How did NZ lose this test match?

Forums › Sports › How did NZ lose this test match?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

6347 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1206

#1740291 16-Mar-2017 13:42

benokobi:

Why is this Latham guy still in the squad.

to be fair he started off ok and had a good few innings between 10-20 tests. but the last 5 or more have been terrible.

i dont think hes a waste of space as a player, i meant hes wasting a spot for a batsman at the moment, needs to go back to first class and get his confidence back and then maybe come back when Ravel needs to retire, or Guptil.

personally id rather have Guptil fail and every 3rd innings hit a 200 at a SR of over 100 than have latham diddly doddly around for 0. I think Ravel has been a good find. If we drop Santner it means we can include munro, whos first class record deserves a go, plus he did ok in his 1st test, he also can bowl a bit. Nesham is really a batsman like Munro that can bowl a bit, I think Southee Boult Wagner and Ferguson should be our fixed pace and we need to play Sodhi who was nailing it in he big bash and our only REAL spinner.

tdgeek

29819 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9155

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1740297 16-Mar-2017 13:51

Before we criticise Williamson, we are not good enough. Trump wouldn't get us over the line except in lucky games. Like any pro Cricket team, we will have p[eriods of great stats, but thats few and far between as we dont have the team to be always a threat. The longer version of the game exposes that

Handle9

11550 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8982

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1740298 16-Mar-2017 13:52

Lets drop the only successful opener we've had in the last 10 years, who is only 25. That seems like a great move.

Jas777

838 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 108

#1740329 16-Mar-2017 14:20

TeaLeaf:

benokobi:

Why is this Latham guy still in the squad.

to be fair he started off ok and had a good few innings between 10-20 tests. but the last 5 or more have been terrible.

i dont think hes a waste of space as a player, i meant hes wasting a spot for a batsman at the moment, needs to go back to first class and get his confidence back and then maybe come back when Ravel needs to retire, or Guptil.

personally id rather have Guptil fail and every 3rd innings hit a 200 at a SR of over 100 than have latham diddly doddly around for 0. I think Ravel has been a good find. If we drop Santner it means we can include munro, whos first class record deserves a go, plus he did ok in his 1st test, he also can bowl a bit. Nesham is really a batsman like Munro that can bowl a bit, I think Southee Boult Wagner and Ferguson should be our fixed pace and we need to play Sodhi who was nailing it in he big bash and our only REAL spinner.

Latham is still in the squad because if he goes back to first class cricket he will be a better opener than anyone else who is there.

' dont think hes a waste of space as a player, i meant hes wasting a spot for a batsman at the moment, needs to go back to first class and get his confidence back and then maybe come back when Ravel needs to retire, or Guptil' You will probably be saying this about Guptill, Raval and Munro at some stage too.

TeaLeaf

6347 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1206

#1740339 16-Mar-2017 14:52

Handle9:

Lets drop the only successful opener we've had in the last 10 years, who is only 25. That seems like a great move.

You have to measure success as an opener in consistency, he doesnt have it, thats why guptil got dropped. IMO Guptil should never have opened in the test game as thats not his play. Opening is definitely Lathams game, hes a blocker. Problem his stance has been all over the place, hes playing at balls he should be letting go, hes just lost himself as a player. Even great players get dropped, Latham will never be a great player but I think he could be one of our best openers if he gets back to what made him successful at seeing off the new ball, thats his job.

I agree Latham has potential, but like Nicholls who is performing today, he needs to go back to the drawing board, be the best opener in 1st class, gain some confidence and come back, it doesnt take long.

In saying all this he got a Jaffa over a delivery today as did the first 3 wickets.

Nesham out by mm's and was turning around the game with intention. Which is what we lack in the NZ team, ad Williamson is not Mccullum. We need that intention back. I dont think we are far away, I do think guptil and munro will add that intention once Taylor is fit, I can see Nicholls replacing Broom who also isnt performing. If Watling can open that really opens up the lineup to fit munro and guptil further down the line.

It would be a massive switch for Watling but he really does have the blocker mentality.

And every team wants their Keeper to be an opener these days, although usually a slogger. Gilcrhist changed the purpose of a keeper which use to be just to keep and bat a little bit.

I also think there is no point playing half way players like Patel and Santner, somebody like Sodhi will win you games in the 4th innings when the balls turns. Patel isnt a bad choice but hes another finger spinner which for me is not hard for the batsmen to play. But Ish Sodhi is our real wrist spinner, but he also averages 23 with the bat. I dont know what the selector and coach has against him considering his recent form.

Jas777:

You will probably be saying this about Guptill, Raval and Munro at some stage too.

Of course but Ravel and Munro have been performing for a long time at a better level than Latham did in first class. And Guptil opening is not the right place for him in the Test team. The guy is the only person on earth who has 3 ODI scores above 180 and all ove them are Not Out, including the 230 odd, he is also faster to 5000 than ponting, lara, gale, tendulkar etc.

So for me its about changing how he plays in tests to how he plays in ODIs and opening is not the position for him to do that.

Either Hesson and Williamson tell him just to play like you do in ODIs or they move him down the order. I think the weight of protecting the Squad is not his game.

Handle9

11550 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8982

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1740392 16-Mar-2017 15:52

TeaLeaf:

You have to measure success as an opener in consistency, he doesnt have it, thats why guptil got dropped. IMO Guptil should never have opened in the test game as thats not his play. Opening is definitely Lathams game, hes a blocker. Problem his stance has been all over the place, hes playing at balls he should be letting go, hes just lost himself as a player. Even great players get dropped, Latham will never be a great player but I think he could be one of our best openers if he gets back to what made him successful at seeing off the new ball, thats his job.

I agree Latham has potential, but like Nicholls who is performing today, he needs to go back to the drawing board, be the best opener in 1st class, gain some confidence and come back, it doesnt take long.

In saying all this he got a Jaffa over a delivery today as did the first 3 wickets.

Nesham out by mm's and was turning around the game with intention. Which is what we lack in the NZ team, ad Williamson is not Mccullum. We need that intention back. I dont think we are far away, I do think guptil and munro will add that intention once Taylor is fit, I can see Nicholls replacing Broom who also isnt performing. If Watling can open that really opens up the lineup to fit munro and guptil further down the line.

It would be a massive switch for Watling but he really does have the blocker mentality.

And every team wants their Keeper to be an opener these days, although usually a slogger. Gilcrhist changed the purpose of a keeper which use to be just to keep and bat a little bit.

I also think there is no point playing half way players like Patel and Santner, somebody like Sodhi will win you games in the 4th innings when the balls turns. Patel isnt a bad choice but hes another finger spinner which for me is not hard for the batsmen to play. But Ish Sodhi is our real wrist spinner, but he also averages 23 with the bat. I dont know what the selector and coach has against him considering his recent form.

Jas777:

You will probably be saying this about Guptill, Raval and Munro at some stage too.

Of course but Ravel and Munro have been performing for a long time at a better level than Latham did in first class. And Guptil opening is not the right place for him in the Test team. The guy is the only person on earth who has 3 ODI scores above 180 and all ove them are Not Out, including the 230 odd, he is also faster to 5000 than ponting, lara, gale, tendulkar etc.

So for me its about changing how he plays in tests to how he plays in ODIs and opening is not the position for him to do that.

Either Hesson and Williamson tell him just to play like you do in ODIs or they move him down the order. I think the weight of protecting the Squad is not his game.

Raval's 1st class average is 1 run higher than Lathams, with Latham having played 1 more game. 30 of Lathams 1st class games have been tests so his record is considerably more impressive than Ravals. He's having a bad trot, that doesn't mean that you drop him.

Can you please point me to all the test openers who keep? As far as I'm aware there aren't any. There are lots of one day openers who keep but not in test matches. You refer to Gilchrist who batted 7 in test cricket. It is way too physically demanding to keep and open. That's why it doesn't happen.

TeaLeaf

6347 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1206

#1740409 16-Mar-2017 16:55

Opening isnt about your average, its about consistency, think im repeating myself.

Ravel has done far better than Latham since being called into the squad. The only reason Ravel didnt play earlier for NZ was other players blocking him. His time has come and hes made the most of it, but hes been consistent in 1st class.

Dont make me say the cliche definition of an idiot.

Latham is still a good player, but hes lost his form and his confidence, there is only one way to get that back and its not by being bowled out for a pair. He needs to get back and get some big time/scores consistently seeing off the new ball well passed 30 overs. I think he has a future in the squad, but this isnt a little BLIP where EVERYONE struggles and you dont drop players etc etc. This is a major change in him, not his luck.

Look at what going back to 1st class has done for Nicholls.

I think you need to get over the fact that players cant be dropped.

Sorry I didnt mean keepers being openers I meant keepers being the hammer, which is something NZ doesnt have, Ronchi is not it. So they need someone like Guptil to be that hammer. Another option is giving Phillips more oppurtunites. But NZ has plenty of hard hitters in guptil and munro and george worker. Its just a case of finding a non opening spot for them.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

Handle9

11550 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8982

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1740433 16-Mar-2017 18:03

Your arguments still aren't making any sense around Latham. He's had a horrible run in the one day series. There is an argument to be made about his place in that team however his test form has been pretty strong. His average in the 2016 and 2017 is just over 39 his average in 2017 is just over 64. This directly represents consistency.

While Raval has been in the team Latham has been the higher run scorer. This is a blip, Latham had an excellent series against Bangladesh 7 weeks ago.

Of course a player can be dropped, there just isn't the justification for dropping our number 1 opener. You are saying he should be replaced by Watling, which makes no sense unless you pick a different keeper.

TeaLeaf

6347 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1206

#1740436 16-Mar-2017 18:19

he did well against bangladesh, i wouldnt expect any less.

i understand your point, but the pressure is building on him and a lot of people are talking about giving him a rest to get back to basics. playing lesser players will give him more confidence. but hes playing out of shape and at balls he should be leaving, hes getting himself out. if he does stay in the team, he really needs some better coaching on these problems. i still think he has a future in the team either way.

i think the problem we have is we have nobody in the team with intent outside taylor, even williamson is a tickler, a very good one, but at times takes a long time to get going. we need players like guptil and munro in the team.

one thing annoyed me the most was them selecting two very average spinners over Sodhi which made boult over bowl and miss this test due to injury, wagner did the goods with the ball, now they call de gron holme who is a nothing player and now hes opening instead of wagner? what is williamson thinking?

good to see Nicholls do well, a good example of going back to the drawing board (1st class) and taking your chances when they come. I think they should have played Munro and used Nesham and Munro. Strengthens the batting big time and doesnt lose much in the bowling. De Gron Holme had a freak of a debut but has done nothing since, hence why he was dropped.

southee and patel at the end showing what intent does and gets us to a bad but somewhat useful total.

nice catch by nesham (one latham would drop for sure) and southee back on the mark. Need wagner in there now with his swing.

TeaLeaf

6347 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1206

#1740439 16-Mar-2017 18:28

Another ripper in the slips by nesham. He dont drop em. Hes a great batsman and a handy bowler and darn good fielder, much like Munro.

tdgeek

29819 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9155

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1740459 16-Mar-2017 19:46

I wont join in that debate, but for a small country we need to have multi talent payers. We don't have the depth. Keep needs to bowl or bat. The way the game has evolved I can see a time when all players can at worse, bat pretty ok. Its too hard for us to compete. At ODI or 20/20 any team can win. BMC will send us out going for 6's first ball. If it works, we win. But in tests, its too long a game to rely on that tactic, and IMHO, we don't have it. Latham's record has had a rough trip, but game after game its a fail. We aren't good enough, and certainly not by being a player down (Latham). Thats what he is at the moment. Go away, learn, come back.

TeaLeaf

6347 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1206

#1740503 16-Mar-2017 20:30

He just needs to look at Raval and learn, hes getting himself out, needs to wait until the ball is a bit older, also his basics are all out of shape.

I think we have a lot of batting depth if we include munro and or guptil, with nesham, but im not a fan of de gron holme, we need 5 specialist bowlers. i know hes only playing this match as boult his out. but with nesham we bat to 6 at an average of 37 (when everyone is fit).

Our fielding is what lost us the last test match and Williamsons inability to put the foot on the throat.

Bowling wise I dont think we have been the same since Shane Bond left as bowling coach, but was nice to see Southee get up close to 140kph this arvo swinging the ball, hes just too easy to play at 130kph even with swing. Wagner is an awesome swing bowler and wont break down like Boult after long spells, Ferguson is accurate at 150kph and could easily bed lethal with a bit of Shane Bond training, needs to learn to either swing it or get more movement out of the pitch. And Ish Sodhi is as close to Shane Warne as NZ has produced.

I think we can do ok in tests, we have been at home, we just need to show more intent and need that batting depth and that bowling precision to back it up.

tdgeek

29819 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9155

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1740517 16-Mar-2017 20:55

TeaLeaf:

He just needs to look at Raval and learn, hes getting himself out, needs to wait until the ball is a bit older, also his basics are all out of shape.

I think we have a lot of batting depth if we include munro and or guptil, with nesham, but im not a fan of de gron holme, we need 5 specialist bowlers. i know hes only playing this match as boult his out. but with nesham we bat to 6 at an average of 37 (when everyone is fit).

Our fielding is what lost us the last test match and Williamsons inability to put the foot on the throat.

Bowling wise I dont think we have been the same since Shane Bond left as bowling coach, but was nice to see Southee get up close to 140kph this arvo swinging the ball, hes just too easy to play at 130kph even with swing. Wagner is an awesome swing bowler and wont break down like Boult after long spells, Ferguson is accurate at 150kph and could easily bed lethal with a bit of Shane Bond training, needs to learn to either swing it or get more movement out of the pitch. And Ish Sodhi is as close to Shane Warne as NZ has produced.

I think we can do ok in tests, we have been at home, we just need to show more intent and need that batting depth and that bowling precision to back it up.

We do have batting depth, yes, agree. But at this level?

Jas777

838 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 108

#1740626 17-Mar-2017 09:22

TeaLeaf:

He just needs to look at Raval and learn, hes getting himself out, needs to wait until the ball is a bit older, also his basics are all out of shape.

I think we have a lot of batting depth if we include munro and or guptil, with nesham, but im not a fan of de gron holme, we need 5 specialist bowlers. i know hes only playing this match as boult his out. but with nesham we bat to 6 at an average of 37 (when everyone is fit).

Really lean from Raval? You mean bat for 90 minutes to 2 hours then get out. Raval needs to get a big score soon or he just be another guptil but with not being able to hit big.

Latham has a better average than Neesham and he is a opener as opposed to Neesham who bats in middle order. Neeshams last scores in test cricket has been 15, 7, 0, 71, 3, 3, 19,15. Hardly what you would call good enough for a middle order batsman.

TeaLeaf

6347 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1206

#1740656 17-Mar-2017 10:59

Jas777:

Really lean from Raval? You mean bat for 90 minutes to 2 hours then get out. Raval needs to get a big score soon or he just be another guptil but with not being able to hit big.

Latham has a better average than Neesham and he is a opener as opposed to Neesham who bats in middle order. Neeshams last scores in test cricket has been 15, 7, 0, 71, 3, 3, 19,15. Hardly what you would call good enough for a middle order batsman

Ummm yeah obviously if hes opening, then batting for the first session would be doing his JOB ! hes an opener, thats TEST cricket. There is nothing between the too on average. The problem is Latham has had a long trot of opening up our best batsman in the first 5 overs. Its not his job to score lots of runs, its his job to see off the new ball, which Raval is doing a much better job at.

Raval avg: 36 SR 46

Latham avg: 39 SR 46

Why are you comparing Latham to Neesham, the reason people are on his case is because his only job is to see out the new ball, hes FAILING for the last number of tests and the pressure on his spot is growing. Neesham has been given very little continuous game time, but did you notice the 2 good catches at slip yesterday, the same ones Latham put down and cost us 140 runs and the 1st test match? Well thats why Latham was dumped from that slip spot and Neesham put in there. So if you want to compare Id say with very little game time Neesham has shown far more promise to the team than any of the young players, 11 sporadic tests vs 40 on the trot for Latham.

As for Neesham, so hes averaring about 25 in his last few tests, and? hes the end of the middle order and has not been given anywhere near the amount of continuous game time Santner has, hes our only all rounder, hes a better batsman and bowler than Santner every day of the week, Santner cant even turn the ball, drops catches like latham and loses our momentum with taking forever to get his scores.

Santner Avg:25 SR 44

Neesham Avg:36 SR 66 (including 137no)

End of story.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4