Page 2 of 2 First 12
Results 26 to 48 of 48

  1. Post
    #26
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricke...steads-to-lose

    Points to note

    1) Stead is the front runner
    2) He had three Plunket Shield titles in a row with Canterbury
    3) He is more "structured" than Hesson. That sounds like a good thing to me as he will invest in systems and processes rather than leaving it up to individual brilliance on the day.
    4) Bradburn did not put up big results prior to leaving for Scotland.
    5) Santner is out for the October tour of Pakistan in the UAE. Ajazz Patel is in his place.
    6) Corey Anderson is in the NZ A side with a view towards including him for the world cup if he forces his way in.
    Last edited by B|ind-Reaper*; 31st July 2018 at 2:41 pm.

  2. Post
    #27
    Corey is playing well in the T20 blast which is encouraging given it's in England.

    Average 60 @ 175 strikerate from 7 games.

  3. Post
    #28
    <N> wrote:
    Corey is playing well in the T20 blast which is encouraging given it's in England.

    Average 60 @ 17ODI) 5 strikerate from 7 games.
    I would have him in my T20 team in a heartbeat.

    In terms of the ODI world cup they will see him as a like for like replacement for CDG, I would prefer that they were lining him up against Henry Nicholls. Having another bowling option like Corey would be ideal and would give us 5 genuine bowling options. The problem is that Corey was quite poor in his last 12 months with the black caps. I am not sure he has done anything technique wise or results wise from a List A perspective to earn his way back in.

    Some stats:

    Batting Average and SR ODIs
    Henry 33.05 85
    Colin 35.36 109
    Corey 27.72 109

    Bowling Avg and SR
    Colin 56.2 63
    Corey 25.03 24.7

    Conclusion: The only way I would pick Anderson would be as a bowling all rounder.

    Number 6 Santner
    Number 7 CDG
    Number 8 Anderson
    Number 9 Southee
    Number 10 Sodhi
    Number 11 Boult

  4. Post
    #29
    Corey needs to stop bowling and focus on batting.

    His bowling RPO is horrible from memory. Seems to get a lot of luck wickets.

  5. Post
    #30
    oddjob wrote:
    Corey needs to stop bowling and focus on batting.

    His bowling RPO is horrible from memory. Seems to get a lot of luck wickets.
    Wasn't this (high RPO) partly because he put his hand up to bowl at the death?

  6. Post
    #31
    Could be.

    Either way the last thing we need is for him to get another back injury.

  7. Post
    #32
    oddjob wrote:
    Corey needs to stop bowling and focus on batting.

    His bowling RPO is horrible from memory. Seems to get a lot of luck wickets.
    He hasn't been bowling lately. His best bet is battling with Nicholls for #6.

  8. Post
    #33
    A T20 team with Corey in it would be close to the best in the world.

    My batting line up

    Guptil
    Munro
    Chapman
    Anderson
    CDG
    Seifert
    Meh and who cares is 7 through 11 but if forced to name a bowling attack I would make a T20 specialists instead of the test match attack.

    7) Santner
    Sodhi
    9) Tickner
    10) Ferguson
    11) Bennett

  9. Post
    #34
    Feel free not to read this post I am bored as work finished early.

    My preferred ODI side at this stage

    Guptil
    Someone (pencil in Munro for now)
    Kane
    Taylor
    Latham
    Santner
    CDG
    8**** key position****
    9 Southee
    10 Sodhi
    11 Boult

    I want a bowling all rounder who can thrash it at number 8.

    Possibilities

    1) Doug Bracewell - Too injury prone. Too unreliable. Probably gets injured shaving.
    2) Corey Anderson - Back won't let him bowl?
    3) Todd Astle - don't laugh he could be an option at number 8 and we play three spinners. His List A SR is 90.
    4) Ellis - has been tried before and failed with his batting.
    5) Woodcock - has been tried before and failed with his batting
    6) Adam Milne - List A average 17 - FC average 23 - List A SR 103 - he is a seamer so would be a better option for team balance. Also has the experience from the last world cup campaign. (Stink compared to England's number 8 Chris Woakes who averages 24 in List A and 34 in FC.)
    7) Wheeler - has the stats but after that T20 bowling capitulation never again.
    Kuggeleijn - was awful on last years A tour


    I don't know. The cupboard is bare for the player that I am looking for. If he were fit and still getting them through quickly I would say Milne. Someone on this web site said he has regressed down to 130s so that may eliminate him. Could go Todd Astle but he has turned out to be very injury prone. So I wouldn't want to waste my time on him.

    The other option is to try some type of money ball selection at number 8 such as chapman and make him a bowling option.

    Which makes our 5th bowler a mixture of CDG/Munro/Chapman. Those three would not be taking a lot of wickets. But on the plus side the addiiton of Chapman to CDG & Munro - makes it a better 5th bowling option as it gives more options.

    Like I said just spit balling here. Not expecting feedback on this post. We basically are short an allrounder for the team.



    7)

  10. Post
    #35
    wrighty wrote:
    A T20 team with Corey in it would be close to the best in the world.

    My batting line up

    Guptil
    Munro
    Chapman
    Anderson
    CDG
    Seifert
    Meh and who cares is 7 through 11 but if forced to name a bowling attack I would make a T20 specialists instead of the test match attack.

    7) Santner
    Sodhi
    9) Tickner
    10) Ferguson
    11) Bennett
    Munro has been failing a lot lately, underwhelming IPL, now dropped from English T20 Blast. Keeps getting out to reverse sweeps, needs to put that shot away.

    That team is good on paper but in reality it would flatter to deceive. Anderson has promised a lot but shown so little for NZ in T20 cricket, Chapman is there purely on potential, he was found a bit wanting in his appearances to date.

    Why would you not have Williamson in there? One average tri-series? He just dominated the IPL and led his team to the final... and is going well in the English T20 comp too. 77 off 41 a couple of days ago. His T20 performances since the tri-series have been pretty insane really, averaging 50+ and striking at 140+. He's been far better than most of the guys you listed, you'd be crazy to pick Anderson or Chapman over Kane. Stacking the team full of sloggers never works.

  11. Post
    #36
    the only argument I will accept for including Kane in the team is so that it allows him to become very familiar with international bowlers so that he can treat them with disdain in ODIs. You can't really prepare for International bowling through county cricket or Plunket shield games, so the more exposure to it, even through T20 the better.

    Setting that argument aside - there is no doubt in my mind that Kane, and Ross for that matter, are excellent T20 batsman. But for each of them it is their weakest format and each of them would be the first to admit that. Kane can make runs if conditions are right. IE a flat pitch and some regulation 135kmh opening bowler running it at him.

    When conditions are set to the bowlers favour e.g. with a kookaburra that just happens to swing a lot, or a pitch that is extremely juicy, then he thinks survival and digs in for a test match style innings and tries to guide New Zealand to score like 110 or 115 off its allotted 20 overs. Kane doesn't like getting out. And that is a fatal flaw in T20 cricket. You basically need to have very low care factor for being dismissed.

    In my view T20 in its infancy. That Eden Park match where both we and Australia scored 230 plus will become the way of things.
    Teams are batting far too conservatively and T20, and the approach to it will be very different even 5 years from now.

    5 years from now - no team will play a Joe Root, or a Steve Smith, or a Kane Williamson. All of them will be ODI and Test match specialists. We are marching towards a future where T20 will be played by specialist batsman and bowlers. Let's get on that train now instead of resisting the future. Kane Williamson is not the future of T20.

  12. Post
    #37
    wrighty wrote:
    5 years from now - no team will play a Joe Root, or a Steve Smith, or a Kane Williamson. All of them will be ODI and Test match specialists. We are marching towards a future where T20 will be played by specialist batsman and bowlers. Let's get on that train now instead of resisting the future. Kane Williamson is not the future of T20.
    I see the opposite happening. Pitches are so flat in T20 cricket most places. Given Kane's success in the IPL he's going to be playing a ton of T20 cricket in the years to come. Joe Root just smacked a 50 off 22 balls a week ago, he too will be an excellent T20 player in time.

    Couldn't disagree more with your last statement. None of our supposed T20 guns have made it in the IPL, even Baz struggles.

    If you watched the IPL and his recent T20 blast innings, he will generally get to 50 off 30 balls and then accelerate further. He's done that at least 10 times in recent months. He's also clearing the rope far more often.

  13. Post
    #38

  14. Post
    #39
    Pundits are saying it will be stead.

    His critics say he is unimaginative, but he will be a safe pair of hands. Look for us to be perform at the same Hesson levels with him. Neither worse nor better, and that is entirely what the selectors want, more of the same.

    We are in the top 5 in the world in all forms of the game. And perhaps with our population base that is as good as it gets.

    Malan may be seen as too unpredictable. If they go with Malan then I would think it would by splitting the role into whit ball vs red ball coaching roles. They won't give Malan the whole keys to the car.

    Speculation only.

  15. Post
    #40
    I have to admit I don't know a lot about both coaches, but I don't feel like they are going to take the team to another level? I really thought there might've been some better international interest in the position.

  16. Post
    #41
    Indigo1 wrote:
    I have to admit I don't know a lot about both coaches, but I don't feel like they are going to take the team to another level? I really thought there might've been some better international interest in the position.
    Not sure why people are in such a rush to think this way. An International coach doesn't mean they'll go to the next level either. They would know a whole lot less about these players than a coach coaching in NZ.

    I knew nothing about Hesson either, and it sure took him a while to get to another level. Give him a chance though, he's been coaching a fairly inexperienced Canterbury team with success. He kinda reminds me of the NZ version of Justin Langer.

  17. Post
    #42
    wrighty wrote:
    We are in the top 5 in the world in all forms of the game. And perhaps with our population base that is as good as it gets.
    Nah, don't except mediocrity, we have been ranked much better before in all forms, especially in 20/20s & ODIs, if you've done something before you can do it again.


  18. Post
    #44
    Have to see how he goes, sounds like he's very similar to Hession, lacks imagination... need someone in the job though that can inspire the players & coach with good sense, surely there must be other good candidates out there.

  19. Post
    #45
    signman wrote:
    Have to see how he goes, sounds like he's very similar to Hession, lacks imagination... need someone in the job though that can inspire the players & coach with good sense, surely there must be other good candidates out there.
    Jeez, give him a go. Hesson has been one of our better coaches so wtf are you on about. Stead has only been coaching a Canterbury side with very few big names in it, see how he goes with some proper talent. How do you know Stead cannot inspire players? Steve Hansen can and he gives very little away from the outside. Coaching is as much man management and making the right calls, backing players. Hansen does that perfectly.

    I have no issues with picking local coaches at all. Look at all our foreign bowling coaches etc, they all ship off after a year or two because they miss home. You think someone like Jason Gillespie would be in it for the long run? Doubt it.

  20. Post
    #46
    <N> wrote:
    Jeez, give him a go. Hesson has been one of our better coaches so wtf are you on about. Stead has only been coaching a Canterbury side with very few big names in it, see how he goes with some proper talent. How do you know Stead cannot inspire players? Steve Hansen can and he gives very little away from the outside. Coaching is as much man management and making the right calls, backing players. Hansen does that perfectly.

    I have no issues with picking local coaches at all. Look at all our foreign bowling coaches etc, they all ship off after a year or two because they miss home. You think someone like Jason Gillespie would be in it for the long run? Doubt it.
    No need to throw your toys out the cot, did say have to see how he goes & don't have a problem with us selecting a local coach.

    Of course man management skills & making right calls is a big part of coaching, in fact it's the main part, but you're kidding yourself if you think Hesson was that great in those areas.

  21. Post
    #47
    Bradburn must have interviewed poorly

    He was cut in the early rounds

  22. Post
    #48
    You would've thought he'd be a decent option to make the final few ?