New Zealand tour of Sri Lanka, 2009

[Howsie]

Whenever I've seen him he's been hit and miss. Can be excellent one day, producing deliveries like the one he got Alistair Cook with in NZ, but can then look incredibly average the next day. Also, is it no coincidence that his only good year, came when the series he played in were against Bangladesh, England, Bangladesh, Australia and West Indies. He still performed decently against Australia, but his average was massively boosted by averaging 16 and 11 against Bangladesh. Take those wickets against Bangladesh off his record, and his average jumps to above 40, that's Stuart Broad-esque Test bowling, guessing you don't rate O'Brien at all either? Tuffey and Bond would be FAR better options.

Yea I do rate O'Brien, because I've actually seen him trouble batsmen for a period of time, unlike Broad.

Let's see:

NZ in England. 7 at 23.12
NZ in Australia 7 at 30
WI in NZ. 8 at 26
Ind in NZ. 9 at 50

Look's pretty good to me. One badish series against India on flat tracks, but it looks rather consistant to me. O'Brien before today would be rated higher then Martin, so if Tuffey had of played Martin would of been given the flick. Bond wasn't fit btw.

 

[Ari]

If we are still having problems getting wickets by the series end I reckon Martin and O'Brien will end up fighting for one spot. It is going to be a question of when not if Bond and Tuffey are selected again.

Oram sending down 120k pies certainly isn't doing his cause any good, likewise Patel didn't do much today either.

 

[King Pietersen]

You consider averaging 50 only badish? Ok, lets check out Broad's run of actual series:

England in New Zealand: 8 wickets at 31
England in West Indies: 12 wickets at 30 (on some of the flattest decks I've seen)
West Indies in England: 8 wickets at 25
Australia in England: 12 wickets at 36
South Africa in England: 8 wickets at 49- but he only bowled badly at Leeds. Was excellent at The Oval, and Lords was incredibly flat but got 2 good wickets in the 1st innings
New Zealand in England: 7 wickets at 43. His worst proper series, but still better than O'Brien against India in home conditions

The only series' missing from that is the 1 match in India, which was on a very flat deck and ended as a draw, and his debut Test against Sri Lanka which again was a very flat pitch, but he did bowl badly and was too raw.

I'd say Broad's troubled batsmen far more consistently, and in series where he's played more than 1 game, has come away with solid figures. Probably why his average is 3 runs lower than O'Brien's (when the wickets against Bangladesh are taken out). I rate Broad higher.

Anyway, Sri Lanka in a very strong position. If Jayawardene and Samaraweera put on a few more in the 1st session tommorow they could take the game away from NZ. They're looking good, can't see them losing the game from here.

 

[nz0003]

You consider averaging 50 only badish? Ok, lets check out Broad's run of actual series:

England in New Zealand: 8 wickets at 31
England in West Indies: 12 wickets at 30 (on some of the flattest decks I've seen)
West Indies in England: 8 wickets at 25
Australia in England: 12 wickets at 36
South Africa in England: 8 wickets at 49- but he only bowled badly at Leeds. Was excellent at The Oval, and Lords was incredibly flat but got 2 good wickets in the 1st innings
New Zealand in England: 7 wickets at 43. His worst proper series, but still better than O'Brien against India in home conditions

The only series' missing from that is the 1 match in India, which was on a very flat deck and ended as a draw, and his debut Test against Sri Lanka which again was a very flat pitch, but he did bowl badly and was too raw.

I'd say Broad's troubled batsmen far more consistently, and in series where he's played more than 1 game, has come away with solid figures. Probably why his average is 3 runs lower than O'Brien's (when the wickets against Bangladesh are taken out). I rate Broad higher.

Anyway, Sri Lanka in a very strong position. If Jayawardene and Samaraweera put on a few more in the 1st session tommorow they could take the game away from NZ. They're looking good, can't see them losing the game from here.

That's just hypocritical, saying "50 is worse than badish and you should have a look at Broads stats". O'Brien bowled pretty good in the India series, picked up the odd important wicket and averaged 50 so therefore his one bad series was just as bad as Broads, but a difference is O'Brien has been good in more than one series.

 

[Howsie]

You consider averaging 50 only badish? Ok, lets check out Broad's run of actual series:

England in New Zealand: 8 wickets at 31
England in West Indies: 12 wickets at 30 (on some of the flattest decks I've seen)
West Indies in England: 8 wickets at 25
Australia in England: 12 wickets at 36
South Africa in England: 8 wickets at 49- but he only bowled badly at Leeds. Was excellent at The Oval, and Lords was incredibly flat but got 2 good wickets in the 1st innings
New Zealand in England: 7 wickets at 43. His worst proper series, but still better than O'Brien against India in home conditions

The only series' missing from that is the 1 match in India, which was on a very flat deck and ended as a draw, and his debut Test against Sri Lanka which again was a very flat pitch, but he did bowl badly and was too raw.

I'd say Broad's troubled batsmen far more consistently, and in series where he's played more than 1 game, has come away with solid figures. Probably why his average is 3 runs lower than O'Brien's (when the wickets against Bangladesh are taken out). I rate Broad higher.

Yea except India's batting is about 10x better then New Zealand's. O'Brien's had one bad series, Broad on the other hand has had three that your've mentioned plus that Indian match (Why exclude it?). Too say Broad's been more consistant then O'Brien is laughable really.

 

[Ari]

Can't we just agree that they are both rubbish at the moment?

 

[Howsie]

Can't we just agree that they are both rubbish at the moment?

We could, but Broad's six wickets against Australia might prove to differ. No matter how jammy they were.

 

[Ari]

We could, but Broad's six wickets against Australia might prove to differ. No matter how jammy they were.

Well someone had to take the wickets and the rest of the English attack were fairly rubbish that game guess he lucked out?

 

[nikhil_99]

293/3 is quite a decent score,scroing 300 in a day is a decent score, the captain Jayawardene got his 26th 100 he is batting good along with Samaraweera who is also close to his 100,SL is in strong position here,they would definately like to get a score around 450 lets see

 

[Raj_Aryan]

Certainly 450 is possible from here,they have plenty of time in their hands...

 

[McLOVIN]

i need to know whats the % of Ross making a 100 in this Test.

i dropped Samaraweera from him in FC

 

[leftarmlegspin]

Sri Lanka can still easily mess this first innings up. The batting is not very deep. Prasanna Jaywardene, as good a WK as he is, is not a great batsman at all. Mathews is OK, but still has a lot to learn and is in essence unproven still at Test level.

 

[irottev]

Martin's very hit and miss, Vettori's got the consistently of line and length, and keeps the runs down, but he doesn't get enough wickets. They need Bond back.

Martin is actually more consistent than you think. The problem is there's no real support. I explained about Vettori in the previous page. We continually decide to bowl first. I guarentee no other side has bowled first more than us and he ends up bowling a heap of overs when there's nothing in the pitch for him. He rarely gets to bowl 4th innings.

Fact is, we picked a 2 seamer attack and bowled first? I can't understand that logic. Oram isn't 3rd seamer, he's a 4th seamer. We shouldn't have picked Patel if we wanted to bowl first but since we did pick him he should have batted. I'm still really worked up on the toss - we do it too often. Look at Australia. They'll bat first 95% of the time. No exaggeration. They very rarely bowl first. We can't keep protecting the top order. They just have to guts it out. Plus the openers suck anyway, we're used to them getting out early. May as well put them out there to survive half an hour.

Oh and now we have to face Murili and Mendis last on the pitch.

Such a stupid call.

And

We could, but Broad's six wickets against Australia might prove to differ. No matter how jammy they were.

That was the worst six-for i've ever seen. Honestly. Half his wickets were tailenders. 1 was a decent ball I think and the rest were batters holing out going for quick runs. But lets move the broad discussion elsewhere. We know KP fantasizes about his girly looks and thinks he's the dogs bollocks.

And O'Brien is crap too. He only does well when the ball seams. Plus he gets caned in T20/ODI games which is always a bad sign.

 

[charith]

NZ in for a tough time here. Even if SL get bowled out for 350 the least saying NZ suddenly has an awesome morning session, its still runs on the board and I dont see the NZ batters being able to keep out the SL attack. It'll be SL vs the rain.

I dont think people realise how good Dilshan's innings actually was. Pretty much all his strokes were good shots a combination of bad bowling and just great batting. At 16\2 it was a bad situation. If he poked and prodded and not played the way he's used to we could've easily been 40\4. It was a brilliant counterattack which put all the pressure back on NZ. Won the toss and bowled first and had a SWEEPER on the boundary in the 7th over!!! unheard of. Going to see more of this counterattacking cricket i reckon with sangakkara at the helm.

hope the weather stays away.

 

[irottev]

I dont think people realise how good Dilshan's innings actually was. Pretty much all his strokes were good shots a combination of bad bowling and just great batting.

He was loose early on. I don't consider it a good innings. For 80% of it it was, but still, on another day he could have been gone very early on. If he'd have edged one of those early cocky drives he'd played straight after SL were 2 down he'd be being ridiculed right now instead. It's a very fine line. It's all very well playing aggressive, but you don't get any extra points for it. He needed to tone it down and play more sensibly. He ruined a chance to get a hundred with the poor shot he played.

We have to hope the weather forecast helps us out now. Plus we need quick wickets tomorrow. Tomorrow they reckon will be the best day for batting, and looks like we won't get much batting done.