General Blackcaps Chat

Forums › Sports › General Blackcaps Chat

1 | ... | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | ... | 265

11922 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9674

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275285 12-Jul-2019 13:58

networkn:
So are our chances against England all but nil? Based on form the press seem to be suggesting England will beat us harder than Australia?

Both teams have been fairly inconsistent. England nearly missed the semis (if we had beaten them in the round robin they were out).

To some extent it'll come down to the surface. England have been good on flat surfaces but quite poor if it's doing a bit or two paced.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275286 12-Jul-2019 13:59

Handle9:
tdgeek:

networkn:

So are our chances against England all but nil? Based on form the press seem to be suggesting England will beat us harder than Australia?

Not all but nil, but very low. We, as usual failed to bat, but cleaning out the three openers in India equalised that. We bowled and fielded well which we usually do, and we just snuck home. Most other games were similar. Failed to bat, and instead of easy wins we had close wins

You keep saying we batted badly against India. That is just wrong. We batted pretty well. There was one player in the match who was able to middle the ball, the rest struggled as it was moving off the seam, two paced and turning. We had Guptill out early but our top 4 scored around 170 of the 239 we got. On that surface what could they have done differently?

We have two batters every game, and Kane and Ross usually have to fix that. Every game, except SL. One game CdeG Neesham was great, but again two people Our openers dont exist thats a big handicap. India was the same, no openers, K+R scored what was it 67 each. the others added a few more. While we cant expect 6 to get 85, its always TWO getting most of the runs, the No.3 a 4

Ok, by batted badly I'm talking openers.

Im not sugar coating it that's all. Thanks to SL being poor game 1 we got a big NRR. That game avoided us being out of the semis. My opinion is to play Guppy and Munro at 4 and 5. Kane has been in effect opening every game

Handle9

11922 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9674

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275329 12-Jul-2019 14:06

Nicholls scored 28 which in the context of that match was a crucial innings.

The idea of totally changing the batting order is daft. You don't fix a problem by moving players who are performing well. That just created two problems rather than solving one.

One of the reasons we are a very successful team is that we are very organised. Every player has a role, understands their role and mostly delivers.

This kneejerk stuff is what we used to do in the bad old days if the 90s.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275330 12-Jul-2019 14:06

Handle9:
networkn:

So are our chances against England all but nil? Based on form the press seem to be suggesting England will beat us harder than Australia?

Both teams have been fairly inconsistent. England nearly missed the semis (if we had beaten them in the round robin they were out).

To some extent it'll come down to the surface. England have been good on flat surfaces but quite poor if it's doing a bit or two paced.

I feel ours have been consistent each game. Cannot open, but bowl well and field well. Thats been pretty consistent. ENG for some reason cannot chase. If they set the total they go hard, that either looks great and often is, or its a fail. Them and India are the top 2 teams, allowing that in ODI's the game is short enough for good or bad luck to matter

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275331 12-Jul-2019 14:12

Handle9: Nicholls scored 28 which in the context of that match was a crucial innings.

The idea of totally changing the batting order is daft. You don't fix a problem by moving players who are performing well. That just created two problems rather than solving one.

One of the reasons we are a very successful team is that we are very organised. Every player has a role, understands their role and mostly delivers.

This kneejerk stuff is what we used to do in the bad old days if the 90s.

9 games? No pattern there? Ok leave it as it is, it will play like the last 9 games, so lets hope for cleaning out the top 3 for one run each. We are already opening with K+R what's different? Put Guppy and Munro back where that can use their skills it aint working now for 9 games . Its daft to think otherwise. Its not messing with the team, thanks to the openers thats already happened. Just do what has been happening already, intentionally do those two can contribute.

Or we can get hammered, and just say its been a great ride

Handle9

11922 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9674

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275341 12-Jul-2019 14:26

tdgeek:
Handle9: Nicholls scored 28 which in the context of that match was a crucial innings.

The idea of totally changing the batting order is daft. You don't fix a problem by moving players who are performing well. That just created two problems rather than solving one.

One of the reasons we are a very successful team is that we are very organised. Every player has a role, understands their role and mostly delivers.

This kneejerk stuff is what we used to do in the bad old days if the 90s.

9 games? No pattern there? Ok leave it as it is, it will play like the last 9 games, so lets hope for cleaning out the top 3 for one run each. We are already opening with K+R what's different? Put Guppy and Munro back where that can use their skills it aint working now for 9 games . Its daft to think otherwise. Its not messing with the team, thanks to the openers thats already happened. Just do what has been happening already, intentionally do those two can contribute.

Or we can get hammered, and just say its been a great ride

Lol. I though we were rubbish and had no chance, not a good side etc. That's the consistent message from you.

Given we've made back to back world cup finals, are consistently rated in the top 4 and rated internationally as a very strong side I'll take Larsen, Williamson and Steads views as being somewhat more educated than yours.

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275377 12-Jul-2019 14:41

Handle9: Lol. I though we were rubbish and had no chance, not a good side etc. That's the consistent message from you.

Given we've made back to back world cup finals, are consistently rated in the top 4 and rated internationally as a very strong side I'll take Larsen, Williamson and Steads views as being somewhat more educated than yours.

Or the medias through this tourney. Im talking about this tournament, which I thought was quite obvious. Its also obvious that we were lucky to sneak into the semis, and that our efforts in some wins against lesser opposition were also not great, every time we are saved by K+R and our excellent bowlers . Yes, don't believe me , Im just repeating what the media and commentators say.

And yes, you can be a fan and be a realist as well.

What about Munro, where does he sit? Genuine question

floydbloke

3646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4554

ID Verified

#2275400 12-Jul-2019 15:54

tdgeek:... Its also obvious that we were lucky to sneak into the semis, ...

Sometimes you need a little luck to make it to the top.

Cast your mind back to Euro'92 winners Denmark. They didn't even qualify to play in those finals originally (but snuck in because they came runner-up in the group won by Yugoslavia, who subsequently didn't take part due to the wars).

Sometimes I use big words I don't always fully understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.

Handle9

11922 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9674

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275403 12-Jul-2019 16:02

tdgeek:
Handle9: Lol. I though we were rubbish and had no chance, not a good side etc. That's the consistent message from you.

Given we've made back to back world cup finals, are consistently rated in the top 4 and rated internationally as a very strong side I'll take Larsen, Williamson and Steads views as being somewhat more educated than yours.

Or the medias through this tourney. Im talking about this tournament, which I thought was quite obvious. Its also obvious that we were lucky to sneak into the semis, and that our efforts in some wins against lesser opposition were also not great, every time we are saved by K+R and our excellent bowlers . Yes, don't believe me , Im just repeating what the media and commentators say.

And yes, you can be a fan and be a realist as well.

What about Munro, where does he sit? Genuine question

To me Munro is a one trick pony who has been worked out. Playing on really flat decks he can probably still be effective but he's shown no ability to adapt his game.

Nicholls is a quality player who is still adapting to Whitehall cricket.

Realistically we have a 30% chance of winning the final. If we lose the final it's still a very good performance from a very good side.

We make more from less than any other team in the world and have done it year after year. We just beat a team with largely superior players through guts and being a very strong unit playing together.

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275451 12-Jul-2019 16:24

2nd in a World Cup given our size, player pool and opponents would be an excellent result. I'd like to think we can be competitive, if we can do this, living with 2nd place isn't too much of a chore. If we go out with a whimper, that would be unfortunate.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275483 12-Jul-2019 18:39

Handle9:To me Munro is a one trick pony who has been worked out. Playing on really flat decks he can probably still be effective but he's shown no ability to adapt his game.

Nicholls is a quality player who is still adapting to Whitehall cricket.

Realistically we have a 30% chance of winning the final. If we lose the final it's still a very good performance from a very good side.

We make more from less than any other team in the world and have done it year after year. We just beat a team with largely superior players through guts and being a very strong unit playing together.

I agree. The saying punched above our weight is true, its amazing.

Despite what you think of my posts I am a big fan. I know and have played indoor against Black Caps. India they are amazing, we beat them. But we had luck and skill to do that, we wont bowl their top 3 for 3 runs that often. 1 in 10 maybe, but we did, and it was great. Jadeja been there for another 3 balls, game over maybe, MSD in sooner, game over maybe, Guppy's run out was great but against the odds, but yes we won, awesome. Its a VERY VERY fine line at this level. 300 balls, maybe 4 tyre the match. If cricket rankings were based also on per capita, then engrave our trophies for the next decade, easy.

I campaigned here that Munro cant go to the UK. His 60 from 30 every blue moon doesn't work for me. Guppy has under performed we cant afford that, despite our per capita greatness it doesnt work. Im not being an armchair coach and changing the team every 8 minutes, but the combo of Guppy (and he has often been vulnerable to confidence lapses) and the tracks, and the top level bowlers are too much. Place him at 4 when the top tier bowlers are off, the ball has dulled, he will be lethal. As would Munro. We need a Munro for THIS final. We can win, but if we played this final 10 times we lose 7 times. Id risk Munro at 5 for 60 from 30.

Having said that, Guptill gets a 78, his opener partner whoever that is gets 65, Im wrong! But overall its a tough ask. Kane and Latham can open. Kane has in effect being opening already. Latham is slow, we have seen over and over this series, hats fine. Imagine Guppy, CdeG, Munro in the middle order. Im just saying they are more suitable there IMHO. And Neesham, and Santner, a LOT of promise. But, only Kane, Ross and Tom can open. IMHO

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275485 12-Jul-2019 18:42

networkn:

2nd in a World Cup given our size, player pool and opponents would be an excellent result. I'd like to think we can be competitive, if we can do this, living with 2nd place isn't too much of a chore. If we go out with a whimper, that would be unfortunate.

I agree. We have got lucky this tournament. Very lucky. But we actually have much more capability. I just feel the perservering with batting order was too conservative.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275486 12-Jul-2019 18:54

On a side note, a mate took the tour, the Sky feed focused on Rod Latham in the crowd, and my mate was behind him, quite cool. He said it was a wild match (obviously) but as we also saw the Indian crowd was very into the match, his words were "Good to hear from you and it was fantastic to be there, a great big rollercoaster ride of a match! And the big Indian crowd brought a great (noisy!) atmosphere to the match, but they were admirably sporting about it afterwards."

I know what Indians are like with cricket, we saw them on the TV, but this is sport at its best.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2275490 12-Jul-2019 19:22

floydbloke:

tdgeek:... Its also obvious that we were lucky to sneak into the semis, ...

Sometimes you need a little luck to make it to the top.

Cast your mind back to Euro'92 winners Denmark. They didn't even qualify to play in those finals originally (but snuck in because they came runner-up in the group won by Yugoslavia, who subsequently didn't take part due to the wars).

You always need some luck. The better you are, of course, the less luck you need. But if every sports competition was down absolutely to skill and ability and strength and so on, it would actually be quite boring.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2276450 14-Jul-2019 18:27

frankv:

floydbloke:

tdgeek:... Its also obvious that we were lucky to sneak into the semis, ...

Sometimes you need a little luck to make it to the top.

Cast your mind back to Euro'92 winners Denmark. They didn't even qualify to play in those finals originally (but snuck in because they came runner-up in the group won by Yugoslavia, who subsequently didn't take part due to the wars).

You always need some luck. The better you are, of course, the less luck you need. But if every sports competition was down absolutely to skill and ability and strength and so on, it would actually be quite boring.

Hmm, not really, but cricket is a funny game. An ODI innings is about 3+ hours, 300 balls. 4 of this can mean the favourite blitzes the opposition, or the underdog reigns supreme. Edges weren't caught, and so on. make that the opener or a key period, it can go either way.

Tonight, TAB has ENG at 1-30, now 1-34. For us we have lacked openers. So as well as giving away say 70 runs, the game becomes shorter, more time to bowl out our other 8. Its shocking handicap that with bowler and fielder skill and luck we have got through. Im hoping we can hold onto our openers. 2 RR through 10 overs ill be happy with, give us a chance. Dont go out for the big first 10 overs, thats bound to fail. ENG are under huge pressure. HUGE. If we win, that will be why, they choked and we stood on the throat and didn't let go. If we play well and lose, Im ok with that.

1 | ... | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | ... | 265