New Zealand in England

[Will_NA]

English batsman fail to take resposibility for the situation England find themselves in. You only have to look at Australia and what Hussey and Clarke did the other day to see how a class team dig in but don't let themselves be dominated. We need Collingwood, a grifter no someone who plays airy fairy shots like Bopara or someone who can't hit the ball in Ambrose and Peter Moores should hold a gun to Ian Bell's head every time he gets to 40 and only withdraw it if he gets 3 figures.

Also, Cook's not an ODI opener. I always rated him but he scores slow 40s too often. It doesn't help that he's slightly out of form in the Test arena too.

Will_NA added 11 Minutes and 47 Seconds later...

nice, would like to see same for england for sometime . .:cool: actually would like to see them below bangladesh.

You didn't answer my question in the other thread so answer it here if you'd be so kind.

 

[irottev]

Well done guys. I was really worried once McCullum got out, but Styris played it really well. Paced it fantastically. That's the experience. People were crying for him to be dropped. He really played well. Elliot was great at the end with him too. Fed him strike and picked good areas to hit boundaries. He's not let us down once.

Bowling-wise, Mills started a bit loose, but Gillespie made up for it with fantastic control. His figures would probably have been even better if that false no-ball call wasn't made too. He's stepped up in these games, it's good to see. Vettori showed why he's the best ODI bowler in the world. Swann set the platform and Vettori was even better. The first two wickets were really as good as it gets in ODI cricket. He totally did them and even though the both clattered into similar spots on the stumps, there were totally different balls. He was really on his game. Tim Southee is really impressive. His first tour and he's highest wicket taker. Very impressive. Totally deserved MOTS.

All series our fielding has been a class above England's as well. England only have themselves to blame for Styris getting away in the last game, and who knows what confidence he gained from that knock. For England to challenge SA, they'll need to improve the fielding. Their death bowling was also poor. We never got away from England until the moment Oram hit that first boundary. The batting needs more consistency as well. Someone needs to bat through. Bell's had starts, but he needed to carry on them. Same with Bopara.

I liked the pitch (though I would say that since we won) because it was a reasonable total, but yo had to work hard for it. There was a bit of bounce for the quick men, some small seam movement and bounce for spinners too. I think England missed Collingwood. No one else really took the responsibility to stay in and accumulate. Turn strike over.

And a comment above said we weren't at full strength. To be fair, we're only really missing Ryder. I think when he comes back, replacing Flynn probably, How has looked better at 3 and Taylor at 4. Franklin has been injured for some time, but that doesn't help our batting a heap. Bond maybe, but he's been gone a year or so as well so we just need to move on. If Gillespie steps up to the plate and plays like that consistently, we'll be fine with bowlers.

 

[karnog]

Shah bats way too low. Number 4 should be his spot. Bopara at 6. Someone slap Bell silly. Those 40-50s won't save him when he hits a bad patch. But well done NZ. Styris really showed the importance of experience. With Ryder coming in NZ will look a lot better.

 

[irottev]

Where does Shah bat for his county? Wherever he bats there, he should bat in internationals. I'm a big fan of picking batsmen in their batting position. If he was to move up, it may cause problems for him or other players. He's pretty good in this role, why not leave him there.

 

[King Pietersen]

I think the main problem for New Zealand is the position of Daniel Flynn. He always looks ok when he gets out into the middle but has yet to go on and make 1 score of note. He played well in his first innings at Lords with Jacob Oram but since then has failed to go on. The commentators have continualy mentioned the blow to the head, but surely 4 games on from that point he should stop using it as an excuse. If New Zealand are going to compete with the best they need Flynn to start taking some responsibility and make an innings of note.

 

[irottev]

Well for the Champions Trophy our top line up will probably be:

Ryder
McCullum
How
Taylor
Styris
Oram
Elliot
Vettori
Mills
Southee
Gillespie

Flynn has shown good signs and this series experience will do him a lot of good. Hopefully for the Champions Trophy we have Franklin back, but he won't have played a lot of cricket, so may not make it. I haven't heard anything about him for a while. Vettori hinted that there wasn't only Ryder joining the team for the Champions Trophy though. I can't think of anyone else missing.

 

[Sureshot]

Where does Shah bat for his county? Wherever he bats there, he should bat in internationals. I'm a big fan of picking batsmen in their batting position. If he was to move up, it may cause problems for him or other players. He's pretty good in this role, why not leave him there.

Shah bats at 3 for Middlesex. I think he can bat anywhere in this line up. I'd have him at 5. With KP at 3 and Colly at 4.

 

[irottev]

If he bats at 3 then move him up I say. I rekon:

Mustard
Bell
Pietersen
Shah
Collingwood

top5. I think Collingwood has played mostly as number 5 and should stay there. If Shah bats at 3 for his county, 4 isn't a lot different. He can actually play both roles obviously since he's doing well at 5/6.

e was England's best batsman by far. He can't afford to keep batting with the weak tail. As soon as you get below Shah, it's very weak, as I said at the start. Then England need probably Wright, Flintoff and Mascaranhas at 6, 7, 8 with Swann, Sidebottom and Broad to follow. Maybe Anderson for Flintoff if unfit or Wright if bowling isn't sufficient. That'd be my picks anyway. You see, with a keeper who can open you leave a space for another all-rounder or bowler. It really helps the balance. I'd actually keep Anderson until Flintoff really proves he can bowl 10 good overs like he used to. Anderson wasn't bad at all. England's main problem is with bowling depth and death bowling bowlingwise. Up front they're pretty decent.

And there's no reason why Wright can't be a 10 over bowler. His pace is as quick as any other bowler England have, I dunno why he gets called a medium pacer or a bits and pieces bowler. Just needs to work on variation and control.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Far out, New Zealand is one of the best ODI teams in the world.

They'd probably be on par or even better then Australia if they still had Bond.

 

[Arunava]

You didn't answer my question in the other thread so answer it here if you'd be so kind.

i answered it, but the posts were deleted, including ur question. .give me the link to the post. .i'll answer again

 

[Owzat]

England's fifth bowler policy of making up the overs played a part in losing the final ODI, 72 conceded off 10 overs including a bizarre decision to give Shah overs and he went for 30 off his 3 overs. Collingwood is a decent bowler, not playing Saturday of course, but then one of your other bowlers has an off day and your plan B is already committed to 10 overs. You play that gamble, as England did with Larkins, Gooch and Boycott in a World Cup final, and you really need the extra batsman/batting to make a difference - England's didn't. Wright looked out of his depth, can just about bat and just about bowl but not yet ODI quality, Bopara still looks a little short and Ambrose managed 10 runs in five knocks which is just poor. Add to that Pietersen scoring just 23 in his last four innings and England's top order was lacking in runs.

Statistical Lowlights : England vs New Zealand 2008

Ambrose, Wright & Bopara : 15 inns, 228 runs @ 15.20

Anderson & Sidebottom : 69 overs, 7 wkts @ 51.00 (ER 5.17, SR 59.14)

Wright, Shah & Bopara : 28 overs, 3 wkts @ 53.33 (ER 5.71, SR 56.00)


England's batting may have come up short, but then so did their bowling. Two key bowlers taking just 7 expensive wickets between them, and neither they nor the bit-part bowlers had a decent ER. And what did Mascarenhas and Tremlett do wrong? Tremlett bowled well and never played again as Sidebottom came back, Mascarenhas batted ok but only got one over and England lost yet another series to New Zealand 3-1.

Tremlett : 10 overs, 1 wkt @ 24.00 (SR 60.00, ER 2.40)
Sidebottom : 28 overs, 2 wkts @ 75.00 (SR 84.00, ER 5.36)

OOoooooops. The pick n mix selection policy of England has to stop, in the old days the ODI side was generally the Test side plus a REAL specialist like Fairbrother. These days any kid who whacks a quick hundred or double gets into the side as an all-rounder. England boast SIX wicket-keepers in two years and not a lot of wins, at the moment England's 20% win percentage in 2008 is their third lowest ever for a calendar year and two lower comprised just three ODIs and one ODI (all lost)

1971 : Won 0.00% (P1 W0 L1)
1976 : Won 0.00% (P3 W0 L3)
1990 : Won 18.75% (P16 W3 L11)
2004 : Won 20.00% (P10 W2 L6)
2006 : Won 23.81% (P21 W5 L14)

If that were extended to the top 20 there would be ELEVEN years (55%) since 1992, the last time England reached the World Cup final and the last time England were a really good ODI side. I'm sure you'd never get that impression from a selector, the chairman or the captain. We're on the cusp of greatness................................

 

[Will_NA]

i answered it, but the posts were deleted, including ur question. .give me the link to the post. .i'll answer again

You said England should 'compensate' for what they did so my question was what made that incident so much worse than Dravid's ball-tampering (which, while unsporting was also illegal), Hansie Cronje, Herschelle Gibbs and Nicky Boje's match-fixing (also illegal by the way) and Brendon McCullum's Murali run-out?

Plus, how did they 'compensate'?

 

[Arunava]

I don't know about Dravid's ball tampering. .give a link about that. About Hansie, and Co. .I was or am no one to decide how one will compensate. .but they did pay and some still paying for some wrong doing..not that incident exactly ..but they must have paid for something like that.

about Murli, that was absolutely legal, and it was Murli's fault. if one wud ask him today , he would agree.

Anyway one cannot go on comparing past incident and try to make the current incident look like it was OK. it wasn't ok. Every incident is different and it was not at all in the spirit of the game. ..when Collingwood had all the time to think it..saying sorry later was no excuse. .It could have been called dead ball. .but he didn't - he continued and thought like this is the only way to win. The Mentality was so bad and weak. .though they got what they deserved. But I believe there is much more to pay. .It is just my opinion.

 

[Will_NA]

I don't know about Dravid's ball tampering. .give a link about that.

Here

About Hansie, and Co. .I was or am no one to decide how one will compensate. .but they did pay and some still paying for some wrong doing..not that incident exactly ..but they must have paid for something like that.

You've just worked around the question witout actually answering it. 'but they must have paid for something like that.' I didn't ask whether or not they paid, I inquired as to how I paid, about which you obviously can't answer.

about Murli, that was absolutely legal, and it was Murli's fault. if one wud ask him today , he would agree.

What Collingwood did was perfectly legal. Have you not been listening.

Anyway one cannot go on comparing past incident and try to make the current incident look like it was OK. it wasn't ok.

No, it wasn't OK. But you didn't seem to take these events into consideration during your damning judgement of England. Also, Collingwod apologised straight away and admitted he was wrong, did Dravid or McCullum or Gibbs?

 

[irottev]

But running someone out for being careless and not paying attention to the game isn't against the spirit of cricket. Running out a player who's just gone down in a mid pitch collision is.