Today’s second one day international between New Zealand and Sri Lanka at Seddon Park ended in a comfortable win for Sri Lanka and nice centuries for McCullum and Dilshan.
But it also brought the curious sight of four run outs in New Zealand’s middle order. And I wonder if this betrays a little nervousness on the part of the Kiwis in the build up to the Cricket World Cup which begins next month. Continue reading
A few people out there seem to think the Black Caps have made a grave error in selecting Grant Elliott and Kyle Mills for their 2015 Cricket World Cup squad over James Neesham and Matt Henry.
I don’t think they could be any more wrong. Continue reading
A short but sweet rant for me today. I’m not sure if I even agree with it yet, I haven’t thought about it for long enough. But I’m going to get it out.
Brendon McCullum has just declared in the test match between New Zealand and Sri Lanka. New Zealand have a lead of 389 runs with 19 overs left on day four.
My question is, why bother? Continue reading
I’ve got a couple of ultimately unimportant points to make following the Boxing Day Test between New Zealand and Sri Lanka.
The first is in regards to Neil Wagner, who the commentators tell us time and again is a “real competitor” and works harder than any other bowler in the team. Continue reading
I’ve struggled to keep up with all the information and points of view floating around the media in regards to Ross Taylor being replaced as the captain of the New Zealand cricket team. Mainly due to the number of people expressing their views, the completely disorganised and contradictory methods in which information has been conveyed, and the fact I eventually got sick of watching the hole that was being dug continue to get deeper.
Initially I couldn’t really decide how I felt about Ross Taylor’s sacking as captain. He’s been criticised by some as supposedly being too laid back and failing to be vocal enough, then by others he’s been criticised as being overly harsh on others, supposedly getting very aggressive and shouting at various players. Taylor himself has referred to the latter criticisms as being laughable, which doesn’t surprise me – the way he’s come across has always given me the impression he’s a very mature and level-headed person. I honestly couldn’t blame him for being laid-back during matches either if those thoughts are true, New Zealand have struggled for so long and face so much criticism off the field that you can hardly blame him for trying to reduce the strain on the players where he can.
But having thought about it for a while, I can’t blame the coach. If he genuinely felt that replacing Taylor with McCullum was the best move for the team long-term, then it had to be made. It’s a decision that will have a major impact on his position, based on whether or not it proves to be successful. The coach was just doing his job in making the decision.
What I do have a problem with (and find somewhat ironic) was the way this decision was handled by those in charge. It’s extremely ironic to hear suggestions that Taylor’s poor man-management skills are the reason he’s been removed as captain when those in charge of the decision have exhibited terrible man-management skills themselves. Taylor’s even been given a formal apology for the way the situation has been handled – at the very least the process of explaining the decision and ensuring a smooth transition was terribly planned. Messages were not conveyed between parties effectively and led to both sides appearing in front of the media having interpreted various scenarious and discussions entirely differently. I think investigations need to be had – if you’re going to judge your captain on his man management abilities and sack him when these aren’t perceived as being up to scratch, then really, the same guidelines should apply to you. Instead of rooting out the problem, I feel like NZ Cricket are eager to get the issue over with as quickly as possible, temporarily papering over the cracks which will more than likely appear again in time.
I don’t blame Taylor, I don’t blame McCullum, I don’t blame Hesson (to an extent, though he must too shoulder some blame for the poor communication throughout the saga) – I blame those in control of the whole thing who did a completely and utterly terrible job. How they are all still in a job is beyond me, how can they command respect as experts on man-management after this?
It’s simply another PR disaster that leads us to once again say that for NZ Cricket of late, it’s been one step forward, two steps back. We’re a long way from seeing any light at the end of what is, has been, and will be a very long tunnel.
In some ways it is a relief that the cricket season is finally over here in NZ, as the Black Caps selections and performances never fail to throw up fuel for debate – so much so that now that it’s all finished I (and I’m sure many others) are relishing the opportunity for a bit of a breather!
The series against the South Africans was always going to be the highlight of the season, and even though the Kiwis struggled in all facets and were comprehensively beaten by a superior side, it was great to get a chance just to watch and admire one of the best seam attacks the world has ever seen in test matches.
But what exactly can the fans conclude from the series’ against Australia, Zimbabwe and South Africa – both positive and negative – and how bright does the future look?
Let’s start by looking at the positives:
In the limited overs formats, it looks like the Kiwis have finally settled on a top order going forward. Possibly. Maybe. Nicol looks like he’s one of the few batsmen who can handle the step up to international quality bowling (though the tests against South Africa suggest that’s likely only limited to international quality bowling when the ball is white) and an ODI average of over 48 is a promising start to his international career. Brendon McCullum has worked well batting at 3, and when fit, Ross Taylor is a shoe-in for the 4th spot in the order. What will be interesting is to see what happens when Jesse Ryder comes back into the side – Williamson has to bat somewhere in the top five if he is going to be selected as his skillset is easily more suited to the accumulation phase of the limited overs matches, which means if Ryder is going to play, he must be selected at 6 – as consistency of selection is a policy which the selectors have to look to employ if they wish to aid the development of this young side. Ryder is explosive, and one of the most naturally talented players in the game. Ideally in the limited overs formats he would go back up into the top order and McCullum would bat at 6, as when he did play in the role, he was one of the best finishers in world cricket. However it seems that whatever McCullum says goes, so Ryder will have to fit in at 6 if he is to play in the team.
The test match bowling stocks, in particular in the seam department, look very promising. Heck, there’s even some depth there. Depth?! In New Zealand?! Incredible. The question on everyone’s lips, which has been there for some time, is still “How much longer can Chris Martin go?” – however there are a number of options to choose from now, which will only expand when Neil Wagner becomes eligible for the side. Alongside Wagner and Martin, there’s Bracewell, Southee, Boult, Gillespie and Arnel – which can only be a good thing as the competition will spur each on to greater heights. The resurgence of Mark Gillespie was a real highlight, and a sign that all players are up for consideration regardless of their histories if they put the hard work in. And of course, the emergence of Doug Bracewell, seemingly out of nowhere, highlighted with his match winning effort with the ball in Hobart, was very exciting.
If anything, there’s more to be excited about in the test arena going forward than there is in the limited overs formats – when everyone’s available New Zealand have a better looking side on paper than they’ve had for some time. The ease with which South Africa took out this test series will likely mean that the rest of the world still regards New Zealand as being one of the weaker sides going around – but it’s worth bearing in mind that Brownlie, Ryder and Watling were all unable to play for one reason or another and Tim Southee will inevitably come back into the side when he sorts out a few technical issues with his bowling – he’s too good a player not to be.
Despite all this, however, there are, as ever, a few negatives that must be addressed over the winter as well.
The first, which became especially noticeable against the South Africans is how things must be approached in terms of spin bowling in future test matches. At home, the pitches suit the seamers – and rightfully so, as that is where New Zealand’s strength lies. Daniel Vettori cops undue criticism for inability to take wickets on these pitches – because that is not his role. It is the seamers who deserve criticism in these cases. Vettori’s role lies in consistency and tying up an end in conditions that do not suit spin bowling, allowing his seam bowling partner at the other end to bowl aggressively and try to profit off the pressure Vettori builds. He is the perfect choice for home tests where conditions suit seamers. Overseas however, where pitches are dusty and the ball is turning, the fact that his bowling style relies on varying his pace and consistency moreso than turning the ball, he will need the help of a second spinner if New Zealand are going to be successful. Tarun Nethula has been talked up, however this may just be more through hope than anything else. A good leg spinner can be devastating – there was some bloke called Warne a few years ago who was meant to be pretty good at it, for example. Nethula however, has not been devastating at domestic level. An average of just over 37 is not amazing. To be fair, he’s probably the best wicket taking spinner New Zealand have got, and deserves a shot – but I fear he has been overhyped somewhat just due to the fact he bowls leggies.
Secondly, an inability to keep concentration and build big partnerships. Story of the test season for the batsmen. How many starts did each of them get? Martin Guptill and Brendon McCullum in particular seem prone to throwing their wickets away cheaply after grafting hard for a few hours to get set and accustomed to the conditions. Each should be walking away from the home series with two or three centuries minimum across all formats. McCullum had one, Guptill had none. At the moment, I can’t see any of these batsmen (other than possibly Kane Williamson) putting on the sort of massive 300+ run partnership that is truly memorable. They just don’t seem to have the mental fortitude and patience to get things done. There are a variety of theories behind why that might be. The effect of Twenty20. The weakness of New Zealand’s domestic competition. Poor coaching. Either way, it’s something that needs to be addressed, particularly before tours to the subcontinent and the flat tracks in store which suit batting to a tee.
Overall though, it’s been fun to get excited about New Zealand’s chances again after the win in Hobart, and I definitely have to say that the positives have outweighed the negatives. Perhaps the performances against South Africa could have been better – I know I myself had quitely hoped for more, but in the end the South Africans were simply too good – no need to read any more into it than that.
With today’s announcement of the New Zealand squad to take on Zimbabwe in a one-off test match next week, further fuel has been added to the fire in regards to the debate over whether or not to hand BJ Watling the wicketkeeper’s gloves, with both Watling and Kruger van Wyk, the “bolter” selection of the group, likely to fight it out for the wicketkeeper’s spot in the upcoming match.
Banished to the Stands 