General Blackcaps Chat

Forums › Sports › General Blackcaps Chat

1 | ... | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | ... | 255

6299 posts

Uber Geek

#2274889 11-Jul-2019 22:57

floydbloke:

Cricket's all about stats right. Statistically speaking Guptill is due for a massive one. I predict he'll get 112 of 78 balls in the final. 😉

He is NZ;'s 4th best batsman ever, he averages 42 and use to be 44 until this recent drought, he has the highest score in a world cup and the 2nd highest all time score of 237no. He was the highest run scorer in the 2015 world cup.

Lets not forget if he and Munro had not gotten Sri Lanks score in 16 overs in the first game, our NRR would have been below Pak and we would not hae qualified.

Hes one ton away from form. I remember Taylors bad period of 2 years where he started getting whispers of drop, sacrilege lol, insane at the least. Cricketers do have bad periods, thas why its a team and a deep batting team in modern white ball.

Quic Broadband

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

TeaLeaf

6299 posts

Uber Geek

#2274890 11-Jul-2019 22:57

floydbloke:

Cricket's all about stats right. Statistically speaking Guptill is due for a massive one. I predict he'll get 112 of 78 balls in the final. 😉

Lets not forget if he and Munro had not gotten Sri Lanks score in 16 overs in the first game, our NRR would have been below Pak and we would not hae qualified.

TeaLeaf

6299 posts

Uber Geek

#2274909 11-Jul-2019 23:48

networkn:

some kind of achievement given our population and the fact it's not our national sport the way it is for so many other nations in the top 10. I love how well we do in sport in NZ, it's just so excellent. Even our top squash players are approaching top 5!

Bang on Networkn !

Eng have Aus 5 down, if they put woakes and archer back in its Eng who should win. Carey out, Stoinos gone, Maxwell is a big no show, Aus screwed if Morgan just uses his 3 best bowlers.

NZ back to #3 in the world after that win, and still #2 in tests, from a country with maybe 3% the talent pool of Aus cricket let alone Ind/Eng etc.

https://www.icc-cricket.com/rankings/mens/team-rankings/odi

mattwnz

20096 posts

Uber Geek

#2274910 11-Jul-2019 23:54

The top story on one news was that NZ now had a 50% chance of wining the world cup. I am not sure how they worked that out, or maybe they don't understand how percentages work, but I think the odds will be that either Australia or England will have far better odds of winning with the bookies. But on the day a game of cricket can go either way, and the better team may not win, unlike with Rugby, which doesn't usually come down to as much luck as cricket. We did almost lose the India game though with 5 overs to spare, as India were coasting. But ODI games can very quickly turn. I far prefer ODIs to the shorter versions of the game.

TeaLeaf

6299 posts

Uber Geek

#2274921 12-Jul-2019 01:16

mattwnz:

I far prefer ODIs to the shorter versions of the game.

Me too, I think the novelty of T20s is wearing off. Really ODIs are the perfect length for half a day/night out.

yes I agree, I think Aus would have been 60:40 given their recent injuries, I think purely psychologically would give them a slight edge.

But looks like ENg, although they have let Aus off the hook here. Should have been all out at 150.

But 224 bowled out with an over to go. If Starc doesnt strike early a lot, otherwise its Eng we face which wll be 70:30, partly due to being a final VS Eng in Eng, but mostly they bowl nearly as well but bat much deeper because we just dont play a keeper and use Latham who is our test opener as our ODI opener.

TeaLeaf

6299 posts

Uber Geek

#2274922 12-Jul-2019 01:16

mattwnz:

I far prefer ODIs to the shorter versions of the game.

TeaLeaf

6299 posts

Uber Geek

#2274923 12-Jul-2019 01:16

mattwnz:

I far prefer ODIs to the shorter versions of the game.

tdgeek

29633 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2274972 12-Jul-2019 07:19

TeaLeaf:

tdgeek:

Replace Nichols with Munro, open with Kane and Latham, then Taylor then Guppy. Munro when it suits us.

Have AUS lost a couple of players? ENG is favourite for the semi, so maybe AUS for us. Like to avoid Starc though

Shhh dont suggest putting your #3 in to open, the purists will freak out. But I agree.

Although Id have Latham/Williamson and leave Nichols out.

1. Latham

2. Willliamson

3. Taylor

4. Guptil

5. Munro

6. Neesham

7. Blundell (keeper)

8 Santner

9 Henry

10 Fergy

11 Boult

That is a hell of a middle order, Williamson is basically opening anyway as you suggest. Give Guptil a break to find his form and Munro has the highest 1st class and t20 average of the entire team, so you have fast scoring from 4 all the way to 8. If the top 3-4 get us to 40, with the above, all of those players are capable of bringing NZ home with 150 from 10. You have Munro also as a bowling option to share Neeshams overs.

NZ has always been innovative. We shocked the world opening with a spinner, I think it was Dipak Patel. The BMC going for a 6 first ball, instead of bedding in for overs and overs. If we dont make a change as you/I suggest, I'll be p!ssed. It will just prove the coach is no good

The fact is, if NZ plays really well, we lose. We need to play outstanding and a bit of luck. We wont be removing ENG top 3 batsmen for 1 run each.. If we make an aggressive but obvious change we can win. If we dont, the game is over 10 overs out

old3eyes

9112 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2275144 12-Jul-2019 10:36

Nothing over here in Ozz in the media over the England win. Big headline here is the retirement home that went bankrupt yesterday and thru everyone out.. If we don't beat England in the final we get second which is better than Australia.

Regards,

Old3eyes

tdgeek

29633 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275148 12-Jul-2019 10:44

old3eyes: Nothing over here in Ozz in the media over the England win. Big headline here is the retirement home that went bankrupt yesterday and thru everyone out.. If we don't beat England in the final we get second which is better than Australia.

That's typical, sore losers. Id wager they are hoping NZ get smashed? Although they don't like ENG either, Ashes and all that

lxsw20

3527 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2275157 12-Jul-2019 10:58

I'd say they would much rather NZ win. They don't care about NZ losing like NZ care about Australia losing. Little brother relationship and all that.

clevedon

1059 posts

Uber Geek

#2275270 12-Jul-2019 13:17

lxsw20:

I'd say they would much rather NZ win. They don't care about NZ losing like NZ care about Australia losing. Little brother relationship and all that.

Dunno, I'd rather see England lose than Aussie lose - at anything.

We're mates with the Aussie's (most of the time) Wer're not really mates with the Pom's.

networkn

Networkn
32239 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275276 12-Jul-2019 13:26

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?

tdgeek

29633 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275281 12-Jul-2019 13:41

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

Will we remove the top three ENG batters cheap? No. 1 in 10 games we might.

BUT they are under huge pressure, we arent, despite any positive articles, its already lost. We can throw the kitchen sink, and often that counts huge in sport. We do need to bat, and Guppy and Munro if he plays and he must, need to not open

It will probably be like 2015, but it could be a fascinating watch. Hopefully I'm off to bed at 2am or 4am and not 10-30pm. You never can never tell in this game, 300 bowls and it comes down to 4 of them

Handle9

11243 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2275282 12-Jul-2019 13:49

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?

1 | ... | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | ... | 255