The necessary media round-up

Hello and welcome back to my blog

Although not quite as carrion-bird-like as post-Bangladesh the media machine has offered up various opinions and 'experts' thoughts following a disappointing ODI series loss in India. Now before I get to some specific articles I want to clear up one mistake that seems to appear too often and that is the notion of the opposition being the Indian B side. This is almost true in that several top players were not playing (Tendulkar, Sehwag, Dhoni and Harbhajan) - although any person who considered Dravid and Laxman part of the A Side shouldn't be reporting for the Dannevirke News let alone any other. The fact that the Indian team on show performed far better than the Black Caps says more about Indian depth than New Zealand's frailty. So let's have no more of that!

Of all the opinions presented this week I found the following article best matched mine: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/cricket/news/article.cfm?c_id=29&objectid=10693724 by Andrew Alderson. He looks at several important details surrounding the coach/management structure and highlights the lack of preparation IN India before the series began. In another article the same writer brings up other issues that I think need mentioning:

• Kane Williamson has played 9 ODIs with only 1 victory and 8 losses - what must this do to his development?
• Just as damaging may have been the decision to place him at 3 (instead of Taylor) - a position he is clearly not ready for just yet

From this I couldn't help but question whether Ross Taylor's development is being poisoned by the label of, not just A senior batsman but, THE senior batsman. Vettori is still a bowling-captain and this leaves Taylor to be the inspiration, the leader and/or the target of the top order; at least Crowe had other batsmen around him in the early 1980s. The other reason I begin to worry about this possibility is what Martin Crowe said himself when referring to Stephen Fleming's career. He suspected that, burdened by captaincy at such a young age, Fleming was robbed of crucial years of batting development that may explain the inability to convert 50s that remained for the entirety of his career. The sad thing is, if this proves to be true of Taylor, there would be little that could be done to reverse/prevent it. Not until Ryder and McCullum establish themselves can the pressure come off Ross Taylor I fear
Finally Alderson's article above ends with, almost a plea, the realisation that Vettori MUST captain on after the World Cup (not currently his intention). The batting is only just beginning to find some structure and the last thing needed is to foist the captaincy on one of them

Now for the dregs

• Mark Richardson (largely a good article by his standards) doesn't want to hear the term 'our world-class players' used anymore. Well sir perhaps you shouldn't have used the term in your commentary/advertising of the team in the first place.
• Similar to this would be the description of Vettori's role as a selector as a 'controversial' appointment - a term used ONLY by the media who failed to realise that most captains are selectors in all but name anyway. Former players were willing to give it a chance - that chance may well have occurred and produced nothing but the experiment was worth it
• Now sadly, before you subscribe to Andrew Alderson (see above) he also suggested that Chris Martin be drafted in to the World Cup squad if Tuffey remains injured. Well I have one question, is there possibly a reason that Martin hasn't been playing ODI cricket this whole time anyway? (I'm not referring exclusively to his batting either)

And here is Jonathan Millmow for his second appearance on this blog. His first appearance here was almost as unpleasant for him as it was for the people reading his article. http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/4450685/Changes-sorely-needed-to-grab-that-elusive-W Here he picks his ODI team going forward and thoughts regarding the World Cup and strangely enough I AGREE with most of his selection. In particular his moving of Brendon McCullum back to 6 or 7 which is long overdue (I don't have time to expand on this now but I believe I covered it in previous posts). Having said that I do have a some thoughts after reading his article:

• Was the 5-0 result in India equivalent to the 4-0 to Bangladesh? Serious question but my inclination is to say no the latter was more embarrassing given that the rot hadn't set in at that point and the Black Caps were expected to win (whereas winning the India series was always a tough ask - competency was what I wanted)
• The big disagreement I have with Millmow's team is the dropping of McKay who seems to be a wicket taker with pace and reverse swing; you have other bowlers to be tight, wicket taking is the key in Asia

A couple of statistical points by David Leggat sum up the problems for me though:

“New Zealand's batsmen managed five half centuries, two by Franklin batting at No 6. India produced four centuries and four fifties, and all bar Yusuf Pathan's spanking 123 not out in the fourth ODI came from batsmen in the top three.

Spinner Ravi Ashwin's 11 wickets matched the combined return of Daryl Tuffey, Mills, Dan Vettori, Nathan McCullum and Tim Southee. Ashwin's came in 47 overs; New Zealand's quintet needed 129.5 overs”

And now for something completely different (forgive me Monty Python) a point on the Ashes before the end of the year. Although most of the last week in Australia has been spent coming up with better puns surrounding the name Michael Beer (...selectors must have had Beer goggles... OR ...Australia will hope they have finally produced a quality beer...) there was one development that struck me during Day 1 of the Perth Test. Has anyone noticed how much the New Zealand commentary team seems to have influenced the Channel 9 one? Whether its the very negative-towards-your-own-team style that Ian Healy has suddenly adopted (reminiscent of Ian Smith) or Slater's rationale of 'Hughes hasn't got the runs at First Class level of late but that just means he's due' which is straight out of our own commentary manual, there is definitely some change there. It may be sad to see the Australian team in decline but the hard days should do wonders for the famously bias and pompous team calling the game.
Lastly, an apology to anyone that was told by this writer that the Perth test would begin on Wednesday when in fact it began Thursday. I pride myself on knowing such things and am sorry for any confusion or disappointment this may have caused.

Well that's it from here and I hope you join me again
It's good bye for now