess that depends what you mean by "27 or 28 onwards". If that mean 30 to 34 year olds in the A team ready to play test cricket at 37 to 38, then yes, that is technically 'onwards'.
But, to be less pithy, and making a serious point:
Getting players ready to be able to play test cricket at 27/28 should be the aim, except for the truely generational talents, who will be ahead of that curve.I'm not sure if what you are describing about the Australian system under Chappell is something you see as a good thing, and to be replicated.
My opinion, is that yes, that is a good thing to replicate in theory.
But, I'm not sure if the theory and reality matched. Or if it was just plain generational quirks. But mention of Hussey ...
The Australian team reached a point from about 2008 or 2009 until 2012ish or even 2013 where Hussey was the last of the line. Both Ponting and Hussey stayed on way too long in the Australian test team. And Australia's batting was shit by their historical standards.
Was this because they had a golden generation of batting (or a generation and a half in Australia's case) and the next generation was just not very good (Fergusson, Mikkelson etc). Or had they been stifled because they had been selecting an 'A' team of 30 year old Husseys equivalents for too long? I don't know, my mastermind topic will not be "Australian 'A' teams of the late 2000s".
I see similarities with NZ's generations. And, heck, we can't be choosers, we need to take our generation when it comes along - and cherish it. But, I don't think we need to cherish so many of that that same generation's C grade players (which is what this NZ 'A' team is made up of once you strip out the 20 odd blackcaps, franchise free-agents, and the IPL players, of that same age bracket) by selecting so many of them for an 'A" squad. Some is fine, 8 to 10 is too much.
No it was not a good thing the flow on was damaging.Young players around 19 to 23 were giving the game away and going to other sports because waiting for 5 or 6 years in the system didn't pay their bills, they wanted a career in sport I am talking about elite athletes.
I was fighting off especially AFL who were offering development contracts to elite 17 year olds that Cricket could not compete for.
So we lost a host of elite players who should have been playing in the State unde rage sides.
It actually harmed the development programmes quite a lot. -
@Duluth said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
Oh there’s an ODI on now
SL put us in
NZ 78/2 after 15
Relaxed crowd here at Eden Park. Felt like all the players got in, but tried to hit and just couldn't execute.
We're one wicket down more than I'd like right now. Looks like 300+ will be par. Pitch playing well, short straight boundaries
-
Black Caps looking like they will be bowled out here.
At least Ravindra has shown promise on debut.
@KiwiMurph said in Blackcaps v Sri Lanka:
Black Caps looking like they will be bowled out here.
At least Ravindra has shown promise on debut.
Feels like our batsmen got themselves out. Very sub par score, but a lovely day down here
