Better, better, better by far
A few years ago I was playing cricket in Middlesex. I went out to a place called Hayes - a dormitory town west of London - to play their local team. It wasn't the romantic English cricket idyll that you might imagine, with elms, and a mock Tudor pavilion. There was an open paddock at one end, a bunch of ugly brick houses at the other end, and a new aesthetically challenged cinderblock fitness centre at the cover boundary - which is where we changed. It was a bit like the Brittas Empire, if any of you remember that series.
The team we were playing was good - one guy had played first-class cricket, and swung the ball in a mile at medium pace. I remember taking offstump guard and facing mid-off to face him. He got six wickets without even trying. Apparently he was a "spinner" for the county team. We scored 170-odd, and it never seemed enough.
I was put at cover, a position I loathe. Their opening batsman was a tall, aquiline man who looked like an accountant. In the first over our opener bowled too full. I remember seeing the blade of this guy's bat rise above his shoulders in an extraordinary movement and slam the ball at me. Not hit. Slam. Not caress, stroke or even punch. Slam. Even now I am convinced I was in the right position to stop it, but the ball was travelling so fast I was about half a second too slow.
It became clear that this was his one shot - I can't remember him playing anything on the leg side. Over the next 30 overs he launched a good 20 cover drives at me - all of them with the same power. I stopped some, missed a bunch, lost a fingernail, and was finally sent to long on. It was a bad day. They won by eight wickets, and this bloke got 90-odd.
I have never before or since experience the power of those strokes from any other batsman. At one point he hit a cover drive at my replacement and the ball bounced back to the bowler, who was standing in mid-pitch. From the cover fieldsman's leg. He was just plain better than us.
This happens to international players too. I remember interviewing Walter Hadlee and asking him about the great players he had opposed. He said that he had never seen anyone drive with the same power as Frank Woolley, who was fifty years old, when the Kiwis played Kent in 1937. Experienced players ended up with bruised hands. Andrew Penn played an international in India in 1997. He got smashed by Tendulkar. In the dressing room he said it was the best he had ever bowled - but he still ended up going for eight an over. His more experienced teammates told him that sometimes in international cricket these things just happen. It is tempting to speculate that Penn never recovered from that treatment.
This is all a long, roundabout way of saying that sometime today India will win this test series. Sometimes you just have to accept we are second best. It is hard to see how a batsman could improve on the centuries of Sachin Tendulkar or Virender Sehwag in the one-day internationals. They were entirely different - one was art, the other craft - but they perfect.
In the test series we have seen Gambhir perform extraordinary feats, a century from Laxman, one match-winning hundred from Tendulkar and Friday's fifty that seemed to have visited from another dimension - one where everything is judged by aesthetic criteria rather than efficacy. Dravid has been virtually anonymous but managed to whisper four half centuries. The only lacking has been Yuvraj, but even then some of the strokes he played yesterday were worth a gasp.
Then there are the bowlers. Harbhajan has been brilliant but then again he is the best off-spinner in the world and has been for a decade. Zaheer has thrived at the Basin, while Ishant running in has a thrill all of its own, a bit like a Jimmy Page lead break - all kinetic energy and threat, with just the vague sense that he's traded his talent for his soul with the devil at some crossroads near Delhi.
Munaf Patel has been a bit average, but quite frankly we'd take him.
We should not be despondent. Guptill, Vettori, McCullum, and of course Our Jesse have scrapped the whole way. Taylor, O'Brien, Mills and Oram have had their moments. Martin has been superb in the tests. If Shane Bond was still playing test cricket we would have won the McLean Park five-dayer.
Let us hold our heads high - Ross Taylor and James Franklin might engage in a bit of trench warfare or Simon Taufel might be spending tomorrow afternoon at the Monet Exhibition or on a golf course - but apart from the anodyne match at Hamilton, we have worked hard and made India work hard. But occasionally in cricket you have to rub your bruised hand and admit - that team is better than us.
Picture: Reuters
Sponsored links
Newest First
Oldest First
Good write-up.
People forget that our NZ team is rebuilding (although, we often seem to be doing that), and that this Indian side is a once in a generation team, and probably one of their strongest of all time. Indeed, they are simply better than us.
I'd like to think that in a few years we'll be a strong team again, we just need a decent quick.
Yes all fair calls - good knocks from Taylor and Frannklin, and a pity McCullum seems to have gone out to one he didn't hit.
Very disappointing to have Tendulkar grab 2 wickets before lunch - sure he is one of the greatest batsmen off all time, but he is a part-timer bowler at best - loss of concentration obviously (and a poor decision)
Re Harbhajan being "the best off-spinner in the world and has been for a decade". Might be a few Sri Lankans have a go at you on this one. Is "Murali" something other than an off-spinner?
This series has been pretty frustrating to watch but has definitely, from a plus side sorted the men from the boys in the NZ side. Ryder, Taylor, McCullum, and Vettori have all batted well while Martin has been backed up by O'Brien with the bowling.
Guptill, Franklin (with bat and ball) and Flynn havnt had a good series but they didnt look to out of their depth either, but Franklin should be at no.8 behind McCullum and Vettori.
Dissapointingly though, McIntosh has been shown up, his only defense is his hundred against the windies, but quite clearly against good bowling his frailties early in the innings, not quite as detrimental in First Class cricket, is easy for good attacks to exploit, no better than the likes of Bell, Cumming and Redmond, if not worse. Southee needs time to work on his game and Vettori needs to start taking wickets, rather than the odd wicket taking ball dispersed between 50 odd run restraining deliveries.
Future side
Papps (probably the most campact opener who needs a long run, he has never got one) Guptill Flynn Taylor Ryder McCullum vettori Franklin / or perhaps Williamson at 6 depending on pitch Bond (if the rumours are true) O'Brien Martin
How does everyone forget that Bond retired from Tests after his last one where he got injured (again) and said he'd only play ODI's & 20/20's for NZ from then on - obviously he then went to the ICL and all that drama etc etc but if he comes back it won't be for tests.
I was VERY impressed with Ryder & Martin in this series. McCullum is still flattering to deceive with is batting as he got his 100 against a very tired attack on a VERY VERY VERY flat wicket. Guptill has shown that he deserves a long run in the team and can be our aggressive opening batsmen in tests that we've never had.
McIntosh was shown up completely - his technique is awful and does he possess a worse pull shot that anyone in the history of cricket?
I would liek to see someone work with Southee over the winter to get him bowling closer to the stumps and also have him add a lil bulk so he can bowl regularly in the high 130's/early 140's.
Oh and Murali is an off spinner, although in a different way to Harbhajan.
This is probably the best batting side to ever visit NZ, and for a change the Indians have a good all round bowling attack capable of taking 20 wickets on most tracks, in any conditions, so yes NZ did do better than perhaps they might have been expected to do. Marvellous to watch the Indians bat, if a bit galling that it was against us.
The Indian side has great cricket skills, but the decision to bat on and on was very dumb. They should have declared with nor more than 450 lead, and the game would have finished yesterday. Post-daylight saving light and a bad weather forecast many days old were due warning. 1-0 against the 8th-ranked team is nothing to shout about. If India wants to get past SA and Australia in the rankings, they will need to make more intelligent decisions than that.
Excellent article. The simple fact is that we were playing one of the top test sides in world cricket and it showed. NZ were simply outclassed. A lot of positives can come out of this series however, Ryder and Taylors batting is potentially world class and the side appears to be on the way up. I have to say I was a little disappointed in Vettori's 'we were unlucky' comments tho... Who the heck does he think he is kidding??
Re: Matthew's team choice -- I agree, McIntosh was exposed and looked out of his depth against quality. He should be perservered with because (from what I've heard) his domestic form over the years has been consistent.
I think Flynn could be promoted to opener. If you can bat at three, you can definitely open (especially as no.3's regularly go in as soon as the first over). So Guptill would pair up with Flynn and we should look for another no.3, or alternatively, move everyone up one spot.
Flynn, Guptill, Taylor, Ryder, Oram, McCullum, Vettori, Franklin, O'Brien, Patel, Martin. Or potentially How at three if he gets his form back. Butler for Patel should conditions warrant it.
I think our batting has the potential to be the same line up in 5 years but NZ needs to find some new quicks who don't break down, or possibly a new leftie. Jimmy Franklin looked dangerous at times once he got his juices going, but he just didn't get the wickets. And as Paulimus_Prime said, Southee needs some work, but if he does the hard work, he'll be a real asset in future. Martin will retire eventually, so I expect Southee will become a mainstay then.
Back on topic, I didn't mind watching the Black Caps being flogged by such entertaining opposition. We fought pretty hard but were beaten by the better side. And the Indians were much easier to like than Australian teams have been. I was most impressed by the fact that if one or two (or three) Indian top order bats failed, there was always one or two who stood up and took charge.
NZ batters take note.
It's tempting to get very frustrated about this season. No test wins, spanked by India in the ODIs too. But there are some very good signs for the future. Taylor and Ryder are now established, Guptill looks the goods, Vettori's captaincy is improving, Martin and O'Brien are great tryers.
The rest of the team though, I'm really not so sure about. McIntosh has severe technical flaws. I know it's unfair to discount his century against WI, but apart from that innings it's been very, very grim viewing. Flynn is gutsy but is not a test match no. 3. Sorry.
Franklin just shouldn't be in the team. I can't understand the logic of saying he just needs to be at 8 because he is a lesser batsman than McCullum and Vettori. This is true, but if he was at 8 then he's being picked as a bowler. And let's be honest, he is not a test match bowler. At 6, he's being picked as a batsman, and he's not up to that either. Therefore, he can't be selected in the team. Simple. So, we can either pick Oram, or play McCullum at 6 and pick 5 genuine bowlers.
McCullum remains the great engima. The way he bats must be so frustrating for the coaching staff. Good on him for getting a hundred, finally, but I felt like throwing something at the screen watching him bat in the 1st inns at the Basin. Mucking around for about 45 mins as we got to the follow-on mark (which was irelevant anyway) then playing one attacking shot to a short, wide ball from Harbhajan and getting out. Terrible.
The bowling lacks penetration. We all know that. Maybe the answer does lie in the ICL, at least until Southeee and the likes of Trent Boult get some more street smarts about them, especially when bowling on unresponsive pitches. I don't buy the argument that re-selecting Bond and Tuffey would be a step backward. We get rid of, or ignore, experience way too quickly in NZ. Having Bond and Tuffey back, even for just 2 seasons until Southee and Boult are ready, would be a massive bonus.
As for the pitches, I tend to think the issue is a bit overblown. As in every game of cricket, the pitch is the same for both sides.
Guptill blasts Black Caps to victory in first T20
Quake felt across lower North Island
Hurricanes weather elements to beat Chiefs
One dead after Northland crash
New York apartment sells for NZ$105m
Police car pig painter mystery unsolved
Flights disrupted as severe thunderstorms hit Auckland
Fatal speed-gliding crash near Wanaka
O'Connor attacks Smith's stance
Protester refuses community work
Helicopter companies still owe $5 million
Blackberry jams preserve the past
Residents tell of crime concerns
I played cricket at Hayes once or twice. Not pleasant.
Agree we have been thrashed by a better team 5 times and played well enough to win 3 or 4 over the whole series.