I’m going to come back with more comments later, but the Sam Wells defence of Nicholls is laughable. Nicholls has largely cruised in behind our greatest 3 / 4 combination in history, used modern bats and padded his average with a steady diet of matches against the worst West Indian and Sri Lankan teams in living memory. He is *not even in the conversation* with a player of Stephen Fleming’s quality, and even with all the advantages listed above averages 3 runs less. He’s also nowhere near as good as say a Jeremy Coney, who has the same average but only scored 3 test hundreds. To me he’s about as good in the general wash up as a Mark Greatbatch or Ken Rutherford, both of whom had their moments but ultimately weren’t really missed when jettisoned - and I don’t think Nicholls will be either when the selectors finally get round to eating some humble pie.
Post script - just saw your footnote about Craig McMillan Dylan and agree that’s a decent comparison. However, even then I don’t see Nicholls being remembered in 10 years, whereas McMillan has a bit of a legacy.
I was frustrated by several of the comments on a Stuff article that essentially said "they both had to bat on it". Yes, but if you have little hope of predicting how much any given delivery will turn and bounce, then it's reduced to a game of luck more than skill. If that's the case, I may as well go and play snakes and ladders with my youngest daughter. To those who say "well Phillips managed to bat on it" - he also got dropped on one. I did appreciate the fact that Stuff ran an article with six of NZ's worst pitches, just to prove we're not immune. That whole 2002/03 series against India was a shocker
I also take issue with the Wells comments about not picking batsmen based on home/away status. Why not? We do it with the bowlers! Some players techniques clearly struggle against spin - the stats are there and should totally be followed when we tour SL and India next year.
You fall back on the hoary old "told it like it was" cliche to describe Southee's post-test comments. But I thought he was patronising and borderline racist - it sounded to me like, 'why can't you subcontinentals prepare proper wickets like your wise colonial masters taught you?' The beauty of test cricket is that you are "tested" in others' conditions, eg NZ's green seamer-friendly pitches, the hardness and bounce of Australia. Glenn Phillips' Dacca return was 130+ runs for one dismissal - so was the pitch really that perilous?
I’m going to come back with more comments later, but the Sam Wells defence of Nicholls is laughable. Nicholls has largely cruised in behind our greatest 3 / 4 combination in history, used modern bats and padded his average with a steady diet of matches against the worst West Indian and Sri Lankan teams in living memory. He is *not even in the conversation* with a player of Stephen Fleming’s quality, and even with all the advantages listed above averages 3 runs less. He’s also nowhere near as good as say a Jeremy Coney, who has the same average but only scored 3 test hundreds. To me he’s about as good in the general wash up as a Mark Greatbatch or Ken Rutherford, both of whom had their moments but ultimately weren’t really missed when jettisoned - and I don’t think Nicholls will be either when the selectors finally get round to eating some humble pie.
Ken Rutherford is a fair shout as a comparison I reckon.
Post script - just saw your footnote about Craig McMillan Dylan and agree that’s a decent comparison. However, even then I don’t see Nicholls being remembered in 10 years, whereas McMillan has a bit of a legacy.
I was frustrated by several of the comments on a Stuff article that essentially said "they both had to bat on it". Yes, but if you have little hope of predicting how much any given delivery will turn and bounce, then it's reduced to a game of luck more than skill. If that's the case, I may as well go and play snakes and ladders with my youngest daughter. To those who say "well Phillips managed to bat on it" - he also got dropped on one. I did appreciate the fact that Stuff ran an article with six of NZ's worst pitches, just to prove we're not immune. That whole 2002/03 series against India was a shocker
I also take issue with the Wells comments about not picking batsmen based on home/away status. Why not? We do it with the bowlers! Some players techniques clearly struggle against spin - the stats are there and should totally be followed when we tour SL and India next year.
You fall back on the hoary old "told it like it was" cliche to describe Southee's post-test comments. But I thought he was patronising and borderline racist - it sounded to me like, 'why can't you subcontinentals prepare proper wickets like your wise colonial masters taught you?' The beauty of test cricket is that you are "tested" in others' conditions, eg NZ's green seamer-friendly pitches, the hardness and bounce of Australia. Glenn Phillips' Dacca return was 130+ runs for one dismissal - so was the pitch really that perilous?
Mike
Oh c’mon Michael - accusing racism and colonialism is pushing the envelope big time, and taking the issue somewhere else entirely.