Mike On Cricket

Ben on...my new cricket blog

2008-12-06T12:10:00.006+13:00

Uh oh! Mike's back to reclaim his blog. I'd better get out here.

I've now set up my own cricket blog:

You'll find it at www.crucket.co.nz.

It's time I had my own place and my own identity. No more "Ben on...", no more being mistaken for Mike.

I'm also setting up my blog as a sandpit for me to try out some web design. You won't actually find any design there yet – I'm just using a fairly standard theme at the moment – but I'll get to some design soon.

I hope you will all join me over there. And continue to hang out here as well. Maybe without me muscling in and taking over, Mike will be inclined to post more often.

Ben on...testing like an ODI

2008-12-04T18:00:00.000+13:00

It must have crossed the mind of every Black Caps' fan at some stage that if we are so much better at one-day cricket then we are at tests, why don't we just play our tests like we play our ODIs?

There are of course fundamental differences between tests and ODIs beyond the limitations on overs and clothing colour:

No fielding restrictions in tests
More mileage for bowlers in tests to get wickets than to restrict runs
The red ball – somehow it is more dangerous than the white

A different strategy is required in test batting than for ODIs, a strategy based around accumulation – taking the shine of the red ball, grinding down the bowlers and taking the field out of the equation by waiting for the bad balls.

It is all obvious stuff and I shouldn't be insulting your intelligence by writing it down.

However, if it is so obvious, then why do the Black Caps batsmen repeatedly fail to stick to this strategy? I think they may simply be incapable of playing anything other than in an ODI style.

When you bat in ODIs, you generally give up about 10 runs in your average in exchange for about 30 points in your strike rate. (E.g. Martin Crowe: test average 45.36, SR 44.65; ODI average 38.55, SR 72.63.) However, for many of our batsmen, this isn't the case and their ODI average is much closer to their test average, or even higher. How, Ryder, Fulton, Taylor – 4/5 of our top 5 – have better ODI averages than test averages though their SRs look about right.

So how can we deal with this, or even possibly use it to our advantage?

We can't use the traditional test strategy as it is clear that simply throttling back on the SR isn't helping the averages of our players.

So should we structure our batting line up like an ODI team? There is a movement in this direction in certain teams where the openers are often the most aggressive batsman. Hayden for example, or Sehwag. In fact, I got thinking along these lines reading a post by Suhas about Ryder playing as an opener. I don't think this is the answer in our case. Using Ryder as an opener would almost certainly go the way of all the other transplanted middle order batsmen. It might work if we had Glenn Turner to partner him, Fleming to come in at 3, Crowe at 4 and Astle at 5, i.e. if we had a batting line up so strong we could sacrifice Ryder.

I have a far more radical suggestion, based on the fact that our batsmen seem to do so well when partnered with a tail-ender; take the 50-run partnership between O'Brien and McCullum in the Adelaide test for example. Perhaps we should simply bat our rabbits amongst our top order. Suddenly scoring in boundaries, something we're good at, become premium, and rotating the strike, something we're poor at, becomes undesirable.

In that vein, here is my suggested line up:

Redmond
Martin
Ryder
Gillespie
Taylor
O'Brien
Fulton
Mason
McCullum
Patel
Vettori

The state of the game

2008-12-04T15:47:00.003+13:00

Ben tells me that I haven't posted since August. And I suspect it was a long-time between posts before that one. Well, you can hardly blame me. Posting bad news gets pretty tiring pretty damn quickly. And over the past season all we New Zealand cricket fans have had is bad news. Have we reached the bottom of the barrel yet? Does the end of John Bracewell's reign give us a glimmer of hope? I am not convinced on either point. The state of the game here is too fragile, and it is hard to see why any sports-minded young New Zealander would want to become a cricketer. Unless the performances of our national team start to improve, the next few decades could well see the end of the game's status as the nation's favourite summer sport.

Peter Roebuck has already penned an obituary for New Zealand cricket. But he pins the cause of death on a funny thing. He blames "splinter groups" and points to former players who carp from the sidelines without contributing. But it is hard to blame former players when a) so many of them have been forced from the game against their will and b) former New Zealand players have always carped from the sidelines. I mean, what on earth would our commentators talk about if they weren't allow to complain? For goodness sake, we can't all be brown-nosed sycophants like Mark Nicholas. And thank heavens for that.

I largely agree with Roebuck that the New Zealand game is in trouble, but the splinter groups and the complainers are just symptoms of the problem - not the causes. The real blame lies with those who govern and with the elements. It lies with the people who stabbed Shane Bond in the back, who pushed Stephen Fleming, Hamish Marshall, Lou Vincent and all the others away, the people who took money from India in exchange for a summer without cricket and who cowered when they demanded we break our word with our best bowler. And it lies with the ICC for enabling the BCCI's abuses of power. But also with the tsunami and the primal forces of violence which have cost us whole tours, and with the local weather which keeps the grass long enough for sheep and cattle to enjoy, and too long for local batsmen to develop a decent back-foot game.

It is true that green wickets have always been a problem, but good technique seems to have evaporated with good governance. Martin Crowe blames poor technique on new coaching methods and perhaps he has a point. He may be a carper, but he also knows batting.

Anyway. As with any team going through a bad spell, bad luck seems to follow us around. But luck always changes. We are due some good fortune, and I just hope that it arrives in time. Perhaps it will come in the form of a promising youngster? If we want to look for that glimmer of hope, then perhaps the best place to find it is in the promise of Corey Anderson, or Trent Boult, or Kane Williamson. And perhaps we should also look with an optimistic eye to the promise global warming holds for our wickets and for our youngsters' back-foot defense.

Ben on...overtaken!

2008-12-02T18:00:00.000+13:00

So the West Indies has leapfrogged us and gone to 7th on the table. Last time we played them, in 2006, we were 5th and leading them by well over 20 points. In fact, it was that series in 2006 that sent the Windies to their all-time low of 72 points. What has happened in the last 2 1/2 years that has led to this reversal of fortune?

Us

Since early 2006, our rating has been knocked by two losses each to South Africa and England and one to Australia. (I also suspect we took a hit from some good older results expiring from the rating system.) A draw against Sri Lanka and two wins against Bangladesh weren't enough to bolster our ratings appreciably. (In fact, this years 1-0 win against Bangladesh actually hurt us.)

This has equated to a fall in our rating from 101 to 81.

Them

Demonstrating just what a load of crock the whole rating system is, the West Indies have improved their rating from 72 to 81 without winning a single series. Since 2006 they have been beaten by India, Pakistan, England, South Africa and Australia and have drawn 1-1 with Sri Lanka. But inconceivably they are a better team by 9 points. I assume that the expiry of some terrible earlier series must be contributing to this shift.

Fight!

However inadequate the ratings system is, I think it is fair that NZ and WI are now fighting it out for bottom place. At the conclusion of the upcoming series, the ranking table should give a fair reflection of the relative strengths of all the teams.

Ben on...wrapped up

2008-12-02T14:01:00.001+13:00

So the series in Australia has wrapped up with the Black Caps being thoroughly wrapped up.

The results were

Brisbane: Loss by 149 runs
Adelaide: Loss by innings and 62 runs.

An embarrassing series, but actually a mild improvement on 2004 as we scored over 100 in every innings and ensured that no Aussie tail-ender scored a 50. (How's that for cold comfort?)

Looking at the tour stats, no one really excelled. Both McCullum and Taylor batted at 40 or above. Everyone else averaged less than 30. The most penetrating bowlers were the part-timers Redmond and Ryder. The pick of the full-timers was O'Brien with 7 wickets at about 30. The best innings performance was Southee's 4/63.

It was a tough series and was always going to be. Just something to be endured. It would have been nice though if there could have been a few bright moments to make it worth following.

One day we will challenge Australia, and it may even be when the current young guns grow up, but right now we just aren't at the same table.

Just to give us hope, I'll point out that in the first few years of the Trans-Tasman Trophy, it was dominated by New Zealand:

Season	Venue	Aus	NZ	Draw	Holder
1985/86	Australia	1	2	0	New Zealand
1985/86	New Zealand	0	1	2	New Zealand
1987/88	Australia	1	0	2	Australia
1989/90	Australia	0	0	1	Australia
1989/90	New Zealand	0	1	0	New Zealand
1992/93	New Zealand	1	1	1	New Zealand
1993/94	Australia	2	0	1	Australia
1997/98	Australia	2	0	1	Australia
1999/2000	New Zealand	3	0	0	Australia
2001/02	Australia	0	0	3	Australia
2004/05	Australia	2	0	0	Australia
2004/05	New Zealand	2	0	1	Australia
2008/09	Australia	2	0	0	Australia

Ben on...an itchy rash

2008-11-29T10:58:00.003+13:00

Yesterday's wickets:

Johnson to How, OUT, bad ball, bad shot and How's got to go, Johnson dishes it out very wide outside off and invites an ugly slash past the covers, the ball gets the toe edge of his bat and Haddin takes one of his easier catches

Hauritz to Ryder, OUT, Hauritz gets his man, he pitches it short of a length and Ryder shapes to pull across the line, he gets plenty of wood on it but slams it to Michael Clarke's right at short midwicket, he flings himself sideways and pulls off a stunning catch, superb reflexes there as he cups it with both hands

Hauritz to Redmond, OUT, Redmond falls right in to the trap and Hauritz has two after lunch! He flights it on middle and leg, he gets on his knee and attempts the slog sweep which fetched him two sixes before lunch, however this time Symonds is there at deep midwicket and he cups it easily over his head after sprinting a few yards to his left

Symonds to Fulton, OUT, great reflexes from Katich! Symonds bowls it back of a length, Fulton reads the length early and shapes to pull but fails to clear short midwicket, Katich flings himself to his right and catches it with both hands, the Australians are really delighted for Symonds

Clark to Taylor, OUT, Taylor gets the slow death from Koertzen, Clark gets the ball to bend back in off the pitch, Taylor tries to flick across the line but the ball hits him just above the knee roll and in line with middle and leg stump at least, Koertzen thinks about it before giving him out, Hawkeye indicates that it hit him too high

Lee to Flynn, OUT, that's a ripper! Lee fires that from round the wicket, lands it on a good length and gets it to swing in sharply through the air, Flynn fails to get right behind the line and the ball clips his pad and cannons on to the top of the off stump, the bowling change has worked

Even accepting that Taylor was unlucky, that's five wickets to rash shots. Only one wicket, Flynn's, was genuinely deserved by the bowler. What was going through their heads when they heard it was a batsman's wicket?

Redmon still reckons 500 is on the cards. I'm picking 330, the lowest 1st innings total at Adelaide since 2002.

Ben on...some good news written about O'Brien

2008-11-28T16:00:00.000+13:00

Nothing like a little scandal to get you noticed by the media. It's been picked up that O'Brien has actually had a really good year. (Perhaps the article is accompanied by the list of the world's leading test wicket-takers in 2008 cited in the article. It's not on-line, so here is a link to such a table.) We know this of course, and anticipated it.

Ben on...race to the bottom

2008-11-28T12:00:00.001+13:00

Even though the Trans-Tasman Trophy isn't up for grabs in today's test at Adelaide, there is still something worth fighting for – the position as the world's second worst major test team.

Let's put some numbers to this.

Currently (from ICC Cricket Rankings):

NZ 1967 points/24 matches = 81.96
WI 1791/22 = 81.41

If we lose this test: NZ = 80.85 (falling below the West Indies)

If we draw this test: NZ = 82.7

If we win, heaven forbid: NZ = 86.4

I calculated this by the following relevant formula (which applies if the difference in the rating of competing teams is 40 or more):

Calculate the series results by taking one point for each match or series win and half a point for a draw, then calculate a new points total by summing the product of the series result and 90 points more than our old rating and the product of Australia's series result and 10 points less than our old rating, then find our new rating by taking the ratio of our new points total and the new number of tests and series played in the last three years.

It is, as you can tell, a maddeningly opaque system with far more precision than it needs considering there is no real championship associated with it. It also really bugs me that we have a situation where the Windies could overtake us in this way (due in large part because of the rained-off test in Bangladesh). If they want to be second-worst, they should bloody well come here and take it from us!

(I could now calculate the possible results for the WI tour, but I've had enough of fiddly calculations for the time being. I used to have a spreadsheet that could calculate it. Imagine that! A championship that requires a spreadsheet to work it out!)

One day I'll take a closer look at alternative ranking systems, but I'll put forward one suggested system now: ditch the points, retain the ranking list; if you beat a team higher than you on the list you go up one ranking, otherwise the rankings don't change.

Ben on...[censored]

2008-11-28T07:27:00.003+13:00

I wonder if the journalist who wrote this piece

Black Cap faces censorship after 'faggot' furore

is the same one who wrote this beat up a couple of days back

Black Cap alleges Gabba 'faggot' taunts

And if so, do they feel stick now?

Apparently OB wants to keep blogging, which is great, but you can be sure that it won't be the same. If the blog had been vetted earlier, would the censor have had a problem with the fagot comment? The comment wasn't controversial until some dim journalist decided to beat it up.

Ben on...domestic cricket round up, round 3

2008-11-27T20:40:00.001+13:00

The third round of the State Championship is just finishing, so it would be good time for me to wrap up round 2, and round 1 for that matter.

Round 1

Just to throw the points table completely out for the whole season, round 1 of the State Championship consisted of just one match, Auckland v. Canterbury:

Auckland 398 & 175
Canterbury 169 & 331
Auckland win by 73 runs

Top batsman: Tim McIntosh scores the first century of the tournament, 140 (&9), inevitably prompting the suggestion that he be picked to open for the Black Caps.
Top bowler: Brandon Hiini gets a 7/148 match. He's compiling a very good record, now just in his third season.

Round 2

Now the business starts. All teams involved in this round.

Northern Districts 275 & 181/7
Otago 277
Match drawn

Central Districts 213 & 335
Auckland 207 & 203
Central win by 138 runs

Wellington 428/8 dec.
Canterbury 162 & 224
Wellington win by inn. and 42 runs

Top bat: Matthew Bell is back with 146, his 18th century for Wellington, a record number for a province. 18 doesn't sound like much of a record and I was intrigued at how many the century machine Glenn Turner had managed, so I looked him up. The point about the record is of course that the centuries were scored for one province. Turner scored 13 for Otago and 1 for Northern Districts, so he isn't even all that high for total NZ provincial centuries. Of course, he has 7 for NZ, 9 for the 'New Zealanders', 1 for South Island and a staggering 72 from his 284 matches with Worcestershire, for a total of 103.
Top bowl: Ewen Thompson had a 7/79 match in destroying Auckland. Of special mention however is the return of James Franklin, who picked up 4/56 over two innings. I think he was taking it fairly easy. I went down to watch a session of the Wgtn/Cant. match, but Franklin didn't get a spell.

Round 3

Again three matches, though the round was largely doomed from its early stages where rain at a couple of venues delayed play, then not helped by certain batsmen's utter reluctance to get out. An aggressive declaration by Canterbury, conceding a 178 first innings lead to Otago ensured that game went to four innings.

Wgtn 533/5 dec.
Auck. 441/7
Match drawn

ND 325 & 249
CD 479/9 & 99/2
CD win by 8 wickets

Otago 352 & 113/5 dec.
Cant. 174/5 dec. & 285/7
Match drawn

Top bat: Where to begin? Eight centuries in total this round. Starting from the smallest: Sinclair 101, Woodcock 102, Watling 111, Bell 122 (increasing his record and pushing for another place in the BCs?), Boom 140, McIntosh 191 (another huge century, but I maintain that he is not consistent enough for the BCs), Franklin 219 (he's back as a batsman as well as a bowler), Ingram 247 (a CD record)
Top bowl: It really was a batsmen's round and I'm tempted to not even mention any bowling. Under the circumstances though, decent bowling performances must be worthy efforts. We actually had a five-fer: Burtt 5/119, which he followed up with 0 in the next innings, meaning that his team mate's 5/54 match was actually the much better haul. [Edit: The team mate was Ellis.]

Points table

Phew, that was a lot of work. I'm not sure I can keep this up all season.

Ben on...I'll teach you to squander our superb bowling performance!

2008-11-27T08:02:00.003+13:00

You can read it different ways, but this article suggests that the NZ bowlers are mightily pissed at the underperforming batsmen and are taking it out on them in the nets.

Ben on...whinging Kiwis beaten up

2008-11-26T12:00:00.001+13:00

The news over in Aus is that the crowds have gone feral and the Black Caps don't like it. "Crowd turns on Kiwi 'faggots'" is the headline in the Daily Telegraph. "New Zealanders say they were called faggots" is the Herald Sun's headline for the same article.

The story seems to be based on a sliver of a comment in Iain O'Brien's blog (which has become a sensation since it was discovered a couple of days ago):

The crowds here are pretty good, ruined by a few, actually quite a few, idiots who think a day out at the cricket is just to abuse the guys playing any way how. You get called anything and everything. Embarrassing for these guys really, as a lot of the others around them are cringing. I don't know how many times I've was called a 'fagot' this afternoon!

(Note that the Aussie papers felt it necessary to alter his spelling of 'fagot'.)

Doesn't sound to me like 'the crowd' is turning on our fagots – just a few, well quite a few, idiots in the crowd. And it doesn't sound like the 'New Zealanders' are saying all that much about it. Just one guy dropping a quick comment amongst a much larger story.

Cricket crowds are nasty, as everyone who has been to a match knows. But there's no issue here. Just a beat up.

Ben on...Bracewell's legacy for new coach

2008-11-26T09:11:00.003+13:00

From The Herald:

Ben on...a new coach, a new leaf

2008-11-25T19:47:00.003+13:00

Callooh! Callay! The Black Caps have a new coach!

New Zealand Cricket have appointed Andy Moles as the new coach and have hastened Bracewell's departure – Moles is to start in two and a half weeks, in time for the West Indies tour.

(For anyone who is wondering what's going on because didn't he just turn that job down? Mott is the guy who rejected the position.)

By accounts, Moles was not high on the short list, behind Mickey Arthur, Graham Ford and Matthew Mott. So we've ended up with the fourth choice. And that's not counting John Wright and Greg Shipperd and other worthies not up for selection. On the one hand, it's a matter of "anyone but..." On the other hand, we can count the advantages of having a less-fancied coach.

Hey, this is the NZ cricket team, when we did we last deserve first pick? Moles should fit right in.
Moles ought to be coming to the position with a bit of humility. We can hope that he won't make the same sort of demands as Bracewell did when he started and hopefully he won't try to exert himself over the team in the same way.
Again, that bit of humility should help him be receptive to learning from the mistakes of the previous administration.

While some in New Zealand will be familiar with Moles from his two years at Northern Districts, it is fair to say that he is a bit of an unknown. He led ND to victory in the State Championship last year and has overseen the development of Tim Southee and Daniel Flynn. However, there isn't much there to judge him on. His previous stints at Scotland (chased out by a cabal of senior players) and Kenya (where the infrastructure is so crap, the best coach in the world wouldn't have made a difference) likewise tell us little.

So we'll have to judge him by his results with the Black Caps alone.

The Black Caps are in a real trough at the moment. After briefly being the 2nd ranked ODI team in the world, we have slipped to 5th. We are also going to be 8th in the test rankings by the start of the Windies tour. The only way is up.

Ben on...more internet finds

2008-11-25T09:43:00.003+13:00

Miss Field catches up with the Brisbane test, suggesting that the underperforming players should be dropped: Watson, Hayden, Ponting and the whole NZ team. (She's blogrolled.)

There's currently a big rave on about analysing your blog, so I thought I'd have a go at that. Since I write 91% of the blog at the moment, I suppose this analysis applies largely to me.

The Typealyzer reckons I'm an ESTP, a 'doer'.

The active and play-ful type. They are especially attuned to people and things around them and often full of energy, talking, joking and engaging in physical out-door activities.

The Doers are happiest with action-filled work which craves their full attention and focus. They might be very impulsive and more keen on starting something new than following it through. They might have a problem with sitting still or remaining inactive for any period of time.

The GenderAnalyzer is 91% sure Mike on Cricket is written by a man, if any of you were wondering.

Ben on...stuff found on the internet today

2008-11-24T19:56:00.004+13:00

A quick squiz at the Aussie blogs finds not much excitement about the weekend's test. JRod covers it, Stu mentions it and Beer and Sport make fun of Jesse.

Better add Stu and Beer and Sport to the blogroll.

I'll also add Damith to the blogroll. He's been badgering me about it in the comments so it would be only fair to acknowledge the work he has done in keeping our comments section alive. He also says nice things about our man Dan. (I'll add HoldingWilley to the links. It's a great site though I never seem to find the time to keep up with it.)

Closer to home, Sportsfreak critiques the test in a remarkably upbeat mood and the Public Address juggernaut finally posted about cricket, not in the sports blog Field Theory, but in Emma Hart's blog. Also, the Sideline Slogger has pointed me towards a blog by our very own Iain O'Brien! Awesome! He's covering every day of every test that he's in, in impressive depth. A great insight into what really goes on for pro cricketers. Highly recommended.

A new section has appeared on the Black Caps site, an archive. It's a bit rough, but the content is breathtaking. A treasure trove of stats. Did you know that there have been 18 double centuries scored at the basin? I should probably also add a link to the CricketArchive, which is the Aladdin's Cave of cricket statistics.

Ben on...a failed experiment

2008-11-24T07:35:00.005+13:00

Despite logic and sense being against it, McCullum is likely to bat at 5 again in Adelaide. Vettori backs him to play up the order and says "initially Brendon did really well in England". He's referring to the match at Lords where McCullum scored 121 match runs. The only other time he has impressed at 5 was an innings of 66 against Bangladesh.

He averages only 26 batting at 5, whereas his average at 7 is 33.46. It seems clear his natural place in the order is at 7. Batting him at 5 is a luxury we could just afford when we had Oram to take his place down the order, but the middle order needs more solidity just at the moment.

Shifting Brendon out of the top order also allows us to figure some balance into the batting order. Our current 3, 4 and 5 all bat at strike rates over 50, which is a mite too reckless against a good new-ball attack. I would be keen to see Flynn promoted all the way up to 3. Flynn bats at a much more sedate SR of about 40.

Shifting Flynn up into the new-ball firing range would be a big experiment too. He did a good job in the middle order at Brisbane, fighting to save both innings. However, it would be much better to have the match saved from 3 than from 6. (Ryder has done a decent job of this, but I'd rather he was an innings builder than an innings saver.)

Anticipating Fulton to come in for Elliott, this is a batting line-up I would like to see:

Redmond
How
Flynn
Ryder
Taylor
Fulton
McCullum
Vettori
Southee/Patel
O'Brien/Patel
Martin

Ben on...a quick game's a good game

2008-11-23T19:12:00.003+13:00

Thank heavens it was over quickly. I would not have enjoyed spending more of the day pretending like I wasn't thinking about how the game was going.

There was a lot of talk during the match about New Zealand still being competitive, right up until Katich was dropped. The truth is though that NZ was out of the match from about the point McCullum fell in the 1st NZ innings. We were behind Aus then and never caught up and the faster it was over the better.

So we've got a couple of extra days before the next test. I'll have to find something else to blog about. Domestic cricket perhaps.

Ben on...the rhythm of NZ cricket

2008-11-23T06:34:00.003+13:00

I suspect that students of dramatic theory could identify and classify the unerring pattern of NZ cricket defeats. I suspect there might be something operatic in the grand shifts from hope through despair to tragedy. Imagine Vettori as Siegfried and Australia as the Nibelungs and you'll understand what I mean.

The basic rhythm of an NZ test defeat looks something like this (using the current test as an example):

Rising dawn of hope (Aus rolled for 214)
Tables turned (NZ rolled in turn)
Misery reaches a nadir (last two Aus partnerships add 82 runs)
Inevitable countdown to defeat (metronomic fall of 4th-innings' wickets)
The end (game over by lunch, day 4)

I suppose a parallel can be drawn to the traditional dramatic structure of exposition–rising action–climax–falling action–denouement. If the parallel is poor it is because the whole thing is so poorly scripted.

Ben on...Australia in disarray

2008-11-21T06:48:00.003+13:00

Heh. We're not likely to see a day like yesterday again for a while, so let's indulge in some schadenfreude while we can.

Being at the receiving end of some disciplined, half-way decent bowling has knocked Australia around so badly they are starting to doubt who they are.

"Confused Australia battle identity crisis" is the headline in Cricinfo. Should Australia continue the 'all-out attack all the time' approach that has served them well or do they rebuild from the ground up, finding themselves a new attitude.

The Age sees things as being even more serious (following the defeat by India, not NZ it should be admitted) and sees the weakening cricket team as a constitutional crisis. "This nation deserves a team to again be proud of" wails Peter Roebuck. Australia, the multi-cultural paradise of altruistic firefighters, shouldn't be represented by a mamby-pamby team that sets defensive fields and doesn't get through it's overs. Peter is a fan of the all-out attack, mental disintegration, no friends on the cricket field approach. Vettori should be accorded full respect, and taken apart ruthlessly.

Ben on...reasonable achievements

2008-11-20T16:45:00.000+13:00

Wow! Aus 60/3 at lunch, day 1. NZ lead the Trans-Tasman clash with only about 29 sessions to play in the series.

Would it be unfair for me to make a pessimistic post now? After all, I've been composing it in my head all morning.

J-Rod has some upbeat advice for how NZ can beat Australia. Basically, bat well, field well, captain well, bowl well. Sounds like too much to hope for. I reckon we'd do better to lower our expectations. Winning a test is an unrealistic goal and we should be looking for some smaller victories. Here's a few suggestions:

Win the toss in each test.
Last 10 days.
Have one of the Black Caps lead one of the stats, such as leading wicket taker or highest strike rate.
Keep Ponting's average below 30 for the series.
Every opening stand to last at least half an hour.
Hasten Hayden's retirement.
Make Ponting sweat about his captaincy at least once in each test. Maybe an unbreakable late innings partnership or someone defying every attempt to set a field.
A first innings lead. (Wouldn't that be nice!)
Drive Symonds to drink.
Player of the series.

Ben on...beaten by our own future coach

2008-11-19T15:09:00.001+13:00

What would be more satisfying for a coach? To take a bunch of green underachievers through a challenging growth, from character-building defeats to hard-fought near-losses to scrappy wins to finally achieving some respect. Or taking a well-drilled bunch of confident cricketers and sitting back while they do their work without you lifting a finger. The first scenario sounds the more fulfilling (especially if the coach is alcoholic and the gutsy efforts of his proteges convinces him to give up the bottle), but in reality would involve more hair-tearing than satisfaction. Only a saint would find it appealing.

The choice for potential NZ coach/current NSW coach Matthew Mott is not quite as stark. NSW aren't exactly all-conquering (bottom of the Sheffield Shield table). However, after the weekend's game (NSW def. NZ by 6 wickets) he would be a saint for not immediately tearing up any NZ coaching contracts he might have on his desk.

Being beaten by NSW's B-team is fairly embarrassing, and has sent the team into a panic. However, it is just a warm-up, it doesn't count. Warm ups are only there to give the team a bit of practice and to sort out any problems with the team. In that respect, the loss to the NSW juniors was a great victory – everyone got some time at the crease and we worked out that our fragile batting is more of a liability than our weak bowling.

The loss doesn't bode well for the test series however, but then that doesn't tell us anything we didn't know.

Let's quickly preview the series.

We have two tests in the series, at Brisbane and Adelaide. This is identical to the tour in 2004 (including being preceded by a tour to Bangladesh), a series where Australia handed us defeats by an inns & 156 runs and by 213 runs. A more recent series, at home in 2005, gave similarly discouraging results, two losses by 9 wickets and a rained out thrashing. Going back through history, 2001 in Aus was Fleming's famous poke in Waugh's eye, but even that was only a series of three draws. We have to go back to 1993 to find our last victory against Australia, with Aus being led by Alan Border and our bowling headed up by Danny Morrison.

Now, Australia – just returned from being given a good spanking by a fired-up India – is a team in free-fall. They have clearly been greatly weakened by recent retirements, their captain is lacking confidence and there are dangerous divisions within the team. However, this will do little to bridge the gap between the teams, it is just too great. Consider also that the last time we toured Australia (that 2004 series I mentioned above) we had a fantastically stronger team, with Richardson, Fleming, Franklin, Astle and Oram playing, and we still got thrashed. The decline in the Aussies since 2004 has been more than matched in the Black Caps. So we should probably expect similar results.

Players to watch

Vettori: First test series against Aus as captain. How will his leadership and tactics compare with Ponting's?

Taylor: First series against Aus. Taylor's going to be carrying the NZ batting crew in the years to come; wouldn't we like to see him do it right now.

O'Brien: The star of 2008 and our secret weapon.

Symonds: First series back from his alcohol-fuelled meltdown and raring to repair his reputation. First test series against NZ believe it or not.

Lee/Johnson/Clark/Watson: So who is Australia's main strike bowler now? Who's going to rise to the top?

Ben on...an absence

2008-11-06T22:59:00.002+13:00

There are some notable missing players in the squad named for the 1st test in Australia. Jacob Oram is of course out of the squad with an injury. Patel stays home, at least for the Brisbane test, saved from taking a trip over just to be 12th man. Martin coming into the squad is the other change worth reporting.

There is another player notable in his absence, not because of selection issues but because he is still injured. James Franklin has not played a test for New Zealand for nearly 2 years (a fact that is slightly misleading, as the whole of the NZ team played no tests for the better part of 2007). He had surgery on his knee in November 2007. The recovery time was supposed to be 6 months, which would have put in the frame for the tour to England. Well we are now in the 12th month and he still isn't in the picture for selection for the Black Caps.

For those who aren't aware, or have forgotten because he has been away for so long, Franklin with 76 wickets from 21 tests is the best bowler currently on the New Zealand scene. And he was also starting to show his potential with the bat, making him a real all-rounder. Damn but it is frustrating to have him close, but not close enough to being available.

Apparently in the emerging players tournament in July, he was not troubled in extending himself for short bursts. Which is barely encouraging. Wellington will be starting off their domestic season on the 17th with a match Championship match against Canterbury, so hopefully Franky will be lining up for that and we can get some idea of how he's doing.

Ben on...'bring back Bond' is back

2008-11-05T16:24:00.000+13:00

Looks like we'll be fighting for the Trans-Tasman Trophy not only without Jacob Oram and Chris Martin, but also without Shane Bond, according to the major newspapers yesterday.

That Shane Bond has no interest in returning to play for New Zealand (and would have retired from tests even if he hadn't left for India) is old news. However, I predict an annual excitement about his imminent return (which should run shortly after Shane Warne's annual plea to be asked out of retirement in the news cycle).

We had this year's story a couple of weeks ago when there was excitement over the fact that the BCCI was willing to talk to the ICL. According to the story, if the ICL was accepted as an unofficial but sanctioned tournament, Shane Bond's exile would be over and he could be free to play in the test series against Australia. This article ignored firstly, as I mentioed above, that (i) Shane Bond was retiring from tests and (ii) doesn't want to play for New Zealand at all anyway, but was also misguidedly optimistic about the outcomes of the talks when (iii) there is in fact no way in Hell the BCCI was going to accept the ICL.

In the end, the BCCI refused to consider making any consessions to the ICL unless they basically closed down their tournmant, which is pretty much as aggressive as you can get in peace talks. The BCCI wants to destroy the ICL and isn't concerned about any casualties.

If you are interested in revisiting the legend of Shane Bond, Cricinfo is reviewing the interview that prompted the story in the papers.

He is also currently playing in the ICL tournament, 7 wickets @ 28.14, decent enough but not electric.

Ben on...the surprise performer

2008-11-01T08:00:00.001+13:00

I'm not going to analyse the performance of the individual Black Caps, I'll leave that to others, and I'm not going to praise Vettori, he has his well-deserved man of the series award. But I do want to highlight one player whose performance has not only been great, but has exceeded expectations.

In the test series Iain O'Brien picked up 8 wickets at 11.87. The best of the specialist pace bowlers by 7 wickets.

So he had a great series in Bangladesh. However, he also had a great series in England, picking up another 8 wickets from 2 tests at 23.12, again the pick of the pace bowlers.

His selection for the England tour was derided, but for the better part of a year, O'Brien has been our best seamer.

Ben on...Bangladesh, the agony and the agony

2008-10-31T08:45:00.000+13:00

Prior to this tour, Bangladesh's greatest achievement in tests against New Zealand was avoiding an innings defeat. Things could only have gotten better.

1st test choke

When Bangladesh had the Black Caps at 52/4 in their first innings in the first test, they had a solid hold on a possible victory. Their grip loosened as the BCs recovered, but defending a target of 317, the game was Bangladesh's to win.

They couldn't do it of course. No doubt, the first test was a good one for Bangladesh, despite the fact that it was lost. And they can justly feel that grim satisfaction of knowing that they lead for most of the match. However, this wasn't the "one that got away". Bangladesh have failed to capitalise on a dominant position a number of times. Most famously perhaps, they squandered a 150-odd first innings lead against Australia in 2006, and they also let Pakistan squeak home by 1 wicket in 2003. They've butchered a few other first innings leads by poor second innings efforts.

One day they will turn a first innings lead into a win against a major team. And that will be great for the game in Bangladesh. However, I reckon the path ahead for Bangladesh doesn't lie in these fortuitous tests.

Fighting draw

The draw in the second test was of course a better final result for Bangladesh than the first test loss. They were however under the cosh for almost the whole of the game. At 44/6, chasing a follow on target of 162, you should have been expecting another loss. The 7th wicket fight back turned the match and saved the test. It was therefore the defining moment of the whole test series for Bangladesh.

It is performances like this that will move Bangladesh cricket forward. Sad as it may sound (and as insufferably arrogant it may be coming from an NZ fan), Bangladesh have to more regularly force the opposition to bat twice before they can think about winning matches.

Ben on...the follow-on target

2008-10-29T13:09:00.004+13:00

Vettori's declaration on 262/6 was a good attempt to be aggressive and just what this game needed. And his three wickets were just what we needed.

On the last day, we'll be chasing 17 wickets. Very gettable. The only problem is the likelihood that NZ will have to bat again between the two Bangladesh innings, taking up extra time and requiring another calculation of when to declare. However, Karl has just pointed out to me some interesting aspects to the follow-on law (law 13).

Apparently the follow-on target depends on the length of the match, not just the grade.

Length      Target
5 days      within 200 runs of opponent's total
3 or 4 days 150
2 days      100
1 day       75

The interesting aspect is that the length of the match is determined from when the first ball is bowled. So this will be a two-day match, with a follow-on target of 162, which is not all that low a total for Bangladesh. That dramatically decreases the likelihood of NZ batting again after the first Bangladeshi innings.

Ben on...prospect for the match

2008-10-27T22:12:00.002+13:00

The third day of the 2nd test has been rained out, following the washout of the first two days. Even if the weather turns and allows play on the 4th and 5th days, surely there is no point continuing with this test. How could there possibly be a result in only two days?

Well, in fact there have been a few test matches decided within two days. It is also worth considering that extra time can be added to the remaining days, allowing a few extra overs, so we actually have a fraction over two days left. Assuming an extra hour can be added to each day, that should give a total allowable number of overs of 210.

Bangladesh have had many 3-day tests recently and a quick look shows that several of those were completed within 210 overs. During a disastrous 2005, Bangladesh were beaten by England in two tests in 190.1 and 190 overs, respectively, and twice by Sri Lanka within 182 and 198.1 overs. Also, they were beaten by NZ earlier this year within 195.5 overs at Wellington.

However, Bangladesh can take heart from history, as NZ has been rolled in some embarrassingly brief tests. NZ's first test match in 1930 lasted only 189.4 overs and the first NZ–Aus test lasted a scarcely believable 145.2 overs. There are a few other examples also, the most recent of which being a thrashing in 188.4 overs by South Africa in November last year.

Ben on...Cricinfo goes a little bit beige

2008-10-24T09:37:00.003+13:00

Cricinfo has a new blogger, Paul Ford, a founding member of the Beige Brigade. (Who we can safely assume is closely related to Paul Holden of Stuff's Sideline Slogger.)

Paul contributes to the blog called Different Strokes, which features 'views from the outside'. I don't know where they draw the boundary, but clearly the Beige Brigade lie outside it.

His first post, Paul analyses Bangladesh and New Zealand based on their performances in the first test and concludes that New Zealand were deserving winners 'by a freckle'.

Ben on...a great escape

2008-10-23T08:06:00.002+13:00

Awesome! Forget the 1st innings, ignore the quality of the opposition (and anyway, it's not like we've proven ourselves to be vastly superior) and don't let Cricket with Balls belittle us, the last innings of the test, chasing down more than 300, was a grand achievement.

Ben on...a five-day test

2008-10-21T06:58:00.003+13:00

1st test: The 55-run opening partnership got me interested, the 90-run second-wicket partnership got me hopeful, but the 172 runs still required keeps me circumspect.

Also, that run out of Ryder's is the sort of snag that could start the unravelling of the whole innings.

Ben on...Ashraful vs New Zealand

2008-10-16T10:26:00.004+13:00

Bangladesh lost the 3rd ODI in the 8th over of the NZ innings. Up to that point, Bangladesh had done well to keep the scoring in check and to dismiss Ryder and McCullum. But in the 8th over, How whipped out two boundaries to set the scoring on a path to a final total that was well out of reach for the Bangladeshis. From that over, NZ's run rate never decreased, and Bangladesh were never up with the required run rate in their innings.

In the eyes of some Bangladeshis however, the game, and the series, was only lost on the first ball of the 16th over of the Bangladesh innings. Playing that delivery, Ashraful shuffled across his stumps to get around the ball and scoop it over leg side, but instead letting it get past him and into his stumps. It was a shot so bad that he felt compelled to apologise to the nation. But for that one ball, that one shot, that decision, the series could have been won. It was that close.

Ben on...lovin' those new uniforms

2008-10-15T16:34:00.003+13:00

Like the new Black Caps' uniform? No? Join the Facebook group.

Could be worse though. Check out the rejected designs.

Ben on...3rd ODI

2008-10-14T14:00:00.005+13:00

ODI 3 to kick off in a couple of hours. Rather nervous. Can't really rely on Bangladesh's weakness to counteract NZ's capacity for epic failure.

The Bangladeshi fans can smell the fear.

The match is being played at Chittagong. Apparently the pitch there is slow but hard. A batting paradise it has been called, with some dew to assist the team bowling first. If things run similar to the first two matches, that won't help us too much.

Thinking positively however, there are several Black Caps who might have been expecting to go home with a bit of a boost to their averages who need to get their act together. For everyone to come out of this ODI series in the black, the top of the scorecard is going to have look something like this:

Ryder        65
McCullum     60
How         100
Taylor       70
Styris       95
Flynn        20 (not much of an average to maintain)
Oram        DNB

Ben on...a Bangladeshi voice

2008-10-13T07:52:00.001+13:00

I've been on the look out for a Bangladeshi blog to read during this series. The closest I have found is this fan site:

Ben on...phew!

2008-10-11T23:32:00.005+13:00

Wow. A 75-run win after being 117/7 might be New Zealand's biggest escape – but even if it isn't, it is easily one of the most important.

Ben on...mighty Bangladesh

2008-10-10T07:18:00.004+13:00

I don't know what I feel worse about, the loss or having been infected by the overconfidence surrounding this tour.

Way to go Bangladesh. Win 7 against top-flight opposition. Only England and West Indies left to go. Let's give Bangladesh its due and review those wins.

1999 World Cup vs Pakistan

Bangladesh record their first major victory, by 62 runs over a Pakistan team who had already qualified for the next round and who clearly didn't mind losing to their brothers.

2004 vs India

Now a proper test-playing nation, Bangladesh won their 100th ODI, beating their neighbour by 15 runs, suggesting that Dav Whatmore was going to perform a miracle with Bangladesh as he had done with Sri Lanka.

2005 vs Australia

Not exactly welcomed in England just ahead of the Ashes, the Tigers give their critics a black eye with a 5-wicket win over Australia on the back of a masterful century by Ashraful.

2006 vs Sri Lanka

On a roll now, winning a big match every year. 4 wickets against Sri Lanka.

2007 World Cup vs India

Bangladesh's incredible World Cup. Helped keep India out of the Super 8s by beating them by 5 wickets.

2007 World Cup vs South Africa

Bangladesh didn't progress any further in the World Cup, though they showed they belonged with a big 67-run win over South Africa.

2008 vs New Zealand

Swaggering into Bangladesh like they were already the 2nd best team in the world, the Black Caps failed to take seriously their own efforts to talk up the opposition and were beaten in every facet of the game.

Ben on...worst case scenario

2008-10-09T18:51:00.004+13:00

With the Black Caps self-destructing in the 1st ODI (149/6 off 40 as I write), threatening to cause major embarrassment to all the commentators predicting the Black Caps rising in the rankings and to me for my uncharitable assessment of Bangladesh's chances in this tour, it is timely to crack open the Predictor and work out what might happen to our ranking if the results don't follow the odds.

NZ lose 1

NZ fall to 113 points (from 116), holding fourth place from India by half a point.
Bangladesh up to 47.

NZ lose 2

NZ fall to 109, past India and Pakistan into sixth place.
Bangladesh up to 51.

NZ lose all 3

NZ fall to 105, dropping another rank past Sri Lanka into seventh.
Bangladesh up to 54, still sadly no where near reaching West Indies on 95.

Ben on...Glossy! New!

2008-10-09T10:24:00.005+13:00

Just got a signed e-mail message from Daniel Vettori himself about the blackcaps.co.nz site:

Welcome to the new BLACKCAPS.co.nz! Thanks for your patience while we got our new website ready. We hope you like it!

While the BLACKCAPS have been warming up for our series in Bangladesh, our website has undergone a transformation.

We've written to you, as a supporter of the BLACKCAPS, New Zealand Cricket or the game in general, that our new online presence is back and better than ever.

To receive regular updates on the latest news from our new look newsletter, just register on the site.

Thanks once again for support,

Daniel Vettori
BLACKCAPS Captain

And I have to say, the new site is pretty. The shambles that was the old site has been cleaned up – it now seems quite straightforward to actually find stuff. It also hits the usability notes: it's focussed on users, the pages aren't excessively busy, the navigation isn't as messed up as it was in the old site. Design wise, it's a winner.

It certainly beats the pants off the other associations, which all use pretty bog-standard templates. Cricket Australia | Tiger Cricket | ECB | BCCI (using a .tv domain, showing their priorities) | PCB | Cricket South Africa | Sri Lanka Cricket (MIA) | WICB

As I get most of my cricket from online sources these days, it's encouraging to see New Zealand leading the world in exploiting the internet. (We are kinda let down by this site though.)

That having been said, although there is a shitload of information on blackcaps.co.nz, there isn't a hell of a lot happening there. Perhaps there's some dynamic, interactive content coming, but until then I'll visit the site for the official word on schedules, but not much else.

Ben on...Bangladesh preview

2008-10-06T09:03:00.003+13:00

The international season kicks off on 9 Oct with the 1st ODI of NZ's tour of Bangladesh and the 1st test of Aus's tour of India.

However, you would hardly know that there was anything on other than the Aus–Ind grudge series. Jeez, even the Eng–Ind series over a month away is getting more coverage.

So it is up to us to provide some shallow analysis of what the tour to Bangladesh is about.

The Black Caps are currently in Bangladesh for a 3-ODI, 2-test series. This is New Zealand's second tour to Bangladesh and the fourth series the two teams have played against each other. To date, there have been simply nothing in the way of fireworks between the two teams. New Zealand have won every full international by wide margins.

Bangladesh

For Bangladesh, this series is the highlight of their home season. In fact, this series is their home season. No one else is visiting. They will be touring South Africa themselves, but they will be done with international cricket for this season by the end of the year.

The Bangladesh stocks have been hit by losses to the ICL, and much has been made about the fact that their list of probables includes six rookies. In my assessment however, while they will be hurt, Bangladesh will not be devastated by the ICL defections, and six rookies in a list of 24 isn't all that dramatic.

The confidence out of Bangladesh is ... mixed – "The players are charged up to play good cricket but I don't know why," according to one. Their hope is to win one match out of the five. Pfft. Fat chance. While anything can happen in cricket, Bangladesh is just too weak and New Zealand, for all our struggles against stronger teams, do not lose to weak teams. If Bangladesh wins a match in this series, it will be a major upset.

In fact, I'm going to give you the numbers. A NZ cricket fan expressing confidence his team will not lose has no credibility, so I'm going to have to prove my point with facts and figures.

Against proper competition (i.e. test-playing nations apart from Zimbabwe), Bangladesh has won 6 out of 119 ODIs. Their chance of losing a single ODI is therefore about 95%. The chance of losing three in a row is a product of the chances of losing each of them – about 85%.

In tests, Bangladesh has failed to win a single test against this competition after 45 attempts. Being as fair as possible, let's assume the chance of this happening is only 50%, so we're assuming Bangladesh has been neither lucky nor unlucky to get this result. A quick calculation on the back of an envelope equates this with a 98.5% chance of losing a single test, or a 97% chance of losing two tests.

Giving a grand chance of not winning a single match in this tour of 82.5% or nearly 5 to 1.

Players to watch: Mohammad Ashraful, with more test centuries than the rest of the squad combined ... in fact, the only current player to have scored test centuries – cripes! ... Ashraful is the great hope of Bangladesh and surely the rock that any success will have to be built on; Shahadat Hossain, Bangladesh's most penetrative bowler; Enamul Haque jnr, Dav Whatmore's protege and the other left-arm spinner in the competition; Imrul Kayes and Shamsur Rahman, two rookie batsmen looking to make good on the opportunities offered by the ICL defections

New Zealand

For New Zealand the equation is quite different: "hiding to nothing".

The Black Caps have to win every game or the tour will be a failure. And when they do win, what would they have gained? The ODI wins will push us up to no. 2 in the ICC rankings, but beating the 9th ranked team to go ahead of a team (England) we comprehensively beat a few months ago shows how bunk the ranking system is. Will the tour provide preparation for the Aus series in November? Well, it didn't work out that way last time.

Players to watch: For the individual players, there may be something more interesting riding on this tour. For several players – Redmond, Elliot, Flynn, O'Brien – this tour will be something of a second chance to stake a claim for further selection. A failure here could at least raise doubts about their selection in the rest of the season. This is of course Jesse Ryder's first appearance in a test squad. You'll recall that Ryder scored 196 ODI runs in February at a SR of 100, showing he has the stuff for the mid-length version of the game. If he did exactly the same in the tests we'd be pretty pleased, but what we really want to see is that he as a test game to complement his limited-over game.

Ben on...new duds for summer

2008-09-29T19:00:00.003+13:00

Looks like the Black Caps are getting their own version of the Walla-bra. The Black Caps have a new sponsor and are getting a new look, shown off here by the team's designated models Scott Styris and Chris Martin.

The new uniforms are produced by Canterbury (hence the faux futuristic look and that bloody bra). They are lightweight and highly breathable. They can also tell the player how cold or hot they are by little sensors on the shirts that change colour with temperature – as if a player standing about on a cricket field isn't highly sensitive to the sun on the back of his neck or the chill making his fingers ache. It gets better though. There are three types of 'super' trousers, for bowling (with a ball polishing patch), fielding (shock-proof) and batting (ventilated).

Ben on...Solid Energy NZ A, limp and listless

2008-09-26T12:34:00.003+12:00

New Zealand A (who NZ Cricket seem to like to call Solid Energy New Zealand A) started the A Team Triangular Series in southern India with a hiss and a roar, thrashing Aus A by 129 runs. This gave them a good headstart on the table with 5 points. However, they then proceeded to lose the rest of their games by wide margins, and under the humiliating points system used at this tournament, saw their points dwindle away to a final total of 2.

Still, there were a couple of good performances.

Peter Fulton, with four solids scores and an average of 55.5, pushed his claim for a spot in the Black Caps should any of the incumbents not perform in Bangladesh. And on the basis of this A performance, Redmond with his 28 runs from three innings has his work cut out for him holding his place against Fulton.

Mark Gillespie took 7 wickets from his four matches at a SR of 30-odd. Jeetan Patel also did well with 6 wickets at a good average of 23.

Beyond these three though, there wasn't much to write home about. Apart from a 50 by Neil Broom, none of the non-internationals did anything impressive.

I don't really understand the point of A series cricket, but I can see three things that might come out of an A-team tournament.

The first is that it gives out of favour players an opportunity to play themselves back into contention. Fulton is a beneficiary in this case. James Marshall is not.

A series give fringe players the opportunity to find form and get practice. Gillespie, Patel and Elliot have made use of this opportunity. Redmond, not so much. Daniel Flynn could have benefited from a run in this tournament.

The third advantage of A series is that it gives up-and-comers the chance to impress. It is pity that the emerging players, the likes of Greg Hay and Martin Guptil, didn't manage to draw attention to themselves.

Ben on...close shaves

2008-09-25T09:53:00.005+12:00

I didn't find the time to comment on the controversy around the Champions Trophy in Pakistan and its postponement. My position would have been that I support NZ Cricket's decision not to send a team to Pakistan. I actually think that the threat posed by terrorism is very small and I typically wouldn't agree with a decision that allows terrorism to impact on our regular lives in this way. However, the NZ cricket team has had several close shaves while touring terrorism-wracked countries, so I think it is only reasonable that they are reluctant to put themselves at risk.

Recall these close shaves:

2002 tour of Pakistan called off after a suicide bomb was denoted outside the hotel they were staying at.
1992 tour of Sri Lanka disrupted after a terrorist attack outside their hotel, the grisly after-effects of which several of the NZ team were to witness.
1987 tour of Sri Lanka curtailed after a bomb blast at a bus station that killed over 100. It didn't occur close to where the team was at the time, though they had passed the bus station half an hour earlier.

It was reported last night that the Black Caps were scheduled to stay at the Marriott Hotel at the very time it was hit by a terrorist attack that killed 53 people and injured hundreds more. If they had been there, there is every likelihood that some of the team could have been injured or killed.

Even though the Marriott bomb occurred half a world away, it must qualify as another close shave.

Ben on...how badly hit is Bangladesh?

2008-09-19T09:00:00.001+12:00

Shock news out of Bangladesh, less than a month ahead of the New Zealand tour, is that 13 Bangladeshi players, including six current internationals, are joining the ICL and effectively leaving international cricket.

New Zealand will be the first team to try out the newly weakened Bangladesh, with our own weakened side, and the powers that be are not happy.

So just how badly will these defections affect the Bangladesh team?

The internationals amongst the rebels include Habibul Bashar, Aftab Ahmed, Alok Kapali, Shahriar Nafees, Farhad Reza, Dhiman Ghosh and Mosharraf Hossain. Of these, the biggest losses are Bashar, with his 50-test experience, and Nafees, the 22-year old prodigy and the only other of these players to have a test batting average over 25. All the others are, quite frankly, replaceable. The sad fact about Bangladesh cricket is that many of its players have simply failed to add anything to the team. Another point to note is that Bashar was approaching the end of his career and his form had already slipped away. Losing Bashar is analogous to losing Fleming – clearly a big loss, but one that the team could ride out. Losing Nafees is more like losing a Ross Taylor.

My feeling is that most of the talent in the current Bangladesh team has remained. Their talented captain Mohammad Ashrafal is staying (reportedly turning down a $500,000/year offer from the ICL), as are Tamim Iqbal (who scored a couple of 50s against us last year) and Shahadat Hossain, their only bowler to have a test average of less than 40, amongst others.

Losing 13 players will certainly hurt Bangladesh. Several of the rebels are first choice picks for the national team, while the others would otherwise be the replacements for the first choice players. Take 13 players out of the top two tiers of NZ cricket and...well, it doesn't bear thinking about. Bangladesh apparently has a robust domestic cricket scene, so it could well be that the weaker of the rebels could be replaced fairly easily. I therefore think that the impact of the defections will not be as great as the numbers suggest. However, the fact that they have a large pool of mediocre players to replace losses in this way, highlights the great loss that Nafees will be.

In the longer term, the damage could be greater, but I might consider the long term implications in another post.

Ben on...ruminations on the summer schedule

2008-09-18T10:09:00.000+12:00

I'm pretty happy with how my tabulation of the cricket summer came out. It makes it quite easy to see how the various tours are laid out:

Tour to Bangladesh
Half month break
Tour of Australia begins, then is broken just as it gets up to speed
Players have about a week to disassemble and make it home before the first test in the leisurely series with West Indies
Another half month break in the international schedule for some domestic cricket
Then back to Oz for some one-dayers that really should have been part of a tri-series
More domestic cricket
Rushed tour by India

The two month gap in the Oz series is the stand-out head scratcher, but the four-day break between the WACA and MCG ODIs in Oz is a mystery (or does it just take that long to cross the Australian continent?). The Boxing Day 20-20 makes an unwelcome return and climaxing the Oz series with a 20-20 is a real 'who gives a fuck'.

My biggest beef with the schedule though is the number of tests. You'll note that each of the four tours includes only two tests. Two-test series are for losers; either the other guys just don't want to play with you or they don't have time for you. Obviously we're not going to agree to more than two tests with the Bangladeshis, 'cause we just don't rate them. Equally, India don't want to hang around for longer than they have to. Australia are usually pretty fair with us, so two tests is probably all they can reasonably spare this summer. The real disappointment is the West Indies series, the showcase of the summer. It's a shame the Windies couldn't give up one of their tests against England to allow them to extend their tour here by a test, but that's probably too much to ask.

I'm hoping that this pattern of short test rubbers is not the way of the future. I suspect that it has been necessary this year because Australia's window is the same as ours, so we have had to fit one of our away tours within our home window.

Ben on...Basin facelift

2008-09-17T17:00:00.001+12:00

So we all know the Basin is a great cricket ground. But don't you think it's just a bit shabby? Especially that bit at the northern end – when the game's gone a bit boring and you're thinking of heading into town, you walk past the R.A. Vance Stand sightscreen...then something happens, a batsman starts opening up or Mark Gillespie is brought into the attack, and you have to stop and watch in that open area by the gates, in the cold shadow of the grandstand with the breeze down the Cambridge–Kent wind tunnel up the back of your shirt, standing amongst the autograph hunters and tomato sauce covered food wrappers from the carts beside the city's worst toilet block.

Well. The happy news is that the Basin is getting a new stand (maybe), right in that area, between the R.A. Vance Stand and the Bank.

The City Council has plans for a 'flyover' to take traffic past the northern face of the Basin, and the new stand will hide the new road from view within the ground. There are a couple of other interesting details. It seems that the flyover will allow the Cambridge–Kent boulevard to be extended right up to the entrance to the ground. The flyover might also be further back than the current road, allowing the Basin to extend its boundaries out a bit. Also, Adelaide Rd is currently being examined for improvement, so the whole area might be get a facelift. (I understand chances of light rail running to the Basin is pretty slim though.)

Only one international match scheduled for the Basin this season, and it's the last of the summer: 2nd test v India, 3–7 April.

Ben on...Boock's gone soft

2008-09-16T21:53:00.000+12:00

Richard Boock is quite a combative cricket writer. He often rubs me the wrong way with his whinges about the crapness of the Black Caps and how they should be winning more. Recently, he has caused a storm at the Sunday Star Times. Two weeks ago he wrote an article in response to Brian Lochore's denunciation of political correctness. The article attracted such vehement response (no surprise perhaps when even the title of the article makes reference to "Brian the Bully") that he devoted last week's article to the responses he received.

They are a couple of very good articles. Well written and with their points well presented. And clearly heartfelt and very brave.

But anyway. It seems that he got enough feedback on his article to continue the topic for a third week. In the latest Sunday Star Times, Boock writes about a cricket team that included J.M. Barrie, Arthur Conan Doyle, A.A. Milne, P.G. Wodehouse, E.W. Hornung and Rudyard Kipling, a team that you might expect did not enjoy a lot of victories. He uses this team as an example to rebut the idea that sport is just about winning and losing, and to make the point that it is really about participation. I found this to be a pretty temperate attitude coming from Boock.

It's a fine sentiment and one that extends to following sport as well as participating. You get knocked back a lot being a Black Caps' supporter. On one hand, those many defeats make the victories all the sweeter, but on the other hand, setting aside the disappointment of the defeats and the joy of the victories and cricket remains an exciting, beautiful, compelling game. Roll on summer.

Ben on...bad boys

2008-09-14T08:51:00.002+12:00

So the news about Andrew Symonds is that he has been dropped from the Australian team for the upcoming tour of India for reasons of poor discipline, most notably his failure to show up for a team meeting, choosing to go fishing instead. He was dumped from the series against Bangladesh for this misdemeanour, after which he went to ground and was reportedly considering quitting international cricket. Apparently, we were told, he was suffering the stress of being a top-flight cricketer, like Trescothick and Tait before him, and that he is seeing a psychologist to get back on track.

For someone so evidently self-confident and reportedly laidback, this seems an unlikely theory. This report suggests that Symonds is less like Trescothick and Tait and more like Shoaib Akhtar, with alcohol in place of performance enhancing drugs and fishing in place of intraparty biffo. It isn't stress that's getting in Symonds' way, but his over-sized ego.

Whatever the reason, he's going to have to scratch India off his to-do list. And you'd have to say that that is a damn shame – Symonds' form has been outstanding recently and he has a great record against India. Myself though, I've never been a fan of the clown makeup, and his naked unfriendliness on the field makes him an ugly player to watch. No doubt he'll be back for the series with NZ, but I just hope that he has been knocked down a peg or two.

Meanwhile, our own larrikin Jesse Ryder is set to make his test debut in the Bangladesh series. Ryder knocked himself down a couple of pegs and is returning to the team chastened and apparently ready to make amends. This means not drinking while in Bangladesh, which might not be too much of a challenge.

It's awesome to see him back. He's tipped to play at 4, where he will fit right in to a top order with the promise of talent but bugger all experience. Assuming a top 5 of How, Redmond, Taylor, Ryder and Flynn, we're looking at a total of 26 caps.

Ben on...the summer schedule

2008-09-13T19:20:00.004+12:00

With the election date having been announced, we now know all we need to know about the summer's entertainment.

It's a good summer too, with trips to Bangladesh and Australia, then a visit by the West Indies (who we have seen quite a bit of recently, which I heartily approve of), followed by a return to Australia (seriously, the tour is interrupted by a whole other tour) and then the Indians visit (who we see too rarely sadly).

I have compiled the 08/09 cricket fixtures into one big table that also shows the days between fixtures. I always seem to find it difficult to find a comprehensive list of matches, so I've done one for myself. I'll put a link in the sidebar so we can come back and check it any time we want. (And please do come back and check it. It took frickin' ages to do all the CSS, so I would like to think my table will be appreciated.)

October 2008






Tue 7	To be confirmed	To be confirmed

Thu 9	1st ODI v Bangladesh	Shere Bangla National Stadium

Sat 11	2nd ODI v Bangladesh	Shere Bangla National Stadium


Tue 14	3rd ODI v Bangladesh	Chittagong Divisional Stadium


Fri 17	1st Test v Bangladesh	Chittagong Divisional Stadium
Sat 18	1st Test v Bangladesh
Sun 19	1st Test v Bangladesh
Mon 20	1st Test v Bangladesh
Tue 21	1st Test v Bangladesh



Sat 25	2nd Test v Bangladesh	Shere Bangla National Stadium
Sun 26	2nd Test v Bangladesh
Mon 27	2nd Test v Bangladesh
Tue 28	2nd Test v Bangladesh
Wed 29	2nd Test v Bangladesh


November 2008












Thu 13	v New South Wales	SCG
Fri 14	v New South Wales
Sat 15	v New South Wales
Sun 16	v New South Wales



Thu 20	1st Test v Australia	The 'Gabba
Fri 21	1st Test v Australia
Sat 22	1st Test v Australia
Sun 23	1st Test v Australia
Mon 24	1st Test v Australia



Fri 28	2nd Test v Australia	Adelaide Oval
Sat 29	2nd Test v Australia
Sun 30	2nd Test v Australia
December 2008
Mon 1	2nd Test v Australia
Tue 2	2nd Test v Australia


Fri 5	Auckland v West Indies	Eden Park Outer Oval
Sat 6	Auckland v West Indies
Sun 7	Auckland v West Indies



Thu 11	1st Test v West Indies	University Oval
Fri 12	1st Test v West Indies
Sat 13	1st Test v West Indies
Sun 14	1st Test v West Indies
Mon 15	1st Test v West Indies



Fri 19	2nd Test v West Indies	McLean Park
Sat 20	2nd Test v West Indies
Sun 21	2nd Test v West Indies
Mon 22	2nd Test v West Indies
Tue 23	2nd Test v West Indies


Fri 26	1st Twenty20 v West Indies	Eden Park

Sun 28	2nd Twenty20 v West Indies	Seddon Park


Wed 31	1st ODI v West Indies	Queenstown Events Centre
January 2009


Sat 3	2nd ODI v West Indies	AMI Stadium



Wed 7	3rd ODI v West Indies	Westpac Stadium


Sat 10	4th ODI v West Indies	Eden Park


Tue 13	5th ODI v West Indies	McLean Park


















February 2009
Sun 1	1st ODI v Australia	WACA




Fri 6	2nd ODI v Australia	MCG

Sun 8	3rd ODI v Australia	SCG

Tue 10	4th ODI v Australia	Adelaide Oval


Fri 13	5th ODI v Australia	The 'Gabba

Sun 15	Twenty20 v Australia	SCG













March 2009





Fri 6	Twenty20 v India	Westpac Stadium

Sun 8	1st ODI v India	McLean Park


Wed 11	2nd ODI v India	Seddon Park


Sat 14	3rd ODI v India	Eden Park


Tue 17	4th ODI v India	Westpac Stadium


Fri 20	5th ODI v India	AMI Stadium

Sun 22	NZ XI v India	Bert Sutcliffe Oval
Mon 23	NZ XI v India
Tue 24	NZ XI v India

Thu 26	1st Test v India	Seddon Park
Fri 27	1st Test v India
Sat 28	1st Test v India
Sun 29	1st Test v India
Mon 30	1st Test v India

April 2009


Fri 3	2nd Test v India	Basin Reserve
Sat 4	2nd Test v India
Sun 5	2nd Test v India
Mon 6	2nd Test v India
Tue 7	2nd Test v India

Ben on...vote for cricket

2008-09-09T08:15:00.001+12:00

It's been deathly slow here at Mike on Cricket, but then it has been deathly slow for New Zealand cricket recently. There hasn't been much going on, so I've been spending my time reading political blogs instead of trying to keep up with the world of cricket.

As you must know, the general election has to be held by 15 November. So the election campaign could be an interesting distraction until the summer really gets started with the first test against Australia on 20 November. I can't help but see cricket everywhere however, so all the politics I have been reading has been making me wonder what effect the result of the general election will have on NZ cricket.

I have checked the websites of the major parties, but no one has any policies for reversing the decline of the NZ cricket team. In fact, no one seems to have a cricket policy at all. National is promising more sports equipment for schools but less funding for sports programmes. Labour claims to have increased funding of sport and recreation during their term by a factor of 67.

Perhaps history is a better predictor of which party will do well for cricket.

History of NZ cricket in terms of the government

1930–35

NZ started playing test cricket in 1930, during the government of the United Party, which would merge with the Reform Party to form the National Party. This government was followed by the Liberal–Reform coalition. All of which means that the first six years or so of NZ cricket was played under the predecessors of the National Party.

In this period, NZ played 11 matches and lost 4.

To follow the trends, I am going to refer to the graphs of the Test Cricket Rating Service. I believe they use a rating system derived from that used for chess. Whatever. I am just using it because it has historical graphs. The beginning of the graph is going to be iffy statistically, and it rather generously shows NZ occupying a lowish mid-table position for this period.

1935–49

The Liberal–Reform coalition was followed by 14 years of Labour government, which established the welfare state in NZ and an interventionist economic system, which were to characterise New Zealand for several decades.

World War II severely curtailed test cricket during this period. NZ played 9 tests and lost 2. It was however a pretty good period for NZ cricket. Burt Sutcliffe and JR Reid were playing. We were outclassed by England and Australia (our only opponents in this period), but if we could have played more cricket of longer duration (we only played three-day tests) there is every possibility our first test win could have occurred in this period.

The graph shows us pretty much holding steady, which is probably fair.

1949–72

Early on in this period, the graph shows a downturn in NZ's cricket fortunes, that turns into a collapse. This period was the long dark night of NZ's cricket history. Our record of an occasional loss amongst numerous draws turned into a bucketload of losses (40) interspersed with draws (35) with an average of about 1 win every 3 years.

This was the long period of the first two National governments. The first ran till '57, the second from '60 to '72. The Second Labour Government filled the gap, just long enough to raise taxes on luxuries and secure NZ's first test victory. Despite the tragic cricket, this was a fairly positive time for New Zealand, with agricultural exports to Britain keeping us relatively prosperous and our alliance with USA giving us greater prominence worldwide then we perhaps deserved, though at the cost of having to join the US in the Vietnam war.

1972–1984

Our cricket fortunes showed a bit of a turn around at the end of the last period, to allow the Third Labour Government, '72–'75, to enjoy a small plateau, that included our first ever win over Australia. Shortly after Labour was replaced by the Third National Government, our results dipped for a few years before rising steadily if unspectacularly.

1984–90

The Fourth Labour Government was perhaps the most controversial government in our history. Our economy and international alliances were upended and several progressive social policies were enacted. NZ was reinvented and, in some ways, reinvigorated. It was also an exciting time for us in cricket. The rise that began under Muldoon accelerated and we somehow lost our habit of losing. By the time the government was re-elected in '87, the graph shows we were the third ranked test nation, ranked above Australia.

1990–99

It couldn't last however. In 1990, National were elected. They cut spending, cut welfare and cut wages. The nation went into a funk and the cricket team went with it. We returned to our losing ways and our ranking slid away.

1999–2008

The end to the '90s doldrums came in 1999 with a sudden claw back in our rating, shortly after the election that would lead to the Fifth Labour Government. After this recovery, our rating continued to rise, taking us close to the heights enjoyed under the Fourth Labour Government. Similarly, the country has gradually clawed its way back from the despair of Ruthenasia to real prosperity.

The Test Cricket Rating Service hasn't been updated since July 2006, so the last couple of years of the Fifth Labour Government haven't been captured. However, it is clear that NZ's position has weakened recently. In the ICC ranking system (which can't be compared with the Test Cricket Rating Service unfortunately) we have fallen from 97 points to 83 points. Interestingly however, that hasn't changed our position in the ranking; we were 7th on 97 and are 7th on 83. Another interesting point is that while our rating rose during the '00s, so did that of most of the other countries, so we didn't actually increase our ranking above 7th for anything but a short period.

Conclusion

So, so what? Well I can't tell you who to vote for, but I can give you a couple of perspectives.

From a historical perspective it is clear. The two periods of plenty have come during Labour governments, while the two periods of famine have come during National governments. You would have to expect from this trend that a National government would turn the recent drop in performance into a longer drought. Could re-electing Labour prevent a collapse?

Ignoring the lessons of history, you might interpret the recent downturn as a symptom of a tired, overdone government bereft of ideas and vision. And perhaps the '00s renaissance was illusory anyway, just a consequence of a general cricket-wide trend upwards. So could electing National dodge the impending collapse?

So there you go. Make sure you vote, vote wisely, and vote for cricket.

Jesus played cricket?

2008-08-11T08:26:00.002+12:00

So claims the Professor who currently holds the Fulbright Distinguished Chair in the Humanities. He points to a passage in the Armenian Gospel of the Infancy, translated into Armenian in the 6th century from a much older lost Syriac original which states:

He (Jesus) would take the boys to the seashore and, carrying the playing ball and the club, he would go over the waves of the sea as though he was playing on a frozen surface, hitting the playing ball. And watching him, the boys would scream and say: 'Watch the child Jesus, what he does over the waves of the sea!' Many would gather there and, watching him, would be amazed.

Ben on...Balls international

2008-08-05T09:14:00.002+12:00

Another Cricinfo Daily has arrived with no mention of anything to do with New Zealand cricket. The long cold winter continues.

Perhaps I should do what Uncle JRod has done and head to the northern hemisphere. It seems fortunes are easily made there – JRod had been in England less than a day and already he has a job, as a blogger for The Wisden Cricketer!

Who knew that The Wisden Cricketer had a blog? I guess I had better add it to the blogroll. It's pretty dry stuff though. "Should Steve Harmison have an England future?" "Collingwood or Gallian? You decide..." JRod is like a dingo yapping amongst a pride of dozing lions. His Wisden posts are thoroughly watered-down compared to Cricket with Balls, but still have much more bite and are far more entertaining than the regular posters. "Why English Administrcrats should apologise to me," he brazenly blogs in only his second post.

He's already started offending the Brits. He called Michael Vaughn a kitten and got this response:

Vaughan was a very hard man on the field....I’ll judge Vaughan in that light and I’ll judge those taking cheap shots at him in that light too.

In fact, he's managed to offend me somewhat. JRod dropped a couple of his regular shticks into his first post, Natalie Portman and the insignificance of New Zealand. Out of context, the reference to Natalie Portman makes him seem just a little desperate (rather than like a stalker, as he does in Cricket with Balls). As for the belittling of NZ cricket, on Cricket with Balls the occasional jab in the ribs of NZ cricket fans and a laugh at our expense are one of the highlights of the blog. However, his jibe on Wisden was...well jeez JRod, it was mean!

Cricket is facing a major road-block if one of the major cricket nations, not one of the minnows like New Zealand, cannot be toured by people with a pale complexion.

Ben on...the contenders

2008-07-26T09:38:00.004+12:00

John Bracewell wants out. So who wants to be the next Black Caps' coach? Word is that everyone's favourite prospect, John Wright, might not be keen. These guys have shown some interest: Dipak Patel (Central Districts coach), Andy Moles (Northern Districts) and Anthony Stuart (Wellington), Greg Shippard (Victoria and Vettori's Delhi Daredevils).

How about you?

I'll tell you one thing, if you want a coach who is going to let you know what he is thinking, hire a blogger:

Sportsfreak
Uncle J Rod - with Mike on Cricket to be embedded journalist(s)!
Sport Review - with Mike on Cricket to commentate!
Miriam
Miss Field
Smitty

Ben on...Dhoni the rockstar

2008-07-19T12:41:00.006+12:00

Mahendra Singh Dhoni is so important and so in danger of his fans' adulation, he needs bodyguards. But the sometime captain of the Indian ODI team won't take any old bodyguard. When he is out and about in Ranchi, he is accompanied by a group of female bodyguards.

That's cool. Rockstar cool. Bond-villain cool.

I'm picturing him protected by burly valkyries, forming a menacing phalanx around him. When it's his turn at the wicket, one of them buckles on his helmet while another hands him his bat.

The truth, as always, is rather more mundane:

Asif the arse

2008-07-16T08:08:00.003+12:00

Most of you have probably heard that Mohammed Asif - who had already escaped bans despite testing positive for performance enhancing drugs in 2006 and after being found with opium in Dubai - also tested positive for drugs during the IPL. However, unlike in 2008 and earlier this year the PCB is not going to defend their man. In fact, they have already suspended him and said that he is going to have to fight the charges alone.

Pakistani cricket writer Kamran Abbasi can speak with much more authority than me on the subject of Pakistani cricketers and drugs, so go and read what he has to say. When you finish his blog, you might notice this response in the comments:

One day after PCB decided that it won't allow its players to take part in the next IPL season if it coincides with Australia's rescheduled visit to the country next year, IPL released Asif's positive results. Not to mention that he was previously found guilty in India. And, also at Dubai Airport where 95% of the working staff is Indian!

Is it just coincidence? Every time when issue like this comes, India is involved in it. What if the Indian mixed something in his food there, and he even did not know it?

We have seen the involvement of Indian secret service agents in much complicated cases to damage the cause and respect of Pakistan. It must be the simplest one for them.

It would be better for Pakistani players traveling to India in future, get tested at home first before departure, to compare the results and to make sure that indeed they are dirty or is it someone else?

If only that were true. Conspiracies are so much more interesting than the mundane truth that a stupid young man thought he could get away with taking drugs.

Conspiracy theorists on the other side might soon be formulating their own theories. A drugs expert (see the side bar) has said that by naming Asif the IPL has breached WADA disclosure guidelines and that this breach of protocol could help Asif win an appeal against any sanction imposed.

Ben on...all-conquering

2008-07-03T08:30:00.001+12:00

After whipping the English 3-1 and demolishing the Irish, the Black Caps will tonight complete a clean sweep of the British Isles by battering the Scottish.

Five stats from the Irish demolition (courtesy Cricinfo)

New Zealand's 290-run triumph eclipsed the previous record for the largest win (by runs) by 33 runs.
James Marshall and Brendon McCullum became the first opening pair to pile up 150-plus scores in the same innings. It was also the first ODI hundred for both Marshall and McCullum.
New Zealand's total of 402 for 2 is their best in ODIs, and the sixth ODI total over 400.
The 266-run stand between Marshall and McCullum is by far New Zealand's highest partnership, and the second-best opening stand in ODIs.
The 18 sixes hit by New Zealand equals the record for most sixes by a team in an ODI. McCullum was just two hits short of the record for most sixes in an innings by a batsman.

Ben on...first cab off the rank

2008-06-28T21:09:00.004+12:00

Kevin Pietersen, England captain. Am I alone in being surprised by this appointment? I would have rated it as likely as, say, Parore being made captain in his day. But there has been no outcry from the English. "A new era" they're calling it. Pietersen claims to be humbled by the appointment, which is certainly something new in the new era. However, he also believes he's going to be so good at it he won't even have to try.

Ben on...more links

2008-06-28T15:32:00.004+12:00

Just in time for the last match in the England series, I am adding BBC's Test Match Special to our links. It isn't really that special, but it is a decent professional perspective.

Cricket Mystery I am adding because it is a New Zealand site. It is pretty ugly and the posts are quite stuffy (not helped by the fact that I can hear John Morrison mumbling through his moustache when I read them). Mike on Cricket can hardly point the finger with regard to site design and hackwork, but at least we don't have a business strategist on our team. Anyway, it does look like it is getting better with time and they are posting with good regularity.

Pro-fern-ity is another NZ cricket blog from the LJ fraternity. There must be more of us out there, floating isolated and lost in the blogosphere. Where are you NZ cricket bloggers? Come home.

Ben on...controversy aside

2008-06-27T10:26:00.002+12:00

Too much focus on the controversy here. Let's not forget it was a fantastic game of cricket, won by one run by the last batsman after the last ball. There are two classic final overs to an ODI: the no. 6 trying to clear the field in chase of double figures and the death bowler trying to prevent the no. 11 scratching a couple runs.

Relive the last over.

Ben on...the spirit level of cricket

2008-06-27T09:38:00.000+12:00

The Collingwood Incident has kicked up some stink. It wouldn't be a decent controversy in New Zealand however without a bit of self-flagellation. According to some, Vettori is the villain for his potty mouth and petulance. And pretty much everyone has been quick to recall the run out of Murali, over which some believe we have surrendered the moral high ground on questionable run outs.

These two controversial run outs hardly bear comparison; they lie on opposite sides of the 'being a dick line'.

I would have been very happy if Murali had been called back and my respect for Fleming would have risen greatly. But really, Murali only had himself to blame. In every other similar circumstance, the batsman waits with the toe of their bat on the line, standing as far back down the pitch as they can to show their impatience, while the ball is returned to the keeper. Everyone understands that the ball is still alive.

The fundamental mechanic of running between wickets is that it is up to the batsman's judgement and his legs to get him to safety and the fielders' fielding skills to get him out. In Murali's case, his judgement failed him in a peculiar way.

In Elliot's case, the fundamental mechanic broke down. Having to deal with being bowled over is not supposed to be part of running between wickets. Obviously it was no one's fault, but to take advantage of a situation where the game has broken down is clearly at odds with the spirit of the game.

Ben on...dueling apologies

2008-06-26T20:50:00.003+12:00

Trust New Zealand to respond to an apology by saying sorry:

"I think we're a little bit contrite ourselves. I think there was a little raw emotion there at the end that we're a bit disappointed in so I apologise to Paul and his team."

Talk about raw emotion! It doesn't come much rawer than a good "fuck you". It's good he apologised, but I actually really enjoyed seeing the boys letting their feelings show. There was a fair bit of anger on the balcony, but plenty of elation too. It's not far from "fuck you" to "fuck yeah!"

Ah, controversy!

2008-06-26T08:20:00.003+12:00

Please feel free to abuse Paul Collingwood in the comments section.

In the immediate aftermath of The Oval match it seems that Collingwood is being a good deal of leeway by New Zealanders for the fact that he has apologised for running Grant Elliott out while the batsman lay dazed on the ground. But, how much of our generosity is the result of post-victory euphoria? If we had lost, you can bet your bottom dollar that right now I would be busy converting office stationary into an effigy of Collingwood and constructing a bonfire on Willis Street (probably outside the gym next door, just to piss off all the smokers who stand outside it - honestly, where are their health priorities?). And I imagine that I would not be the only one bristling with righteous indignation.

At the time Collingwood decided to uphold the run-out appeal, Ian Smith compared the event to the infamous under-arm moment. But he was premature. If we had lost the match I am sure he would have been right and Collingwood would have been reviled as Greg Chappell still is today. But we won. And that means Collingwood's moment of madness will hardly be remembered in six month's time, let alone 25 years. And for this reason, the England captain should be extremely grateful that his team choked, wobbled, shot themselves in the foot and lost the match.

Ben on...topsy-turvy

2008-06-22T08:18:00.003+12:00

Strange things happen on the other side of the world – everything is opposite. I went to bed last night, praying for rain, with the All Blacks outscoring the Black Caps and woke up to find that our tormentors of the last two months have been humbled.

I am going to have to read the commentaries to find out how this could happen. A quick look at the scorecard hints it wasn't so bizzaro however: Elliot 56 & 2-9, Mills 47 & 2-42 and Southee 4-38. Looks like a top-shelf performance from a top ODI side.

Ben on...new rules after we need them

2008-06-20T20:08:00.003+12:00

Paul Collingwood seems to be the only person happy with the outcome of the last ODI. In contrast, Suave is livid.

The ICC has acted in admirable haste in amending the laws to include fiddly details about reducing the between-innings interval:

Where the innings of the side batting first is delayed or interrupted, the umpires will reduce the length of the interval.

In the event of time being lost (playing time lost less any extra time provided) up to and including 60 minutes in aggregate, the length of the interval shall be reduced from 45 to 30 minutes. In the event of more than 60 minutes being lost in aggregate, the duration of the interval shall be agreed mutually by the umpires and both captains subject to no interval being of more than 30 minutes' duration or less than 10 minutes' duration. In the event of disagreement, the length of the interval shall be determined by the ICC match referee.

That will no doubt help the next time a similar situation arises. No help when a completely different problem arises however.

Wouldn't a better all-round solution be to simply allow some flexibility in the rules or allow for the application of common sense?

Ben on...tour high point

2008-06-19T11:10:00.004+12:00

Could this near possible victory be the high point of this dismal tour of England? It's the closest we've gotten to a win so far, so shouldn't that be some sort of distinction when looking back on this game? Not according to the Guardian over-by-over commentary:

"I think generally we should all forget that this match ever happened. Let us never speak of this nonsense again."

Sportsfreak didn't even get to start their OBO commentary, so over there the game was forgotten before it even began.

Ben on...an old revolution

2008-06-18T12:48:00.002+12:00

Keven Pietersen's newly legitimised switched-grip reverse sweep has been hailed as revolutionary. I don't recall it ever being called this when Craig McMillan pioneered it and I don't think his left-is-the-new-right reverse seeping ever got the MCC in a twist. But then I don't think he ever used it to the same effect as Pietersen, but then again he never faced Scott Styris.

Ben on...polarising Vettori

2008-06-11T12:08:00.003+12:00

He has his fans (357) and he has his non-fans (13); Danny is a polarising guy. To some he's the thinking woman's crumpet. While to someone else, he has one of cricket's XI most punchable faces.

Ben on...rating the test series

2008-06-11T11:58:00.002+12:00

Cricinfo has rated the New Zealand and England players on their performance. The eleven English average a mediocre 6.5, while the thirteen New Zealanders rate a poor 5. But what do numbers really mean? Suave (who seems very angry these days) has expressed his ratings in words, six per player.

Ben on...we're useless, especially Mike

2008-06-10T12:27:00.004+12:00

Remember that tipping challenge Mike and I signed up for? The post-test series update has been posted at Sportsfreak. It's a close contest, with six tippers within 2 points of the top spot. Mike and I on the other hand are both within the 2-point margin of bottom place.

Our scores have also been helped by the several bonus points we've earned. Mike got a good one last week, getting a consolation point for picking that a guy who didn't even play would get man of the match. For my part, I got a sympathy point for picking Redmond to top the New Zealand test run scoring, much to Sportsfreak's amusement; he got 54, a good 189 off Taylor's top place. In my defence though I will note that Redmond is far and away the biggest scorer on tour with 545 runs and two centuries. Which just makes things that much funnier really.

The competition is going to continue through the ODI series though and we all know NZers are better at one-dayers.

Ben on...copping it

2008-06-10T11:09:00.004+12:00

The Black Caps were always going to cop it after their defeats in this test series, but Jonathan Millmow has sent down a beamer that catches Vettori right in the faceguard.

Our biggest problem in this tour was our lack of depth. We can't fault the lesser lights for doing no better than we expected, the likes of How, Flynn and O'Brien. We were always going to need decent performances from our stars, Vettori, Oram, McCullum, Taylor and Mills. While they did perform passably well in England, they each played worse in some way than they did in the home series – or in other words, before their IPL sabbatical.

We can only speculate as to what effect missing the start of the tour to play twenty20 might have had on these players, but it is hard to imagine that it was anything other than detrimental to their test form, particularly to Vettori's captaincy.

It certainly looks bad for New Zealand to lose like we did in the last two tests. I myself would find the loss easier to swallow if there wasn't this doubt over our preparedness. With the heat being turned on Vettori, I wonder if he would still claim that he's not worried about how it looks.

Vettori main culprit in gutless showing

2008-06-10T10:01:00.001+12:00

The fall-out from our inept performance in the third test continues, with Jonathan Millmow giving the team a real blast in the Dominion-Post. Jonathan may be harsh, but it is hard to disagree with anything he says.

Meanwhile John Bracewell does his best to make Dan Vettori feel valued by revealing that he wishes Stephen Fleming had stayed on as test captain.

The third test

2008-06-09T09:44:00.002+12:00

Don't worry guys. Don't get upset at the result in the third test. John Bracewell says "If we're patient enough and we're persistent enough eventually we'll end up with an era of very good cricketers,".

"We can't afford to (panic), our cupboard isn't that full anyway. We've picked the right guys, it's just keep exposing them (to test cricket)."

Phew! So that's alright then.

Of course you could argue that John Bracewell has been whistling the same frickin' tune for four years. And you could also argue that the reason the frickin' cupboard is bare is that most of our decent players have quit rather than play under him.

You could also argue that Bracewell's last sentence doesn't make any sense. But that would just be picky.

If you can be bothered reading them, Dan Vettori offers some more excuses here.

Personally I am sick of excuses. So reading Scyld Berry in the Telegraph was kinda liberating. He just tells it as it is. We can't bat, and we don't have a decent bowler.

Looking at the third test through the retrospectoscope, you do have to ask one question though. Why on earth did we go into a test on a wicket famed for swing with four into-the-wicket bowlers and a spinner? Inserting England and letting them score 364 was criminal. Of course being knocked over for 123 and 232 was criminal too, but then we didn't leave our best batsmen for the conditions on the bench. Tim Southee would have been as much of a threat on that wicket as any of the English bowlers, but instead we picked four seamers. Madness.

Still, if there is one positive from this test match it is that the loss was not the result of a single bad session. It was the result of a whole bunch of bad sessions. And Bracewell has been calling for consistency, so we must see this a step in the right direction.

Good news for Lou

2008-06-06T14:35:00.001+12:00

Lou Vincent has just signed a deal with Lancashire. Of course he should be playing for New Zealand, but I am just glad that he is playing at all.

Asif arrested

2008-06-04T10:32:00.004+12:00

The soap opera which is Pakistani cricket continues. Drug cheat/fast bowler Mohammad Asif has just been arrested in Dubai. According to the Pakistan Board of Control he is being detained on "suspicion of possessing drugs". Early reports quoted PCB officials as saying that Asif was found with opium. As you can imagine heroin possession is not treated very lightly in Dubai.

Because this is a cricketer from Pakistan we are talking about, the drama does not stop there. Asif now appears to be simultaneously claiming that the drugs were planted by airport officials, and that they are an innocent medicine for sore elbows that he has been carrying around in his wallet for months.

Taylor gets the knives out

2008-05-30T12:42:00.002+12:00

Ross Taylor's latest tour diary is damning of his team-mates for their role in the loss at Old Trafford. The most vitriolic attack comes against Jamie How, Iain O'Brien and Michael Mason. They are outed as bogans. Not that Taylor lets himself off the hook entirely. He, Dan Vettori, Jake Oram and Jeetan Patel are all revealed as being R&B fans. Terrible.

Oh and he also criticises the bowlers for not matching Monty Panesar's efforts on the field. But, you know, we knew THAT already.

The Guardian on Jerry

2008-05-29T13:23:00.002+12:00

Jeremy Coney is the new Richie Benaud? According to Rob Bagchi of the Guardian he is:

Coming across as cricket's answer to the poet and critic Tom Paulin, each word is measured for effect and the effort of thoughtfulness is etched across his face as he weighs each comment. He never preaches, though, just talks with the ease of an accomplished raconteur in a charming and shrewd, if slightly kooky fashion. If you still miss the master, catch Coney while you can.

I know some people find his kookiness irritating, but I count myself as a fan. His autobiography was the first cricket book I read that contained any real insights into the game and he can be a marvellously inventive, thoughtful and clever speaker when he feels like it.

If anyone has an MP3 of him and John Parker discussing Parker's only test wicket (during a lull in play at the Basin test between England and New Zealand in 1988)please, for the love of god, post it here so the rest of us can relive one of cricket broadcasting's true golden moments.

Vettori comes under more pressure

2008-05-29T08:10:00.003+12:00

Chris Rattue, in this morning's Herald, has sifted through the ashes of the second test and found Vettori's captaincy wanting:

The honeymoon period for Vettori's captaincy is over and this horrible failure must be judged against the harsh standards of international sport. After squandering a surprise series advantage at home to England this year, this sideways drift has reached the point where the leeway is over.

If Vettori cannot inspire and demand more than this, then the captaincy issue is not at rest. There must be serious questions over a side that can so blatantly betray one of the finest centuries ever scored by a New Zealand batsman, a rare gem that has already faded because of what followed.

Vettori and the 4th innings blues

2008-05-28T07:55:00.002+12:00

Conventional wisdom tells us that spin bowlers should struggle in the first innings of a test match, and improve as the wicket wears and crumbles. Monty Panesar showed us how this works in the Old Trafford test - with 1-101 in the first innings, and 6-37 in the third.

But one exception to this rule seems to be Dan Vettori. I can't count the number of times where he has performed well in the early stages of a match, and then gone missing once the wicket starts to take a bit of spin.

An analysis of his career seems to bear this out. Look at these figures:

Innings --- Wickets --- Average
1st --- 61 --- 41.40
2nd --- 90 --- 29.67
3rd --- 77 --- 32.58
4th --- 28 --- 38.14

The 1st innings figures are probably a reflection of New Zealand conditions. If the wicket is a green-top, then Dan probably won't get a bowl at all. If it is dead flat, then he (and all the other bowlers) get pasted.

But there is clearly a trend from innings 2 to innings 4. The longer the match goes on, the less effective he becomes.

Martin Crowe tells us what he really thinks about Geoff Howarth

2008-05-27T15:16:00.003+12:00

...

Oh, it was definitely the culture in the team when I came in that I wasn't made very welcome. Only John Wright actually welcomed me into the team. The captain [Geoff Howarth] called me a show pony the whole time and treated me like shit. That didn't help. Greg Chappell and Rod Marsh were nicer to me than my own team-mates.

...

Howarth as coach was a joke, and I played under Lee Germon, which was ridiculous.

From here.

The morning after

2008-05-27T08:41:00.001+12:00

Should I be writing this now? I am tired, I am grumpy and I managed to get only a couple of hours of sleep last night. It wasn’t that I spent the whole night watching cricket – I turned off when it was clear England were going to stroll to victory – it was that I spent the whole night lying awake seething.

I think I am going to have to restrain myself from ranting though. After all, this blog is going to become as predictable as the New Zealand cricket team if I have a rant after every single bloody victory-turned-into-defeat-by-a-second-innings-collapse.

Uh-oh. I almost couldn’t restrain myself there. I had to interrupt this post to fetch myself a nice cup of tea. Just typing the words “second-innings-collapse” made my blood boil.

Uh-oh. I did it again. Mmmmm, tea. Nice, soothing tea.

Positives. Yeah, positives. Let’s look at some positives. Forcing myself to look for a silver lining always helps me get over a loss. Jamie How is starting to look the goods now isn’t he? And Ross Taylor is proving himself to be a world-class batsman. And I bet Iain O’Brien’s first innings spell really surprised a few people.

I’ve always had a high opinion of O’Brien. I remember watching him bowl for Wellington years ago and being surprised at how quick he was. Mark Gillespie was bowling with the wind at one end and looked sharp, but O’Brien looked even sharper and more dangerous bowling into the breeze.

Another reason I have a fondness for O’Brien comes thanks to a bunch of annoying school kids who once perched themselves next to me during a State Shield match. The tykes had a not very endearing dimness to them, which was highlighted by the constant high-pitched abuse they piled on Iain. Maybe they don’t teach school kids about apostrophes anymore, because those idiots were pronouncing his name “Ob-re-on” – which meant O’Brien didn’t actually notice that their abuse was directed at him. I still find that funny. The abuse becoming increasingly shrill as O’Brien obliviously wandered back and forth in front of the embankment.

I think I might have told that story before.

What else can I talk about to distract myself from the nature of our loss? I could complain about the lack of variety in our defeats I guess. Wouldn’t it be really nice if just – for once – New Zealand failed in the first innings and then went gloriously to defeat with a battling second innings performance? I know the end result would be the same – but I think I would respect the team a lot more. And, you know, variety is the spice of life - for both cricket and blogging.

Ben on..hit wicket (tooth)

2008-05-24T08:58:00.003+12:00

End of 1st day, 2nd test: NZ 404/4, Taylor 67*, Oram 22*; Flynn retired hurt 4:

Not wishing to be macabre by posting this video, but that visual of the tooth is something else. I really hope Flynn is doing okay and that he'll be back with a vengeance.

Netherland

2008-05-23T11:34:00.002+12:00

I like books. And I occasionally get a hankering to read what I call in my mind "a great American novel". I am not sure what I even mean by that, and I am usually disappointed with whatever pretender I happen to pick up ("Cold Mountain", I am looking at you). I am starting to get that old hankering again, and am very tempted to pick up the latest attempt by a novelist to capture the American condition in print. Mainly because the vehicle that author has chosen as base his novel on is - weirdly enough - cricket.

"Netherland" by Joseph O'Neill isn't just attracting great reviews, it is also selling like hotcakes (as of this second it is the 10th biggest seller at Amazon). And the New York Times has even run an article about the real-life Staten Island Cricket Club, where the protagonist of "Netherland" plies his trade.

Billy Bowden pops up in the oddest places

2008-05-23T09:49:00.002+12:00

I was flicking through a medical journal this morning and came across an almost full-page photo of Billy Bowden signalling a wide. The photo was part of an ad for a cream that treats arthritis by "depleting substance P from the whole c-fibre neurone both peripherally and centrally".

I'm not sure how I feel about cricket umpires having a media profile, but I guess a) Billy has a good reason to be involved in advertising an arthritis treatment, b) an ad in a medical journal hardly counts as having a media profile and c) it is certainly no worse than Stephen Fleming promoting deoderant and air conditioning.

Ben on...Carry On at Lord's

2008-05-22T10:03:00.002+12:00

You have to love the English and their love of double entendres. The cricket at the Lord's test has already faded from memory, but the match will still be remembered with a chortle because of this 30-second snatch of commentary by Christopher Martin-Jenkins.

Some of the New Zealand commentators had a go at their own suggestive commentary, but not with the same panache. Ian Smith's quip about Oram's level of arousal has attracted comments, whereas Jeremy Coney's exposition about Jesse Ryder practising pulling in the shower has rightly been ignored (and, in a completely different vein, I bet he's hoping his shocker on Ross Taylor will be too).

Ben on...updated honours board

2008-05-20T11:46:00.001+12:00

Go Big Jake!

Year	Batsman	Country	Runs
2008	J.D.P. Oram	New Zealand	101
2004	M.H. Richardson	New Zealand	101
1999	M.J. Horne	New Zealand	100
1994	M.D. Crowe	New Zealand	142
1990	T.J. Franklin	New Zealand	101
1986	M.D. Crowe	New Zealand	106
1978	G.P. Howarth	New Zealand	123
1973	B.E. Congdon	New Zealand	175
	M.G. Burgess	New Zealand	105
	V. Pollard	New Zealand	105*
1949	M.P. Donnelly	New Zealand	206
1931	C.S. Dempster	New Zealand	120
	M.L. Page	New Zealand	104

Ben on...Vaughn and Vettori on the honours board

2008-05-19T13:27:00.003+12:00

Despite the fact that the current test is heading for a likely rain-affected, dilatory draw, two players have earned honours: Vaughn's 106 and Vettori's 5-69 are the latest additions to the England batting and visitors bowling Lord's honours boards.

It is great to see Vettori's name being immortalised, even if it is in a meaningless (probably) test.

Here's the list of honoured New Zealand bowlers:

Year	Bowler	Country	Figures
2008	D.L. Vettori	New Zealand	5-69
1999	C.L. Cairns	New Zealand	6-77
1994	D.J. Nash	New Zealand	6-76
	D.J. Nash	New Zealand	5-93
	D.J. Nash	New Zealand	11-169
1986	R.J. Hadlee	New Zealand	6-80
1983	R.J. Hadlee	New Zealand	5-93
1978	R.J. Hadlee	New Zealand	5-84

And here are the batsmen:

Year	Batsman	Country	Runs
2004	M.H. Richardson	New Zealand	101
1999	M.J. Horne	New Zealand	100
1994	M.D. Crowe	New Zealand	142
1990	T.J. Franklin	New Zealand	101
1986	M.D. Crowe	New Zealand	106
1978	G.P. Howarth	New Zealand	123
1973	B.E. Congdon	New Zealand	175
	M.G. Burgess	New Zealand	105
	V. Pollard	New Zealand	105*
1949	M.P. Donnelly	New Zealand	206
1931	C.S. Dempster	New Zealand	120
	M.L. Page	New Zealand	104

Little joys

2008-05-19T11:33:00.001+12:00

It’s the little things that make following cricket at Lord’s such a joy. Little things like hearing David Gower lament that the English bowlers could not roll a batting line-up as weak as New Zealand’s in conditions perfectly suited to their bowling. Little things like waking up to hear that England have been bowled out for 319, when the last thing you can recall before going to sleep was Strauss and Cook marching on while Nasser Hussain warbled on about batting conditions being so good that Michael Vaughan should look for a lead of at least 200 and to still be batting by the close of play. Little things like having pessimistic expectations and a few English egos punctured.

Let’s just hope that these little things and my joy can last for at least one more day.

Ben on...cricket royalty

2008-05-17T09:40:00.005+12:00

I think it may be time to add King Cricket to the blogroll. He's the one on the right (courtesy of AYaLAC's Valentine special):

They love their King Cricket up in the northern hemisphere. It's even been featured in Wisden Cricketer. It's a good blog. I've just been too much of a republican to add it here. Actually, the main reason I haven't added it to the blogroll is because of my raging parochialism – it seemed to me that the king just didn't mention our little dominion often enough, even though we've been playing each other for the last four months. I may have been too quick to judgement however; a look at his "New Zealand" tag reveals the occasional hat tip to a New Zealand player (which is of course more than I've ever written about an opposing team). In fact one of his more recent posts was about Brendon McCullum.

The post that prompted me to pay more attention to the blog though was about replacing Shane Bond with some recently discovered alternatives. I'm pinching the picture of Ryan Shanebondom:

Ben on...new depths plumbed in journalism

2008-05-16T19:12:00.002+12:00

I recommend that you do not read this article. It is wrong in so many ways and insulting to New Zealand on so many levels. Just don't read it. Read this instead – Prince Brendan McCullum one of the 5 most important cricketers.

Ben on...claws out in the comments

2008-05-16T16:31:00.004+12:00

We don't get many comments at Mike on Cricket. If I make a poor post, there will most likely be no response (though I might possibly get JRod or Sportsfreak pop in to make a pithy comment, saving me some embarrassment). I should count my blessings. Check out the harsh comments in this blog. And here are some of the deleted comments:

3. At 8:01 pm on 14 May 2008, Rvvm wrote:

No offence, but I have no idea who you are.

Any chance you could get a journalist who has played the game at this level or at least has some knowledge of the game to write the next blog?

Cheers.

5. At 06:54 am on 15 May 2008, bonedoc70 wrote:

I agree with much of the above. Sorry to be negative but you appear to be describing the routine happenings of a build up to a game of cricket! It is the most banal piece of writing I have read in a world (wide web) that is overflowing with the trite and cliched.

"The groundsmen have been working on the pitch and the wicket since 9am and were still going around with a lawnmower at 4pm."

SHOCK! HORROR! READ ALL ABOUT IT.......LORDS GROUNDSTAFF DO THEIR JOB!

Did you speak to the groundstaff? What is the wicket going to play like?

"...........the caterers bring in all the beer, champagne and pies they will need while sponsors tents have also gone up."

HOLD THE BACK PAGE.......PEOPLE WON'T STARVE AT LORDS

Furthermore your piece is one large contradiction. Initially you state that England vs NZ is not "box office stuff" then go on to say "the excitement is building......bring it on" and there are "legends to be made". The next line I was expecting was "he was a slow left armer from the wrong side of the tracks who broke all the rules......this time its personal"

Hmmmm.....do you actually like cricket? Do you know anything about it? I am sorry to be negative but there was nothing of interest in your piece and it also sadly betrayed a lack of passion and understanding of the game.

6. At on 15 May 2008, edbaron wrote:

Is this the worst BBC sport blog ever written. Comments about the grass being cut and pie tents going up suggest this person won a Blue Peter prize to write about this blog. What does she know about cricket? Less than G Boycott's cat I would venture. If the BBC has stopped showing the cricket on TV at least have journos who know something about the game passing comment on it!

Mike Atherton on Dan Vettori

2008-05-16T08:28:00.002+12:00

Ouch! As you might guess from the title of his column, "Daniel Vettori has failed to lead by example for New Zealand", Mike Atherton is not best pleased with Dan.

Ben on...anticipation

2008-05-15T20:40:00.002+12:00

While the English press and the English players are boring us with their boring stories about how boring the England tour is going to be, a couple of Englishers are giving more nuanced opinions.

The Atheist proves that he alone in England has a memory by noting that it wasn't that long ago that there was little separating England and New Zealand. Recalling the last time the two teams met in a tour, too long ago for most to remember:

And what happened? We won some games here. They one some games there. It was like watching two lobotomised quadriplegics trying to play “flip the coin.” Of course, there could only be one winner in such a contest: the coin.

Miriam has made a delightfully optimistic and up-beat post about her joyous anticipation of the start of the cricket season (helped no doubt by the presence of a certain librarian). The first test will apparently be like "the first time you sleep with someone after you've both been anticipating it for months."

Speaking of Miriam and the Atheist: There is a lot to be said for anonymity in the blogosphere. We will all have seen the Atheist in his appearances in his series of blu tack re-enactments of matches. Knowing what he looks like doesn't impact on his posts. If anything, it gives them character. However, in an indescribable post, he has, in a way, given faces to several of his blogging friends. Apparently the zany pairing of JRod and Miriam over at Cricket with Balls are the cricket blogging equivalent of Peter Andre and Jordan:

The analogy is strangely appropriate, but I suspect that the image of Pete and Jordan will change my reading of the posts at Cricket with Balls.

New Zealand 'B' vs England, first test preview

2008-05-15T13:33:00.003+12:00

Cricinfo is all over the first test. From stats, to the weather (wet) to interviews and tour diaries. It is not often that a New Zealand 'B' tour gets this much fanfare. I can't wait to see what sort of coverage Shane Bond and the rest of the 'A' team get when they arrive.

Sigh.

As my excessively heavy use of the 'B' team literary device and my tips over at Sportsfreak indicate, I am not particularly optimistic about our success on this tour. Even worse, even at this stage I am not particularly enthusiastic about it either. The two-faced treatment of Shane Bond; the defections of Lou Vincent, Hamish Marshall et al; the shabby treatment of Stephen Fleming - all these things have taken a toll on my love for the game. I know I will still be staying up to watch the first session on Sky. And I know my heart will still beat at a million miles an hour in the build-up to the toss. But right now any excitement lingers a long way behind some real bitterness.

Luckily none of that bitterness extends to any of the team. And once the real cricket starts, all the administrative blundering is just going to become a bad memory. So, as of tonight, my posturing and complaining about this being a New Zealand 'B' side is going to stop. The players with ferns over their breasts are my team, and I am going to damn well support them.

So out with the bitching, and in with the cheering. Go kiwi! Smash 'em McCullum! Show us yer cover-drive Ross! Rip out their stumps Tim! Go lads, GO!

Ben on...tips

2008-05-15T09:46:00.003+12:00

Speaking of fantasy cricket, Mike and I have been drafted into the Sportsfreak tipping premier league, which has had its first round of tips for the NZ–Eng test series as a whole. (Look out soon for the first-test tips.)

We're running at a combined score of 0 at the moment, which isn't actually that bad considering the series hasn't started. We would be doing much worse except that Mike got a bonus point for doing some research, counteracting the penalty I got for my own, rather underhand, research (bloody Flintoff factor again).

As a matter of interest, here are the series outcome predictions (for NZ): 0-2, 0-3, 0-2, 0-3, 0-3, 1-1, 1-1, 1-1, 0-2, 2-1!!!, 1-1, 0-2, for an average of 0.5-1.83.

Ben on...the Flintoff factor

2008-05-11T10:33:00.002+12:00

So Andrew Flintoff won't be playing for at least the first two tests. This will disappoint some commentators, but not others.

I gotta say, I'm not convinced by Flintoff. I know he carried England to Ashes victory and spent a couple of years at the top of rankings. But I picked him in a round of some fantasy cricket thing once and he got no wickets, so I ended up getting 0 points in that round and never recovered.

Ben on...Black Caps' performance rated

2008-05-05T11:04:00.006+12:00

If the Black Caps was your (male) lover:

New Zealand: Underrated, with a quiet librarian-esque charm, underneath which lay a second layer of librarian-esque charm, but underneath THAT lay some extremely good all-round skills. Didn't talk the talk as much as I would have liked, though, and had a tendency to collapse at the same point too early in every innings. Rarely good for more than one-dayers / day-nighters.

or (female):

New Zealand – a shy bookkeeper I’ve seen a few times. Not the most attractive girl I’ve ever been with, but more than makes up for it with her performances on the pitch. Plays above herself almost every time she takes the field. Wildly inventive and proves yet again looks can be deceiving. Not a world cup winner, but you know you’ll get a few good wins out of her.

Ben on...the English view

2008-05-05T08:17:00.003+12:00

I'm really liking the new Guardian website. It's got some proper articles at last and they're easy to find. Here's a profile of Ross Taylor. And here's one of Jacob Oram from the Times. Nice to see these papers think the New Zealand players are interesting enough to profile. Not like the bloody Independent.

Ben on...the boys are back

2008-05-03T22:37:00.003+12:00

The Black Caps are playing Essex at the moment. We managed to score a healthy total in our first dig, with Essex starting their innings as I write.

Our line up looks much better now that the IPL contractors are back in the team. There might be a couple of changes for the first test (Martin in, Flynn out?), but we are fielding a near to full strength side.

The IPL guys seem to be finding their feet in the longer form of the game as well, all of them keeping their scoring rates in check – McCullum in particular scoring at a very responsible 33.33 runs per 100 balls. Unfortunately, they seem to be forgetting how to hang on to their wickets; the five IPL players scored only 64 between them, in a total of 355.

Ben on...ICL wrap-up

2008-05-02T20:04:00.004+12:00

Chris Harris won the ICL 20s Grand Championship with the Hyderabad Heroes. He was also the only New Zealander that turned in anything like an outstanding performance, with his bowling at least.

I've tabulated everyone's stats. I don't really know which stat is the most important in 20-20, but I have chosen to sort everything by average, simply because I like the fact that this puts Shane Bond at the top of the batting chart and the bottom of the bowling chart.

Batsman              I   Runs  Avg   SR    6s
Bond (Delhi)         5    31  31    114.81 0
McMillan (Kolkata)   9   198  24.75 133.78 8
Astle (Mumbai)       7   148  24.66 102.06 5
Cairns (Chandigarh)  5   119  23.8  143.37 8
Adams (Kolkata)      5    77  19.25 126.22 4
Vincent (Chandigarh) 7   108  15.42  99.08 3
Harris (Hyderabad)   7    74  14.8  127.58 4
Tuffey (Chandigarh)  4    17   8.5  113.33 0
Parore (Chennai)     4     6   2     60    0

Bowler   I Wk  Avg  Ecn  SR
Harris   9  9 19.88 6.62 18
Cairns   2  3 20.33 8.71 14
Tuffey   7 10 24.5  8.16 18
Vincent  4  2 24.5  8.16 18
Adams    8  9 24.66 7.08 20.8
McMillan 6  3 31.33 8.54 22
Astle    5  2 33.5  8.04 25
Bond     7  2 86.5  6.25 83

There isn't much that can be taken from these stats. Bond had a shocker, as did Parore (3 catches, 2 stumpings). Cairns remains good value. All in all, certainly no one lit up the competition like McCullum and Taylor have been doing over in the IPL. (Is it too much to hope that the ICL will realise that Bond's how-many-$100,000 for 2 wickets is too dear and decide to release him to return to New Zealand cricket and the brighter lights of the IPL?)

We had a few kiwis selected for the World XI team for the ICL 20s World Series, Cairns (c), Harris, Tuffey and Vincent (wk), who lost the final to the India XI. No one covering themselves with any glory.

Batsman I   Runs  Avg   SR    6s
Vincent 7   108  15.42  99.08 3
Cairns  3    28  9.33   77.77 1
Harris  -     -   -      -    -
Tuffey  -     -   -      -    -

Bowler   I Wk Avg Ecn   SR
Harris   1  -  0   6.33  -
Cairns   1  1 12  12     6
Tuffey   4  4 29   8.28 21
Vincent  -  -  -   -     -

Ben on...Bond on Bond

2008-05-01T15:15:00.005+12:00

Anyone interested in what Shane Bond's up to might find this interview interesting (from the revamped Guardian online; hope they still have live commentary).

He seems to have moved on and is having a good time playing ICL T20, counting his earnings and talking cricket with cricketers. Good for him.

He's still carrying a chip on his shoulders however. A couple in fact. He's blaming NZC for him not being in the IPL. And everyone who said "It's a shame you can't play anymore but thanks for your contributions and good luck," (which really seems to be the prevailing attitude, even amongst those of us who also said "Oh, he doesn't want to play anymore so bugger off!") will be a bit disappointed to hear him say:

...no one even said: 'It's a shame you can't play anymore but thanks for your contributions and good luck.' It was just a case of, 'Oh, he doesn't want to play anymore so bugger off!' That irritates me most.

Also, here's a nice little report about the other ICL superstar Chris Cairns and his efforts to cause embarrassment to ex-coach.