Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SSMO said:
Six bowlers:
McLenaghan starts as does Southee. Boult bracketed with N McCullum. Anderson and Ryder, with Williamson the part time or second spinner.
That’s three bowlers and three part-timers. Not strong enough. And Williamson isn’t even allowed to bowl.
Guptill is being persevered with because in 2013 in England he touched heights none of the other options are capable of.
Not sure the lineup you proposed gives six bowlers? Can’t expect Anderson and Ryder to bowl ten each.
Mills gets selected because he has fashioned a fine record in ODIs over 13 years, much better than many people give him credit for. He’s probably coming to the end of his time, but still has something to offer the current team.
I guess having two big positives out of the day – Ronchi and Boult – balances out the negative. I’d quite forgotten it was almost two years since Boult played in the one-day team.
Shame Ronchi doesn’t work as an opener, but he doesn’t and his presence at seven gives finishing ability we’ve struggled to provide since McCullum moved up the order. Speaking of which, it may be time to stop counting Vettori when weighing up batting options. Shouldn’t condemn on basis of a single short innings yesterday, but reality is his batting was already in decline before the injuries started so expectations should be adjusted.
ANZ (I’m going to call them that from now on in recognition of the wrong turn the uniform designers have taken) didn’t play a line-up you’d want them to field in a World Cup semi-final. Seemed oddly short in both batting and bowling. Obviously they are searching for combinations but even at this early stage it looks as though 5th/6th bowler is going to be an issue unless either Williamson is reinstated or Ryder comes back into the fold.
The result of Guptill spending the winter remodelling his batting technique under MD Crowe wasn’t exactly obvious. Hopefully he’ll come good but I have to say now I wouldn’t be shocked if Guptill was out of the team by World Cup time.
Difficult to argue that Walsh wasn’t biased against Wellington.
I thought Barnes’s performance in the match was pretty good overall. Of course there were countless calls that could be argued, but that happens in every match. One notable reason it was such a good match was the absence of the recent trend where referees seem to decide they automatically have to give yellow cards in order to control the match.
Clearly the way replays are currently being used in international rugby is a joke, and needs to be clarified urgently.
A nation that wasn’t insecure would have let go of the Barnes 2007 incident shortly after the tournament. That’s what this is all about (from the media, not necessarily from you).
It’s odd to say that about Barnes now when there was no evidence NZ didn’t get the ‘rub of the green’ in that match. NZ’s childish obsession with Barnes, which is led by our pathetic television news programmes, shows our continuing insecurity as a nation.
Is that ’50 ODIS’ a typo or sarcasm?
SSMO (and why can’t I quote so it’s obvious to whom I am responding?): McCaw has made tactical mistakes before and will do so again. Not convinced these are closely linked to his future in the team. The reality is the match was closely fought, NZ nearly got out of jail despite struggling throughout but couldn’t quite pull it off. Either team could have won – there have been other occasions during the unbeaten run where NZ escaped against the odds.
The final penalty does raise the question of the influence of the video screen in rugby internationals, when the pictures shown within the ground end up having an influence on the referee and the home broadcaster controls what is displayed. It’s ludicrous that a referee can look at a big screen replay and then decide to call the TMO.
Signman: ridiculous to blame Barnes, and lame to still hold that one match against him. Too stubborn and sure of himself to be one of the best in the business, but the claim he always rules against NZ is without basis.
That said, I’m really tired of the logic that every player trying to intercept a pass with one hand is guilty of a penalisable deliberate knock-down. The idea that the intercepting player has to successfully catch the ball for the act to be legal is just nonsense.
There were tactical problems in that France game, but it’s worth noting that if the first XV is fielded in every match, that’s not very good preparation for losing two first fives injured in the same match.
Oi! If you’re going to quote For the Fallen, reckon you could get the words right? Cheers.
Hansen’s faith in Fekitoa reminds of Graham Henry and that bloke from Auckland who couldn’t catch the ball. Forget his name now, but he was part of that drongo backline when we lost to France at the 2007 World Cup. Henry spent about five years telling us he was going to be the next big thing in NZ rugby but it never happened.
I can normally remember names, but I think subconsciously I’ve erased it on purpose and I’m not going to look it up either. Don’t tell me.
Was accidentally subjected to a couple of minutes of the CGW breakfast this morning when switching on radio to wake recalcitrant teenager.
Mark Richardson was doing a ‘public service announcement’ which consisted of him moaning that when he sat in somebody else’s seat at the Warriors match, the owner of said ticket came along and was rude enough to ask him to move. Apparently wanting to sit in the seat you’ve purchased makes one an ‘anal retentive’.
-
AuthorPosts