Why New Zealand is not No.1 team even though they have great bowlers like Vettori, Shane Bond?

[sifter132]

2. You can hardly call Vettori a "great" bowler with a SR of 76.7

Well to be fair, he's also called Hauritz, Bollinger and Siddle great bowlers. Hauritz will never be great. Bollinger and Siddle probably won't either, but I guess they've got a little more potential.


To me NZs problem has always been batting. They've had some great stroke players. Martin Crowe, Nathan Astle, Craig McMillan, Ross Taylor, Oram, McCullum and now Ryder. But they've rarely had guys who can occupy the crease at the same time. Sure there's been your Andrew Jones or Mark Richardson even Stephen Fleming over the years. But there hasn't been enough of them to pair with the more natural scorers. They needed a couple of Steve Waughs in the lineup.

When Vettori is your best crease occupier there is a big problem.

 

[OKP]

The selectors take way to long to change players. Jamie How was in there for 10 tests too many after failing everytime, VS Pakistan they made 1 change to a team that needed at least 3 or 4, and they bring in players when they are old.. the two new guys are 29 and 31, they take to long to notice potential. Our real problem though is that every NZ quick bowler is a MF or FM... cept for Bond and Hadlee and Butler once upon a time and we seem content with guys that can't roll through teams because we don't have any.

 

[Ari]

Lack of depth has always been the main problem as has already been said Rugby is by far the main sport in NZ so most natural sporting talent ends up going there. On top of that things like the IPL/ICL are causing some of our better players to call time on their careers far to early.

McMillan is 33 and has been gone for about 3 years now, Fleming and Astle went to early (although now they would probably be coming to the end of their careers anyway) Oram and Styris have quit test cricket. We have lost a few years of cricket from Bond, Tuffey, Vincent etc because of the ICL the list just goes on and on.

We do have some exciting new talent but they are young and are having to basicly learn the game at test level rather than first class level which is never ideal but with all the disruptions to the team over the years we don't have a choice. We have young batsman and old bowlers as far as test cricket goes that is probably the wrong way around to have it.

Finally our selectors certainly don't help the situation (common problem for many countries though ) there have been many questionable decisions recently.

 

[CG123]

It really comes down to our batting, and our lack of depth.
Our bowling if all fully fit would be one of the top attacks in the world, especially in one-day cricket.

We have always struggled for test match openers. Over the past 10 years, the only one with any real success has been Richardson. Players like Papps, Cumming, Bell, Fulton, Sinclair, Jones, (not all openers) have got great FC records, but can not take that into the international arena.

Teams like Aus, Ind, Eng, SA all have a lot stronger domestic competitions than us. And therefore it's a much bigger step up, e.g. often our players score a domestic 200 one week, and then are selected for the BlackCaps and get two fails the next week.

Or middle order is not that weak. Taylor, Ryder, Vettori, and McCullum, are all good batsman, but in all of their cases lack consistency at times. Taylor is really coming along in the test match arena, and that was shown in the Pak series, where he made a few 90's.

Again our team is injured plagued. Bond and Oram are both world class players, but are hardly fully fit to showcase their talent. To a lesser extend we currently we have four first team one-day players out of the Bng series, Bond, Elliot, Mills, and Ryder. The likes of Franklin and Vettori have also had injury troubles.

In terms of out test match bowling now that Bond and O'Brien are gone, it really doesn't look like it'll be able to cause much damage to Ponting, Clarke and Hussey. Southee has been in and out of the side over the last 12 months, Tuffey is only bowling 130's, but on his day is a good bowler, Chris Martin our leading pace bowling probably only has another year left in him.

Overall we are never going to be a number one or two test side in the world, just down not having enough talent, we do have the potential to move up into about 4th/5th spot though, and over the next few years we'll see if we can push ahead of the likes of SL etc.

In one dayers I would currently rate us third in the world behind Aus and SA. We do have a much better batting line-up suited to that format of the game, and a bowling attack that as I said before may be the best one-day attack in the world.

 

[drainpipe32]

Your comparison of batsmen is ridiculous

It's more got to do with experience, and creating that 'winning feeling'. Momentums a powerful thing.

Injuries pretty horrible too. But NZ have done exceptionally well for a population of less than Victoria.

Although, they might lose to Victoria or NSW

 

[sifter132]

The selectors take way to long to change players. Jamie How was in there for 10 tests too many after failing everytime, VS Pakistan they made 1 change to a team that needed at least 3 or 4, and they bring in players when they are old.. the two new guys are 29 and 31, they take to long to notice potential. Our real problem though is that every NZ quick bowler is a MF or FM... cept for Bond and Hadlee and Butler once upon a time and we seem content with guys that can't roll through teams because we don't have any.

What you've described is the Australian selection model, pick guys late and give them every chance to succeed. Of course, Australia has a bit more depth and a better domestic comp, but I'd still prefer their method of selection over the Pakistani style - pick em young, and drop them after every mistake, except if they are Javed's nephew :laugh

 

[sami ullah khan]

They lack batting and bowling options. Bond and vettori alone can not carry the whole weight. They need a good bastman in middle order. A third seamer who can actually take wickets in the middle will also be very handy for them.

 

[nz0003]

They lack batting and bowling options. Bond and vettori alone can not carry the whole weight. They need a good bastman in middle order. A third seamer who can actually take wickets in the middle will also be very handy for them.

Stick to Pakistan cricket mate.

 

[sami ullah khan]

Stick to Pakistan cricket mate.

Why? Did I hurt your feelings or something.

 

[irottev]

Probably the fact that Pakistan has the same problems really at the moment.

 

[CG123]

They lack batting and bowling options. Bond and vettori alone can not carry the whole weight. They need a good bastman in middle order. A third seamer who can actually take wickets in the middle will also be very handy for them.

I'm not sure if you're talking about test or ODI's.
In both of them, the middle order isn't our problem.
In tests it's our top three batsman...
And in ODI's it's just our consistency.

Re third seamer in ODI's, have you heard of Kyle Mills, Daryl Tuffey, or Jacob Oram.

So our attack number one OD attack is:

Bond (retired from tests)
Mills (currently injured)
Tuffey
Oram (retired from tests)
Vettori

That would be one of the top one-day attacks in the world, but if you convert it to tests, Bond and Oram have retired, while Mills is in and out of it, and Vettori is not really a huge wicket taker.

 

[stereotype]

New Zealand used to have a glut of allrounders to make up for shallow depth in batting and bowling, guys like Astle, Cairns, McMillan, Styris, Harris etc etc there are many others.

Now without them the batting is very short, the Victorian Bushrangers have a better top 6 and the bowling is very good while the keeper is too inconsistent and lacks patience.

 

[nz0003]

Why? Did I hurt your feelings or something.

Is that a question or a statement? You were just wrong.

 

[Owzat]

The kiwis simply don't have enough strength in depth. Bond wasn't playing regularly and Vettori is good but nothing that special. They haven't really produced the players they had for a while. When they beat us in 1999 they had McMillan, Fleming, Cairns, Astle, Parore, Nash, Vettori and Twose who compensated for a relatively ordinary back up bowling cast. In that series Cairns (19), Nash (17) and Vettori (10) took 46 wickets between them in FOUR Tests. Fair enough England weren't great in that series, but the kiwis had a good team.

This kiwi side isn't a patch on that one, or past kiwi sides. Not enough top batsmen, a bit like Pakistan who they drew with quite recently

 

[irottev]

We woulda beaten them if the weather didn't save them. Keep underestimating Vettori. I love it when people do that. He's only the best spinner we've ever had. Nothing special indeed.