New Zealand Cricket faces a new crisis this morning, and it's got nothing to do with the performance of the Black Caps! The Dom-Post is reporting that New South Wales coach Matthew Mott has decided to turn his back on an offer to take over from John Bracewell as the Black Caps coach, and has re-signed with the state team.
And can you blame him? He coached a second-string NSW team to a victory over New Zealand a week ago, and would have seen for himself the shambles that currently exists, and the magnitude of the job ahead. He's obviously realistic enough to know that either it is a task beyond him, or a whole bunch of problems and stress that he doesn't need - probably the latter.
New Zealand Cricket must shoulder the blame for this farcical situation. It was a big mistake to re-hire Bracewell after the 2007 World Cup. Keeping Stock reckons that NZC was buying time, and waiting for John Wright to confirm his interest. But Wright, who must be gutted to see the batting malaise so prevalent in the Black Caps has decided that life on the road isn't what he wants, and fair enough.
And so, right at the start of the "Summer of Cricket", NZC is in big trouble, and is likely to have to readvertise the coaching job. Bracewell wants out before the home series against India, so that he can take up his new role in England in time for the county season, so a stop-gap coach will need to be appointed. Meantime, has anyone seen Steve Rixon lately?
UPDATE: Wither now NZC? Englishman Andy Moles has been appointed to the role, starting next week, in time for the West Indes tour! Stuff profiles the new coach, to whom Keeping Stock wishes the best of British luck!
9 comments:
Perhaps this new fellow can have a top order along the following lines:
How - Still our No1 Opener but needs runs in Adelaide.
Bell or McIntosh - both now how to score big centuries.
Fulton - probably our best no3.
Ryder - needs to learn to get past 40.
Taylor - put awa the big shots until 100.
Flynn - could move to 3 in a year.
McCullum - No 7 is his place
Vettori
Southee - a wicket taker
Patel/or O'Brien depending on wicket.
Martin - a wicket taker
Oram of course would come back in when fit at the expense of either Flynn or Patel/O'Brien.
Was impressed with the new guy who said NZ needed to bat a minimum of 145 overs in every first innings. Good stuff we just need batsmen with the mentality to bat sessions - dashers can go to 20/20 for mine. We won't win tests batting 50/70 overs per innings.
Not a bad side pdm - currently, I'd go for Bell ahead of McIntosh, but there's not a lot in it. And as for Oram coming back in - bring him back for Ryder - leaves a middle order of Fulton, Taylor, Flynn, Oram, McCullum & Vettori
And yes, good to hear Moles talking about a day and a half being a minimum for a first innings - but can he change the Bracewell-inflicted mindset?
The mindset is the problem INV2, plus they play too much `hit and giggle' cricket.
You could play Oram as a batsman at 5 but Ryder is a talent just a pity he seems to lack concentration. I never saw the great Colin Cowdrey bat live but from what I see of Ryder reminds me of film clips of Cowdrey at his best as far as effortless timing goes.
I hear John Wright is now a selector - but if Glenn Turner cannot work the oracle then Wright will probably struggle too.
When I look at my team with Oram not there it needs a bowler to tie up one end. Martin, Southee and O;Brien are not up to that.
As an aside I find it hard to understand why the Aussies don't give Johnson the new ball ahead of Clarke - he is much more likely to run through a team as far as I can see.
Ponting won't read this will he?
Good points pdm. Somehow, I have doubts that Ryder has the overall game to make the transition to a successful test batsman. I doubt that he has the mental application to bat time. Taylor is somewhat impetuous, but with two hundreds in his first season as a test player, it is hard to be too critical. But I think that Ryder is more likely to feature in ODI's or 20/20.
Oram is a class all-rounder, although his longer-term future is probably as a batsman - although I see he bowled 20 overs today, broken finger and all. With test centuries against South Africa (home and away), Australia (away) and England (away - at Lord's, no less), he is a "big occasion" player. If it came down to a choice between him and Ryder, it's a no-brainer!
I pretty well agree INV2 but think Ryder may just be a talent worth perservering with because if his concentration comes right then he could become a very good test player. He seems to have a very good eye which lets him get away with minimal movement of his feet. It is the dumb shots that frustrate me.
Fair point pdm - Ryder certainly has talent for Africa - hopefuly Andy Moles can get inside his head and teach him to use his abilities to the fullest.
A shame it has only been you and I debating this INV2 - don't any of your other readers enjoy cricket and the ups and downs of the Black Caps.
Where is Adolf who usually has an opinion on NZ cricket.
By the way I see Orams figures yesterday 18.10.22.1. Will be interesting to see how he goes if he bats with his broken fingure today. Because if he can bat close to properly he should be playing in Adelaide not Hamilton this week. My daughter thinks he is a hypocondriac and he has me wondering at times.
pdm - Oram is only going to bat in this match if absolutely necessary - and with CD at 330-2 (Ingram 211* and Sinclair 79*) and already with a first-innings lead over ND as I type this, that is unlikely. His goal in playing was to prove his fitness prior to the Windies series, and in bowling a further 14 parsimonious overs yesterday, broken digit and all, I guess he did that. I don't think broken bones can be put down to hyperchondria!
Does your headline suggest the NZC will become even more dry and shrivelled than cricket in this country has become?
Post a Comment