keith Posted March 1, 2015 Posted March 1, 2015 No idea' date=' and it was especially moronic to bring him back against NZ. Said it before the game.:(([/quote'] Do you think Bailey would have done better? TBH I think Smith should be batting 3 when Faulkner comes back.
HippoSucks Posted March 1, 2015 Posted March 1, 2015 Do you think Bailey would have done better? TBH I think Smith should be batting 3 when Faulkner comes back. The best batsman is at #3 and that is Clarke.
addicted4444 Posted March 1, 2015 Posted March 1, 2015 You can't look at statistics and go "Wow, that is some amazing bowling!". Boult was gifted his wickets from stupid shots by the idiotic Australian batsman. He was bowling good, but nothing really special. Apart from McCullum, no one on the New Zealand team really were playing any really bad shots (even McCullum was playing very sensibly). Despite that, Starc and Cummins induced a collapse because they bowled really well. Forget umpiring. The only controversial decision was the Warner one and even if he was given not out, it probably wouldn't have changed much. You cannot just look at the individual deliveries either, or even one bowler's bowling. NZ as a bowling unit was far superior to Australia, because for all of Starc's heroics, the bowling at the other end was pathetic. OTOH, after the good Aussie start, the NZ bowlers as a whole unit completely choked off the Australian batsmen causing tentativeness and poor shots.
HippoSucks Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 You cannot just look at the individual deliveries either, or even one bowler's bowling. NZ as a bowling unit was far superior to Australia, because for all of Starc's heroics, the bowling at the other end was pathetic. OTOH, after the good Aussie start, the NZ bowlers as a whole unit completely choked off the Australian batsmen causing tentativeness and poor shots. The discussion I was having with the other guy was regarding Boult's bowling, not New Zealand's in general. Boult and Southee bowled decently, but it was nothing exceptional (certainly not good enough to induce such a major collapse). For the most part, the Australian batsman just batted like idiots. Vettori bowled very well though. The bowling at the other end wasn't really bad. Johnson bowled bad but not atrociously bad. He was opening the bowling and had to face McCullum a lot which is why he got hit for a lot of runs. Cummins did very well. The Australians didn't play poor shots because wickets were falling and they got nervous, they played poor shots and that is why wickets even began falling.
keith Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 The Australians didn't play poor shots because wickets were falling and they got nervous, they played poor shots and that is why wickets even began falling. The Australian batsmen by and large do not have faith in their defensive game because they basically don't have one. The difference between their Test and ODI lineup is a reflection of that. Maxwell et al chopping on is just as much due to their inability to deal with good bowling as Elliott getting clean bowled. I could write it off and say Elliott shouldn't just miss a straight one, but that would be doing a discredit to the bowler. Similarly Australia's capitulation was due to inability to deal with quality bowling. Clarke's shot was poor but that was a very clear bowling plan with two short covers. Pretty good execution.
GrandMasterSaxy Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 Australia is worst than New Zealand, however neither of them would make it to finals.
vamos_rafa Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 The Australian batsmen by and large do not have faith in their defensive game because they basically don't have one. The difference between their Test and ODI lineup is a reflection of that. Maxwell et al chopping on is just as much due to their inability to deal with good bowling as Elliott getting clean bowled. I could write it off and say Elliott shouldn't just miss a straight one, but that would be doing a discredit to the bowler. Similarly Australia's capitulation was due to inability to deal with quality bowling. Clarke's shot was poor but that was a very clear bowling plan with two short covers. Pretty good execution. Don't you think that retrofitting Clarke in the ODI side would eventually screw things up for Oz. He isn't going to be missed much, coz let's face it, he isn't that much of an impact player in ODIs. Also, I haven't kept a tab on records, but Bailey, I suppose has done fairly well in ODIs. Wh
bulbul Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 Don't you think that retrofitting Clarke in the ODI side would eventually screw things up for Oz. He isn't going to be missed much' date=' coz let's face it, he isn't that much of an impact player in ODIs. Also, I haven't kept a tab on records, but Bailey, I suppose has done fairly well in ODIs. Wh[/quote'] Bailey averages below 20 for last 2 years. Ideally they can remove both of them and make Smith captain. But they have throw out Watson as well.
vamos_rafa Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 Bailey averages below 20 for last 2 years. Ideally they can remove both of them and make Smith captain. But they have throw out Watson as well. Oops ok. So, either ways both of them are reduntant. With Clarke, you don't know when would he break down next. And yes, Watson is again someone who is a spent force. They are a bit too depedant on a few folks isn't it?
brendan07 Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 Do you think Bailey would have done better? TBH I think Smith should be batting 3 when Faulkner comes back. Put it this way he couldn't have done worse, and as much as I have bagged George Bailey, he made a 50 the match before against England. Ideally and I'm being a fraction realistic here, my lineup would be: Warner Finch Smith Clarke (unfortunately)- although I'd play Bailey as Clarke isn't fit. Maxwell Marsh Faulkner Haddin Johnson Starc Cummins or Hazelwood. Basically Watson out, but we have enough bowling options.
brendan07 Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 The best batsman is at #3 and that is Clarke. You might not want me to bring up Clarke's ODI averages recently. I'll give you a tip, all of Warner, Finch, Smith and Faulkner average more. I'll give you another top Clarke despite every opportunity in the book hasn't made a ODI ton for years!
BlueBee Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 What's up with Smith? Same like Kohli, Piled up runs in Tests and mysteriously out of form ATM ? Though Kohli found his form at the right time. Is he making up for the huge runs he made in Tests in so much less matches? :giggle:
brendan07 Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 What's up with Smith? Same like Kohli, Piled up runs in Tests and mysteriously out of form ATM ? Though Kohli found his form at the right time. Is he making up for the huge runs he made in Tests in so much less matches? :giggle: Got a good ball on Saturday ( one of the very few that can say that for us). It happens. I'll back him to come good very soon. Still believe he should be in the top 4, ideally at 3.
HippoSucks Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 You might not want me to bring up Clarke's ODI averages recently. I'll give you a tip' date=' all of Warner, Finch, Smith and Faulkner average more. I'll give you another top Clarke despite every opportunity in the book hasn't made a ODI ton for years![/quote'] I don't really care about statistics much. He has generally gone out to good balls (except a few ones like last night) and is obviously unfit. He has a long ODI career left. Watson on the other hand is almost done. However, I would still like for him to get a few more games (should be dropped in Tests soon though).
HippoSucks Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 What's up with Smith? Same like Kohli, Piled up runs in Tests and mysteriously out of form ATM ? Though Kohli found his form at the right time. Is he making up for the huge runs he made in Tests in so much less matches? :giggle: Smith did very well in the ODI series v. South Africa but has been out of form for the last few matches. He didn't really do anything wrong, just was outplayed by some good bowling.
keith Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Giving this a quiet bump, before a massive bump on Sunday.
bulbul Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Giving this a quiet bump' date=' before a massive bump on Sunday.[/quote'] Yes,Sunday they will be bumped off by India
Gambit Posted March 25, 2015 Posted March 25, 2015 Hope this NZ generation outshine Fleming and his team.
MCGGG Posted March 25, 2015 Author Posted March 25, 2015 NZ were lucky to get past SA, very lucky! You will see how good they are when they have to leave their home shores to play Australia in the final.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now