New Zealand vs England 2013 - Series Page

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Wed 23 Jan 2013, 5:15 pm

First topic message reminder :

While we'll likely have individual match threads, I figured I'd set this up for general pre-series stuff.

Tour fixtures:

Spoiler:

An NZ XI squad has been named for the tour opener T20s:
Andrew Ellis (capt), Anton Devcich, Colin Munro, Hamish Rutherford, Ian Butler, Jimmy Neesham, Luke Ronchi, Matthew Henry, Michael Bates, Neil Broom, Neil Wagner, Nick Beard, Ross Taylor, Tom Latham

NZ T20 squad:
Brendon McCullum (capt),
Trent Boult,
Ian Butler,
Grant Elliott,
Andrew Ellis,
James Franklin,
Martin Guptill,
Roneel Hira,
Mitchell McClenaghan,
Nathan McCullum,
Colin Munro,
Hamish Rutherford,
Ross Taylor

NZ One-day squad:
Brendon McCullum (capt),
Trent Boult,
Grant Elliott,
Andrew Ellis,
James Franklin,
Martin Guptill,
Mitchell McClenaghan,
Nathan McCullum,
Kyle Mills,
Colin Munro,
Ross Taylor,
BJ Watling,
Kane Williamson

England T20 Squad
Stuart Broad (captain),
Jonny Bairstow,
Danny Briggs,
Jos Buttler,
Jade Dernbach,
Steven Finn,
Alex Hales,
Michael Lumb,
Stuart Meaker,
Eoin Morgan,
Samit Patel,
James Tredwell,
Chris Woakes,
Luke Wright.

England ODI Squad
Alastair Cook (captain),
James Anderson,
Jonny Bairstow,
Ian Bell,
Stuart Broad,
Jos Buttler,
Steven Finn,
James Harris,
Eoin Morgan,
Samit Patel,
Joe Root,
Graeme Swann,
James Tredwell,
Jonathan Trott,
Chris Woakes.

England Test Squad
Alastair Cook (capt),
Nick Compton,
Jonathan Trott,
Kevin Pietersen,
Ian Bell,
Joe Root,
Jonny Bairstow,
Matt Prior,
Chris Woakes,
Stuart Broad,
Graeme Swann,
Steven Finn,
James Anderson,
Monty Panesar,
Graham Onions

by ShankyCricket Thu 24 Jan 2013, 7:47 pm

I am not sure why people are getting carried away by Bell's "superb" ODI summer. We have seen plenty of false dawns from him in ODIs before. He had a similarly "superb" summer in 2007, esp against India in that 7 match series, where he virtually scored in every game. That didn't improve his ODI performances in the long run however. I think his performances in the summer earned him the next couple of series (ie. the current one and the one in NZ) but I fail to see how a player with such an average ODI record becoming "undroppable" on the basis of 4 good months. FWIW Root has outperformed Bell in this series and if he continues to do so in NZ (where he will surely play given that KP has been rested) then I see no reason why Bell should be picked ahead of Root, especially considering that Root offers a bowling option.

Not hyping him up at all (my original choice would've been Hales or Taylor anway) but if he continues to outperform Bell then he should be picked.

by VTR Thu 24 Jan 2013, 7:55 pm

I'd have to say Cook, KP, Trott would be my top 3. Bell has not set the world alight as an opener at all. He's done ok, no more, whereas KP opening a year ago was excellent (back to back hundreds?)

With that top 3 I don't really see a place for Bell in the term as I'd rather have a more dynamic middle order.

by ShankyCricket Thu 24 Jan 2013, 8:09 pm

VTR wrote:I'd have to say Cook, KP, Trott would be my top 3. Bell has not set the world alight as an opener at all. He's done ok, no more, whereas KP opening a year ago was excellent (back to back hundreds?)

With that top 3 I don't really see a place for Bell in the term as I'd rather have a more dynamic middle order.

I'd pick only one of Bell or Trott depending on how they go in NZ.

by Gerry SA Thu 24 Jan 2013, 8:17 pm

gboycottnut wrote:
Gerry SA wrote:I'd say the Kiwis will be happy that the limited overs stuff is first.

As they showed against South Africa(still crying ) they are more that good enough to beat anyone in the shorter formats.

I'd say that the Kiwis could build some momentum ahead of the Tests by winning the limited overs contests.

Well for the tests, they now have a few of their best players back like Southee, Vettori and their leading batsman Ross Taylor. Also throw in former Australian wicketkeeper Luke Ronchi into the test side and suddenly New Zealand have a strongish and very healthy test XI again. People must remember that NZ aren't that bad at test cricket as they did manage to beat Australia in a test match in 2011 in their own backward and not many teams have managed this in recent times apart from England in 2010 and South Africa last year. A very strong India team got absolutely thrashed by Australia at the start of 2012 in test matches.

Totally agree GBN.

Taylor is world class make no bones about it. Southee is a wonderful bowler. Vettori is their key all rounder.

For me Ronchi is in the top 3 glove men in the world. He's that good.

I hope they get Ryder involved. He's a little bit too good not to be in the Test side.

by Hoggy_Bear Thu 24 Jan 2013, 8:45 pm

Really glad to see Woakes in the test squad. His game is much better suited to the longer version of the game, as his FC record shows.
Just hope he gets a game.

by Mike Selig Thu 24 Jan 2013, 10:03 pm

I agree with Hoggy on Woakes.

I agree with Shelsey on Patel - his bowling is mostly not good enough for 10 overs anyway, and statistics tend to show that if your number 7 is facing too many balls (more than 15 or so, which corresponds to 5 overs) then you're not doing too well anyway. I would suggest that the key in ODI cricket as it is currently is to get to 40 overs with 3 or 4 wickets down at most, and then kick on. If you are 5 down after 35 overs, then you aren't going to be able to bat the last 10 overs with enough freedom to score the 100 you need to win matches nowadays (see Sri Lanka in their last game against Aus - with 5 wickets down they could go for 10 an over for 6 or 7 overs, but no more).

On Bell: for me he has to bat in the top 3 - he has neither the nurdling ability nor the big boundary ability associated with batting at 4,5 or 6; on both those counts I would say Root so far is superior. The question is then is he worth his place in the top 3? Well Cook and Pietersen pick themselves, so it is a straight out fight IMO between Bell and Trott. Root bats 4, where he can nurdle or accelerate (if you're requiring your number 4 to score 100 then you're struggling already - most of ODI centuries come from the top 3) as required, with Morgan 5 (IMO his natural position - moving him up to 4 hasn't helped his game) - DITTO - and Buttler 6 as a finisher.

England want to pick an all-rounder in the top 7, but at the moment neither Patel nor Woakes are good enough bowlers.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Fri 25 Jan 2013, 9:33 am

Whatever we think it's clear England wrestler protecting root and letting him develop gradually, focussing on his test batting first and even then hidden down the order in what used to be bells happy place.
Long term he will replace Compton or trott in the top 3 ( and that may be several years depending how Compton fares) ....possibly joined by Taylor eventually although he seems to have been sidelined for whatever reason.

England don't need to worry about their proper batsmen in odis at the moment, they canI've without root especially in more steamers friendly conditions where trotts dobblers or even boparas flobbers are more useful than bog standard parttime off spin. There's hales too if they want more aggression
Although through top order under performed for most of this series I really don't see it as the weakest part of the team. The seam bowling was tepid, only Treadwell offered a real wicket taking threat and aside from the first game the middle order powerhouses gave them nothing. Buttler and keissweter both have big reputations in county cricket but neither has really bought that to the international stage. Patents with Luke wright and indeed Woakes and Brennan continue to be not good enough in any discipline to justify selection. Broad has a temporary pass on that pending injury recovery.
What they are left with is 3 spots to fit in a bowler who offers variation, a genuine keeper, two players who can score at t20 rate with a career average over 30, and a 10 over bowler who can bat a bit.
Unfortunately it appears we just don't have through personnel so continue to either have an unbalanced side or keep pretending that round pegs go in square holes.

by guildfordbat Fri 25 Jan 2013, 11:38 am

Mike Selig wrote:

England want to pick an all-rounder in the top 7, but at the moment neither Patel nor Woakes are good enough bowlers.

And the same surely applies to Rikki Clarke who has been selected for England Lions squad going to Australia. Shocked

by Mike Selig Fri 25 Jan 2013, 12:14 pm

guildfordbat wrote:
Mike Selig wrote:

England want to pick an all-rounder in the top 7, but at the moment neither Patel nor Woakes are good enough bowlers.
And the same surely applies to Rikki Clarke who has been selected for England Lions squad going to Australia.

That's strange (and a bit worrying). I like Clarke, I think he's had a lot of stick for something which wasn't his fault (getting picked) - he's done well since moving from Surrey and is a good hard-hitting batsman and decent partnership breaker at county level. Not to be sniffed at. But international class? Not for me...

by **Fists of Fury** Fri 25 Jan 2013, 12:37 pm

Oi leave Rikki alone you lot - he is an excellent player and wouldn't let anybody down.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Fri 25 Jan 2013, 1:00 pm

Mike Selig wrote:
guildfordbat wrote:
Mike Selig wrote:

England want to pick an all-rounder in the top 7, but at the moment neither Patel nor Woakes are good enough bowlers.
And the same surely applies to Rikki Clarke who has been selected for England Lions squad going to Australia.

That's strange (and a bit worrying). I like Clarke, I think he's had a lot of stick for something which wasn't his fault (getting picked) - he's done well since moving from Surrey and is a good hard-hitting batsman and decent partnership breaker at county level. Not to be sniffed at. But international class? Not for me...

*Luke Wright and Samit Patel shuffle uncomfortably*

Theres the rub really. Its very hard to balance a limit over side when all your proper bowlers are pretty orthodox right armers (seam or spin) and you dont really have anything other than very occasional bowling in the top order.
England would be quite unique in limited overs cricket if they didnt pick someone who pretended to be an all rounder.
Currently they have a bunch of medicore batsmen who can bowl 10 overs at a push (patel, wright, bopara) and a bunch of mediocre county trundlers who everyone claims can bat despite their international records (woakes, bresnan, and to some extent Broad)...not to mention a casualty list of failed keeper batsmen which resembles the sommes roll of honour.
The argument is do you try and bring through yet another like Clarke who really is never likely to be Jacque Kallis or do you pick some random kid who definitely isnt? Or just give up? Someone has to play! ( Napier? Run

)

Its a miracle that England are still one of the best T20 and ODi sides in the world really. Anyone would think other sides were faced with similar problems.

by Duty281 Fri 25 Jan 2013, 1:01 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/21195537

Root has replaced Briggs in the T20 Squad for NZ due to injury.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Fri 25 Jan 2013, 1:03 pm

So theyve seen what happened in the first ODI and picked him as a specialist spinner? Erm

by msp83 Fri 25 Jan 2013, 2:18 pm

Nothing against Root's selection there, but in place of a spinner? Perhaps they think on the lines that a reserve spinner won't mean much in NZ conditions, and put Root in there at the first given opportunity, seeing that he has got a fine temprament.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Fri 25 Jan 2013, 3:02 pm

Theres probably an element of them not wanting drag the fourth choice (or fifth if you include patel) away from whatever hes doing this winter to fly half way round the world at a few days notice just to carry drinks.
Whereas Root will be out there anyway, and unless theres any injuries can most likely just get on with mucking about in the nets against second rate seamers.

by gboycottnut Fri 25 Jan 2013, 4:01 pm

Does anyone think that Woakes got selected for the NZ tour purely because the selectors want to try out a 5 man bowling attack with Prior at 6 in case this plan may be needed for the ashes?

by guildfordbat Fri 25 Jan 2013, 4:39 pm

gboycottnut wrote:Does anyone think that Woakes got selected for the NZ tour purely because the selectors want to try out a 5 man bowling attack with Prior at 6 in case this plan may be needed for the ashes?

Boycs - I wouldn't say ''purely'' but the different strings that Woakes has to his bow and the options it might give England won't have been overlooked by the selectors.

That said, the inclusion of Rikki Clarke for the Lions squad (as posted earlier on this thread) might just go some way to further supporting your view as to what the selectors are now seeking.

As regards Woakes, I'm unconvinced by his bowling and have real doubts that he'll make the grade at top Test level. He may do alright if he gets a game against New Zealand but so probably would the likes of David Masters and Tim Linley.

Happy to be proved wrong. He would be very valuable if he could justify a Test starting place and so I don't slate the selectors for wanting a decent look at him despite my doubts. As I've said before, I think he certainly has batting potential and is already a very good fielder (something rarely mentioned).

by Guest Sat 26 Jan 2013, 10:21 am

IMO england will stroll to a series win in the tests and odi's.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Sat 26 Jan 2013, 11:09 am

CF wrote:IMO england will stroll to a series win in the tests and odi's.

I wouldn't be so sure about the ODIs

by Guest Sat 26 Jan 2013, 11:33 am

i would, the conditions in NZ are similair to england, and we showed against the saffers in the summer, that we can compete and win with the best in typical home conditions, so i would be very confident of a test and odi series win in NZ.

by Stella Sat 26 Jan 2013, 2:36 pm

NZ are playing better than us at present, in ODI's, that is.

by Shelsey93 Sat 26 Jan 2013, 2:54 pm

Stella wrote:NZ are playing better than us at present, in ODI's, that is.

I don't know. SA were missing a lot of top players for big parts of the series. I'd be very disappointed if we didn't win the series.

by Guest Sat 26 Jan 2013, 4:07 pm

Pete, do you think Ross Taylor will be back in the NZ side for this series?

by gboycottnut Sat 26 Jan 2013, 5:09 pm

guildfordbat wrote:
gboycottnut wrote:Does anyone think that Woakes got selected for the NZ tour purely because the selectors want to try out a 5 man bowling attack with Prior at 6 in case this plan may be needed for the ashes?
Boycs - I wouldn't say ''purely'' but the different strings that Woakes has to his bow and the options it might give England won't have been overlooked by the selectors.

That said, the inclusion of Rikki Clarke for the Lions squad (as posted earlier on this thread) might just go some way to further supporting your view as to what the selectors are now seeking.

As regards Woakes, I'm unconvinced by his bowling and have real doubts that he'll make the grade at top Test level. He may do alright if he gets a game against New Zealand but so probably would the likes of David Masters and Tim Linley.

Happy to be proved wrong. He would be very valuable if he could justify a Test starting place and so I don't slate the selectors for wanting a decent look at him despite my doubts. As I've said before, I think he certainly has batting potential and is already a very good fielder (something rarely mentioned).

But when Woakes first came onto the first class county scene for his county team Warwickshire, weren't many people thinking that this guy was the real deal and could be as good a bowler one day as even the great Ian Botham.

by Guest Sat 26 Jan 2013, 6:08 pm

NZ's test side will also be strengthend by the likely return of Dan Vettori

by gboycottnut Sat 26 Jan 2013, 6:38 pm

CF wrote:NZ's test side will also be strengthend by the likely return of Dan Vettori

Well if NZ play this following XI they can well give England a very good run for their money in the test series :-

1 Watling
2 Brownlie
3 McCallum
4 Taylor
5 Williamson
6 Ronchi (keeper)
7 Ryder
8 Vettori
9 Bracewell
10 Southee
11 Bolt

by Guest Sat 26 Jan 2013, 6:53 pm

Brownlie wont open, and Ryder wouldnt bat as low as 7.

by Shelsey93 Sat 26 Jan 2013, 7:23 pm

Jimmy Anderson would love the look of that top 3. Plus, Ryder has ruled himself out.

by ShankyCricket Sun 27 Jan 2013, 8:50 pm

Shelsey93 wrote:
Stella wrote:NZ are playing better than us at present, in ODI's, that is.

I don't know. SA were missing a lot of top players for big parts of the series. I'd be very disappointed if we didn't win the series.

Indeed! Anything other than 3-0 would be disappointing.

by ShankyCricket Sun 27 Jan 2013, 8:52 pm

CF wrote:NZ's test side will also be strengthend by the likely return of Dan Vettori

I hope you mean batting rather than the bowling. His bowling record over the last 2 years or so is worse than even Harbhajan's, whom many consider finished at Test level. Vettori has been a ridiculously innocuous Test bowler for some time now.

by gboycottnut Sun 27 Jan 2013, 10:09 pm

ShankyCricket wrote:
CF wrote:NZ's test side will also be strengthend by the likely return of Dan Vettori
I hope you mean batting rather than the bowling. His bowling record over the last 2 years or so is worse than even Harbhajan's, whom many consider finished at Test level. Vettori has been a ridiculously innocuous Test bowler for some time now.

Understandable considering the amount of injuries Vettori has had as he comes towards the end of his international career.

by msp83 Mon 28 Jan 2013, 9:55 am

But NZ doesn't have a terrific spin bowling tallent who can step in for Vetori. He has to play as an all-rounder, and in that role, he'll be miles better than James Franklin, with both bat and ball.
Guptill
McCullum
Williamson
Taylor
Brownlie
Munro
Watling
Vetori
Bracewell
Southee
Boult. Could make a half decent side. Ryder for Munro would have been even better. and if Watling opens along with Guptill despite the job being demanding, McCullum bats 3 and Williamson can come down to 5, where I think he could be best suited for NZ.
Bats down to 8, and both Southee and Bracewell are capable hitters in the lower order. Munro is a useful support seamer in helpful conditions, and Williamson too is a decent parttime spin option.
The pack of young seamers could be pretty handy for NZ, and Vetori, even now is hard to get away and hence help build sustained pressure.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Mon 28 Jan 2013, 10:31 am

msp83 wrote:But NZ doesn't have a terrific spin bowling tallent who can step in for Vetori. He has to play as an all-rounder, and in that role, he'll be miles better than James Franklin, with both bat and ball.
Guptill
McCullum
Williamson
Taylor
Brownlie
Munro
Watling
Vetori
Bracewell
Southee
Boult. Could make a half decent side. Ryder for Munro would have been even better. and if Watling opens along with Guptill despite the job being demanding, McCullum bats 3 and Williamson can come down to 5, where I think he could be best suited for NZ.
Bats down to 8, and both Southee and Bracewell are capable hitters in the lower order. Munro is a useful support seamer in helpful conditions, and Williamson too is a decent parttime spin option.
The pack of young seamers could be pretty handy for NZ, and Vetori, even now is hard to get away and hence help build sustained pressure.

Sadly I understand Vettori won't be fit to play anyway. But hopefully they find a way of keeping Franklin out of the test team.

The test team will look something like
McCullum/Flynn (there's growing talk that McCullum will move back down to 5, and Flynn opened in the last round of Plunkett Shields)
Guptil (here's hoping he finds some form in the T20/ODIs)/Watling
Williamson
Taylor
Flynn/McCullum
Watling/Ronchi
B. Martin/N. McCullum
Bracewell
Southee
Wagner (or Munro may bat 7 as 4th seamer)
Boult

by **Biltong** Mon 28 Jan 2013, 10:43 am

Pete, why would you think Ronchi should play ahead of Watling as a possibility?

When I look at Watling he has really applied himself and did very in SA.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 28 Jan 2013, 11:04 am

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
msp83 wrote:It was a fine performance from Bell in the context of the game. But I am not yet convinced that he's the man to do the job at the top for England. The style of batting is too demanding on the guy at the other end, and I wouldn't fancy him opening in a chase of 270+.

To be fair hes ben a run monster, taking over Trotts role in that regard. His record, especially in chases since taking the openers role again he been very good. Averaged 56 at 0.8 (Cook in the same period is 36 at 0.7...and career wise hes not that much better)
People also say this about Trott...he was being selfish or his slow scoring was hamstringing england ..yet England are still winning games (and finaly all over the world), and these two players have played a huge part in England establishing themselves firmly back at the top table of ODI cricket and finaly capable of at least putting up a decent show in India.
Yes maybeits true that certain players arent much use when chasing 700. But then how often do England actualy conceed over 270? Not very often...so why pick players for the exceptions? The majority of games its guys who can bat the long innings that have helped England settle into a comfortable total.
Of all the games hes opened since regaining the role England have only had to chase over 270 twice. The first of those he score 45 in 41 balls, more than adequate and by a country mile Englands best batman in the game. The other one he got 1 run off 6 balls in a complete dicking of such epic proportions he can hardly be held soley responsible for it.
Earlier in his career (as an opener) he scored a slow 50 in a chase of 272 , England won. There was a chase of 387 against India where frankly Gilchrist Hayden and Chuck Norris wouldve struggled, and one other where he failed.

All in though Bell has played 44 matches as an opener, of those England have only had to chase 270 plus 5 times.Thats retty much once every 9 games or every other series.
So whilst his record hasnt been amazeballs in these situations doesit really need to be? Why not pick players for the situations that happen more often, chasing 220-260 or bating first? Have pinch hitters ever worked out for England long term (no)
In sumary I would cede its a fair point that Bell isnt the best big total run chaser in world cricket, I would argue its not that much of a problem and more important to have plyers who are good at setting totals and chasing normals ones first, and the ability to score run a ball centuries on demand a nice bonus.

The more daring option would be Hales, I certainly wouldnt want Bell Trott and Root in the side together with Cook as well. But right now this is working for England
They arent a perfect side, but they keep doing OK.

msp83 wrote:Would really like to see how they go about when Trott comes back. Well they have a top 3 of Cook, Bell and Trott? Will that mean Root has to sit out? An interesting choice.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Of the 4 its Cook who would be dropped on form *shrug*
Obviously it wont happen.We also assume KP and Morgan are untouchable as they are the ones who can make rapid runs more regulalry.
Roots had an impressive start but Bells record in his latest stint as an opener matches that and over a longer period. Id also note that England have won 8 and lost 1 of the games where Bells opened and Trott batted 3 despite playing SA, Aus and the Windies.

I think it will could down to what they do about spin options, with Trotts swing perhaps beng better suited to NZ and home conditions (also the locations of upcoming ICC tournaments). If they play Swann and Tredwell then Roots bolwing really goes out the window, a third right arm off spinner really isnt much use.
Im gonna stick my neck out and say Cook Bell Trott KP Morgan Butters Broad Swann Tredders Finn Anderson. It doesnt bat deep but they have the stability at the top of the order and 3 explosive batsmen plus 3 bowlers who can score. 5 proper wicket taking bowlers and some variation from Trott and KP at a push.

I forsee though a raft of bizare circumstances leading to a top 5 of Keiswetter Bopara Clarke, Wright Patel

msp83 wrote:Broad's batting has declined over the last year or so, and I don't think he can bat 7 in an ODI side. If the top 3 aren't going to score quickly, then Pietersen and Morgan will have to pick up the pace regularly, and that increases the chances of more wickets, meaning that the number 7 will have to chip in with good consistent contributions, something I don't see Broad doing.
Its a dificult situation for the team management, and lets see how they would take up the task. Perhaps Morgan should be pushed to 6 with Root batting at 5, and they can then hope Root, Pietersen and Trott will help them through the 5th bowler overs. Or make one of Root, Trott and Bell sit out in favor of Woakes who can then come in at 7.

I understand the point but lets bear in mind Woakes wasnt exactly a first choice in this squad, or even the last one. Nor has he actually done anything to justify selection other than being the only one of the seamers who can bat a bit...which hes yet to really show at international level any more than Broad has.
Im assuming broad is over his injury problems, but yes his position would be threatened by Woakes, who is a viable option at 7. That I grant is a selection that has its merits, but carries risks too.

I really dont see Root KP Trott as a viable 5th bowler option..they are bit part contributors at best. Root only bowled as much as he did because the seam bowlers and Patel were so expensive. Bopara (or Patel if you are delusional) is really the only English batsman who could be considered for that role, and hes been considered many times then dropped.
Trott and Bell should be under pressure from root, but I really cant see an England side with all 3 in (pending injuries, rests, KP deciding he wants to play BPL etc)

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 28 Jan 2013, 11:17 am

ShankyCricket wrote:I am not sure why people are getting carried away by Bell's "superb" ODI summer. We have seen plenty of false dawns from him in ODIs before. He had a similarly "superb" summer in 2007, esp against India in that 7 match series, where he virtually scored in every game. That didn't improve his ODI performances in the long run however. I think his performances in the summer earned him the next couple of series (ie. the current one and the one in NZ) but I fail to see how a player with such an average ODI record becoming "undroppable" on the basis of 4 good months. FWIW Root has outperformed Bell in this series and if he continues to do so in NZ (where he will surely play given that KP has been rested) then I see no reason why Bell should be picked ahead of Root, especially considering that Root offers a bowling option.

Not hyping him up at all (my original choice would've been Hales or Taylor anway) but if he continues to outperform Bell then he should be picked.

Rehashing what I was talking about with MSP:
Bell took the openers role back at the start of June. In that time hes averaged over 50 at a decent rate, pretty much the same as Root has in a month...but over 16 games rather than 5 ...7 months not 1 etc. By your own argument that makes Root not undropable, its 4 innings and a high score of 53 ...his average is a bit misleading. Id say hes battling for Trotts place first ( as the bowling option and a player who scores notoriously slowly and whos been out the side) currently.
The kid is a real talent and defiantly worth his test place, currently in the ODI side we have an excess of batsmen (Hales is too making a strong case to step up a format) its harder to include him. I do agree though that Bell and Trott shouldnt be seen as untouchables in the medium term. I dont see Roots bowling as strong enough (21 overs, no wickets) to justify selection ahead of Bell (who has 6 ODI wickets at 14!) especially if england do play tredwell and swann.
Its a pity cooks captain really, since hes the batsman whos been off form.

by msp83 Mon 28 Jan 2013, 11:25 am

Cook's been off form? The one relax line in an otherwise serious debate I assume!.
By the way is KP part of the ODI squad? wasn't he rested from one of the limited overs squads?
If he's not there, then it has to be Cook, Bell, Trott and Root top 4, Morgan at 5, Buttler at 6, and one of Patel and Woakes at 7.
Swann, Broad, Finn, and Anderson the bowling lineup. Should also help England decide on who among the 3 of Bell, Trott and Root should take up the first choice position when Pietersen returns.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Mon 28 Jan 2013, 11:27 am

Biltong wrote:Pete, why would you think Ronchi should play ahead of Watling as a possibility?

When I look at Watling he has really applied himself and did very in SA.

Sorry I should have commented - I think there's a chance Watling will open, in which case Ronchi would come in as keeper - he's a better gloveman that Watling (understandably as Watling spent most of his career without the gloves on)

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Mon 28 Jan 2013, 11:29 am

msp83 wrote:Cook's been off form? The one relax line in an otherwise serious debate I assume!.
By the way is KP part of the ODI squad? wasn't he rested from one of the limited overs squads?
If he's not there, then it has to be Cook, Bell, Trott and Root top 4, Morgan at 5, Buttler at 6, and one of Patel and Woakes at 7.
Swann, Broad, Finn, and Anderson the bowling lineup. Should also help England decide on who among the 3 of Bell, Trott and Root should take up the first choice position when Pietersen returns.

KP's only playing the tests in NZ, no ODIs or T20s. Squads are in the OP Smile

by msp83 Mon 28 Jan 2013, 11:46 am

So Root, Bell and Trott, all should get a fair chance to put forward their case.
Pete, do you thing Daniel Flynn has the game to open at the test match level? I doubt whether he really deserves his place in the side itself.

by gboycottnut Mon 28 Jan 2013, 12:33 pm

msp83 wrote:So Root, Bell and Trott, all should get a fair chance to put forward their case.
Pete, do you thing Daniel Flynn has the game to open at the test match level? I doubt whether he really deserves his place in the side itself.

No as he is very weak against pace bowling. England fast medium bowler who lacks express pace James Anderson even managed to hospitalise Flynn back in one of the tests V NZ in 2008.

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 28 Jan 2013, 1:28 pm

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:
msp83 wrote:Cook's been off form? The one relax line in an otherwise serious debate I assume!.
By the way is KP part of the ODI squad? wasn't he rested from one of the limited overs squads?
If he's not there, then it has to be Cook, Bell, Trott and Root top 4, Morgan at 5, Buttler at 6, and one of Patel and Woakes at 7.
Swann, Broad, Finn, and Anderson the bowling lineup. Should also help England decide on who among the 3 of Bell, Trott and Root should take up the first choice position when Pietersen returns.

KP's only playing the tests in NZ, no ODIs or T20s. Squads are in the OP

Christ KP isnt in is he. Doh

Well please disreagrd the last 27,000 words of waffle from me Whistle

MSP...since the Windies series Cooks really not been very good, only averaging about 30 without scoring quickly. If we take the same period that Bells being opening ( what I was talking about) we tack on the Windies series where he did get a century, but even that doesnt drag his average up far. Hes scoring nearly 10 runs less an innings and at a slower rate than the rest of his career, thats off form by his standards and comfortably worse than any of the other england front 6 batsmen (Bell, Trott, KP, Morgan Cook Root) . Indeed its the sort of form that everyone hates bell for displaying in most of his ODI career, but obviously not anywhere near sustained or bad enough for him being dropped (captain) to even enter the equation.
Currently he is the weakest link, yet undroppable.

Now realising KP isnt playing that really sticks the cat amongst the pigeons. Can we really play Cook Trott Bell Root (plus Morgan)? I imagine England would be far too tempted to put Patel in as a bowler/finisher if we did that due to the lack of firepower upfront ...which would mean no Tredwell. A wasted selection IMO as that lot could bat till christmas pretty much negating the requirement for batting at 7 but creating the problem that they will only have amassed 3 runs of the first 49 overs. Weaken the bowling to include a player who may not even get to bat and is frankly rubbish anyway( one innings aside).

Assuming they do pick the 5 proper batsmen its a huge opportunity for Root as Kiwi says. If he shows he can play explosively as well as properly he has to be a real contender to kick Trott or Bell out of the team when KP returns. Its a huge chance too for Bell to step up, hes got the runs over a sustained period that prove he can accumulate and contribute tio a winning team, can he now add the ability to clear the ropes when needed too?
Who knows...maybe England will end up telling KP hes welcome to play IPL next year. (umm maybe a mild exaggeration)

Poor old Bairstow meanwhile gets to carry drinks, be the butt of the ginger jibes and wish hed actually scored some runs when given his chance. Still England keepers rarely last more than a few months so if Buttler continues to maintain an ODI high score of 14 someone may notice eventually and issue the time honoured "the door is not closed" speach for him.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Mon 28 Jan 2013, 2:00 pm

msp83 wrote:So Root, Bell and Trott, all should get a fair chance to put forward their case.
Pete, do you thing Daniel Flynn has the game to open at the test match level? I doubt whether he really deserves his place in the side itself.

I wouldn't have Flynn in the team. He did post 160-odd opening for Northern the other day, but that was on a flat pitch, with Chris Martin the only "name" seamer on the other side. Then again, I wouldn't have McCullum or Guptil opening at the moment either Whistle

if there was anyone there to fit in.

Peter Fulton is back from his injury so he may just get a shot at the top

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 28 Jan 2013, 2:19 pm

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:
msp83 wrote:So Root, Bell and Trott, all should get a fair chance to put forward their case.
Pete, do you thing Daniel Flynn has the game to open at the test match level? I doubt whether he really deserves his place in the side itself.

I wouldn't have Flynn in the team. He did post 160-odd opening for Northern the other day, but that was on a flat pitch, with Chris Martin the only "name" seamer on the other side. Then again, I wouldn't have McCullum or Guptil opening at the moment either if there was anyone there to fit in.

Peter Fulton is back from his injury so he may just get a shot at the top

Just how bad is Flynn that youd seriously turn to a 34 year old with an average of 20 ahead of him? Is it not better to stick by some of the kids and force them to face up to the fact that at some point there wont be dads army to try and hide behind

Even with the injury/sulk list clearing up its a pretty makeshift batting lineup.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Mon 28 Jan 2013, 2:52 pm

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:
msp83 wrote:So Root, Bell and Trott, all should get a fair chance to put forward their case.
Pete, do you thing Daniel Flynn has the game to open at the test match level? I doubt whether he really deserves his place in the side itself.

I wouldn't have Flynn in the team. He did post 160-odd opening for Northern the other day, but that was on a flat pitch, with Chris Martin the only "name" seamer on the other side. Then again, I wouldn't have McCullum or Guptil opening at the moment either if there was anyone there to fit in.

Peter Fulton is back from his injury so he may just get a shot at the top

Just how bad is Flynn that youd seriously turn to a 34 year old with an average of 20 ahead of him? Is it not better to stick by some of the kids and force them to face up to the fact that at some point there wont be dads army to try and hide behind

Even with the injury/sulk list clearing up its a pretty makeshift batting lineup.

It's more asking someone to open at test level after 2 or 3 games opening at 1st class I object to with Flynn - and Flynn is 27, and only averages 26 in test cricket, and just 37 in first class. Fulton's been opening the batting and scoring runs in first class cricket the last 2 or 3 years. In terms of a stop gap until Hamish Rutherford, Jeet Ravel or someone else is ready, Fulton is a better bet than Flynn as an opener. It's either that or go back to Jamie How or Aaron Redmond (seeing as James Marshall and Mathew Sinclair are both batting number 4 or 5 in FC this season)

by Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler Mon 28 Jan 2013, 3:15 pm

OK that I understand, but would it not be better to stick by Guptill and Mccullum ..despite their recent struggles...or is one out?
The names you are trotting out put into context their performances...sub-standard but not as bad as others whove been given a go.

TBH its a tough ask for anyone to face steyn and co then get andersons mob turn up a few weeks later.

by msp83 Mon 28 Jan 2013, 3:17 pm

Pete you said Vetori won't be available for the series. Any idea about his injury status and as to when would he be back?

by msp83 Mon 28 Jan 2013, 3:19 pm

Looking at the kind of alternative options, I'd rather have McCullum and Guptill at the top. The only other restructuring I would look at is to make Watling open and bat McCullum at 3. As I said earlier, I am not sure NZ are making best use of Williamson's tallents by batting him at 3.

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Mon 28 Jan 2013, 4:04 pm

msp83 wrote:Pete you said Vetori won't be available for the series. Any idea about his injury status and as to when would he be back?

Not sure - I'm going from an article I read in the NZ media at the weekend which mentioned "no Vettori" in passing. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/cricket/news/article.cfm?c_id=29&objectid=10861813

The Herald is expecting the side to be
McCullum/Flynn
Guptil
Williamson
Taylor
Brownlee
Flynn/McCullum
Watling
Bracewell
Southee
Boult
A. Spinner (Patel/Martin/McCullum/Astle/?)

by Pete C (Kiwireddevil) Mon 28 Jan 2013, 4:14 pm

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:OK that I understand, but would it not be better to stick by Guptill and Mccullum ..despite their recent struggles...or is one out?
The names you are trotting out put into context their performances...sub-standard but not as bad as others whove been given a go.

TBH its a tough ask for anyone to face steyn and co then get andersons mob turn up a few weeks later.

True. And I'm expecting a complete pasting in the tests regardless of who opens - McCullum at 5 may just give him a chance to re-find his test mojo though. The limited overs stuff, (especially with no KP) should be pretty close - England have just shown in India that they have some issues with team balance to work on in limited overs. Also, Jan/Feb pitches in NZ won't be green seamers given the summer NZ's having. There may be a bit more juice in the tracks by March though.

by Sponsored content