The GBU of the Sri Lankan Tests
GOOD
Daniel Vettori: Batting and bowling, and becoming a genuine all-rounder with Kapil Dev's 400/4000 mark next on the list. Clearly at home with the captaincy blazer given his return of 74 wickets and 1232 runs in 21 matches in charge, but he can't keep doing it all himself. There must be temptation aplenty to send him north up the batting order ahead of McCullum and even Oram - but his comments in the aftermath of the 2-0 series loss make it pretty clear that will not be happening.
Rangana Herath: 82 overs, 20 maidens, 209 runs, 8 wickets. This portly left-armer was predicted to be a threat, yet the Sri Lankan selectors overlooked him for their XI in the first test. Small mercies.
Samaraweera: He might not be an opener but he is bloody good: 159, 20, 143 and 25.
Iain O'Brien's testicular fortitude: He is an unfashionable cricketer but he has some ticker. His 75-ball, 69-run, 20-over vigil with the captain was a terrific effort that put several batsmen above him to varying degrees of shame - he was out in the middle for longer than McIntosh, Guptill, Taylor, McCullum and Patel.
The "penetration": The bowling struggled to make inroads into the powerful Sri Lankan batting order - only O'Brien and Vettori took wickets in all four Lankan innings. The inability to dislodge can be demonstrated by the scores at which Sri Lanka lost their 4th wicket: 300, 205, 295 and 301.
Chris Martin's willow-waving: 4 bats, 2 runs, 25 balls, and an average of infinity. Solid.
BAD
The Lankan appealing: It was relentless and at times ridiculous. At least Paranavitana was slapped with a wet bus ticket of a fine for appealing for a catch that clearly hit the ground - given he scored just 58 runs in 4 bats in the Test series was he in their team as a professional screamer?
Martin Guptill's pulling addiction: His manner of dismissal in the first innings at Colombo was one of the most frustrating passages of play in the series. After being continually provoked into playing the pull shot by Thushara, he succumbed by slapping one straight to Murali at deep square leg. It was recklessness personified.
The obsession with the New Zealand team physiotherapist, Kate Stalker. The banners started to get a bit weird at the end there.
Mark Richardson slagging off Muralitharan: We'd just lost the Test match the day before, so it was an ill-timed whinge about a longstanding issue. It looked like sour grapes, even though he had no doubt written it during the Test match.
Kyle Mills in the nets: The cameras found him out the back getting some throwdowns from Mark O'Donnell (who would have given more throwdowns than anyone else in New Zealand) - the very first ball we saw smashed into Mills' stumps.
Danny Morrison's preparation for the awards ceremonies: Wouldn't it be a good idea to practice the 27 multi-syllabic names on the dignitaries joining him in stage?
UGLY
Brendon McCullum vs Muttiah Muralitharan: All. At. Sea. Was he paying attention during Saqlain Mushtaq and Maurice Holmes' "How to face outrageously good spin bowlers on their home tracks and not get made to look too silly" class earlier on in August?
The moustache growing competition: Some horrible early growth sighted on the upper lips of Guptill and Ryder - keep an eye out for more over the one-day series.
Getting out to Sri Lankan pace bowlers: The unheralded Sri Lankan pace bowlers did a decent job of knocking over the Kiwi batsmen - and that was disappointing. They had more heat, more venom and took more wickets.
The patience of the NZ batsmen: Out of 44 attempts, only 5 times did our batsmen last out in the middle for longer than two hours: McIntosh (69, Galle), Vettori (67, Galle), Taylor (81, Colombo), Oram (56, Colombo) and Vettori (140, Colombo). In comparison, the Sri Lankans had 34 bats and swaggered past the 120-minute mark on 8 occasions.
Sponsored links
Newest First
Oldest First
Great summary Holden. We have to stick with this team, but I'm trying, so hard, to see little bits of improvement. I'm not quite sure what they are yet. All I can say is that hopefully, with a home series up next against a not-amazing Pakistan team, that some of this experience will start to bear fruit for our younger players, and that Baz can finally learn how to bat in test matches. Watching him try to play Murali was like watching a car accident in slow motion.
The lack of penetration will be solved with the bun fight that will occur with Bond at one end and Martin, O Brien, Tuffey, Mills (who I see put in his 2 cents this morning for test inclusion) and maybe even Southee jostling for the other two spots at the other end. If only the batsman had that amount of genuine competition between them...Interesting to note that Harry Potter has asked for a temporary end to musical chairs with the top 3, but one feels that Tim 'nice but dim' will feel the kookaburra on the side of his helmet, let alone the side of his ribs, vs the Pakis. Flynn needs to play some shots at the start, which made him such a good no.3 vs the Windies, Guptill - you need to do the opposite, son. Although one feels he's one innings away from discovering test cricket, provided he's disposed of the ''see the ball hit the ball'' saying. Try ''if you build it, they will come' saying instead. Thats crease occupation, Martin.
Stef: Take some small micro-solace from the fact we made it to the 5th day. Yippee. (Remember John Bracewell's brilliance when he said making the 5th day was a massive blow to teams like Australia who aren't used to playing the 5th day of test matches?)
Alvin: The bowling is one thing but at least if we sort the batting we can stop losing. Our bowlers might even get a rest between the first and second innings. I hope Bond does come back in, but he might not be bothered - a diet of Int T20, IPL and the odd ODI series would probably suit a man with a robot for a back.
Last time we played a T20 we put out this side: B McCullum, Redmond, Guptill, Taylor, Styris, Oram, McGlashan, N McCullum, Vettori, Mills, Butler. 12th man was Franklin (I think).
This time around we have Ryder and Bond back in as definites. For mine, Butler should play, I am unconvinced about the McGlashan scenario (although I do want it to work) and I think Mattress McCullum has been our best-performed T20 bowler of late.
So I'd have: B McCullum, Ryder, Guptill, Taylor, Oram, Broom, N McCullum, Vettori, Mills, Butler, Bond. 12th: Elliott, McGlashan
The way I see it Holden, is Bonds motivation (besides getting loads of money like the rest of them with the IPL) is on two counts. One is the WC in 2 years and the other, more importantly for him, is test cricket. As we all know that's where respect is found. Look at Mills, he's ranked 2nd in ODI rankings - yet he can't even make the woeful NZ test team? Bond has only played 17 tests and would want about 40 odd tests before he retires. Thats about a minimum to gauge a test career on. So I'm picking his swansong from tests will be the England tour in early 2012. To do that though, he'll be given a free ride as to what games he wants to play outside of tests in the next couple of years, the odd ODI series to be missed for example. He wants tests, we want him in tests, lets spoon with Shane Edward Bond over that thought.
Nice summary Holden but put away the Aus-schlok speak, it doesn't suit you.
Wouldn't it be nice if McGlashan actually come up trumps with the bat at international level? If he'd reverse swept a few 6s at the world cup like he has at the domestic level, he'd be a superstar right now.
IB: What is "Aus-schlok speak"?
Holden: Yes our batting was poor, but we didnt take 20 wickets once and the only reason we got close ish in the second test was because they declared. Ive been harping on about our bowling because i think its obvious our batting is poor but our bowling is equally bad. Even if we did score runs our bowlers can never bowl us to victory. It actually made me angry reading Obriens blog when he said he was 'angry' that he had to go back out there to bowl. Why? yes they were crap but so were you and the other bowlers. They got 400+ for gods sake. We just arent very good at the moment with bat and ball unfortuanately
School unapologetic for chewing gum expulsion
Crash blocks SH1 on the Kapiti Coast
Cameras capture girl's abduction ordeal
Dead woman's family says thanks
Fraudster's $59m shopping spree brings 15 years jail
Boy missing after Huntly bridge jump
Kewell magic lifts Victory past Central Coast
Wrong boot costs adventurer his life
Fraudster's $59m shopping spree brings 15 years jail
Waitangi London pub crawl a beat-up
Infratil founder Lloyd Morrison dies of cancer
This is how cricinfo summarised our potential selections..
"The other allrounder's spot will be contested between Neil Broom and Grant Elliott.
New Zealand: (probable) 1 Brendon McCullum (wk), 2 Jesse Ryder, 3 Martin Guptill, 4 Ross Taylor, 5 Jacob Oram, 6 Neil Broom/Grant Elliott, 7 Peter McGlashan (wk), 8 Daniel Vettori (capt), 9 Kyle Mills, 10 Shane Bond, 11 Nathan McCullum/ Ian Butler"
But I would have to disagree. I don't think Broom will get a go. I believe it's a 3 way selection issue for a batsmen/bowler. I believe Elliott, McCullum and Butler all fall into that category (being that Mills and Butler aren't the most useless batsmen around).
So who would you choose? As much as I like Elliott, I'm probably leaning towards McCullum or Butler.. McCullum if it's turning or Butler to be economical.
Who would you choose?