Australia beat New Zealand in 1st Test by 208 runs

[Aman]

Third man to score two centuries in a match three times



Plenty for the bowlers in the Adelaide shield game

Adelaide means nothing now, I'll be shocked if Boult and Southee make it to that game.

 

[Jabo]

Poor NZ

 

[Nikhil_cric]

They are toying with NZ here. OZ are many monstersat home.

 

[Aman]

The only good thing to come out of this game for NZ was KW's batting masterclass.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

NZ have taken five wickets and given away 773 runs )

 

[Gilly]

The only good thing to come out of this game for NZ was KW's batting masterclass.

Even that sits behind Warner and Khawaja and equal with Burns.

 

[Aman]

NZ have taken five wickets and given away 773 runs )

That's what happens when you have support bowlers like Bracewell, Neesham and Craig.

 

[Aman]

Even that sits behind Warner and Khawaja and equal with Burns.

Nah, classical > slugging + scoring against 130 trundlers on this wicket isn't the same as scoring against MJ, Starc and Hazlewood yet he did so effortlessly.

 

[Gilly]

Nah, classical > slugging + scoring against 130 trundlers on this wicket isn't the same as scoring against MJ, Starc and Hazlewood yet he do so effortlessly.

Difference being Warner beat your bowlers so badly that they became clueless and didn't have a clue what to do. KW scored runs but could not dominate and bully the bowlers like Warner did.

 

[Aman]

Boult going at close to 9 an over...

Even the Indian bowlers didn't go that badly...

Indian bowlers > Boult.

 

[Aman]

Difference being Warner beat your bowlers so badly that they became clueless and didn't have a clue what to do. KW scored runs but could not dominate and bully the bowlers like Warner did.

Once again, 130ks isn't going to trouble anyone here, also easier to score when you have a spinner who's dropping 2-3 balls short an over.

 

[Aman]

These wickets are little bit too late now, needed this in the first innings.

Soft wickets now.

 

[Convict]

comeback is on

 

[Gilly]

Nah, classical > slugging + scoring against 130 trundlers on this wicket isn't the same as scoring against MJ, Starc and Hazlewood yet he did so effortlessly.

Wasn't it you who said that the NZ gifted the Aus bowlers their wickets, now you are saying it was great bowling to make KW's inning look better. Wish you would just stick to one story.

 

[Convict]

Cunning plan to keep Craig in the team?

 

[Aman]

Wasn't it you who said that the NZ gifted the Aus bowlers their wickets, now you are saying it was great bowling to make KW's inning look better. Wish you would just stick to one story.

Both teams bowled poorly, difference is KW is a touring batsmen playing first up at the Gabba against an attack who is best equipped to bowl here.

 

[Haroon786]

Boult going at close to 9 an over...

Even the Indian bowlers didn't go that badly...

Indian bowlers > Boult.

You're such a fickle fan.

 

[Aman]

Aussie trying to ensure Craig plays the next Test, not like it will make much of a difference....

 

[Aman]

You're such a fickle fan.

I was taking the mickey out of fans having a go at Boult.

Yes, he's been poor but he's underdone, by no means are Indian bowlers better...

 

[Haroon786]

I was taking the mickey out of fans having a go at Boult.

Yes, he's been poor but he's underdone, by no means are Indian bowlers better...

Sure.....

 

[Aman]

Sure.....

Have a look through this thread, everyone has been having a go at NZ.

 

[Gilly]

Both teams bowled poorly, difference is KW is a touring batsmen playing first up at the Gabba against an attack who is best equipped to bowl here.

Yes he batted very well and scored some good runs, probably 3rd or fourth best batsman in the match.

 

[Haroon786]

Have a look through this thread, everyone has been having a go at NZ.

And they're justified NZ have been utter garbage in this match.

 

[Junaids]

Cunning plan to keep Craig in the team?

Funny you should say that.

I turned to the bloke beside me at the Gabba yesterday when Voges was running riot and said "with the West Indies up next, Dale Steyn in 2016 will be the beneficiary of Burns, Khawaja and Voges nailing down their positions!"

 

[Convict]

Funny you should say that.

I turned to the bloke beside me at the Gabba yesterday when Voges was running riot and said "with the West Indies up next, Dale Steyn in 2016 will be the beneficiary of Burns, Khawaja and Voges nailing down their positions!"

Nah. I think we play a series in Asia before that.

 

[Aman]

Yes he batted very well and scored some good runs, probably 3rd or fourth best batsman in the match.

Okay.

 

[Junaids]

And they're justified NZ have been utter garbage in this match.

Not just in this match.

You might recall my World Cup Final argument with [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION]. I've seen Starc and Co run through the Kiwi middle order in two World Cup matches in the flesh and again here.

Yes, the ball was red here. But the collapse to Starc last evening was after the sun sunk below the western stand - it felt a lot like an ODI.

Credit to the Aussies for selecting the right attack and for punishing medium paced filth.

I once saw Mark Greatbatch draw a Test for NZ from this position at Perth, with session after session of leaving the ball.

Let's see whether these Kiwis are one-paced in the image of McCullum or if they can dig deep like FAF at Adelaide to save it.

 

[Haroon786]

Not just in this match.

You might recall my World Cup Final argument with [MENTION=135134]CricketAnalyst[/MENTION]. I've seen Starc and Co run through the Kiwi middle order in two World Cup matches in the flesh and again here.

Yes, the ball was red here. But the collapse to Starc last evening was after the sun sunk below the western stand - it felt a lot like an ODI.

Credit to the Aussies for selecting the right attack and for punishing medium paced filth.

I once saw Mark Greatbatch draw a Test for NZ from this position at Perth, with session after session of leaving the ball.

Let's see whether these Kiwis are one-paced in the image of McCullum or if they can dig deep like FAF at Adelaide to save it.

I haven't watched a single ball of this match, so all that I'm going off is the scorecard and Australia have totally outclassed NZ in batting and have made the Kiwi bowling look mediocre and not international standard.

No I wasn't around much near the time of the WC on PP, however I understand that NZ are trying to bat a similar manner to the way Australia batted vs their own bowlers - the only problem is that Starc, Johnson and Hazelwood are in a different league at home than their NZ counterparts and hence simply going after them isn't possible, you need to bat properly.

I don't see NZ batting out 180 overs although Macculum has scored a triple century before, it was against the mediocrity of India and not this Australian bowling.

 

[Aman]

Smith will probably declare overnight, gives them more than enough time to win the Test.

If we bat out 180 overs, we'll probably win it (highly unlikely).

 

[Junaids]

I haven't watched a single ball of this match, so all that I'm going off is the scorecard and Australia have totally outclassed NZ in batting and have made the Kiwi bowling look mediocre and not international standard.

No I wasn't around much near the time of the WC on PP, however I understand that NZ are trying to bat a similar manner to the way Australia batted vs their own bowlers - the only problem is that Starc, Johnson and Hazelwood are in a different league at home than their NZ counterparts and hence simply going after them isn't possible, you need to bat properly.

I don't see NZ batting out 180 overs although Macculum has scored a triple century before, it was against the mediocrity of India and not this Australian bowling.

Those are fair interpretations, but with respect, they are actually wrong.

What the Australians have very smartly done is turn this match into a Test version of the 2015 World Cup: grassless track making the slip cordon redundant, amassing a huge score fast, then making scoreboard pressure tell to get the opposition to lose wickets.

You are totally right that Australia have been able to punish a fast-medium attack, but that is largely down to the pitch-to-order, which offers zero seam movement off the pitch (although the modern version of the Kookaburra ball has no seam anyway).

If these teams were playing with a Dukes ball or on a sporting pitch the Aussies could not just plant their front foot half-forward and then drive away from their bodies. But on this pitch with this ball against this attack they can do it with total impunity.

It's the Kiwis fault for not assessing that their key bowler for the Gabba and the WACA was going to be Adam Milne.

And McCullum's fault in particular for giving Trent Boult far too much bowling at Lords and Headingley which stressed his back and left him on the comeback trail now, down on pace and fitness.

Funnily enough, the other half of your assessment it completely wrong. The Kiwis haven't tried to over-attack with the bat. They just had to bat on Day 2 after the wicket sped up and then lost wickets in a heap in the dark after tea on the second evening.

I think that as overall Test bowlers, Boult, Johnson and Starc are equals and Southee is not far behind.

But that is a global rating. On these modern grassless Aussie wickets you need to be 6 foot 4 or 140K to take wickets.

That's why Tremlett worked at 140K in 2010-11 and was toothless at 125K in 2013-14.

 

[Haroon786]

Those are fair interpretations, but with respect, they are actually wrong.

What the Australians have very smartly done is turn this match into a Test version of the 2015 World Cup: grassless track making the slip cordon redundant, amassing a huge score fast, then making scoreboard pressure tell to get the opposition to lose wickets.

You are totally right that Australia have been able to punish a fast-medium attack, but that is largely down to the pitch-to-order, which offers zero seam movement off the pitch (although the modern version of the Kookaburra ball has no seam anyway).

If these teams were playing with a Dukes ball or on a sporting pitch the Aussies could not just plant their front foot half-forward and then drive away from their bodies. But on this pitch with this ball against this attack they can do it with total impunity.

It's the Kiwis fault for not assessing that their key bowler for the Gabba and the WACA was going to be Adam Milne.

And McCullum's fault in particular for giving Trent Boult far too much bowling at Lords and Headingley which stressed his back and left him on the comeback trail now, down on pace and fitness.

Funnily enough, the other half of your assessment it completely wrong. The Kiwis haven't tried to over-attack with the bat. They just had to bat on Day 2 after the wicket sped up and then lost wickets in a heap in the dark after tea on the second evening.

I think that as overall Test bowlers, Boult, Johnson and Starc are equals and Southee is not far behind.

But that is a global rating. On these modern grassless Aussie wickets you need to be 6 foot 4 or 140K to take wickets.

That's why Tremlett worked at 140K in 2010-11 and was toothless at 125K in 2013-14.

Australian pitches have been like this for a number of years now, so your point about this being a version of the 2015 WC is wrong.

Yes NZ have over attacked - seven out out of ten wickets have fallen to balls that should have been left or defended.

Perhaps you misread, so I'll repeat Starc, Johnson and Hazelwood are in a different league at home than their NZ counterparts and hence you can't simply attack them but you have to bat properly - see off the good balls and attack the bad ones like Williamson did.

I agree with the type of bowlers that succeed on Australian pitches and the overall rating of the Australian and Kiwi bowlers.

 

[BigBoy123]

Aus will easily win this ...i hope that kiwis can win at WACA to set up a decider in Adelaide (which will a historical match)

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[leatherface58]

Terrible performance. Cannot expect Williamson to do this every time. Time for Macca and Taylor to do some responsibility.

 

[Convict]

Those are fair interpretations, but with respect, they are actually wrong.

What the Australians have very smartly done is turn this match into a Test version of the 2015 World Cup: grassless track making the slip cordon redundant, amassing a huge score fast, then making scoreboard pressure tell to get the opposition to lose wickets.

You are totally right that Australia have been able to punish a fast-medium attack, but that is largely down to the pitch-to-order, which offers zero seam movement off the pitch (although the modern version of the Kookaburra ball has no seam anyway).

If these teams were playing with a Dukes ball or on a sporting pitch the Aussies could not just plant their front foot half-forward and then drive away from their bodies. But on this pitch with this ball against this attack they can do it with total impunity.

It's the Kiwis fault for not assessing that their key bowler for the Gabba and the WACA was going to be Adam Milne.

And McCullum's fault in particular for giving Trent Boult far too much bowling at Lords and Headingley which stressed his back and left him on the comeback trail now, down on pace and fitness.

Funnily enough, the other half of your assessment it completely wrong. The Kiwis haven't tried to over-attack with the bat. They just had to bat on Day 2 after the wicket sped up and then lost wickets in a heap in the dark after tea on the second evening.

I think that as overall Test bowlers, Boult, Johnson and Starc are equals and Southee is not far behind.

But that is a global rating. On these modern grassless Aussie wickets you need to be 6 foot 4 or 140K to take wickets.

That's why Tremlett worked at 140K in 2010-11 and was toothless at 125K in 2013-14.

How is this a pitch to order wicket?

It's exactly the same Gabba wicket Kevin Mitchell produces year in year out

 

[trogger]

Australian pitches have been like this for a number of years now, so your point about this being a version of the 2015 WC is wrong.

Hilarious him trying to make it out this is some sort of wicket prepared specifically with nz in mind, just your normal gabba wicket the idea a typical gabba wicket like this has something to do with the odi WC is truly head scratching stuff.

 

[Haroon786]

Hilarious him trying to make it out this is some sort of wicket prepared specifically with nz in mind, just your normal gabba wicket the idea a typical gabba wicket like this has something to do with the odi WC is truly head scratching stuff.

I wasn't sure whether he was trying to troll but it seems like he genuinely believes in the stuff he posts.

 

[trogger]

I wasn't sure whether he was trying to troll but it seems like he genuinely believes in the stuff he posts.

Hehe at first i thought he was a troll as well but no he is the real deal, entertaining and kinda disturbing at the same time thats life on planet junaids.

 

[Haroon786]

Hehe at first i thought he was a troll as well but no he is the real deal, entertaining and kinda disturbing at the same time thats life on planet junaids.

Lol true, still enjoy reading his posts though.

 

[Pantani]

How is this a pitch to order wicket?

It's exactly the same Gabba wicket Kevin Mitchell produces year in year out

I remember when England made 1/500 dec. or some such in 2010. Same pitch as this one more or less. Everybody who comes to Australia knows what to expect: if your bowlers rely solely on swing and seam movement for their wickets, and can't find pace or extract bounce, you're going to get absolutely massacred. It's nothing new.

 

[Junaids]

How is this a pitch to order wicket?

It's exactly the same Gabba wicket Kevin Mitchell produces year in year out

I agree, but it's awfully bad for cricket.

When I first arrived in this country the Gabba was considered to be a wicket which at least provided some to the quicks. From 1994-95 onwards the first innings scores were:

426 v 167
463 v 97
479 v 277
373 v 349
485 v 375

Those were the scores in the 1990s.

Now, I agree that each of those first innings scores was big. But none of them reached 500, and all ten wickets were taken.

But in recent years we have reached a point where 500+ is the rule, not the exception.

Even England made 507-1 at the Gabba five years ago (Strauss 110, Cook 235*, Trott 135*).

That's why I tend usually not to attend the Gabba Test but instead I prefer to go to the SCG or Wellington.

 

[Junaids]

I wasn't sure whether he was trying to troll but it seems like he genuinely believes in the stuff he posts.

I don't believe it was ordered for New Zealand.

I think that either the grounds or Cricket Australia have ordered high-scoring pitches in recent years to try to ensure that Tests last 5 days.

But I think that that is a commercial direction, not a nationalistic one.

But it makes home Tests really boring to watch. Even when my country scored a mind-numbing 507-1 at the Gabba.

 

[Haroon786]

I don't believe it was ordered for New Zealand.

I think that either the grounds or Cricket Australia have ordered high-scoring pitches in recent years to try to ensure that Tests last 5 days.

But I think that that is a commercial direction, not a nationalistic one.

But it makes home Tests really boring to watch. Even when my country scored a mind-numbing 507-1 at the Gabba.

That was a quick changing of the goal posts.

Anyway, as long as Australia are winning Tests series at home, I doubt that they will care whether the pitches are high scoring or low scoring.

 

[Gilly]

I agree, but it's awfully bad for cricket.

When I first arrived in this country the Gabba was considered to be a wicket which at least provided some to the quicks. From 1994-95 onwards the first innings scores were:

426 v 167
463 v 97
479 v 277
373 v 349
485 v 375

Those were the scores in the 1990s.

Now, I agree that each of those first innings scores was big. But none of them reached 500, and all ten wickets were taken.

But in recent years we have reached a point where 500+ is the rule, not the exception.

Even England made 507-1 at the Gabba five years ago (Strauss 110, Cook 235*, Trott 135*).

That's why I tend usually not to attend the Gabba Test but instead I prefer to go to the SCG or Wellington.

How would you compare the fast bowlers in the 1990's to the fast bowlers now?.

 

[Pantani]

How would you compare the fast bowlers in the 1990's to the fast bowlers now?.

Pretty much every team, except maybe India, had a better attack during the '90s than today. Even the likes of Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka, the weakest teams of that decade, had useful guys like Streak and Vaas. It's also interesting to consider that although they were the two weakest sides going around, they were certainly no pushovers - unlike Zimbabwe, West Indies and Bangladesh (arguably) today.

 

[Gilly]

Pretty much every team, except maybe India, had a better attack during the '90s than today. Even the likes of Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka, the weakest teams of that decade, had useful guys like Streak and Vaas. It's also interesting to consider that although they were the two weakest sides going around, they were certainly no pushovers - unlike Zimbabwe, West Indies and Bangladesh (arguably) today.

So you expect the fast bowlers of the 90's to have a lot more success at the Gabba than the fast bowlers of today, or do you think the batsmen today face the same quality bowling.

 

[Justcrazy]

Easy win for Aussies here , kiwis will be disappointed.

 

[Pantani]

So you expect the fast bowlers of the 90's to have a lot more success at the Gabba than the fast bowlers of today, or do you think the batsmen today face the same quality bowling.

Batsmen of today aren't as gutsy as the '90s batsmen and bowlers of today aren't as skilled as '90s bowlers. Although Junaids will make the counter-argument that the bowlers are only worse because the pitches are flatter. There's really no way to settle that line of argument, it's like a chicken and egg scenario - did the bowlers become worse first, or did the pitches become worse first.

 

[Junaids]

How would you compare the fast bowlers in the 1990's to the fast bowlers now?.

Excellent point - I hadn't thought of that.

Having said that, three years ago Australia scored 569-5 at the Gabba against an attack of Steyn, Philander, Morkel and Kallis, which is probably as good as modern Test attacks get.

I'd just like to see the balance shift a little on these home tracks. I think Cricket Australia is afraid that tourists will be blown away in a session if home pitches have lateral movement to go with the bounce and carry.

But I'd much rather see 350 play 300 rather than see one team amass 500+ ever, anywhere.

 

[Gilly]

Excellent point - I hadn't thought of that.

Having said that, three years ago Australia scored 569-5 at the Gabba against an attack of Steyn, Philander, Morkel and Kallis, which is probably as good as modern Test attacks get.

I'd just like to see the balance shift a little on these home tracks. I think Cricket Australia is afraid that tourists will be blown away in a session if home pitches have lateral movement to go with the bounce and carry.

But I'd much rather see 350 play 300 rather than see one team amass 500+ ever, anywhere.

So how does Australia come up with a wicket that enables the crap that NZ bowled on day one dismiss Australia for 350?.

 

[Junaids]

Excellent point - I hadn't thought of that.

Having said that, three years ago Australia scored 569-5 at the Gabba against an attack of Steyn, Philander, Morkel and Kallis, which is probably as good as modern Test attacks get.

I'd just like to see the balance shift a little on these home tracks. I think Cricket Australia is afraid that tourists will be blown away in a session if home pitches have lateral movement to go with the bounce and carry.

But I'd much rather see 350 play 300 rather than see one team amass 500+ ever, anywhere.

And that is part of the modern Gabba problem.

Steyn and Philander at the height of their powers?

Steyn 1-129
Philander 0-103

Both around 6 foot tall.

Morne Morkel, who is the worst bowler of the three, but also the tallest?

Morkel 3-127

I can't watch basketball because it is game for gangling giants. And fast bowling in Australia nowadays seems to be a game for giants only.

That's what England thought too - but of course on their last tour they discovered that Rankin and Tremlett were tall enough, but just too slow.

 

[Junaids]

So how does Australia come up with a wicket that enables the crap that NZ bowled on day one dismiss Australia for 350?.

They don't - that was nobody's problem except New Zealand's.

 

[Gilly]

They don't - that was nobody's problem except New Zealand's.

So its not the pitch but its the bowlers.

 

[Gilly]

And that is part of the modern Gabba problem.

Steyn and Philander at the height of their powers?

Steyn 1-129
Philander 0-103

Both around 6 foot tall.

Morne Morkel, who is the worst bowler of the three, but also the tallest?

Morkel 3-127

I can't watch basketball because it is game for gangling giants. And fast bowling in Australia nowadays seems to be a game for giants only.

That's what England thought too - but of course on their last tour they discovered that Rankin and Tremlett were tall enough, but just too slow.

The most successful bowler over the last 10 years in the first innings at the Gabba is Siddle with 10 wickets @ 22 and Lyon has 9 first innings wickets @ 34.

Both pretty short bowlers.

 

[Junaids]

So its not the pitch but its the bowlers.

No.

If the pitch had had any grass at all and if the ball had had any seam at all, Warner and Burns and Khawaja and Voges and Smith could not have done what they did - just plant their front foot forward and then drive away from their body.

Craig and Bracewell and Neesham bowled some rubbish, and on a reasonable pitch would have taken 1-180 between them.

But Boult and Southee bowled decent lines and lengths for zero reward because of the crap pitch and crap ball. I would argue that they should both have had figures of roughly 20-5-50-2 on a sporting pitch with a sporting ball.

So that first day performance should have left the game poised with Australia 5-280 on a sporting pitch with a decent ball.

But in modern Aussie conditions it reaps 3-389, and an army of batsmen whom England have only just exposed as Flat Track Bullies (or perhaps No Lateral Movement Bullies is a better descriptor) cash in.

 

[Aman]

Easy win for Aussies here , kiwis will be disappointed.

Fortunately for the side this thrashing won't get scrutinized much with the nation still on a high from the RWC.

You might think I'm exaggerating but nah, the nation is still on a high and the AB's are still going around NZ with Will.

 

[Gilly]

No.

If the pitch had had any grass at all and if the ball had had any seam at all, Warner and Burns and Khawaja and Voges and Smith could not have done what they did - just plant their front foot forward and then drive away from their body.

Craig and Bracewell and Neesham bowled some rubbish, and on a reasonable pitch would have taken 1-180 between them.

But Boult and Southee bowled decent lines and lengths for zero reward because of the crap pitch and crap ball. I would argue that they should both have had figures of roughly 20-5-50-2 on a sporting pitch with a sporting ball.

So that first day performance should have left the game poised with Australia 5-280 on a sporting pitch with a decent ball.

But in modern Aussie conditions it reaps 3-389, and an army of batsmen whom England have only just exposed as Flat Track Bullies (or perhaps No Lateral Movement Bullies is a better descriptor) cash in.

What and let me guess the NZ batsmen would have batted much better if there had been seam and swing and the Australian bowlers would not have got so many wickets.

 

[Junaids]

What and let me guess the NZ batsmen would have batted much better if there had been seam and swing and the Australian bowlers would not have got so many wickets.

No Gilly, I'm not a Kiwi, let alone a one-eyed one.

I would have liked the condition I described. Australia would have been 5-280 at the end of day 1 and the match would have been better poised. Maybe they would have reached 380 or so.

But New Zealand would have scored less runs too. Guptill for sure would have gone sooner and cheaper. Perhaps they would have scored 240 in response to Australia's 380.

And then the presence of a livelier pitch and a seam on the ball would have stopped the second innings slogathon.

Ultimately, I just like Test cricket to be a game with balance between bat and ball and between hosts and visitors.

 

[Gilly]

Ultimately, I just like Test cricket to be a game with balance between bat and ball and between hosts and visitors.

You only get that when both teams are evenly matched.

You just told us that you think that as overall Test bowlers, Boult, Johnson and Starc are equals and Southee is not far behind. And you have been telling us that NZ is a better team than Australia.

 

[Junaids]

You only get that when both teams are evenly matched.

You just told us that you think that as overall Test bowlers, Boult, Johnson and Starc are equals and Southee is not far behind. And you have been telling us that NZ is a better team than Australia.

Sure, but not in Australian conditions - I have never predicted New Zealand to prevail in these three Tests.

The back-to-back tours of the UAE showed us that New Zealand are better than Australia in Asia. If you had to put together a composite ANZAC eleven based on those series only Warner and Johnson would get in.

The back-to-back tours of England showed us that New Zealand are better than Australia in seaming conditions. If you had to put together a composite Anzac Eleven to play in England, only Rogers and Smith would get in.

The World Cup showed us - and this tour is too - that Australia are better on hard pitches with bounce but no lateral movement.

I don't for a second dispute that Australia are the best team in the world in these home conditions, especially now that South Africa is in decline. But they are worse than New Zealand in Asia or England.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Interesting to see how much longer Australia bat on day 4 an hour maybe max, either way the kiwis are set for a heavy beating in the 1st test. The way Aussies have pummeled kiwis bowling in both inns must be a concern for Bmac.

 

[Gilly]

The back-to-back tours of England showed us that New Zealand are better than Australia in seaming conditions. If you had to put together a composite Anzac Eleven to play in England, only Rogers and Smith would get in.

.

Lyon 16 wickets @ 25
Craig 7 wickets @ 42

Hazelwood 16 wickets @ 25
Southee 8 wickets @ 49

Warner 418 runs with 5 50's would be one of the first picked

M Marsh 8 wickets @ 19
T Boult 13 wickets @ 24

M Starc 18 wickets @ 30
M Henry 8 wickets @ 42

Just because you think that NZ were better than Aus in England does not make it so, there is a high probability you are wrong.

 

[Junaids]

Interesting to see how much longer Australia bat on day 4 an hour maybe max, either way the kiwis are set for a heavy beating in the 1st test. The way Aussies have pummeled kiwis bowling in both inns must be a concern for Bmac.

It depends upon the Queensland weather. It's the stormy season.

Sunday is unlikely to be interrupted but at this stage rain is forecast for Monday - day 5. There are officially 180 overs left in the game at this stage.

This New Zealand team is built in the image of McCullum - wham, bam, thank you Mam. But they need to hope that Australia delay the declaration tomorrow - and Smith notably did at Melbourne last December - and that it rains for half of Monday.

That could reduce their task from surviving 180 overs to somewhere around 120 if they get lucky with the weather. But they don't deserve it.

 

[Amjid Javed]

It depends upon the Queensland weather. It's the stormy season.

Sunday is unlikely to be interrupted but at this stage rain is forecast for Monday - day 5. There are officially 180 overs left in the game at this stage.

This New Zealand team is built in the image of McCullum - wham, bam, thank you Mam. But they need to hope that Australia delay the declaration tomorrow - and Smith notably did at Melbourne last December - and that it rains for half of Monday.

That could reduce their task from surviving 180 overs to somewhere around 120 if they get lucky with the weather. But they don't deserve it.

If the weather is iffy and clarke knows thats the case then he should declare overnight and look to crush the kiwis as quickly as possible.

 

[trogger]

Cooler change is coming through so expect more actual overcast rain/showers tomorrow and day 5, good and bad news for us i guess means less time in the middle but the time there will be better conditions to bowl in both from a swing pov and player comfort pov.

 

[Junaids]

Cooler change is coming through so expect more actual overcast rain/showers tomorrow and day 5, good and bad news for us i guess means less time in the middle but the time there will be better conditions to bowl in both from a swing pov and player comfort pov.

I tell you what, it's been a nightmare as a spectator. I've been drowning in sweat by lunch each day!

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Sure, but not in Australian conditions - I have never predicted New Zealand to prevail in these three Tests.

The back-to-back tours of the UAE showed us that New Zealand are better than Australia in Asia. If you had to put together a composite ANZAC eleven based on those series only Warner and Johnson would get in.

The back-to-back tours of England showed us that New Zealand are better than Australia in seaming conditions. If you had to put together a composite Anzac Eleven to play in England, only Rogers and Smith would get in.

The World Cup showed us - and this tour is too - that Australia are better on hard pitches with bounce but no lateral movement.

I don't for a second dispute that Australia are the best team in the world in these home conditions, especially now that South Africa is in decline. But they are worse than New Zealand in Asia or England.

I disagree about England . Long tours are better for home teams. Last year SL won the 2 test series in England 1-0 but its highly unlikely they wouldve won a 5 test series there.

Similarly NZ played only a two test series in England whereas Australia played 5 tests .

 

[trogger]

The back-to-back tours of the UAE showed us that New Zealand are better than Australia in Asia. If you had to put together a composite ANZAC eleven based on those series only Warner and Johnson would get in.

The back-to-back tours of England showed us that New Zealand are better than Australia in seaming conditions. If you had to put together a composite Anzac Eleven to play in England, only Rogers and Smith would get in.

The World Cup showed us - and this tour is too - that Australia are better on hard pitches with bounce but no lateral movement.

I don't for a second dispute that Australia are the best team in the world in these home conditions, especially now that South Africa is in decline. But they are worse than New Zealand in Asia or England.

nz have one series win in england in their entire history and it was back in the 1990's.

They have never won in india(not even a single test match)

They have won once in asia vs pakistan(45 years ago)

they have one win in SL(30 years ago when sl were a minnow)

We might get belted at times in asia but jeez at least we win the odd series, our win over sl a few years back is still more than nz have achieved there since the 1960's for goodness sake's.

 

[trogger]

I tell you what, it's been a nightmare as a spectator. I've been drowning in sweat by lunch each day!

try living here, last year was even worse felt like we were in far north Queensland all summer was awful.

 

[zabalestmsm]

NZ will win. It will be a record breaking chase.

 

[zabalestmsm]

Just watching the highlights of Day 3. NZ bowlers were mostly short off good length. Thats why they suffered.

 

[zabalestmsm]

Mark Craig is the worst spinner to have played Test cricket.

 

[zabalestmsm]

Some brutal hitting by the Australians. Beating Australia in Australia will be some achievement. I hope Pakistan will beat them next year.

 

[Aman]

 

[Aman]

Some brutal hitting by the Australians. Beating Australia in Australia will be some achievement. I hope Pakistan will beat them next year.

No chance.

The only side that was capable of beating them at home is rebuilding.

 

[Gilly]

Rugby only rates with the netball, so we wont mention the netball if you don't mention the rugby.

Remember rugby union is a minor sport in Aus.

 

[Sachin136]

If the weather is iffy and clarke knows thats the case then he should declare overnight and look to crush the kiwis as quickly as possible.

Unfortunately it isn't Clarke anymore, but that's what Smith did.

 

[trogger]

Pouring down here east of the city, if this hits the gabba long long delay ahead.

 

[in_cutter]

Is it my tv or is there no sound being transmitted..?

 

[Convict]

fortunately since I'm not a private school boy from Sydney I don't care for the rugby

 

[Suleiman]

I think NZ can do this.

If they can make nearly 700 vs a threatening Pakistani spin attack on the testing UAE pitches under the desert heat, then they have a shot at this.