The Armory Show

Well let's get some things out of the way first. If the skipper wants Chris Martin, you give him Chris Martin. It doesn't matter if all and sundry can see he seemed to be lacking in zip in Australia, or that he is averaging over 100 in the State Championship, or that he is old enough to have grandchildren, or that he bats like a gibbon in a splint. If Daniel Vettori sees him as an important piece of his armory - you must must give him the quiver he seeks.

There have been disastrous selections where a captain hasn't had faith in a bowler gifted to him by the benevolent dictates of three guys with waxed 'taches and pinstriped suits. I think of Gary Robertson in 1986. One of domestic cricket's best bowlers, he suddenly seemed unable to bowl with the same verve and steadiness at Eden Park as he did at Pukekura Park or Hagley Oval. Coney didn't even bowl him in the second innings of his first test.

Then there was Paul Wiseman, never a go-to-guy for Stephen Fleming, or the recent bizarre selection of club cricketer Darren Pattinson for England against South Africa, where it became increasingly clear that Vaughan would have preferred somebody else. Anybody else. And going way way back there was Archie Maclaren, captain of England, yelling to the long room at Lord's, "My God, look what they've given me. Do they think we are playing the blind asylum?" He went into a test lacking the best bowler ever - Sydney Barnes, the only man he had explicitly asked for. England lost.

I have less truck with a captain wanting a batsman - Fleming obviously would have preferred to have Cantabrians at various times during John Bracewell's rein - but quite frankly most of a captain's control is abrogated when any side goes into bat. But bowlers? That's micro-management. Give them everybody they ask for. Vettori will have spent months planning the dismissals of Tendulkar, Sehwag and Dravid.

It's only about seven levels down, but when I was captaining my Thorndon side, two or three opposing batsmen in the grade would play on my mind. I would think of their technique, trying to find their flaws, even when I should be doing law.

There was a guy from J'ville who had a great eye, and an even greater opinion of himself, and was probably the best or second best batsman in the grade. He fell over to the off, meaning he always opened himself up to LBW - but this is in the world of player-umpires, where to get a decision from one of the opposing players was like getting Aucklanders to voluntarily pay for their own roads.

One of our guys sprayed Yorkers and bouncers and nothing else, so I opened with him, and told him to hit the bottom of off stump on the full. The first ball he got on target was about the 18^th he bowled to the guy, but he was castled and I basked in the glow of a personal victory - well until we lost by 120 runs, that is.

Sure Martin, O'Brien and Mills is a longish tail but Vettori will have a plan. The selection of Arnel is surely based around the strength of his forearms in carrying the drinks tray. It would have been better to have Southee there. He was torn apart in the one-dayers when everything he bowled seemed to end up in various construction sites, but his confidence will have taken an even bigger bruise from being dropped from the test squad. He is only twenty and is surely the fourth best quick in the country.

I also have doubts about the top three. McIntosh, Guptill, Flynn is a very new top order. I strongly believe that Jamie How is the best opener in the country and I was disappointed he wasn't selected. He may have been through a slump, but it didn't seem related to technique. A year ago his batting was winning a test at Seddon Park. A year later, for him to be on the ever enlarging scrap heap of former openers - along with James Marshall, Michael Papps, Aaron Redmond, Craig Cumming, Richard Jones, Matthew Bell, Matthew Sinclair - is surely wasting talent.

I've just checked the cricket and we are FIVE down. It makes you wonder whether it's worth it. Maybe I should blog about table tennis - it looks like more fun.

Newest First

Oldest First

Alex Gilks   #1   03:17 pm Mar 18 2009

I love gibbon in a splint.

Nice points. Concur with top three green-ness. Inject Taylor into opening in meantime?

I can't abide genuine complaints about Martin's batting until we start losing tests by 10 runs. I can't see that happening while our guys are regularly dismissed for 250.

matthew   #2   06:00 pm Mar 18 2009

Ryder and Vettori led a remarkable comeback, but considering how the pitch eased out i have little optimism for the rest of the test. How in my opinion should have been selected ahead of McIntosh, while he got a century he rarely looks comfortable at this level, whereas How looked very comfortable, he just didnt make runs, and at present is in some fantastic form. Guptill deserves a chance and his short stay was reminiscent of so many of Hows test innings, composed some great shots, but over to fast.

Re Alex Gilks Taylors strokeplay is to expansive for even number three until he gets his shot selection to the level of Ponting, the best aggressive no.3, which lord knows may never happen. I reckon shove Ryder to four ahead of Taylor.

nick   #3   07:56 pm Mar 18 2009

Not sure why Guptil was selected. He hasn't produced any results opening in 4-day games at domestic level. Jamie How should be persevered with for the experience he brings.

guy   #4   08:15 am Mar 19 2009

Yep, How & Southee over Guptill & Arnel. How's coming back into form and adds experience to a very inexperienced NZ 11. Southee, got to keep in the team environment after his confidence to a beating in the one dayers. Arnel won't play a game anyway.

Stef   #5   10:42 am Mar 19 2009

I agree with the comments on the top 3. I think it's a rookie too far up there. It's harsh on Flynn but I would go with this order: McIntosh, How, Taylor, Ryder, Oram (batsman only). Test cricket -- you won't win anything with kids.

mike74   #6   11:22 am Mar 19 2009

Gibbon in a Splint is a great call! I may use that one myself in the future. Everyone knocks Chris Martins batting but he did what he had to do yesterday! (Unlike his top order, who let everybody down)

Any thoughts on why we are a competitive one day unit yet are pretty much the worst Test team in the world?? Why can our guys not get their head around knuckling down and batting for a couple of days?? Are their minds on hit and giggle 20/20 contracts?

Richard W   #7   11:57 am Mar 19 2009

Cheap shot about Aucklanders and their roads there Hamish! In fact we (I count myself an honarary Aucklander after 10 years out of the south) have been paying for the rest of the country's roads for decades... makes you sound like Jim Anderton or someone... But what do you make of Martin's comeback after his actual performance on day two? (It's the morning session as I write this...)

Alex   #8   12:54 pm Mar 19 2009

@Mike74 "Any thoughts on why we are a competitive one day unit yet are pretty much the worst Test team in the world??"

Because the blackcaps don't play any first class cricket (unless they get dropped from the blackcaps). Guptill made his test debut opening the batting on a greenish first morning pitch, when was the last time he faced a red ball? December, 3 months ago. Lucky him.

Alex   #9   07:16 pm Mar 19 2009

@Richard W - you gave Martin a whole 57 minutes to perform before you started implying his inclusion was wrong and forecasting failure. i'd rather my captain or team-mates rated me than as Hamish put it "three guys with waxed 'taches and pinstriped suits." i'm sure Martin won't disappoint his captain - against one of the best teams in the world let's not forget.

Cooch   #10   08:25 pm Mar 19 2009

Martin bowled alright - the only one running in hard all day. Can see why Vettori chucks him the ball. Not sure why the NZ selectors only picked 5 batsmen, though... Elliott might have been a better choice than Franklin, or Mills...

On another note, Tendulkar's determination should be a lesson to our young players. Hope these NZ players who rule themselves out of tests were listening when Shastri said that Tendulkar manages his one day workload so that he can play more tests. Test cricket is where it's at, chaps!

Ad Feedback