Results 1,176 to 1,200 of 1754

  1. Post
    Black Plague*** wrote:
    What a thumping, Indias biggest defeat by runs.
    When we beat them, we beat them in record fashion

    CDG didn't even bowl, so I'm really wondering why he's playing. They can't possibly think his form warrants it over Neesham. Mitchell seems like a better CDG.

  2. Post
    Lots of positives of this game, never really bothered to watch Seifart mind you he hasn't really stuck out an innings long enough to get a good look in but he looked promising today. His glovework was ****en shit though.

    Southee looked good and I do hope he can do it for a remainder of the games, perhaps him coming to WC won't be a wasted slot afterall, his paced looked up to. Dejavu of Boult/Southee from the last WC would be awesome.

    Mitchell looked ok can only judge him from the ball if anything tonight but if his batting proves good why the **** have we bothered with CDG,Brace etc for so long. I don't follow domestic enough to know if this guys the goods or not.

    While its a real bold and risky move I hope NZC can make some ballsy calls before the WC rather than sticking with what has been seemingly stuck in stone for the last 12 months -perhaps thats why we are all so ****en shit atm, everyones flights were booked months ago.

    Mudro really needs to ****en go though. and its concerning how bad Kane looks atm. sure he still plays some good shots but his brainfart moments are too often now.

  3. Post
    Chaosfollowsme wrote:
    Lots of positives of this game, never really bothered to watch Seifart mind you he hasn't really stuck out an innings long enough to get a good look in but he looked promising today. His glovework was ****en shit though.




    Mudro really needs to ****en go though. and its concerning how bad Kane looks atm. sure he still plays some good shots but his brainfart moments are too often now.
    https://www.icc-cricket.com/rankings...s/t20i/batting

    Munro is currently ranked #2 in the world for t20i (higher than Rohit, Shikar and Kohli). Bit harsh to call for his dropping from the t20 team? Perhaps you just mean the odi team.

    I really wouldn't worry about how Kane looks right now. I loved his back to back 6's in the t20 match. He didn't stall all the momentum Munro and Seifert generated. Perhaps NZC give him some time off vs Bangladesh if he wants a holiday. I am much more worried about him going to the WC exhausted if he captains SRH again this year. Kane will want a great season because he only on about 619k NZD and last year played like a 2.6m NZD player scoring most runs in the tournament and begging the question why his pay level was less than a quarter of Steve Smiths or David Warner's would have been... He knows where his true worth is, and he may put pressure on himself to cash in.

    NZC need to get this right. Its very easy for a fan to say his job is to play for NZ, but after losing Vettori, Bond and McCullum, we actually have to accept that the person's job, is what actually pays the bills and sets them up for retirement. The likes of ABdV, MMorkel, Abbott, Gayle, Pollard, Bravo, Bravo, Dre Russ, turn their backs on intl cricket for the very same reason that the likes of Dhoni, Kohli, Smith, Warner, Starc, Cummins do not. Money. NZC need to manage its talent, especially Boult and KW right now, but perhaps Sodhi and Santner in the future as well, around this fact.

    I am far from convinced on Seifert. No Kuldeep, Bumrah nor Shami, dropped on 17, dropped again on 70... I have plenty of reservations still. I am happy India got thrashed playing this flaky middle order vs NZ and serving up a bowler like Ahmed instead of even someone like U Yadav. Then leaving out Rahul, Kohli, Rayudu, they got what they deserved in my opinion.

    I piss and moan about NZC selectors, and I get the need to blood new talent and develop, but this was a slap in the face for NZC at home. NZC rightly replied in style. And this almighty Indian team even for the World Cup, does have a middle order weakness (especially lacking power hitters) and a long tail without Krunal or Jadeja playing at 8. And they know it. So maybe it was okay to play a flaky middle order to search for a solution besides Rahul or Rayudu in keepers Pant and Kathik to support Dhoni in both roles, but Shankar? Shankar? No way.

    http://www.espn.com/cricket/story/_/...rder-conundrum
    Last edited by Paddles; 7th February 2019 at 8:29 am.

  4. Post
    I didn’t watch
    How did Kuggs go with the ball? Looked expensive from the scorecard ?

  5. Post
    I cringe how people are calling for Siefart to be the opening batsman for the CWC and the next BMac solely on one innings.

  6. Post
    wrighty wrote:
    I didn’t watch
    How did Kuggs go with the ball? Looked expensive from the scorecard ?
    Was great finishing by him with the bat, but his bowling was poor, he bowled too much just short of a length stuff, with batsman looking to attack you from ball one he made it too easy for them to smash him for a 4 or 6... but Southee was absolutely outstanding, kept the ball really full most of the time, making it very hard for them to score, think his first two overs only cost him one run & went for just 4 per over.

  7. Post
    Indigo1 wrote:
    I cringe how people are calling for Siefart to be the opening batsman for the CWC and the next BMac solely on one innings.
    Yeah, was only one performance, but the fact is the bloke was absolutely lethal with his fast hands & power striking, was also against a top team which even makes it more impressive & as the commentators were saying he did remind you of Baz, plus he took a couple of great catches behind the wicket, I'd definitely have him as our keeper in both short forms of the game.

  8. Post
    wrighty wrote:
    I didn’t watch
    How did Kuggs go with the ball? Looked expensive from the scorecard ?
    Horrid with the ball. Got his length wrong. Bowled far too full and was regularly driven on the up. Didn't bowl short enough - which is odd for him. He should have had Shikar out with his second ball, after a lovely outswinger to start, but Ferg miffed the chance and it went for 6. Then Shikar hit a 4 and a 6...

    Would have been nice for KW to give Kuggs a chance at the Indian lower mid and tail...

    Pace was good, 140-142...

  9. Post
    Thought Mitchell was impressive as well, bowled smartly using a lot of slower balls & bats well too, the bloke was very unlucky to get caught in the deep, was a top piece of fielding by the Indian fieldsman though.

  10. Post
    signman wrote:
    Yeah, was only one performance, but the fact is the bloke was absolutely lethal with his fast hands & power striking, was also against a top team which even makes it more impressive & as the commentators were saying he did remind you of Baz, plus he took a couple of great catches behind the wicket, I'd definitely have him as our keeper in both short forms of the game.
    Ugh, Seifert was dropped on 17 (and again later albeit on 70 I think) ... Lets not drop Latham just yet. And for all his great catches, there's so many easy misses and mistakes... Not just of catches - but runs, I remember Santner quite disappointed at the ball going through Seifert...

    - - - Updated - - -

    Indigo1 wrote:
    I cringe how people are calling for Siefart to be the opening batsman for the CWC and the next BMac solely on one innings.
    Agreed 100%

    - - - Updated - - -

    Indigo1 wrote:
    I cringe how people are calling for Siefart to be the opening batsman for the CWC and the next BMac solely on one innings.
    Agreed 100%

  11. Post
    Paddles wrote:
    Horrid with the ball. Got his length wrong. Bowled too full, was driven on the up. Didn't bowl short enough.
    What ? he didn't bowl full enough, why would you want to bowl short in this form of the game especially, if you do it has to be directed at the batsman body, either side of their bodies & they smash you over the fence, Southee bowled with real smarts keeping the ball really full a lot of the time.

  12. Post
    signman wrote:
    What ? he didn't bowl full enough, why would you want to bowl short in this form of the game especially, if you do it has to be directed at the batsman body, either side of their bodies & they smash you over the fence, Southee bowled with real smarts keeping the ball really full a lot of the time.
    Ugh. yes he did. And Southee bowled a helluva lot more back of a length and short than full. He went full to Shikar to begin with with when there was swing.

    http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/1...ealand-2018-19

    If you find the pitch map for Kuggs, you will see he was not bowling short enough, hence he was smashed down the ground and over cover...

    Kuggs is bang it in bowler, he needs to bowl back of a length and short, and he was too full, and got hammered... He should have been aiming for chest and ribs - not hips and certainly not knees that was smashed on the up.

    Kuggs looked like a failed Steyn impersonator trying for swing, he should be smashing it in like Mitch McClenaghan.

  13. Post
    Paddles wrote:
    Ugh, Seifert was dropped on 17 (and again later albeit on 70 I think) ... Lets not drop Latham just yet. And for all his great catches, there's so many easy misses and mistakes... Not just of catches - but runs, I remember Santner quite disappointed at the ball going through Seifert...
    Disagree... The very attacking way Seifert was playing most of the time you're always going to give a couple of chances anyway, would criticise Seifert as a keeper too much, have seen Latham drop some very easy ones along with some pretty sloppy keeping, Seifert just adds more value to the short form than him.

  14. Post
    signman wrote:
    Disagree... The very attacking way Seifert was playing most of the time you're always going to give a couple of chances anyway, would criticise Seifert as a keeper too much, have seen Latham drop some very easy ones along with some pretty sloppy keeping, Seifert just adds more value to the short form than him.
    Than Latham? This is ridiculous imo. Latham is not a good keeper. He is better than Seifert, though.

    http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/eng...g;view=innings

    Seriously, why would NZ drop Latham for Seifert after one 50 from 11 games when he was dropped on 17?

    Latham and Taylor are regularly the glue for NZ of late. He has done nothing wrong and his SR is improving. Plus he can play spinners well.

  15. Post
    Paddles wrote:
    Ugh. yes he did. And Southee bowled a helluva lot more back of a length and short than full.

    http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/1...ealand-2018-19

    If you find the pitch map for Kuggs, you will see he was not bowling short enough, hence he was smashed down the ground and over cover...
    In Southee's first couple of overs he bowled a lot of very full stuff, my point if you get it very full in good areas it's very hard to score, haven't seen a yorker hit for 6 yet

    Yeah, accurate back of a length can be hard to score from & a good option, mostly need to get it really full though, it also brings in more ways to get a batsman out, bowled, LBW, caught & runout etc, whereas back of a length bowling only gives you a couple of options & runouts don't happen that much.

  16. Post
    signman wrote:
    In Southee's first couple of overs he bowled a lot of very full stuff, my point if you get it very full in good areas it's very hard to score, haven't seen a yorker hit for 6 yet

    Yeah, accurate back of a length can be hard to score from & a good option, mostly need to get it really full though, it also brings in more ways to get a batsman out, bowled, LBW, caught & runout etc, whereas back of a length bowling only gives you a couple of options & runouts don't happen that much.
    You're not talking in globally accepted and defined cricket terms. Very full is a bad area unless the ball is swinging or you mean a yorker. Tim bowled no yorkers. So I doubt you mean this. A half volley not swinging is a bad ball - that is a full ball. A length ball can even be bad if the batsman are prepared to slog and get under it to go cross bat, or look to smash on the up.

    Kuggs bowled too full imo. He needed to pull his length back. He failed to do so. I had the conversation on here with someone during the game and the cricinfo pitch map highlighted the problem. I do not know how to bring it back up now.

    This is a t20 slogathon, there is no need for bowled, lbw and I have no how a full ball causes a run out in your opinion. Mitch and Corey took plenty of wickets banging it in for NZ in odi... its not hard to take wickets with short stuff. Wagner's made a test career out of it.

    M Johnson, MMorkel, L Plunkett (in ODI) all spring to mind with short heavy balls too. It's so easy to set a field for, and its saying to the batsman - you need to risk a catch to score a run.

  17. Post
    Paddles wrote:
    Than Latham? This is ridiculous imo. Latham is not a good keeper. He is better than Seifert, though.
    Didn't say that Latham isn't a good keeper, just said he has been a bit sloppy at times, he may be a bit better than Seifert as a keeper, but there's not a lot between them in that area.

  18. Post
    signman wrote:
    Didn't say that Latham isn't a good keeper, just said he has been a bit sloppy at times, he may be a bit better than Seifert as a keeper, but there's not a lot between them in that area.
    Latham has been one of the shining lights for NZ under the radar. Ross scores 181* - but Latham scores 79 with him in that England epic chase. Latham scores a 100 in India to keep the series alive. Again in the UAE last year, Latham scores big in NZ's win.

    Latham regularly contributes for NZ in games we have no business being in, let alone winning. He goes under the radar, especially given it is most often done in conjunction with Ross, but Latham should be under no selection pressure right now for the ODI team imo.

    He has seen us through so many top order collapses its not funny. All Seifert has done is smash Ahmed around after being dropped on 17, wait until Bumrah and Kuldeep are bamboozling him. Latham has far more street cred against the best India has to offer.

    Just look at this:
    http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/eng...g;view=innings

    All 4 big scores include Bumrah, 3 include Kuldeep...

    Given Afg, Pak, Bang, Ind, and SL all play in Asia, I'd keep Latham around for a while until something much better than Seifert presently offers presents itself. Seifert averages 23.86 at List A, Latham averages 33 at intl...
    Last edited by Paddles; 7th February 2019 at 11:16 am.

  19. Post
    Paddles wrote:
    You're not talking in globally accepted and defined cricket terms. Very full is a bad area unless the ball is swinging or you mean a yorker. Tim bowled no yorkers. So I doubt you mean this. A half volley not swinging is a bad ball - that is a full ball. A length ball can even be bad if the batsman are prepared to slog and get under it to go cross bat, or look to smash on the up.

    Kuggs bowled too full imo. He needed to pull his length back. He failed to do so. I had the conversation on here with someone during the game and the cricinfo pitch map highlighted the problem. I do not know how to bring it back up now.

    This is a t20 slogathon, there is no need for bowled, lbw and I have no how a full ball causes a run out in your opinion. Mitch and Corey took plenty of wickets banging it in for NZ in odi... its not hard to take wickets with short stuff. Wagner's made a test career out of it.

    M Johnson, MMorkel, L Plunkett (in ODI) all spring to mind with short heavy balls too. It's so easy to set a field for, and its saying to the batsman - you need to risk a catch to score a run.
    Southee got some swing last night, but bowling very full isn't a bad area if the ball isn't swinging, you then adapt & change your target area & home in at the batsmens pads to cramp their shot selections, naturally 20/20 has a hell of a lot to with restricting the oppositions score.

  20. Post
    signman wrote:
    Southee got some swing last night, but bowling very full isn't a bad area if the ball isn't swinging, you then adapt & change your target area & home in at the batsmens pads to cramp their shot selections, naturally 20/20 has a hell of a lot to with restricting the oppositions score.
    Full on a batsman's pads? You have just opened up long on all the way through to fine leg for a 6. Even I'd fancy facing that. And the very easiest of glances or on drive for a safe 1 or 2... and no chance of lbw (regardless of which side of the wicket a right armer bowls from), and less chance of bowled as its hitting the pads or going for a wide. How does one set a field for that? The only bowler this is remotely an option for a is leftie to a rhb like Starc or Boult pref with inswing.

    Just because NZ batsmen frustratingly get out to such rubbish by finding fielders doesn't mean everyone does. I am picturing Latham in a test match getting out to such a pie by glancing it up and lobbing it straight to square leg after getting through 30 balls and looking set. Argh he is so frustrating in tests.
    Last edited by Paddles; 7th February 2019 at 11:36 am.

  21. Post
    Paddles wrote:
    Full on a batsman's pads? You have just opened up long on all the way through to fine leg for a 6. How does one set a field for that?
    I'm talking very full {very slightly short of yorker length} not just short of a length stuff where Kuggs got completely hammered... all these blokes do is play cricket, our bowlers should be good at yorkers or very full bowling, as you know you only execute those type of deliveries consistently well by repeatedly practicing them a heap of times, clearly Southee puts a lot of work in there, don't see those skills much from the others by the way they bowl in games.

  22. Post
    signman wrote:
    I'm talking very full {very slightly short of yorker length} not just short of a length stuff where Kuggs got completely hammered... all these blokes do is play cricket, our bowlers should be good at yorkers or very full bowling, as you know you only execute those type of deliveries consistently well
    by repeatedly practicing them a heap of times, clearly Southee puts a lot of work in there, don't see those skills much from the others by the way the bowl in games.
    Kuggs didn't get hammered from short of a length... He got hammered from length and full... He didn't bowl short enough... Southee did not bowl a single yorker. At all... He bowled full in his opening spell with swing, mostly to the left hander Dhawan. But Southee bowled most his balls either short, or short of a length. That is what Kuggs needed to do. Its what he does best. It is legitimate bowling tactic, I have no issue with bowlers bowling short against sloggers. But serving up length when they're slogging and looking to smash on the up or get under it with full half vollies - I have an issue with Kuggs doing. He was looking to bowl swing like Steyn. Its not his go. He needed to bring his length back, and take the covers and downtown out of the equation.
    Last edited by Paddles; 7th February 2019 at 11:47 am.

  23. Post
    It's been ages since we saw a good t20 to order knock from someone outside the core, so Seifert gets high marks for that. That chance on 17 was difficult... He's going to give chances and fail but when he's hot he's bloody confident. He's likened to Baz because he's a small guy but hits it hard and far.

  24. Post
    <N> wrote:
    It's been ages since we saw a good t20 to order knock from someone outside the core, so Seifert gets high marks for that. That chance on 17 was difficult... He's going to give chances and fail but when he's hot he's bloody confident. He's likened to Baz because he's a small guy but hits it hard and far.
    http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/eng...s;type=batting

    Heh, Bruce and Phillips...

    Its very frustrating how Munro is so consistent in t20i... His t20i record compares very favourably to BMac's, slightly lower average but much much higher SR...

  25. Post
    What has stood out for me is Scott KuggleJuggle's unorthoxy is so effective so far vs SL and Ind both. Why are ND not using him further up the order? I get they had Dev, Seifert, Corey, Browlie, Mitchell, et al but surely NZC could step in and get this remedied. There's simply too many NZ players and fringe players in the ND team to help to develop all our talent. It's not actually good for NZC overall...

    Kuggle now has 55 runs in t20i at 250sr for no outs... If that's not promising hitting ability, what is?

    Seems like everyone wants to play for ND and CD these days and avoids the South Island cold and shakiness and Auck and Welly city prices like the plague. It could be time to price adjust the financing to the teams and pay ND and CD less... And offer some "central contracts" to encourage migration of ND and perhaps even CD players elsewhere... CD is so stacked they didn't even offer Ryder a contract...
    Last edited by Paddles; 7th February 2019 at 12:20 pm.