New Zealand- could they just win it?

[Son Of Coco]

Ok, SP here is a challenge for you: Name me two NZ cricketer's you rate, hell even one.

Try naming two English cricketers that have been genuinely world class in the last couple of years...Flintoff when he is playing and ahhhh that South African bloke Others in spits and spurts.

Obviously over cricket's lifetime there are a lot more than that.

I think NZ have a decent chance of winning, and I hope they do. I'm supporting them and the WI now Australia's out.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Broken nail?

Was just about to type 'split ends' when I read that.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Who gives a crap if NZ actually turn up for meaningless OD series? Neither have won the WC so as far as proper competition goes they're both equally useless. England are still more likely to win one at some point than NZ, because total mediocrity doesn't beat the world's best when it matters and England are far more likely to find the quality required than NZ.

Not really, as NZ have been a far better OD side than England for quite a while now. Most English fans here seem to have conceded that England have been really poor in OD matches for a sustained period.

 

[Athlai]

Who gives a crap if NZ actually turn up for meaningless OD series? Neither have won the WC so as far as proper competition goes they're both equally useless. England are still more likely to win one at some point than NZ, because total mediocrity doesn't beat the world's best when it matters and England are far more likely to find the quality required than NZ.

 

[Flem274*]

I love you Scaly, you're such a randomly NZ hating retarded donkey that it makes my day to come into this thread and read your posts. I'm in a good mood atm so i cbf proving you wrong (not that there's much need). You'll probably have a boo boo and report the post but meh, someone needed to tell the truth.

 

[Athlai]

The above post needs more swears.

 

[Flem274*]

The above post needs more swears.

Wouldn't want to have a dirty ****ing mouth now would I?

 

[Athlai]

Thats more like it.

 

[Uppercut]

Not really, as NZ have been a far better OD side than England for quite a while now. Most English fans here seem to have conceded that England have been really poor in OD matches for a sustained period.

Not true Coco, they're merely inconsistent. Since beating New Zealand and Australia in the tri-series following their whitewash, England have won series against South Africa, India, Sri Lanka and the West Indies twice. In that time they've lost series to the West Indies once, New Zealand twice and India. Truth be told, that's not a bad record at all over the last 2 1/2 years, but they failed big when it mattered- in the World Cup- and have a habit of copping unspeakable abuse when they fail in ODIs but not getting any credit when they win.

 

[Flem274*]

England actualy have the makings of a good team, they're just wierd, a lot of their reserves are absolute crap and so are some unblelieveable first teamers (cough, Wright).

They should do better, but they don't.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Delusional as always.
You moan and groan over NZ fans being optimistic about their teams chance of winning something, yet at the same time you feel that your team (England) has a better chance than them.

Hmmmm, I wonder who is being more realistic.....

You are missing the whole point.

It's not about being consistently good in meaningless ODI 300 match series. To win a World Cup you have to have the capability of performing to a very high standard. New Zealand do not have that capacity because they do not have the quality. England can hit the necessary heights occasionally and that means England at least have a puncher's chance of winning a big global competition. New Zealand can only win by default - ie opponents playing to a mediocre standard throughout the knockout stages which is highly unlikely.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Not true Coco, they're merely inconsistent. Since beating New Zealand and Australia in the tri-series following their whitewash, England have won series against South Africa, India, Sri Lanka and the West Indies twice. In that time they've lost series to the West Indies once, New Zealand twice and India. Truth be told, that's not a bad record at all over the last 2 1/2 years, but they failed big when it mattered- in the World Cup- and have a habit of copping unspeakable abuse when they fail in ODIs but not getting any credit when they win.

It's possible I've taken more notice of this then than their successes. I don't have the satellite TV capabilities (especially in this country) to follow their every move. The last time I recall them being talked about as being poor was a while back too - possibly before they beat us at home in '06. I assumed they'd carried on in that fashion.

New Zealand weren't poor by the same standards though, and they seemingly do better than expected in big competitions so I don't think Scaly's summation of their chances is fair.

 

[superkingdave]

Our record in ODI's is probably better than our test record of late

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

New Zealand weren't poor by the same standards though, and they seemingly do better than expected in big competitions so I don't think Scaly's summation of their chances is fair.

Exactly. Scaly's "England more likely to produce quality" line may sound good in theory, but I'd say the team that consistently fails at the business end is more likely to give themselves a chance to win a big tournament than the team that consistently fails to even reach the business end.

 

[GGG]

Exactly. Scaly's England more likely to produce quality" line may sound good in theory, but I'd say the team that consistently fails at the business end is more likely to give themselves a chance to win a big tournament than the team that consistently fails to even reach the business end.

Come on lets be honest, who in the England team would even make the NZ 20/20 side, Pieterson, Anderson and ?

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

I was talking about their possibility of producing quality, like Scaly was hinting at. I presume he means population base and domestic structure.

 

[Uppercut]

It's possible I've taken more notice of this then than their successes. I don't have the satellite TV capabilities (especially in this country) to follow their every move. The last time I recall them being talked about as being poor was a while back too - possibly before they beat us at home in '06. I assumed they'd carried on in that fashion.

New Zealand weren't poor by the same standards though, and they seemingly do better than expected in big competitions so I don't think Scaly's summation of their chances is fair.

For sure, completely agree with the Kiwis here. But New Zealand being much better than England =/ "England have been really poor in OD matches for a sustained period."

 

[Scaly piscine]

Come on lets be honest, who in the England team would even make the NZ 20/20 side, Pieterson, Anderson and ?

Broad, Swann, Sidebottom/Wright, Colly, Bopara

 

[Athlai]

Wright? Swann? lol

 

[Uppercut]

Wright? Swann? lol

Indeed.