MasterBlaster76
ICC Chairman
Wow - well done England on pulling that one out of the fire! We really should've lost that; so we start the 2nd Test level. Gotta play much better than that, ladies. 
New Zealand in England May - June 2013
- Thread starter IanG
- Start date
If you weren't going to lose either, why not declare? England would have batted to the end anyway, and you can't say for sure what might have happened had you not batted on. If England batted days 4 and 5 then you shrug your shoulders and say, "there was nothing more we could do". That isn't true here, 10 overs wasted for 58 runs when runs were not likely to be the issue.
It gave England less time to "survive", New Zealand less time to bowl England out and used up time. No matter which way you dress it up, you couldn't win that game unless you bowled England out and you weren't going to do that by batting......................
Not really a surprise it peetered out into a draw, kiwis more like chickens when it came to declaring. Not being able to get Finn out may well set the tone for the rest of the series, first ever first class fifty says it all, hell it's usually England that give away embarrassing records to tailenders
The rest of the order was there for the taking, Compton and Cook had done most of the damage the previous bit day and the rest just clung on for dear life. I don't think the kiwis could have batted any quicker, they might have declared overnight though. You just never know what might happen with as late as possible an announcement of a declaration, they say you should do what the opposition least wants you to do and I'm certain Cook et al were happy being out in the field once the kiwis were 150+ in front. Four day match, five day mentality.
Bring on tiers, the sooner sides who have got no balls are playing each other in a lower tier the better. They might not have won, but they seemed afraid to give it a real go.
I completely disagree with pretty much all of that. To win the match we were always going to need more than the 235 run overnight lead, so it just made complete sense to go out and have a quick slog in the morning. What do you expect when it's 2 vs 8, tbh it just sounds like you've got a massive chip on your shoulder against NZ.
If you watched any of it you'd actually realise that NZ bowled pretty well in the second innings. The bowlers all kept at their task, and at the end of the day other than a dropped catch and a missed run out we just weren't good enough on that pitch to get through the English team.
puddleduck
Chairman of Selectors
He really will be. I think on a first day pitch like this a top three of Cook, Compton and Trott has got to be making at least 200 between them to set the team up to put England in a winnable position with poor weather due days 4/5.
I'm shocked
It made no sense to have a quick slog when the kiwis were short in terms of WICKETS not runs
You need to score more runs than the opposition to win, but you also can't win if you don't bowl the opposition out twice no matter how many runs you've scored 
Even if the kiwis left themselves 150 to chase in 30 overs it would have been in their hands, England were only intent on drawing the match and the number of (extra) runs the kiwis scored mattered to neither sideI'd suggest you're the one with a massive chip on your shoulder as you're still debating a point you're missing, but carry on believing you're right even though you're not. The kiwis wouldn't have known how many runs or how quickly they'd have scored them, they might have spent 15 overs adding 30 runs although by then even the stupidest kiwi, yourselve included, would have realised they were wasting time and declared. Most of your flawed argument is based on hindsight, my argument is entirely based on the right thing to do no matter who the two sides are
There's one thing England struggled with, and still do sometimes, and that is pushing for victory. Too often our captain has even literally wasted time to achieve some kind of "magic formula" of setting a target of four runs an over or X runs per session. Cost us against India, has cost us on other occaisions. You can do it when time is on your side with decent weather forecast.
My entire point was they should have declared overnight, I didn't say that would have definitely won them the match but it was a poor decision when time was of the essence. You're even arguing where we're not actually disagreeing, I doubt the kiwis would have won it BUT they didn't do everything they could and should have to win it re the declaration.
Have some salt and vinegar on your chips, I'll be just as shocked if you don't reply (but you know you will
as do I, I could easily ignore it if there was more interest in a series with England playing minnows)----------
I think the Bradman comparison was very poorly advised in many ways, especially in timing.
Anyway we've put the series back into perspective, cricket's second tier side on the ropes and England may well be on their way to wrapping up a Test win.
England just need to make the right decisions in terms of acceleration, declaration and annihilation
cue some kiwi to "completely disagree" , it's funny how often fans of weak sides always think they know everything, be it football, cricket, anything.
Last edited:
Have some salt and vinegar on your chips, I'll be just as shocked if you don't reply (but you know you will
Lets just agree to disagree, because imo they got it right, and at the end of the day they still had like 150ish overs to take 10 wickets and we just weren't good enough. Yes I can see your point, but those 60 runs in eight overs allowed us to be a lot more aggressive, but we just couldn't create enough chances to make it count.
Anyway we've put the series back into perspective, cricket's second tier side on the ropes and England may well be on their way to wrapping up a Test win.
England just need to make the right decisions in terms of acceleration, declaration and annihilation
Tbh it just shows the state of international cricket when the 8th ranked team is getting called a minnow and a second tier side. It's the same with every team other than South Africa and England, so I'm not going to "completely disagree" with you there. I guess your last point is also true with rugby, where for the last ten years we've been able to look down on all of the other countries who think they know how to play the game.
I'm with Callum on this. NZ scored fast enough to justify the declaration but with the pitch being a featherbed an extra session to bowl England out would have made little difference (especially as England's lead would then have been bigger too).
We scored 58 runs in 8.4 overs, so we batted for under 1/3 of the session since England still batted for 22 overs before lunch.
StinkyBoHoon
National Board President
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
surely mccullum comparing cook to bradman was genius and showed that he gets the english psyche. don't think any other nation would quickly jump on their own players for being considered too good 
Last edited:
StinkyBoHoon
National Board President
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
personally I still think it should be bell next for the chop, but I'd understand if they wanted to wait a bit to see if root was a genuine longterm option before they mess about having to bring other debutants in.
in the first test root at least got a good ball in the 1st innings, and he was only out for a duck because guess who ran him out.
----------
actually that's probably nonsense, he's alright at home and won't have to face any quality spin during the ashes so it would be silly dropping him.
in the first test root at least got a good ball in the 1st innings, and he was only out for a duck because guess who ran him out.
----------
actually that's probably nonsense, he's alright at home and won't have to face any quality spin during the ashes so it would be silly dropping him.
D
Dutch
Guest
Best thing is for England to lose the last three wickets rather quickly me thinks........
----------
How about Finn for a second fifty...
----------
Oh here we go, time to move on a bit thinks Matt.....
----------
How about Finn for a second fifty...
----------
Oh here we go, time to move on a bit thinks Matt.....
Worked out well, got up to around 450 then took three kiwi wickets. Morning session tomorrow is crucial, if the kiwis can make it through losing 0-1 wickets only then this may yet turn into a contest, an early wicket or two and they're up against it.
England only need a bog standard 2-3 wickets in that session and through the innings, those three wickets have put them right in box seat. England may face a decision whether or not to enforce the follow on, like the kiwi decision to declare overnight which they should have made, England's should be made for them. If they can win batting only once then enforce the follow on, this is unlikely unless the kiwis are bowled out for around 150. Otherwise bat again, there are only two scenarios you enforce the follow on - lack of time to bat again, or not needing to bat again.
But we're not there yet, it's just a real possibility at this stage. Tomorrow will determine if the kiwis can make a fight of this series or if their 'moment' has passed already
England only need a bog standard 2-3 wickets in that session and through the innings, those three wickets have put them right in box seat. England may face a decision whether or not to enforce the follow on, like the kiwi decision to declare overnight which they should have made, England's should be made for them. If they can win batting only once then enforce the follow on, this is unlikely unless the kiwis are bowled out for around 150. Otherwise bat again, there are only two scenarios you enforce the follow on - lack of time to bat again, or not needing to bat again.
But we're not there yet, it's just a real possibility at this stage. Tomorrow will determine if the kiwis can make a fight of this series or if their 'moment' has passed already
Similar threads
