-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* Super Six Discussion
- Thread starter Anil
- Start date
I am looking forward to NZ V India as potentially being the best match of the Super Sixes. It will be crucial enough as it is, let alone if NZ need a win to reach the semis!
At this stage I am reasonably confident that NZ can win the match as they are masters at strangling the opposition - the same tactics worked v India in the ICC Trophey when NZ won the title - India & Ganguly got frustrated into self destructing.
NZ need a good performance V Australia, particularly from the bowlers.
At this stage I am reasonably confident that NZ can win the match as they are masters at strangling the opposition - the same tactics worked v India in the ICC Trophey when NZ won the title - India & Ganguly got frustrated into self destructing.
NZ need a good performance V Australia, particularly from the bowlers.
Tim
Well-known member
I see Wisden have entered Stephen Fleming's 146* against South Africa in the World Cup as the 13th best ODI innings of all time.
I didn't realise it was THAT good, I know alot of New Zealand writers & cricket analysts had said that it was probably the best ODI hundred in NZ history.
I didn't realise it was THAT good, I know alot of New Zealand writers & cricket analysts had said that it was probably the best ODI hundred in NZ history.
Fleming certainly has taken his attacking cricket philosophy into his batting with opening in ODIs! He is starting to look like the player a lot of people have always thought he was capable of becoming. It also seems to be having some effect on the rest of the batting as well.
That chase against Canada was very impressive, marred only by the loss of some unecessary wickets. I for one would like to see a few more performances like that from the Kiwis & posting some impressive / intimidating targets. If more of the Kiwi batsmen would do so it would take more of the pressure off the likes of Fleming, Astle & Cairns.
That chase against Canada was very impressive, marred only by the loss of some unecessary wickets. I for one would like to see a few more performances like that from the Kiwis & posting some impressive / intimidating targets. If more of the Kiwi batsmen would do so it would take more of the pressure off the likes of Fleming, Astle & Cairns.
Tim
Well-known member
Well the fact is, is that if Fleming was consistent he'd be way up in the batting ratings for both ODI & Tests.
He is such a good batsman, but he's just struggled to put good scores together.
It really is frustrating seeing such a natural talent like him go to waste, hopefully we get 3 or 4 good years out of him.
He is such a good batsman, but he's just struggled to put good scores together.
It really is frustrating seeing such a natural talent like him go to waste, hopefully we get 3 or 4 good years out of him.
krkode
Well-known member
Fleming is easily, in my opinion, still one of the most valuable players in the world. Despite a lack of magnificense in the batting, I think he makes a great captain, in spirit and leadership and the Kiwis have done well under him. He's probably today's most experienced captain (meaning played the most matches as a captain). :wow:
krkode
Well-known member
In fact, only Ranatunga (56), Border (93), Taylor (50), Atherton (54), Cronje (53), Clive Lloyds (74), and Viv Richards (50), have captained more matches than Fleming has in the history of test cricket :wow:
And Fleming has captained 49, and by the time he's done, I'll expect he'll be in the 70s, 80s or even the 90s.
And Fleming has captained 49, and by the time he's done, I'll expect he'll be in the 70s, 80s or even the 90s.
IMO Fleming's decision to take on the role of opener in ODIs may well be the next piece of the jigsaw. I admit I was dead set against it to start with, but now I have to say I enjoy watching him bat there. He has taken a more aggressive approach to his batting and IMO the best is yet to come from him.
He struggled to start with, but if he continues his rapid improvement he should be considered amongst 'the greats' of the game by the time he retires.
The Aussie tour seems to have been a coming of age for the team and the next half dozen years look good for Fleming & NZ cricket. I hope that the team again follows the Captain's example - the next few games will give us a good indication.
The final piece will be the improvement of NZ pitches to further encourage stroke play & aggressive seam bowling.
He struggled to start with, but if he continues his rapid improvement he should be considered amongst 'the greats' of the game by the time he retires.
The Aussie tour seems to have been a coming of age for the team and the next half dozen years look good for Fleming & NZ cricket. I hope that the team again follows the Captain's example - the next few games will give us a good indication.
The final piece will be the improvement of NZ pitches to further encourage stroke play & aggressive seam bowling.
Tim
Well-known member
I also like this idea of Astle at 3, he seems to play better coming in after the new ball has been worn off a little. After all he is NZ's best batsman and I don't think he should be exposed too soon.
McMillan I don't think is a long-term solution as an opener, but NZ are starting to develop a few good openers back here like Michael Papps or Jesse Ryder who I think would do a good job.
McMillan I don't think is a long-term solution as an opener, but NZ are starting to develop a few good openers back here like Michael Papps or Jesse Ryder who I think would do a good job.
Anil
Well-known member
What is the reason for such inconsistency? When he came into the NZ side for the first time, he was hailed as a natural successor to Martin Crowe, high praise that. He has always seemed an elegant and wonderfully talented player, but woefully inconsistent. His captaincy has been exceptional, but he still has some way to go to fulfil his potential as a batsman. Hope he does though, one of my favourite batsmen. Hope he doesn't do it in the Ind-NZ match however...:duh:Tim said:
Anil
Well-known member
NZ need to win every match in the SS if they don't want to be at the mercy of the result in the Ken-Zim match. India have already qualified for the semis and NZ will be desperate for a win so.....I have to say it all depends on India's intensity going into the match. If India gives a performance like the one against SL, they would be the clear favourites.anzac said:I am looking forward to NZ V India as potentially being the best match of the Super Sixes. It will be crucial enough as it is, let alone if NZ need a win to reach the semis!
At this stage I am reasonably confident that NZ can win the match as they are masters at strangling the opposition - the same tactics worked v India in the ICC Trophey when NZ won the title - India & Ganguly got frustrated into self destructing.
NZ need a good performance V Australia, particularly from the bowlers.
That ICC final was atleast 3 years ago, wasn't it? A lot of water has flown under the bridge since then. A more appropriate indicator would be the comprehensive NZ victory in the recently concluded series.
I beg to differ.krkode said:
Cairns finished off the job that was started by NZ in the field by restricting the total posted by India. India was out thought by Fleming & Co & got strangled in their batting & they broke in the field. Pressure was the key in that game - NZ applied it & India were'nt able to handle it.
The Indian bowling performances by and large have been crap when put under consistant pressure, & have only started to look good recently in this WC & particularly when defending a big score. As a team their fielding is also suspect (although it has improved) but by and large India are suspect in the field & especially if they do not have a big total to defend. Bottom line I feel India are suspect / fragile in the mental toughness stakes.
In contrast the all aspects of the NZ team have improved since that time although they have yet to produce a 'complete' performance this WC.
In the big games for India so far ENG & PAK opening bowlers were too short & wide, and SL did not have the pace to unsettle them early. The NZ attack has both pace & bounce, with Bond & Oram forming the same sort of partnership / role as Lee & McGrath. Cairns will also be a different prospect now that he has some confidence, and this will relieve some pressure off the rest.
As I said elsewhere I do not think the Indians can improve significantly from where they are at now, whereas NZ can. On current form India may be slight favs, but if NZ put their game together I would back this team v India on anything other than 'sub continent' pitches.
full_length
Well-known member
"As I said elsewhere I do not think the Indians can improve significantly from where they are at now, whereas NZ can. On current form India may be slight favs, but if NZ put their game together I would back this team v India on anything other than 'sub continent' pitches.
"
And I responded to that stupid comment about SubC pitches elsewhere. Why dont you take the pain to go and look at match results for India in ODIs home and away and run a similar excercise for NZ. Let us know what you find.
As for the first part of the quote above, some more crap!
How do yuou know INdia cant improve significantly while NZ can?
Harbhajan hasnt come into play significantly yet. Kaif hasnt made big scores. Sehwag hasnt plummeled a century this WC (he was the only one who managed to score on your so called cricket pitches recently). There's scope for improvement.
I think that NZ have already performed out of their skins, and done the best they can..
They will have to fire big time to make a match of the India encouter.
"
And I responded to that stupid comment about SubC pitches elsewhere. Why dont you take the pain to go and look at match results for India in ODIs home and away and run a similar excercise for NZ. Let us know what you find.
As for the first part of the quote above, some more crap!
How do yuou know INdia cant improve significantly while NZ can?
Harbhajan hasnt come into play significantly yet. Kaif hasnt made big scores. Sehwag hasnt plummeled a century this WC (he was the only one who managed to score on your so called cricket pitches recently). There's scope for improvement.
I think that NZ have already performed out of their skins, and done the best they can..
They will have to fire big time to make a match of the India encouter.
krkode
Well-known member
True that they were outthought and outplayed in that game - but Cairns was just one barrier that they could not possibly pass. 250 isn't that bad of a score, but with Cairns out there, it was made bad. That's all I was saying :Panzac said:I beg to differ.
Cairns finished off the job that was started by NZ in the field by restricting the total posted by India. India was out thought by Fleming & Co & got strangled in their batting & they broke in the field. Pressure was the key in that game - NZ applied it & India were'nt able to handle it.
True that the Indian bowlers mostly bowl well to large totals, but that's part of being an Indian bowler - you expect your batsmen to score big, and 250 in the ICC trophy and 250 today will be very different scores for the Indian bowlers to defend, as I think 250 today is a much bigger score for the Indian bowlers.
Rik
Well-known member
You want proof that NZ could quite easily brush off India? Just look here http://uk.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/WORLD_CUPS/WC2003/SCORECARDS/SUPSIX/AUS_NZ_WC2003_ODI-SUPSIX5_11MAR2003.html#current