New Zealand tour of England - May/June 2015

[richowebbo]

I think the lack of any proper alternatives at the moment to Ballance or Bell is a real hindrance. I do think England should stick by Ballance, like they did with Bell 10 years ago. However Bell is a different proposition. His last 10 tests or so he's been poor. Experience shouldn't be the only thing keeping him in the team. However right now it is.

James Taylor is definitely a proper alternative to either.

 

[Deleted member 149013]

@dp458 @cooks1st100 @richowebbo

I suppose I would putt Vince in front of Roy with the idea that Vince has more potential as a test batsman regardless of the current county season. Roy like Robson in many ways both of them looked floored at the higher level. So I would keep Roy in mind for ODI’s with Billings.

Taylor is a mystery and I think if it was any other cricket nation he would have been playing tests a lot longer by now. Bell yes has experience but you wouldn’t think it after the way he has played recently.

The spin options don’t look that good and I suppose Tredwell would top the list just with experience and Borthwick or Patel and even Rashid coming in at a possible second. Maybe Borthwick as he would offer something with the bat. Could see the Aussies take Tredwell apart so he would need to bowl the best he ever has.

I can’t see England dropping Broad there are questions about his batting and why he looks so scared at the crease he has protection so a bit confused to why this is. If it’s because he was hit in the face last year then he can’t show fear its inviting the short ball.

This bowling at the lower order with the short balls and coming around the wicket has to stop its predictable and the Aussies will score runs from that all day I don’t think it’s a challenge considering the nature of the pitches they have at home.

 

[blockerdave]

Perhaps they may try Bairstow? He's done OK when thrown in before, and though seemingly being seen as 2nd keeper he has played previously purely as a batsman. They tend to prefer guys in and around the squad...

Providing he looks like doing better in getting forward during the county games, I'd give Ballance a game or two more at 3, drop Bell and move Root to 4, and try Taylor at 5.

If Ballance isn't cutting it I would look at someone like Hales at 3 to give us a more attacking option up the order.

 

[richowebbo]

@dp458 @cooks1st100 @richowebbo

I suppose I would putt Vince in front of Roy with the idea that Vince has more potential as a test batsman regardless of the current county season. Roy like Robson in many ways both of them looked floored at the higher level. So I would keep Roy in mind for ODI’s with Billings.

Taylor is a mystery and I think if it was any other cricket nation he would have been playing tests a lot longer by now. Bell yes has experience but you wouldn’t think it after the way he has played recently.

The spin options don’t look that good and I suppose Tredwell would top the list just with experience and Borthwick or Patel and even Rashid coming in at a possible second. Maybe Borthwick as he would offer something with the bat. Could see the Aussies take Tredwell apart so he would need to bowl the best he ever has.

I can’t see England dropping Broad there are questions about his batting and why he looks so scared at the crease he has protection so a bit confused to why this is. If it’s because he was hit in the face last year then he can’t show fear its inviting the short ball.

This bowling at the lower order with the short balls and coming around the wicket has to stop its predictable and the Aussies will score runs from that all day I don’t think it’s a challenge considering the nature of the pitches they have at home.

I've never seen Vince or Roy bat, so can't pass comment, but I've heard more good things about Roy than Vince.

I totally agree with you about Taylor. Its mental that he hasn't been playing for years. He's made loads of runs for Notts and the Lions and was even Captain of the one day side.

As Dave said below, Bairstow is a definite option (good shout my man!). Always makes runs for Yorkshire and I enjoy watching him bat. I think he's as good of a Wicket Keeper as Butler, maybe not as agile, but he could be in on batting alone. Also fairly aggressive in the middle order.

They won't drop Broad, no, but they should in my humble opinion. I seem to remember he actually came out and said he was scared of the short ball before the World Cup! Silly thing to do.

I don't mind so much the coming round the wicket, if the ball is pitched up. Its smetimes good to change the angle. But the short stuff is silly, as you rightly say.

I don't think I've ever agreed with so many points in a post before!

 

[_Sam_]

I've never seen Vince or Roy bat, so can't pass comment, but I've heard more good things about Roy than Vince.

I totally agree with you about Taylor. Its mental that he hasn't been playing for years. He's made loads of runs for Notts and the Lions and was even Captain of the one day side.

As Dave said below, Bairstow is a definite option (good shout my man!). Always makes runs for Yorkshire and I enjoy watching him bat. I think he's as good of a Wicket Keeper as Butler, maybe not as agile, but he could be in on batting alone. Also fairly aggressive in the middle order.

They won't drop Broad, no, but they should in my humble opinion. I seem to remember he actually came out and said he was scared of the short ball before the World Cup! Silly thing to do.

I don't mind so much the coming round the wicket, if the ball is pitched up. Its smetimes good to change the angle. But the short stuff is silly, as you rightly say.

I don't think I've ever agreed with so many points in a post before!

Vince will be on TV tonight along with Finn and Morgan who are the players of interest if you've got sky, or access to a stream.

 

[War]

Two interesting stats came out of test match for me.

Before KP was dropped Bell's test average was 45.41. Since KP dropped Bell averages 31.60

Very good example that KP actually added a lot to team in terms of how others performed around him. Thus the KP saga will continue to haunt England into the Ashes.

Also i'm an early advocate of England not playing Moeen in Ashes & simply picking 4-quicks. I highly doubt whatever specific red-ball bowling he will do in county cricket while he misses ODI series - will help him much vs Australia.

When will the ICC or Big three learn that 2 test series need to stop also. NZ would have easily won this IMO if we had third test, they have officially shaken of a bit of rust that some players had after IPL & ENG's XI problem were becoming more evident.

And an early sign that the ICC big three is failing to make a difference over basic things, NZ who are probably building their greatest team in history, will only play two tests on their next scheduled tour to England in 2018

 

[richowebbo]

Didn't watch the match but none of the three Sam mentioned did great!

 

[richowebbo]

Two interesting stats came out of test match for me.

Before KP was dropped Bell's test average was 45.41. Since KP dropped Bell averages 31.60

Very good example that KP actually added a lot to team in terms of how others performed around him. Thus the KP saga will continue to haunt England into the Ashes.

Also i'm an early advocate of England not playing Moeen in Ashes & simply picking 4-quicks. I highly doubt whatever specific red-ball bowling he will do in county cricket while he misses ODI series - will help him much vs Australia.

When will the ICC or Big three learn that 2 test series need to stop also. NZ would have easily won this IMO if we had third test, they have officially shaken of a bit of rust that some players had after IPL & ENG's XI problem were becoming more evident.

And an early sign that the ICC big three is failing to make a difference over basic things, NZ who are probably building their greatest team in history, will only play two tests on their next scheduled tour to England in 2018

I expect that may be increased to 3 or 4 Test matches after the outcry over the 2 match Test Series.

It could quite simply be that Bell has lost form, nothing to do with KP at all, but I certainly think Bell was better when he was at 5. In my opinion, I think having a destructive player at 4 is good, and as such I'd like to see Hales playing at 4.

I said the same thing about 4 quicks a few days ago, so I'm totally on board with you on that point! Moeen and Root do the same job in terms of bowling, and I think you only need one person to do that job. We don't produce spin friendly pitches here in England. The only thing is, it would be good to get a front line spinner in and let him get some Test Experience for when we tour the more spin friendly places.

 

[T.J.Hooker]

NZ would have easily won this IMO if we had third test, they have officially shaken of a bit of rust that some players had after IPL & ENG's XI problem were becoming more evident.

I don't know if they'd have done it easily, but I think they would have been likely winners.

They were on top until day 4 in the first test, and would likely at least have drawn if Stokes had holed out early. Even as it was they could have held on but for some uncharacteristic unforced errors.

 

[richowebbo]

I don't know if they'd have done it easily, but I think they would have been likely winners.

They were on top until day 4 in the first test, and would likely at least have drawn if Stokes had holed out early. Even as it was they could have held on but for some uncharacteristic unforced errors.

If England hadn't dropped so many catches, NZ wouldn't have scored so many runs. If we had bowled normally to the tail-enders rather than stupid bouncers, NZ wouldn't have made so many runs! This is what Test cricket is all about. Opportunities taken and opportunities not taken. I think the teams were pretty evenly matched and it could have gone either way. I wouldn't have put NZ as likely winners.

 

[T.J.Hooker]

If England hadn't dropped so many catches, NZ wouldn't have scored so many runs. If we had bowled normally to the tail-enders rather than stupid bouncers, NZ wouldn't have made so many runs! This is what Test cricket is all about. Opportunities taken and opportunities not taken. I think the teams were pretty evenly matched and it could have gone either way. I wouldn't have put NZ as likely winners.

But the scenarios you're outlining are further outside the norms than the scenarios I outlined. If both Eng and NZ have an average day at the office, you'd expect the odds on Eng repeating their mistakes to be shorter.

Ok, England were especially bad with the dropped catches but they've got some technical issues in the slips without Jordan so it's not entirely atypical. Likewise they've been prone to bowling to crap plans that don't fit the match situation, especially involving bowling too short, because they've been poorly managed and led for ages. When plan A fails for England and the oppo get on top, they struggle to come up with a plan B that isn't shit.

On the other hand, Stokes will not often make 85 ball hundreds at exactly the right time to push England into a potentially winning position, and the NZ batting line up will not often make so many unforced errors in the 4th innings.

 

[richowebbo]

But the scenarios you're outlining are further outside the norms than the scenarios I outlined. If both Eng and NZ have an average day at the office, you'd expect the odds on Eng repeating their mistakes to be shorter.

Ok, England were especially bad with the dropped catches but they've got some technical issues in the slips without Jordan so it's not entirely atypical. Likewise they've been prone to bowling to crap plans that don't fit the match situation, especially involving bowling too short, because they've been poorly managed and led for ages. When plan A fails for England and the oppo get on top, they struggle to come up with a plan B that isn't shit.

On the other hand, Stokes will not often make 85 ball hundreds at exactly the right time to push England into a potentially winning position, and the NZ batting line up will not often make so many unforced errors in the 4th innings.

I wouldn't say they are any more or less outside the norms. I was trying to make the point that its silly to say "if that had happened then the result would have been different" because, obviously it would have been! Yes Stokes won't always make an 85 ball hundred, but you are not giving the England bowlers credit for NZ's 4th innings at Lords, as they built pressure for those "unforced errors". It's like when people say "Without Cook's runs in Australia in 2010/11, we wouldn't have regained the Ashes". Well the point of having someone in your team who can get runs, is to get runs so its a moot point!

Both sides played good and bad cricket, and as such, I believe they were evenly matched. I don't think that NZ are that good that they would have been favourites for an extra match played away from home. I think it would have been an even game, with England improving the mistakes they made from the 2nd Test, just as NZ improved the mistakes they made from the 1st Test.

I personally tend to make predictions based on the players ability, and I think Man for Man, England and NZ are a very similar outfit.

EDIT - Sorry if this sounds argumentative, it wasn't meant that way! Its just my opinion, which obviously differs from yours.

 

[_Sam_]

Mascarenhas has evidently passed his 'trial' and is now permanent New Zealand bowling coach.

 

[Pinch hitter]

It will be interesting to see how England will play in ODI series after bad World Cup... New Zealand are playing really well under McCallum captaincy...

 

[Aislabie]

James Taylor has been dropped; what a pisstake.