Comments on: Harden up

By: sla

sla — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 07:49:53 +0000

LB – definitely agree franklin could/should get runs. I like him in the side and i want to see him get a decent run at it. I guess my point was more directed towrds elliot; franklin’s (traditionally) looked as a bowler who bats. Oram a batsman that bowls. And Elliot is an in-between player not suited to test cricket.

i was mad when i saw franklin chase that wide one in the second innings. Almost as mad as M.Crowe correctly predicting Ross Taylor was getting impatient and was about to do something stupid.

By: Leg Break

Leg Break — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 05:05:29 +0000

Oram update:

3 for CD today in a score of 450/7.

sla; Franklin can get runs. He’s technically good, has a test century and has proven he can get them at the next level down.

He’s really low on confidence though, and doesn’t seem to start that well.

And when things are going against you, the luck often doesn’t run your way; like in the 1st dig in Hamilton.

And when things are going against you, the brain often doesn’t kick into gear; like in the 2nd dig in Hamilton.

By: sla

sla — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:07:27 +0000

I don’t think elliot should be considered. Ever. His bowling is not test standard – he’s not going to take wickets and its hard to imagine him scoring any reasonable amount of runs against a half decent pace attack. So why bother? He’s looked out of his depth in all test matches that he has played to date.

On a good day its feasible that franklin could take wickets and Oram will score runs… but elliot? Neither are concievable.

Still it comes back to the point that Ben eludes to – no one is putting their hand up demanding ownership of the #6 spot. And Oram has the best track record. When fit.

By: Ben

Ben — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:43:42 +0000

Does anyone feel Grant Elliott deserves a run in the number 6 slot

You would have thought Elliott had played himself into contention for this spot. Maybe the selectors thought they saw enough of him after the test series in Australia.

Of course, Elliott’s bowling is not nearly as useful in tests. Especially when Ryder is already there as the part time bowler.

By: Ben

Ben — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:29:11 +0000

Oram is not the option

While I do reckon Oram isn’t up to it just at the moment, it might be worth rushing in a guy with a recent average of 27 to replace one with a recent average of less than 6 (Franklin), especially when the other option (Elliot) has an average of less than 7.

Maybe we need to be adding another batsman and letting Ryder be the fourth seamer. (Though we don’t have any other batsmen in the squad.)

By: Ben

Ben — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:05:22 +0000

I really think NZ have lost the plot with these flat batting tracks.

Hey Ron, welcome to Crucket.

Flat batting tracks have been the vogue in NZ for several years now. We certainly aren’t preparing them this way especially for the Indians.

On the one hand, though conditions made NZ unique as a touring destination. However, it has made it hard for NZ players to develop decent techniques.

By: Ron

Ron — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 05:42:25 +0000

I really think NZ have lost the plot with these flat batting tracks. India are a much better side on paper but everyone knows they struggle in true hostile away batting conditions (I wonder if they still struggle…) so why not take a chance? I know they want the games to go five days to get the TV revenue but the way things are going these contests will be done in four anyway.
I still expect NZ to come out stronger in the next test.

By: Leg Break

Leg Break — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 01:49:23 +0000

Suhas, Oram is not the option

By: Suhas

Suhas — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 23:01:10 +0000

Does anyone feel Grant Elliott deserves a run in the number 6 slot which James Franklin and Jacob Oram are battling for? While Oram appeals as the best option, he carries no batting form and there are doubts about his ability to get through a test match in his current condition.

Elliott has had a miserable start to his test career, but seems to have redeemed himself with his batting in the one dayers. He’s also capable of accurate wicket-to-wicket bowling a la Nathan Astle. Have the selectors decided to treat him as a limited overs specialist for the time being?

By: Adverbin

Adverbin — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 04:54:22 +0000

I can empathise with you. My image of NZ is that of a ordinary but scrappy outfit with one classy bowler and one classy batsman, brilliant fielding and punching above it’s weight especially at home. The present team has a classy batting line up, a passenger (Franklin), ill disciplined fielding and bowling, and a glut of injuries. In fact this is India of the nineties and large parts of this decade. I have felt similar heartbreak for most of this period.
Still, remember that the last time India won in NZ, the win was largely set up by a Mumbaikar (Gavaskar) and an off spinner (Prasanna). In the third test Sir Richard bowled India out for 81.
Keep the faith.