NWR Cricket

Ajaz Patel! All ten wickets - against India, in India, in the first innings of the match. Extraordinary.

And they still look like losing by an innings. He might not even get MOTM!
I was thinking the same myself. It would be rare to get 10 in an innings and not be man of the match, but you would have to give it to the Indian opener who has thrived when all others have struggled.

I suspect most NZers did expect this sort of batting performance, although probably not quite such a dire effort. They are a very fragile batting team without Williamson and Conway. Doesn't help their credibility which they have worked hard to develop. Taylor is past it, just a slogger these days, Nicholls tends to get all his runs in NZ against weak opposition and Ravindra has been rushed in far too early. The lack of a genuine allrounder is really hurting the balance: they keep selecting players who can do a wee bit of both, but aren't particularly great at either.
 
Location
SW1X
Not a great start from South Africa at 1-1, it looks like there’s swing early on, but will New Zealand be able to capitalise.

It should be a good warm up game for New Zealand to play England in the summer.
 
Last edited:
Guess it will forever be known as the Matt Henry test .
I have always been a Henry fan. The English should know him well. He has never been given a decent run in tests and has often had to play in tough conditions such as Aussie from memory. He only gets in when someone else is indisposed for some reason.

Why on earth he ended up batting below Southee amazed me. Why anyone should have to bat below Southee has always amazed me. It does now mean he is the only player to take 7 wickets and then score 50+ batting at 11. So many wonderful records to aspire to in cricket.
 
South Africa have a pathetic batting line up, and certainly not good enough on a green track at Christchurch . Amazed they managed to beat India recently .
You’ll obviously be equally amazed this morning then Keith. A pathetic batting line up that knocked up 350 twice in a row. More than England managed all summer.
 
Yes an amazing result considering this Test was played only a few yards from the wicket last week . Great innings from the new wicketkeeper who does have a good first class record, but the quality of this innings was completely unexpected ——-at least by me :) It’s really surprising that New Zealand have never beaten South Africa in a Test Series , either home or away !!
 
Yes an amazing result considering this Test was played only a few yards from the wicket last week . Great innings from the new wicketkeeper who does have a good first class record, but the quality of this innings was completely unexpected ——-at least by me :) It’s really surprising that New Zealand have never beaten South Africa in a Test Series , either home or away !!
Yep, that was news to me too. To be fair, they've only been good for the past ten years or so and prior to that SA were out of test cricket for a very long time.
 
So that would be any NZ team with Sir Richard Hadlee in the side. :D
Yep, for about a three year spell in the mid eighties they were excellent. Hadlee played from 73-90 and apart from a little golden spell of three years they didn’t win a test series home or away. Unless you're going to count the infamous 1-0 Frank Goodhall series and 1-0 home series victories against then minnows Sri Lank and India.

I’m not decrying Hadlee as he was a great of the game, but one man isn’t a great test team.
 
It was a very poor performance from NZ, but obviously SA played very well. I didn't see any of it as I was away and cricket in NZ has been sold off to an obscure pay to view channel and hardly anyone gets to watch it anymore, which is not a good look for the sport. It is quite badly run in NZ.

Unfortunately it was the age old problems for NZ: one good win and they think they don't have to try next game, they believe all the hype written about them; a lack of openers - the openers combined scores over four goes was the lowest in the history of cricket; lack of a spinner; poor leadership etc. The best indication of their arrogance and poor leadership was their persistence at batting Southee at 9 ahead of batters who actually value their wicket and play proper shots.

They obviously miss Williamson, but it looks like they will have to get used to that, and SA were missing some key players as well.
 
It was a very poor performance from NZ, but obviously SA played very well. I didn't see any of it as I was away and cricket in NZ has been sold off to an obscure pay to view channel and hardly anyone gets to watch it anymore, which is not a good look for the sport. It is quite badly run in NZ.

Unfortunately it was the age old problems for NZ: one good win and they think they don't have to try next game, they believe all the hype written about them; a lack of openers - the openers combined scores over four goes was the lowest in the history of cricket; lack of a spinner; poor leadership etc. The best indication of their arrogance and poor leadership was their persistence at batting Southee at 9 ahead of batters who actually value their wicket and play proper shots.

They obviously miss Williamson, but it looks like they will have to get used to that, and SA were missing some key players as well.
That’s not great Kevin. Why would they do that? I can see that in India or Australia it makes sense as the audience is large enough and sufficiently enamoured with the game to follow. Even in England I’m not sure that the move has been by any means entirely successful. Plenty of money into the game for sure, but the game is withering at the grassroots level as (I would venture) a direct result.
 
That’s not great Kevin. Why would they do that? I can see that in India or Australia it makes sense as the audience is large enough and sufficiently enamoured with the game to follow. Even in England I’m not sure that the move has been by any means entirely successful. Plenty of money into the game for sure, but the game is withering at the grassroots level as (I would venture) a direct result.
Yes, a very strange decision Mark. Obviously based on very short term financial gain. The traditional pay to view sports channel here is sky, which most sporty people have. Spark are the new comers. They have cricket played in NZ, but Shy have the cricket played overseas, including NZ games overseas. So you can imagine that didn't please people. They even got the rugby world cup as a one off which further annoyed people. However they didn't do it well and several games ended up free to air because of the public outcry.

I actually have spark. They had a free offer and I forgot to cancel it when the free bit ended. I will cancel it after the ladies cricket, but I hardly ever use it. Very easy to get out of the habit of watching sport live when it becomes a pain to organise.

It has been a strange cricket season in NZ. All we have had has been two tests against Bangladesh and two again SA; no 20/20s or one dayers. Seems weird that those two teams went to all the trouble to get here, with 14 days in managed isolation, and only played two games each. Cricket is sadly becoming a struggling sport here.
 
Whoops. I have only just realised that the womens world cup is actually an international event held in NZ so spark don't have it, its on Sky. All very confusing. I had better cancel my spark as quickly as possible.
 
Top