Paint it, Black

Friday, July 27, 2012

Day 2 at Antigua: Give Chris Gayle an inch..

Doesn't matter who bowls against the breeze, the Gayle will get you anyway!

-- Yesterday, I suggested that New Zealand needed around 350 to be competitive. They got that in the end (thanks to some good hitting from Doug Bracewell and poor captaincy from Sammy), but it is still about 100 short of what they should have got with the foundation they had. Since then, the Windies have made them pay dearly, and if the pitch starts to deteriorate they could find themselves short.

-- The West Indians, especially Roach and Rampaul, put in a good controlled effort with the ball and were not averse to trying to bounce the batsmen out. NZ should have taken the cue from them on what lengths to bowl on this pitch, but unfortunately Martin, Wagner and Bracewell were mostly too full. Only in the final session did they start to put things right.

-- Chris Gayle breezed back into test cricket with a typically nonchalant assault, and there could be further grief for the bowlers if he gets stuck in tomorrow. There was a case for including Tim Southee, who troubled Gayle in the one-dayers, and the bowlers should have probably followed his example yesterday.

-- Undamaged ball or not, I hope Doug Bracewell gets a good talking-to from the match referee, if only for the sake of consistency in dealing with such issues.

-- In general, a NZ victory (against a top side) requires that our fielders be at their sharpest - the expert slip catching during the Hobart win last November comes to mind. In this context, the two missed chances (Guptill off Powell, and more damningly Flynn off Gayle) in successive balls could turn out to be critical.

-- Finally, we got to witness Neil Wagner's much-anticipated international debut. First impressions: he certainly possesses a bit of extra pace, if not the swing of someone like Trent Boult, but is a bit erratic as well; there were enough four-balls on offer. He seems to be quite a fired-up character, and sledging Chris Gayle wasn't the best idea. However, he is getting the old ball to reverse appreciably, and that might be the key to NZ making inroads on day 3.

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Day 1 at Antigua: Guptill 1-1 Narine

A century against a team they take seriosuly...someday!

-- A pretty good day for New Zealand. 232 for 4 is an excellent start considering we didn't reach 200 in either innings of the warm-up game. I don't agree, however, with Ross Taylor's suggestion that NZ are on top. The set batsmen are all gone, and there's a new ball as well as a confident Narine to contend with.

-- The pitch so far has hardly been the minefield that we were apprehensive about (McCullum earlier described it as being 'full of ridges'). It looks like it will play as a good challenging test wicket, offering more turn and bounce as the game goes on. In that sense, it was probably a good toss to win. A lot now depends on how Narine and Vettori fare with the ball.

-- You really hope Martin Guptill puts his dismissal on 97 behind him and looks at the positives. Disappointing it may have been to miss out on a century, but he has provided the team with an invaluable foundation, and should take this as a sign that he is capable of cracking it at the test level. It's up to the remaining batsmen now to make his innings count.

-- I disagree with the rule that the fielding side must not lose a review when the DRS reveals a no-ball to have been bowled. This was applied in the second session when the Windies reviewed a not-out decision off Kemar Roach. My view is, the moment you call for a review you are leaving it to a legal basis for giving a decision either way, which should include the possibility of a no-ball. I don't see why a no-ball should cancel everything after the review has been called for.

-- I'm a big fan of Darren Sammy, but I can see why people continue to wonder about his place in the XI. In these conditions it must have been really tempting to play the second spinner in Shane Shillingford, which would have been a more difficult proposition for NZ. However, with Sammy and two new-ball bowlers taking up three spots, there was room for just one slow bowler in Narine. Perhaps West Indies' best bet in the future would be for Andre Russell (if his batting develops well enough) to play as a fast-bowling allrounder, thus freeing up one bowling slot.

-- Not really sure what to expect from NZ on day two. They could easily undo all the good work and be rolled over for less than 300, or pile up 400-plus if the likes of Vettori and van Wyk get stuck in. 350, in my view, should be their immediate target if they are to stay in the game.

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

On Cricinfo's Assessment of New Zealand's Problems

A recent stats piece on Cricinfo, detailing New Zealand's woes in the two larger formats of the game, makes for predictably depressing reading if you're a kiwi supporter. While this is the sort of data that ought to be a wakeup call for the NZ management, I wish Cricinfo would go beyond stating the obvious and shed a bit more light on NZ's situation. A couple of things stand out from the piece:

-- Sure, NZ have a worse test record than anyone barring the West Indies from April 2006 onwards. But they have also played just 37 tests in this period - lower than anyone in the top eight. The Windies have the next-lowest figure of 48 matches, and England have played 74 in this period. We all know NZ doesn't play enough test cricket, but still, the number comes as a shock. There appears to be no obvious solution; as David noted in a post last year, NZ are truly in a Catch-22 - the other teams don't wan't to play them because they don't bring in the revenue and are not considered worthy opponents, but then NZ can't expect to improve unless they play more test cricket.

-- Somewhat similarly, since Feb 2010 (the 'start' of NZ's decline in one-day cricket) NZ appear to be playing less one-day cricket than the rest - 37 games against the top sides compared to 52 for England, who aren't keen on this format. NZ have lost 29 of these games, and the key stat here is that 19 of these losses have come in subcontinent-type conditions (the West Indies included). Worryingly, this comes across as a symptom of a cricketing culture in which lessons are not being learnt. In the Fleming era, for example, NZ's batsmen were never great players of spin, but thanks to regular appearances in tri-nation tournaments in Sharjah and other places they did learn to adapt over time.

In addition, I would say that a few personnel changes in the one-day side have affected things. NZ earlier had a good range of bowling options and lower-order hitting power that could win them matches in tight situations. Styris has retired and Vettori's appearances in the shorter form have been sporadic lately, and the bowling hasn't recovered yet. Batting-wise, ever since McCullum moved up to open and Oram forgot how to bat, the lower-order strength has been compromised.

I'm actually a bit more optimistic about the test side, where a number of individuals like Williamson and Bracewell are beginning to settle nicely. Starting with the West Indies games, we're entering a rare bumper year in which NZ get to play 13 tests (ending with the tour to England next year), even if most of them are those annoyingly small two-test rubbers. The opportunity to develop is here, now it's up to the players to make the most of it.

Friday, July 20, 2012

The Caribbean ODIs: Wrapping up

Best bloody series result in six years, and they're still questioning my place!

-- The West Indies richly deserve the 4-1 result, they have looked to be steadily getting their house in order ever since Darren Sammy was appojnted in late 2010. The inclusion of Narine and Russell has given them a certain X-factor that's been lacking for a while.

-- Equally, I feel New Zealand deserved their loss, which was at least partly self-inflicted. After a good comeback in the third ODI, they got into identical winning situations in the last two (50 to get off 7 overs with 4 wickets in hand). Both games ended with a choke of South African proportions. If you can't win from there, I suppose you just don't deserve to win at all.

-- It's amazing that Darren Sammy's detractors continue to question his place in the side. Not only has he managed to keep his side focussed (more than can be said for his predecessors Lara and Gayle), his bowling's been the ideal foil for Sunil Narine thus far. Ross Taylor would give his right arm for the Gavin Larsen-like efforts Sammy has been coming up with.

-- Mike Hesson has just been appointed as national coach by NZC, and will take over from Wright at the end of this tour. If I were him, the first things I would look at are 1) getting the top order to learn how to rotate the strike and 2) finding a bowler who can keep it tight in the middle overs; Rob Nicol and Nathan McCullum are not the answers.

-- I'd have to think really far back to remember a NZ lower-order looking this clueless. Jacob Oram and Kyle Mills are still NZ's most reliable one-day bowlers, but their batting skills seem to have deteriorated to the point where getting bat on ball is an achievement in itself – particularly tragic in the case of someone with five test hundreds to his name.

-- Great to see Tino Best become a regular fixture in this West Indian side. I love the spirit this guy injects into the proceedings and the effort he puts into bounding in with every delivery. A bowler who refuses to compromise on raw pace has got to be worth watching.

-- Given that Sunil Narine tormented Australia a fair bit earlier in the year, NZ couldn't be expected to fare much better against him. But I can't help thinking back to the days of Stephen Fleming when extensive planning was the hallmark of the NZ sides. Had a bit more effort gone into preparation, I'm sure the batsmen could have worked out a way to see him off for something like 1-32 in each game. Make no mistake, he will be a major threat in the tests too.

-- Captaincy is certainly having its effect on Ross Taylor. He seems to be playing far more responsibly - the 110 in a losing cause at St.Kitts was probably the best one-day innings I've seen from him. On the other hand, it seems to be getting him injured all the time, a la Martin Crowe!

-- The performances of BJ Watling and Tim Southee were two positives from this series. Watling will hopefully settle NZ's search for a new keeper-batsman, and Southee has amazingly jumped the queue towards a likely recall to the test side. While he was magnificent in the final three games - bowling with much hostility when swing was not on offer - Southee needs to do this more consistently. Here's hoping he turns the corner.

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Thoughts on the Ongoing Caribbean Series


Captaincy...um.. sure, why not?

-- New Zealand came into this tour woefully under prepared, and are missing several key players at the moment. However, I believe the result would be no different even at full strength; NZ have been a shaky limited-overs side for nearly three years now. On top of that, since the end of the 2011 World Cup NZ had played only 9 ODIs, 6 of them against Zimbabwe. This is a serious long-term lack of matchplay and, for me, the more telling factor.

-- Still, NZC should take a good hard look at themselves for the way this tour was approached. When expenditure is trotted out as a reason for not having a preparatory camp, you have really got to be concerned about the way the game is being run at the national level.

-- Chris Gayle just hasn't looked like getting out. Earlier, he would always give the bowler a chance; now, in the manner of a cold-blooded killer, he picks his targets carefully (and just about anything NZ throw at him makes for an appealing target). The way he's been going, NZ's best hope is probably for Gayle to use up his run of amazing form by the time the tests start!

-- How good are the West Indies really? Are they a truly formidable (limited-overs) side who are just starting to hit their straps, or are they simply capitalsiing on some indifferent bowling and tentative batting against spin from the kiwis? It's tempting to think that better bowling sides like South Africa or Pakistan would put them in their place, but certainly in slower, drier conditions they are emerging as a force to be reckoned with.

-- I wouldn't completely rule out a NZ fightback in this series. The conditions are taking a while to get used to, but I expect the side to improve with every game. The remainder of the series could be a lot more competitive.

-- Sunil Narine is, expectedly , having a major influence on this series. While the NZ batsmen are probably not confident enough to use their feet against him and get away with it, I'm surprised they haven't employed the sweep shot a bit more. BJ Watling has managed it with some success.

-- NZ have summoned the test specialists - McCullum, Trent Boult, Chris Martin, Neil Wagner - early. I say go ahead and play them in the remaining one-dayers. It would be a lot to expect them to hit the ground running in the tests.

-- Tim Southee is fast becoming New Zealand's Ajit Agarkar - not a good thing. While he may still have a good one-day series, I think the management has missed a trick by not arranging a first-class stint for him in England or South Africa. He hasn't played enough domestic cricket since the start of his career, and in my opinion this is hurting his progress.

-- Kane Williamson has no doubt been marked as a future full-time captain. Even if the task of leading the current side is a rather thankless one, one supposes the experience will be beneficial. Still, I hope he's able to develop his batting for a good four-five years before the top job comes calling. Stephen Fleming was 23 when he took over, and his growth as a batsman was stunted as a result.

Thursday, July 5, 2012

Cricket Just Got More Insular

One of the charges constantly levelled against the test-match format is that it is much too exclusionist. Several apologists for the shortest form of cricket contend, therefore, that T20-based leagues are the way forward, and will popularise the game.

While this could well be true, the recent announcement about the format of the Champions League T20 suggests that form of the game is starting to exhibit test cricket's supposed biggest vice. The team which finished fourth in the IPL now gets direct entry into the main round, along with two teams each from Australia and South Africa, while the rest have a qualifying round to deal with.

I thought the Champions League was a fantastic idea when it started out. Sure, there were several one-sided matches in the first two editions, but as a world tournament it made a nice change from the likes of the Champions trophy and the T20 World Cup. It had a truly global feel; you got a look at up-and-comers you wouldn't know of otherwise, as well as familiar international names, past and present, in a different setting. The first two editions, despite the conspicuous absence of Pakistani teams, were appealing precisely because of this inclusiveness. The sight of a Hyderabad crowd lending its support to Daren Ganga's Trinidadians during the 2009 edition was one of the more heartwarming cricketing moments over the last few years.

However, all this was undermined last year, when a clear line was drawn with the introduction of a qualifying round. To drive home the point, the fourth-placed IPL team (the Kolkota Knight Riders) were included as part of it; I suppose it was only a matter of time before this would be changed to direct entry. The champions from the West Indies, England, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan have effectively been deemed second-class citizens. While the Kiwi and Lankan teams don't really have a previous record to stand on, the West Indian representatives - Trinidad and Tobago - are rightly aggrieved. Even more galling, the winners of the BPL and the Stanbic Bank T20 are not even invited for qualification; last I checked, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe play test cricket too.

The CLT20 is a joint venture between three countries, and effectively a cartel. Marketability and audience figures are cited as the main reasons for preferential treatment here. But must they be the overriding criteria for the design of every goddamn cricket tournament? Even during the early days of World Cup Cricket, when England alone had its way, affiliates were always invited to the party.

The league could be seen as a microcosm for the way test cricket is today - a clique of sides who play each other regularly and are too cool for the rest. That's the nature of the beast, you may say. Fair enough; in that case, it's time everyone stopped buying into the myth that franchise-based T20 cricket in its present form will help globalise the sport. If anything, it has made cricket more insular.

Thursday, June 28, 2012

The Basement Battle Preview: NZ in the Windies

A little trivia: how many times have New Zealand visited the West Indies for a full tour since 1985? Two. They've played a grand total of four test matches over those visits in 1996 and 2002.

This promises to be an interesting little series in an otherwise overstuffed calendar, because the two teams rarely play each other and appear to be on equal footing. Each would fancy its chances of a rare series triumph. From NZ's point of view, the test series is a must-win; not only to move up the rankings, but to earn some respect in the cricketing world. When the seventh-ranked West Indies finally decides to host you after ten years for just two tests, you know you're not being taken too seriously.

However, NZ are going into this series on the back of very little preparation, while their opponents will no doubt be hardened by their recent series against Australia and England. Superficially, the sides are similar; both are characterised by calm leadership, flimsy top-order batting, decent pace-bowling stocks and an inability to finish opponents off. But the Windies have the edge in a couple of areas.

One, they boast some real depth in the spin department - and these days, conditions in the Caribbean tend towards the subcontinental. If Sunil Naraine should fail to live up to the hype, there's Devendra Bishoo, Shane Shillingford and even Suleiman Benn waiting in the wings. NZ's answer, Daniel Vettori, hasn't been much of an attacking threat in test cricket for a while now, and Tarun Nethula has only played a handful of international games. Also, NZ's best player of slow bowling, Jesse Ryder, is not in the tour party.

Two, the presence of the top-ranked batsman in the world, Chanderpaul, could well prove to be the difference between the sides. On recent evidence, no one on either side looks capable of matching the weight of Shiv C's runs (Kane Williamson or Marlon samuels maybe?), particularly in these conditions. Again, the closest NZ batsman to Chanderpaul's style is Vettori, and his stats don't really compare to Chanders'. The ex-NZ-captain may be past his prime, but this just shows you how dependent the side is on him still.

If these two factors mean NZ's task is far from easy, a third one probably ensures West Indies go into each format as favourites. Chris Gayle is back in the national side for all forms of the game (supposedly), and he does have a history of dining out on kiwi bowling; he averages something like 70 against NZ in tests.

This is John Wright's last assignment with the national side, so here's hoping he gets a good send-off. The tour kicks off with the two T20s on lifeless Florida pitches, and it'll be interesting to see what the crowd numbers are like. As for the tests, even if the standard of cricket isn't likely to rival that of the upcoming England-South Africa series, the contest could be very watchable so it's a real shame the organisers didn't include a third test.