Cricket: NZ vs Aus
-
@Donsteppa hasn't actually been impossible to bat out there so far, so being five down is a bit disappointing. If we'd played really well and had more luck we might have been only two or three down.
Ball is likely to play tricks in the final session - I don't think we'll need to set aside time for cricket watching tomorrow!
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@Donsteppa hasn't actually been impossible to bat out there so far, so being five down is a bit disappointing. If we'd played really well and had more luck we might have been only two or three down.
Ball is likely to play tricks in the final session - I don't think we'll need to set aside time for cricket watching tomorrow!
We are done for sure
-
So I guess Matt Henry will come in for Lachie, interesting to see if Jeets gets another crack with Blundell in the wings as a wild card? I expect Jeets to get another run based on Stead's habit of playing out of form players longer than he should (Munro at the CWC)
-
So I guess Matt Henry will come in for Lachie, interesting to see if Jeets gets another crack with Blundell in the wings as a wild card? I expect Jeets to get another run based on Stead's habit of playing out of form players longer than he should (Munro at the CWC)
-
-
I wish we had Ajaz Patel in the squad - I'd swap him in for Santner. I guess Todd Astle is the option available - and I'd be inclined to give him a crack. Santner is just not an attacking enough option.
Boult in for Lockie.
As a wild option - Astle used to open for Canterbury and he couldn't really do worse than Jeet did in Perth. A nightwatchman opener?!! It's pretty desperate and typical of series against Oz, where our lineup starts to disintegrate.
-
I wish we had Ajaz Patel in the squad - I'd swap him in for Santner. I guess Todd Astle is the option available - and I'd be inclined to give him a crack. Santner is just not an attacking enough option.
Boult in for Lockie.
As a wild option - Astle used to open for Canterbury and he couldn't really do worse than Jeet did in Perth. A nightwatchman opener?!! It's pretty desperate and typical of series against Oz, where our lineup starts to disintegrate.
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
I wish we had Ajaz Patel in the squad - I'd swap him in for Santner. I guess Todd Astle is the option available - and I'd be inclined to give him a crack. Santner is just not an attacking enough option.
Boult in for Lockie.
As a wild option - Astle used to open for Canterbury and he couldn't really do worse than Jeet did in Perth. A nightwatchman opener?!! It's pretty desperate and typical of series against Oz, where our lineup starts to disintegrate.
Night watchman opener is very early 2000s black caps.
Didn't Fleming try a Kyle Mills as a new ball watchman once in South Africa (at Wanderers maybe?)
-
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
I wish we had Ajaz Patel in the squad - I'd swap him in for Santner. I guess Todd Astle is the option available - and I'd be inclined to give him a crack. Santner is just not an attacking enough option.
Boult in for Lockie.
As a wild option - Astle used to open for Canterbury and he couldn't really do worse than Jeet did in Perth. A nightwatchman opener?!! It's pretty desperate and typical of series against Oz, where our lineup starts to disintegrate.
Night watchman opener is very early 2000s black caps.
Didn't Fleming try a Kyle Mills as a new ball watchman once in South Africa (at Wanderers maybe?)
@Cyclops said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
@Chris-B said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
I wish we had Ajaz Patel in the squad - I'd swap him in for Santner. I guess Todd Astle is the option available - and I'd be inclined to give him a crack. Santner is just not an attacking enough option.
Boult in for Lockie.
As a wild option - Astle used to open for Canterbury and he couldn't really do worse than Jeet did in Perth. A nightwatchman opener?!! It's pretty desperate and typical of series against Oz, where our lineup starts to disintegrate.
Night watchman opener is very early 2000s black caps.
Didn't Fleming try a Kyle Mills as a new ball watchman once in South Africa (at Wanderers maybe?)
Kyle Mills could hold a bat, pity about his bowling.....
-
It's been a while since I have taken much notice of Blundell, but my memory tells me we are kidding ourselves if we can think he can do the job against Aussie. From what I recall he has the typical NZ lack of footwork thing. But maybe I have him confused with someone else...
-
Man what a hiding. Everything that could go wrong did go wrong. Lost the toss, conceded 400+ and lost Lockie to injury, confidence knocked facing the new pink ball under lights, and CdG's match saving 100 sawn-off by an absolute howler of a decision just to add to it all.
I didn't think we'd win this test, but I was really hoping a few things would go our way to keep it at least sort of close so we have something to take to Melbourne. As it is we're in disarray a bit now.
That said, I wouldn't mind Stead sticking with the same 11. I don't think there's a huge amount to be gained from chopping and changing. Blundell will be tempting to open in place of Jeet but I'm not convinced he will fare any better - smacking a ton in an ODI is a far cry from facing the Aus quicks on the first morning of a test.
Some positives are:
- Southee was actually really, really good. If he bowls like that with Boult at the other end life will be really tough for the Aussie batsmen. He was getting beautiful shape and causing plenty of problems.
- Wags was his usual self and bowled really well, he's such an asset.
- Ross got some time in the middle and should take some confidence from the way he played in the first innings - that was as tough as it gets in test cricket.
- Warner didn't make many runs. Thank fuck for that. Fuck that guy.
That's about it really.
Some negatives:
- Santner offers nothing with the ball. He's a batting all rounder or not in the test team for me. We can't afford to carry players that are not quite good enough at either discipline - they have to make the team on one of those alone and the other should be a bonus. Otherwise we should stick to the best 6 batsmen, a keeper and the best 4 bowlers.
- No runs from captain fantastic, by God to we need him to come good in Melbourne.
- Not a lot of fight from the batsmen overall, folding weakly in both innings which caused Caps fans PTSD to go into overdrive. So disappointing given how good our lineup is these days.
Looking forward to the next match still, we absolutely do have a good enough side to win in Aus. We just need a few things to go our way to get a bit of confidence back.
-
Man what a hiding. Everything that could go wrong did go wrong. Lost the toss, conceded 400+ and lost Lockie to injury, confidence knocked facing the new pink ball under lights, and CdG's match saving 100 sawn-off by an absolute howler of a decision just to add to it all.
I didn't think we'd win this test, but I was really hoping a few things would go our way to keep it at least sort of close so we have something to take to Melbourne. As it is we're in disarray a bit now.
That said, I wouldn't mind Stead sticking with the same 11. I don't think there's a huge amount to be gained from chopping and changing. Blundell will be tempting to open in place of Jeet but I'm not convinced he will fare any better - smacking a ton in an ODI is a far cry from facing the Aus quicks on the first morning of a test.
Some positives are:
- Southee was actually really, really good. If he bowls like that with Boult at the other end life will be really tough for the Aussie batsmen. He was getting beautiful shape and causing plenty of problems.
- Wags was his usual self and bowled really well, he's such an asset.
- Ross got some time in the middle and should take some confidence from the way he played in the first innings - that was as tough as it gets in test cricket.
- Warner didn't make many runs. Thank fuck for that. Fuck that guy.
That's about it really.
Some negatives:
- Santner offers nothing with the ball. He's a batting all rounder or not in the test team for me. We can't afford to carry players that are not quite good enough at either discipline - they have to make the team on one of those alone and the other should be a bonus. Otherwise we should stick to the best 6 batsmen, a keeper and the best 4 bowlers.
- No runs from captain fantastic, by God to we need him to come good in Melbourne.
- Not a lot of fight from the batsmen overall, folding weakly in both innings which caused Caps fans PTSD to go into overdrive. So disappointing given how good our lineup is these days.
Looking forward to the next match still, we absolutely do have a good enough side to win in Aus. We just need a few things to go our way to get a bit of confidence back.
@No-Quarter Pretty much. The Aussies definitely weren't doing us any favours by starting us in Perth with a pink ball. Wonder how much say we had in that. Not much, I'd imagine.
Overall, Kane lost the game when he lost the toss - or at least any slim chance we had on that deck against those bowlers.
To be honest, it could easily have been worse. Rossco could easily have run himself out for very little in the first innings. Kane nicked out against Wade's rubbish, but they didn't review - ditto BJ in the 2nd innings. And if Hazlewood hadn't broken down, they would have had him as part of a relentless rotation.
Overall, very disappointing though. Yesterday's top order batting just didn't sell their wickets dearly enough - though we were never getting out of that game with a Greatbatch.
-
I was really disappointed with that game. The circumstances didn't work out for NZ, sure, but to get rolled twice for under 200 is pretty weak for a team ranked a few spots higher on the world rankings.
Our discipline in the first innings was pleasing, and Marnus looks a future great. Six months ago we had S.Smith and nobody else, and now we've had three big wins in a row without any real contribution from him.
And of course our fast bowlers were great as usual. Having Pattinson to come in is a real luxury, he will be firing in front of his home crowd.
-
I was really disappointed with that game. The circumstances didn't work out for NZ, sure, but to get rolled twice for under 200 is pretty weak for a team ranked a few spots higher on the world rankings.
Our discipline in the first innings was pleasing, and Marnus looks a future great. Six months ago we had S.Smith and nobody else, and now we've had three big wins in a row without any real contribution from him.
And of course our fast bowlers were great as usual. Having Pattinson to come in is a real luxury, he will be firing in front of his home crowd.
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
Having Pattinson to come in is a real luxury, he will be firing in front of his home crowd.
And yet, all the talk is about Siddle
-
Our batsmen need to show a shitload more discipline and application in Melbourne. I still can't understand why Ajaz wasn't considered, he would have rocked it on that deck. Not quite as shocking as omitting Sam Cane, but so much has to go our way to win without us shooting ourselves in the foot
-
I was really disappointed with that game. The circumstances didn't work out for NZ, sure, but to get rolled twice for under 200 is pretty weak for a team ranked a few spots higher on the world rankings.
Our discipline in the first innings was pleasing, and Marnus looks a future great. Six months ago we had S.Smith and nobody else, and now we've had three big wins in a row without any real contribution from him.
And of course our fast bowlers were great as usual. Having Pattinson to come in is a real luxury, he will be firing in front of his home crowd.
@barbarian said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
I was really disappointed with that game. The circumstances didn't work out for NZ, sure, but to get rolled twice for under 200 is pretty weak for a team ranked a few spots higher on the world rankings.
The low ranked team didn't have Marnus, Smith or Warner though. We'd love to face that team - would be far easier
-
what i am really impressed with is that while we thought we were tying Aus down on Day 2, it looks an awful lot like they hit the go slow to ensure they got to bowl at the best time of the day. That's pretty fucking smart cricket, able to be pulled off because their best players did a lot of the heavy lifting.
-
That was a fucking pumping.
Great efforts from Wags, Southee, and Rossco. Everyone else needs to have a long hard look at themselves.
Satnav is a waste of space. So is Raval.
Fucking Australia are back now that they have found loose bus change. 8 months ago, they would have been there for the taking
oh wait, not with 340 runs total
-
That was a fucking pumping.
Great efforts from Wags, Southee, and Rossco. Everyone else needs to have a long hard look at themselves.
Satnav is a waste of space. So is Raval.
Fucking Australia are back now that they have found loose bus change. 8 months ago, they would have been there for the taking
oh wait, not with 340 runs total
@mariner4life said in Cricket: NZ vs Aus:
That was a fucking pumping.
Great efforts from Wags, Southee, and Rossco. Everyone else needs to have a long hard look at themselves.
Satnav is a waste of space. So is Raval.
Fucking Australia are back now that they have found loose bus change. 8 months ago, they would have been there for the taking
oh wait, not with 340 runs total
Regardless of the batting woes, with that bowling attack in their own conditions they are lethal
