For the series losses in both the one-dayers and tests, I lay the blame squarely on the shoulders of Scott Styris and the vocal crowds at Auckland and Hamilton.
Perhaps if Scotty hadn't prolonged that confrontation with Mitchell Johnson, and it hadn't been followed by predictable heckling from those spectators, the left-armer would simply have stewed in his own juices instead of being stoked by them. And each kiwi innings wouldn't have been a cringefest full of limp shots by right-handers to 150km/h deliveries angled across them.
Then again, if Mitch didn't get us, Bolly would've..
There have been four Trans-Tasman rubbers since the heady days of Stephen Fleming circa 2001-02, and each one has ended 2-0. This latest drubbing naturally raises the same old questions on what needs to be done if NZ are to turn out more competitive next time. Vettori, who has now played 18 tests against Australia without a win to show for it, looks back at the series in a considered but tired manner. Ricky Ponting, in a No Shit, Sherlock moment, suggests that for NZ to impove they need to bring Bond back.
Cricinfo has rated the Australia and New Zealand players on ten. The Aussies average 6.5 to NZ's 4.5, a fair reflection of the gulf between the two sides; but it also suggests despite their hugely successful summer, the Aussies have some way to go to before they recapture the glory days of old. I can't see Pidge making his customary 5-0 Ashes prediction on this evidence.
I suppose the one consolation from the ratings is that our three best players - McCullum, Vettori and Taylor - for once outdid their Aussie counterparts (Haddin, Hauritz and Hussey). It's good to know they've more-or-less affirmed their world-class status (after 55 tests, you might expect Chris Martin to be in that list, but his bowling is a subject best left for another post).
Top Cricket From The Second Tier
13 years ago
7 comments:
I am sure Punter was joking there. If he wasn't he has not only lost his form but also his mind. Bond is even niggling about in the IPL :/
I think there are so many factors disadvantaging NZ. Cricket not exactly being the national sport is not ideal for a country that has only 8 million inhabitants. Plunkett Shield might not be enough to prepare them for the Tests. There are voices that say they should play some matches in the Sheffield shield each year, or take part in it. I support this idea.
But NZ also needs to stick to guys (like Guptill for instance) and keep sending them through the bone mill of test cricket until they are good. I don't know what their general test pensum is but it is not enough :P
You're probably right; in hindsight, it was a silly question to put to Punter, and there was little he could do than state the obvious. He played it pretty well.
Yeah, the plunkett shield has always been so-so, most kiwis end up having to learn at the top level - the fact that McCullum and Vettori, for example, didn't spend (waste?) too much time at the first-class level has helped them quite a bit. The sheffield shield idea is a good one, but I doubt it will ever be implemented..the men in charge at NZC seem to be inertial about such things.
Also agree on the 'bone mill of test cricket' bit..the only way NZ will become a force in tests is if the selectors stick with this core group over a four year period if necessary, and allow for a painful development phase. You could argue they brought it upon themselves by shutting out a whole bunch of senior players in 2007.
Good to see you writing again da. I watched a bit of the aus vs nz series and as usual it felt like a foregone conclusion. From a neutral point of view (kiwis over aus anyday but I'm still neutral) the kiwis can never compete with the kind of batting line up they have. Ryder like u've mentioned is probably gonna be injured more often than not (hopefully not). I'm a big vettori fan (which neutral is not?) but if he is your best batsman than best of luck! Taylor for all his undoubted class is still too prone to throw it away. I've always liked the kiwis. But for what its worth, I reckon this is the weakest side I've seen over the last 2 decades. Astle, Fleming, Mcmillan, Harris, Nash, Cairns, Parore (I might be missing 1 or 2) but that was a quality side. Not great but they could compete on their day with pretty much any1. This side - Vettori apart is ordinary.
Sting they have a lot of holes in the lineup but I would put McCullum in the top category any time. Southee has already shown his class, I am still waiting for Guptill to explode. Mills return, this should help. Taylor needs to do some autogenic training.
Wes' last blog:
A match I would have loved to watch
@Sting1: You're right, the side you mentioned was a quality one and the current one seems to compare unfavourably at the moment. But as Wes points out, man for man these guys really aren't inferior. McCullum is arguably a better keeper-batsman than Parore, and Taylor and Guptill are at least as talented as Astle and Fleming were. But the application is what's been missing so far.
I think Fleming's side benefited from playing the top nations more regularly, and growing together as a unit. They were quite hopeless in 1997, but the same guys were good enough to beat England away from home by '99. These guys similarly need time to develop, but my fear is the structure of the cricket calendar means the the dice is loaded against them.
Apologies guys - yes undoubtedly McCullum is a class act. But Guptill over Astle/Fleming? I must confess I've seen very little of Guptill. He has impressed on the few occasions that I have (not necessarily in terms of runs but technique, temperament etc). But I still believe its too early to compare him with either Astle or Fleming. If anything I still believe Fleming under achieved as a batsman.
I'm comparing Guptill/Taylor with Fleming/Astle purely in terms of raw talent..ie shotmaking ability, I certainly agree those two have a long way to go before they can be put in the same class as predecessors.
Fleming was an underachiever..true..but he got better with time. These guys could perhaps learn from his example then.
Post a Comment