NZ - Australia Tests

Great start to the series by Australia...Hazlewood and Siddle skittling NZ for 183 : and that total owes much to a last wicket 46 stand between Craig and the big-hitting Boult.

However with Burns and Warner both out with just five runs on the board this match looks like struggling to go the distance ! If I were a spectator with tickets for Monday I'd be very concerned

Smith and Khawaja have steadied the ship...

Smith dropped at slip early on ; which might have been NZ's best chance of getting back into this game gone. Couple of wickets might change things ; but at 113/2 with an hour to go you'd think Australia could have a pretty firm grip on this by close of play.

As it stands including his current innings Voges has a test average over 100. Sit down Bradman.

Gooseberry wrote:As it stands including his current innings Voges has a test average over 100. Sit down Bradman.

100% should retire after this test so we have to call him the best of all time imo

Only 19 tests though so he will keep going no doubt. Even if he slips down to an average of around 60 after 30 test innings that's still a very decent achievement. The Don, himself, would want him to keep going.

Although only 3 wickets were lost for 316 runs today, Khawaja said afterwards that it was not as easy as it looked. Before play, the NZ commentators were somewhat excited saying that the prevailing southerly wind off Cook Strait would bring some moisture over The Basin and hence some reverse swing would come into play. This effect didn't seem to occur and instead we saw quite a decent summer's day out there.

Australia will look to score as many as possible with a very slim chance of a declaration before lunch - if they get that far. The substantial 280 run lead could be looking more like 400 if things go their way and they get through another morning session relatively unscathed.

The Loaded Dog wrote:
...

Australia will look to score as many as possible with a very slim chance of a declaration before lunch - if they get that far. The substantial 280 run lead could be looking more like 400 if things go their way and they get through another morning session relatively unscathed.

Hi LD - there's no need for Australia to rush though, is there? Only 2 days gone. Keep NZ out there in the field and keep the runs ticking beyond lunch if you can - that would be my approach.

The one thing you don't want to do is get all out on the stroke of lunch. Opening batsmen are always keen to have as long as possible to prepare before walking out to the wicket - so just restrict them to 10 minutes with a declaration or being all out with a bit of time before an interval.

That said, probably doesn't matter too much here. Australia massively in command.

NZ's performances in tests have dropped so rapidly and dramatically.

Khwaja is "in the zone" from what we read of him...and finally delivering the potential that everyone saw in him.

Voges is 36 and averages 100+ with loads of runs against listless WI

If you're Adam voges why wouldn't you retire hurt in your next innings and retire from the game with the highest test average?

KP_fan wrote:
Voges is 36 and averages 100+ with loads of runs against listless WI

551 no out over 3 innings is pretty decent regardless
Even more so for a pretty average player

Olly wrote:If you're Adam voges why wouldn't you retire hurt in your next innings and retire from the game with the highest test average?

Quick visit now to Anorak Corner.

If you don't impose a minimum number of innings qualification and even if you exclude Voges, Bradman doesn't have the highest Test average. That actually belongs to Andy Ganteaume of the West Indies who scored 112 in his only Test innings which was against England in 1948.

Ganteaume's story is an interesting one, if not entirely clear. Accusations made against him of selfish, slow play which cost the West Indies the chance of victory with counterclaims made by him of his face and background not fitting with establishment figures. He's still with us today at the age of 95.

Australia are way too good and always will be in test cricket compared to NZ. But what's with these crap English umpires giving them a leg up? Llong and Illingworth.

Some sensational figures being posted by Voges and Khawaja.

West Indies on flat wickets were perhaps a bit of a soft opponent ; but they've continued to impress against NZ , who are - at least on paper - a much tougher proposition. I didn't get to see much of the Australian innings but I understand Boult has been some way short of his best except for the odd burst: even so I'd have expected them to have made things harder for Australia so I think we have to credit these fellows for some really fine batting - they have pretty well buried the Kiwis and its hardly surprising they are now working their way through the hosts' second innings...

NZ conspiracy theorists will be filing away the bizarre reprieve for Voges on day one An unfortunate event ; as umpires rarely call even quite clear no balls these days , being happy to use the TV replay as a safety valve - which obviously can't be used in reverse. They've suffered from a couple of such incidents in these trans-Tasman Tests ; they really have to make sure they don't let them distract them from their true purpose of playing solid cricket and putting Australia under pressure.

This one is going to be an easy Australian win ; but I don't think that guarantees the result of the second match.

Yeah you're right alfie, NZ need to forget about these bad umpire calls and push on. But it seems that both the Australian players that benefited didn't think likewise. They both kicked on to have game-changing innings and it's like they've thought 'wow I dodged that bullet now it's time to really put the knife in'. Full credit to both players for doing so as it shows their class. But it is galling.

Hard to forget that one though, ebop. Probably one of the worst ones I've ever seen in a cricket match. Not the players fault of course.

Some really poor umpiring decisions recently. Bowden must be blind (in that recent ODI) and now a plumb lbw not given in the SA-England ODI... but rightfully overturned on review.

Trent Boult has really gone off the boil recently

Yeah LD, definitely not casting aspersions on the Aussie players. I'm just a cry baby

You wouldn't believe how long kiwi cricket fans have been hanging out for these tests. It's pretty cool to see the focus being on test cricket in NZ as it's not always like this. Honestly, a lot of kiwis thought we could actually pull it off and win the series. But alas, not even close so far.

Boult was recovering from a virus before the last one-dayer but that shouldn't be holding him back in this test but who knows?

A minor oddity - NZ batsment hit 5s in successive overs. NZ have lost one further wicket (Anderson) before the mid morning drinks interval.

* * * *
Lyon dismisses Watling shortly after, his 6th wicket in the match.

* * * * *

Nicholls falls - 218 - 7. NZ subsiding without much fight this morning.

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:A minor oddity - NZ batsment hit 5s in successive overs. NZ have lost one further wicket (Anderson) before the mid morning drinks interval.

* * * *
Lyon dismisses Watling shortly after, his 6th wicket in the match.

* * * * *

Nicholls falls - 218 - 7.  NZ subsiding without much fight this morning.

Evening Corporal - thought you were going to comment on there being 4 caught & bowled dismissals in Australia's innings. Understand that's a joint equal Test record.

Meanwhile, from Daniel Brettig's cricinfo day 3 report - ''Guptill was itching to get at Lyon, but like so many batsmen before him, underestimated the spinner's flight, drift and drop.'' to bowler and writer.

As stat you'll enjoy Guildford, Nathan Lyon is closer to 28 than 29 and is closing in on 200 Test wickets. Graeme Swann didn't make his Test debut till he was 29. He could take a lot of wickets if he stays fit and carries on has he has been.

Cheers, JD. I hadn't realised that. One factor that might slow down Lyon's wicket taking is almost everyone now appreciating what a decent bowler he is and that causing batsmen to attempt less liberties off him.

Always good to have an impromtu evening meet up of the Lyon fan club.....

JDizzle wrote:As stat you'll enjoy Guildford, Nathan Lyon is closer to 28 than 29 and is closing in on 200 Test wickets. Graeme Swann didn't make his Test debut till he was 29. He could take a lot of wickets if he stays fit and carries on has he has been.

Lyon's is a good subject to put on notice.....

How he has progressed quickly but silently, almost under the radar screen, nearing 200 wickets, in just over 50 tests....at a very fine SR  of under 63 ball/ wkt for a non-subcontinent spinner.....
another 7 to 8 years left in his career...and at this rate likely to get past 400 wickets.
The average of 33 should come down and a sub-30 average to the end career likely if this progress is maintained.

And he is very Swann like in his....clean, uncomplicated action, the virtues of classical off-spin, flight and rip and make it spin...from an off-stump or just outside line

where he is not quite Swann...not deemed by his team or the opponent as a match winning strike bowler.....at least yet....a stature that Swann had acquired for the last 2 to 3 years of his career.

Lyon is a delightful cricketer.....representing the uncomplicated and traditional side of the game

guildfordbat wrote:

Olly wrote:If you're Adam voges why wouldn't you retire hurt in your next innings and retire from the game with the highest test average?

Quick visit now to Anorak Corner.

If you don't impose a minimum number of innings qualification and even if you exclude Voges, Bradman doesn't have the highest Test average. That actually belongs to Andy Ganteaume of the West Indies who scored 112 in his only Test innings which was against England in 1948.

Ganteaume's story is an interesting one, if not entirely clear. Accusations made against him of selfish, slow play which cost the West Indies the chance of victory with counterclaims made by him of his face and background not fitting with establishment figures. He's still with us today at the age of 95.

The Cricinfo lists has 20 innings minimum, Voges has had 19. He can get out for 0 in his next innings and still be in second place on that list.

Voges is now slightly behind Bradman after getting out, on 97 and small change. He did surpass Tendulkars record for not getting out with 614 unbeaten runs. He also got a century in the warm up. Its a pretty remarkable run of form for a guy whos career averaged mid 30s in first class cricket and only just got capped, regardless of the pitches and opposition bowling.

Its a remarkable stat for sure, and being quite an old debutant, who knows how much longer he might play so he could actually finish with a silly average. If he plays for 2 more years I'd expect it to level out to around the 45-50 mark, which would still be very good

Some strange stat about Voges needing to be 33* or out for 133 to pip the Don again.

Talk about some added extra pressure on the man!

Siddle out and Pattinson comes back in for the ChCh test. They are preparing a wicket with more life apparently.
Could be an eventful first day's play... not to mention an eventful first morning's session.

I really like the new ground in Hagley Park. A perfect setting for cricket.

guildfordbat wrote:

Olly wrote:If you're Adam voges why wouldn't you retire hurt in your next innings and retire from the game with the highest test average?

Quick visit now to Anorak Corner.

If you don't impose a minimum number of innings qualification and even if you exclude Voges, Bradman doesn't have the highest Test average. That actually belongs to Andy Ganteaume of the West Indies who scored 112 in his only Test innings which was against England in 1948.

Ganteaume's story is an interesting one, if not entirely clear. Accusations made against him of selfish, slow play which cost the West Indies the chance of victory with counterclaims made by him of his face and background not fitting with establishment figures. He's still with us today at the age of 95.

Oh dear. There are jinxes and then again there are jinxes.

Andy Ganteaume died yesterday.

guildfordbat wrote: ............. Oh dear. There are jinxes and then again there are jinxes.

Andy Ganteaume died yesterday.

Andy Ganteaume at the time of his death was the second oldest living test cricketer. L Tuckett (SA), at just over 97, remains as the oldest living cricketer. In some ways it's a bit surprising that there are only 6 living test players aged over 90. Of them, Everton Weekes is the only one that is still well known - or so I would imagine.

Extraordinary cricket in Christchurch this morning...

NZ reduced to a battling 32/3 after an hour and a half .

McCullum arrived ; hit Marsh for 21 off an over ; lost his mate Williamson straight after lunch ; kept swinging , caught off a Pattinson no ball...

And just reached a hundred off 54 balls

Fastest ever Test hundred ... And NZ now 181/4 in the 37 th over

Gee on Brendan! Pleasure to watch.

Anderson no slouch either ...has joined in with three sixes in a rapid 37 : they've scored at nearly 11 per over since lunch.

Indeed exhilarating stuff to watch.

Pity I've got to head out shortly to play my own game ; hard to leave this !

My quick gratz to McCullums 100. I wonder if well see another player who plays like him?

145 off 79... Well batted Brendan, well batted.

What a way to go out! Also it was made under pressure, more than worthy of the record

Oh man I fell asleep at lunch

What a way to bow out, what an innings! They had 30 off 20 overs when he came in!

indeed a remarkable innings ...and he still has one to go.

This could be an interesting Test Match. I didn't see a thing after 220/4 : how was the pitch looking late in the day ? Still life ? Certainly wouldn't have thought 32/3 off twenty overs would translate to 427/11 in a day

NUCLEAR

Not sure how to say this without coming across too harsh but it was not a good innings at all, the amount of luck he needed was absurd and an all out slog is not great entertainment for me.

Harsh indeed. Would you prefer a painfully slow, grafting 45-runs off 150 balls on Day 1? Brendon McCullum's innings has set up this match.

Full credit to him for taking the bowling on and having the guts to risk his wicket with some streaky shots on the way to his 145.
The only way one could better the 56 ball 100 run record was to do exactly that. An unconventional knock from an unconventional player.
It was captivating viewing; like Gilchrist's innings at Perth in 2006.

Looks a great batting wicket and there are plenty of wide open spaces on the ground. Win, lose or draw, I'm sure it will be a thoroughly entertaining Test match for those who appreciate Trans-Tasman rivalries and taking the game to new limits as McCullum did yesterday.

He had some luck, undoubtedly, but compared to the two other 50 ball Test hundreds I have seen from Gilchrist and Misbah, the difference is they were both in occasions where quick runs were needed to set up a declaration (taking nothing away from both those knocks, scoring hundreds in less than 60 balls in a Test is ridiculous) whereas B-Mac has come in at 30-3 with the ball moving about a bit and completely changed the game.

You can add caveats to pretty much any innings, but at the end of the day he's scored a Test hundred off 54 balls - there is a reason no-one has done it before!

How is that not entertainment?! A big part of the entertainment element for me is how unexpected it was. A guy comes in at 30-3 after 20 overs or something, so you expect some grafting, but instead he decides to try to hit everything to the boundary.

On the wider match, we can also see that innings also kept them in the game. It's a good pitch, if BMc had prodded around and been out for 30 NZ would have been rolled. As it is, they are still just about in it

Not being a fan of McCullum and the way he plays test cricket it's an innings I will unfortunately forget, entertainment isn't edging three hook shots over the keeper nor is it flailing a bat at anything. Gilchrists Perth century was however superb, he combined aggressive shot making with more conventional shot making.

He played the situation well, he had some luck but felt he had to take some risks and make every ball count whilst he was out there. It was probably his day, and you will struggle to forget it now as it is kind of a significant record!

In fairness VTR I had no idea that Sir Viv jointly held the old record, it's a record I place no stock in.

Fair enough, each to their own. I thought it was an impressive counterattack, by him, Anderson and Watling. Gutsy cricket as they could have sat in and been all out for 100.

Meanwhile, more normal Test service has been resumed. Thanks to Burns and Smith. Australia will be disappointed they both fell late in the day but the visitors remain very well placed.

Two almost identical dismissals. Wagner's bowling plan and execution worked. Twice!

The Loaded Dog wrote:Two almost identical dismissals. Wagner's bowling plan and execution worked. Twice!

So I read. Very handy but NZ's attack seems pretty samey and probably too much so.

Neil Wagner is so depressing to watch bowl

Is Mitchell marsh the worst test number 6 in history?

Olly wrote:Is Mitchell marsh the worst test number 6 in history?

He's giving Wayne Larkins a run for his money, isn't he?