The Silver Fern

@MN5 Phillips for me is a batsman who can bowl - similar to Ravindra and Mitchell.

He's not playing like it when they bat him at seven.

His place is under threat (in my team) because I want him to bat with more starch and less cavalierly.

Having him bat at six might change this mindset a bit.

@MN5 If Phillips plays, I reckon he needs to bat at 6.

At 7 he seems to think his job is to have a bit of a tonk, rather than playing as a proper batsman.

I'm not convinced either Smith or Foulkes are good enough batsmen to warrant playing them ahead of guys who are better bowlers.

If a pitch will assist spinners, I'd pick:

Latham, Conway, Williamson, Ravindra, Mitchell, Phillips, Hay, Santner, Jamieson, Henry, O'Rourke.

If it won't:

Latham, Conway, Williamson, Ravindra, Mitchell, Phillips, Hay, Jamieson, Henry, Duffy, O'Rourke.

@MN5 Forgot him - probably ahead of Fisher but, behind Tickner for me.

@MN5 Yeah - rankings probably something like:

Henry
Jamieson
O'Rourke
Duffy (he's been impressive and jumped up the list)
Sears
Tickner
Fisher
Foulkes (can swing the ball a mile in the right conditions, but shades of Lance Cairns for me)
Rae

Not a bad mop up job this morning - 39/4.

They won't have Roach to bowl so hopefully some hay to be made.

My boy Rae comes on and finishes Roach!

Have a rest for a few hours lads.

So, according to me we need to bat normally for about a session and then play increasingly aggressively for another session. Set them about 400 in 3.5 sessions and hope to knock them over cheaply.

@Donsteppa I think he's more likely to do it than Phillips.

Unless the pitch deteriorates markedly in the next 24 hours, though, I don't see where another 10 wickets are coming from.

Hooray - Jeetan gets Seales. Will Roach bat?

Duffy is carrying our attack, really.

@MN5 Stand him out on the boundary then to cut down the runs off Rae!

Why are we bowling Phillips?

Surely Rae or Foulkes are more likely to knock Seales over quickly?

Hope apparently had food poisoning. If we'd got another couple of wickets yesterday, maybe we wouldn't have had to deal with him at all, but he doesn't last long.

Eight down now and Roach might not bat.

Come on boys - knock them over and open up the chance of a result!

There's a touch of irony requesting 150 on demand. It's around the, "we need a hat trick right now"!

Slightly more likely, perhaps.

@MN5 said in Ashes 2025/6:

Crawley 50 up.

Just needs to add at least 150 to that and he’ll become an Ashes hero and say a big fuck you to the doubters.

If Brook can make 150, England will get close.

I think he's their last remaining hope - with Crawley, Stokes et al to bat around him.

Finally we do go bang, bang!

Ajaz gets Chase cheaply.

Still got Hope and Hodge to get through, and presumably Roach can bat even if he can't run. Hope still not coming out, though.

Starting to look a bit draw-like to me.

We really need a good last session today where we roll them for, say, 400.

Which would leave six sessions and us leading by 175. Invest two sessions scoring 225 and boldly leave them four sessions to make 400?

That's gettable on a flat track if they start well.

Phillips into the attack - in tandem with Patel.

Eleven overs to the new ball. Presumably hoping to get through quickly, cheaply, and with a bit of luck snaffling at least one wicket.

@Chris-B said in West Indies tour of NZ:

According to me:

Duffy has a test bowling average of 12.3 and Foulkes is averaging 8.9.

Matt Henry needs to pull finger!

Posted this a couple of weeks back.

Message back from Matt Henry:

"I don't have to do a goddamned thing - 'çept sit on my ass and wait!"

Really need to go bang, bang about now.

Pretty much regardless of pitch condition, I tend to look at a first innings score of 220/4 as being par - we were behind the game at stumps last night, but a couple of wickets (or three) in the next half hour would have us back on course.

@MN5 said in West Indies tour of NZ:

@Chris said in West Indies tour of NZ:

The decision to re select Blundell over Hay as I have said before is a poor one.
Compare the reckless shot Blundell played in his score of 4 to the 61 Hay scored when NZ was in trouble in the previous tests, shows who will contribute more.
Blundell dropped a catchable one down the leg side, and anyone who says it was hard sure, but if you get a decent glove on it you should catch it at test level, he just moved too late at 35 that is going to happen.
Hay is the best WK in NZ as he anticipates very well and gets in to catching positions very easily compared to other keepers, and stays down longer which gets him in to good positions to take the ball and keeps his head and eyes more in line with the ball.
It is always easier to catch a ball staying low and coming up than coming up too soon and having to re adjust.

Blundell has been an admirable trooper for NZ and a handy successor to Watling but the fact he walked straight back in after Hay made every single post a winner ( some excellent keeping from what I saw to go with a very handy score ) is a bit troubling for me. His batting continues to be far more misses than hits too.

The coaching staff are very loyal though, they can point to Conways efforts in this series as justification for this I suppose but Hay looks a seriously good long term talent who should get his chance now especially in an ageing team ( Ravindra the only other top six batsman under 30 )

I think something we realised after the bad old days of the 1990s, when selection was a merry-go-round of pick, discard and re-pick is that you don't want guys to feel like they're playing for their place every time they go out to bat. And avoiding that perception means you've got to back people through their slumps - not just for them - but, to give everyone else confidence too.

The balancing act is recognizing when a change has got to happen. In part, that might need help from the player themselves recognizing their time is up, before the selectors have to. Conversations - which is probably a more mature way of running a team compared to having selectorial "gods".

We didn't quite get that right with Tim Southee. I think they should have given Hay this test as well as part of what looks to me to be a necessary transition. Blundell has been deteriorating for a while now - in his last 20 tests he's averaged 18, with one century and one fifty. Hay's matched the latter in his first test innings.