[Match Thread] Zimbabwe v New Zealand: Test Match

[betterdays]

not sure you can throw Bell in with people with limited range of shots but my real issue is throwing in newbie's to see if it works. Sibanda and Taylor had LOTS of mishits but were stuck with, coached, encouraged and shown that there was confidence in them. When you bring in someone on a whim (albeit a strong whim that they have equal talent) what are you saying to those already in the team who have worked hard domestically to get there and have shown some - if not great - ability to be picked in the first place, and maybe even shown some form at International level? This is the perennial problem for selectors - when to blood, and when to banish!?

Surprise has occasional merit and may go some way to explaining your two WI examples, cos I ain't seen either since (not that I've looked too closely) - but certainly an unknown Hughes came to SA after SA had beaten Oz away for the first time and milked runs (a little like an equally unknown Duminy had done in OZ weeks before) - neither have maintained it. I also hope it was more than surprise what Vitori did to BD [but he waned against PK].

Zim need a good allrounder (a bowler who can bat may be preferable than vice versa), and if Meth turns out to be the better choice over Chigumbura - who has had it a little easy in terms of competition for that spot - then so be it. All the better for Zim cricket if the players know they have close competition and understand why/when they've been dropped.

My memory goes back a bit further than 2011 and Utseya had a good few seasons when his containment was vital and consistent. Sure, Zim may have moved beyond that with some attacking leggies around, but Price is not far from retirement and will need replacing - he's been vital to our competitiveness too. Chibhaba also had some good results with the bat, the lone hand in a fairly embarrassing tour - i think in WI some years back when Zim was at its lowest ebb ... and Meth was in that team. I'm not down on Meth and am seriously impressed with the hunger he's shown with his quick return - that sort of desire sometimes seems lacking in some of the players (maybe it's a pay thing i don't know but occasionally it just doesn't seem to be there). Always feel it strongly in Price - that feeling of "we don't want to be seen as the whipping boys anymore - we're sick of it!" Zim has LOTS of talent on display at the moment and have been giving lots of guys a shot which is understandable when trying to find the team you want to settle with, or at least really invest in so i agree that they need to make some decisions but until someone grabs the chance with both hands (like Mawoyo, Jarvis and Waller), i don't see how there will be any settling with Meth over Chigumbura, Chakabva over Mutizwa or even Vitori over any number of other talented young quicks.

[sscricket]

I dont see it as Meth vs Chigumbura. Chigumbura in my view is an exceptional talent from what I have seen.Both should play together in all formats. No doubts about that. I just think Meth is mandatory in any Zimbabwe team.

Meth is a rare talent these days, someone who can swing the ball and attack with the bat. He impresses me more with the bat than the ball.

He is underrated with the bat.I do think his technique with the bat looks like a top order batsman still head, no premeditation of strokes and can play both the short and full deliveries well. He just needs to hit more balls on the ground. Another important thing he impresses me with is the optimal backlift when playing his shots. He is not holding is bat in a horizontal position (like Chakabva and Chibhabha) when the bowler is about to deliver the ball. This any coach will know that it makes it difficult to play full deliveries and length deliveries. You are unlikely to get maximum power in your stroke for these deliveries as your are pushing and prodding at the ball and will offer chances. Your best bet is to defend the ball which they do and not take singles and dry up the scoreboard. This technique might help in English conditions or other fast tracks but not Zimbabwe, subcontinent etc. Contrast this technique with the Indian batsman(except kohli) and you will understand why they are successful.

In general it two of these three things to be a good batsman a good eye for length(sehwag), initial feet movement (Dravid,Waller and Ross Taylor do this) and quick hands through the ball (Kohli). There are many variations but holding the bat like that will certainly disadvantage and negate your positives. Mawoyo holds his in a horizontal position and without initial feet movement and that is why he is good at defending but not playing attacking strokes.

Contrast this with Taibu who keeps his bat on the creaseline in a vertical position when the bowler is about to deliver and he can play attacking strokes with optimal backlift (including lot of fours and sixes) even though he is very lightly built.
The same applies to Dravid, Sehwag, Gambhir, Yuvraj singh and even more so with Dhoni (quick backlift from the crease line and quick hands when the bat comes down on the ball. This combined with his power and perfect height, No surprise he is the best batsman in the world.

I did not make up the above theory. Martin Crowe always talks about it during commentary and now he is back in domestic cricket at the age of 48. He is Ross Taylors batting coach and I can see the influence there.

Having said that I would use Meth during the powerplay and give him more confidence to play his strokes because he has the optimal backlift, good eye and no premeditation of strokes. I am not demanding to chop and change the team completely. Zim are only 2 or three good players away from becoming a much more competitive unit that can challenge any top team regularly.

[betterdays]

I dont see it as Meth vs Chigumbura. Chigumbura in my view is an exceptional talent from what I have seen.Both should play together in all formats. No doubts about that. I just think Meth is mandatory in any Zimbabwe team.

They can't both be in the same team because so far neither has been consistent enough with either bat or ball which will make for a longer tail without genuinely strengthening the attack - for now, it will be one or the other (or maybe someone like Lamb will take the spot). I have to concede to your superior knowledge of the technical side of batting but in terms of result, it must be there ... and it's not. Meth lost his test sport to Ncube (I'm hypothesising obviously) not due to conceding 85 runs (he'd done well enough in his opening spell for that to be see for what it was), but his implosive innings - what on earth was he doing. and it should have been a comfort seeing him walk in with the line in sight, instead he got out and heaped pressure on Waller to get the win. I REALLY hope that his technique gets him another few chances and serves him well when/if that happens - we certainly need it!

[sscricket]

I dont see why both cant play in the same team. It will be a shame on the selectors if they dont.
Here is my team for limited overs

Hamilton,(another really good attacking batsman), taylor, taibu,waller (5 batsmen)
price, mpofu, jarvis or vitori (3bowlers)

That leaves three more slots open two of which can be given to chigumbura and meth.

So now you have 4 full time bowlers, 3 part time (chigumbura, waller and hamilton who i think is being grossly underused)
YOu have 5 regular batsman and chigumbura and Meth.

YOu still have place for another batsman or bowler. I dont understand why any team will not play two talented all rounders.
Regardless of which way you go this should be the default team.

Honestly I dont see Zimbabwe being able to compete without Chigumbura or Meth.(unless Taylor scores a hundred every game)
Most of the time when Chigumbura walks in the top order has too much left to do. He has no choice but to attack or throw away his wicket.

[Jemisi]

Im starting to favour BRM at 3 except in T20 he can open

[CrimsonAvenger]

A test match which had all 4 different results possible going into the last hour of play. What more can you ask for as an endorsement for the longest form of the game? Probably one of the best test matches of recent times, and the ICC must use this as an example to promote the values of test cricket. Kudos to both the Taylors, for making it so exciting, with brave declaration and spirited run chase. Brendan's approach, though, overshadows the bravery of Ross.

[hhm]

Interesting discussion there between sscricket and betterdays!
Meth sould have played ahead of Ncube in my opinion.

I will continue to reserve judgement on Mawoyo and Waller, but that match was for me a coming of age for Jarvis. He should kick on from there.

I'd love to have anything positive to say but sorry. I'm hugely disappointed the guys lost. Against such a pathetic attack we should've chased down that total.

They were a very impressive attack apart from Patel, who, in my opinion, has gone backwards as a spin bowler. Bracewell and Martin are two very good fast bowlers and Vettori is Vettori, he's always good. Bit more credit where it's due please

Guys I said Zim would have a first innings lead because this NZ side was woeful, nobody said a word. Now we fail to chase down that target and I'm critical - then I'm said to be overboard! Double standards!

First of all the fact is Zim got 270odd runs on the 5th day of a Test match from just our middle order, having started 2 wickets down. That says a lot about your attack! Chris Martin was going at on average3.5- 4 an over for the most part, while Vettori hardly troubled our top batsmen at all except briefly Mawoyo in the first innings. If it was Southee, Martin, Vettori and Mills(after destroying us with Southee in the WC) then pathetic would be wrong, but it was horrible Patel and young debutant Bracewell(can't believe we gifted him a 5-fer) plus an out of sorts Chris Martin! Pathetic Guys give me a break! Since 2009 (30 innings) Vettori has only taken a 5-for per innings once before this match - against India pretty much same time last year (and will probably only take another 5-for in November 2012 )

If we can't beat this attack whom do you expect us to beat? Pak has beaten us, WI:Fidel-Roach-Rampaul, SA:Steyn-Morkel-Tahir, Eng:Jimmy-Broad-Swann, Aus:Mitch-Harris-Cummins, Ind:Zaheer-Sharma-Bhaji or SL's unknowns? Tell me then, whom do you expect us to beat? NZ in their conditions with Ryder, Southee and Mills or even Bennet? Enlighten me please!

These are the sort of sides we should be beating - weakened and playing at home! If NZ crush us in the return series, I hope all of you will be saying "what went wrong we should have beat them or at least run them close again"! We are not progressing if the only side we draw or beat in a Test is Bangladesh. We should've beat NZ let alone draw with them!

[andybligz93]

Congratulations to Zimbabwe. They can take the much cliched positives from this defeat.

I started following this team last month (I have been watching cricket for more than 20 years) and like most of us I am a bit of a backyard legend and playing through my television. It is a simple game and it is all easy from 6 feet away.
I am a bit of a cricket tragic and I like and support good cricketers in general regardless of where they come from.

I do place bets on games and I did put 5 bucks on Zim before this game(hoping Meth will play). I do see a lot of talent in this team and firmly believe they are due for more upsets.

The two things that will take Zim forward are bold selections and a proper mindset. Everyone outside (including Crincinfo) thinks Zimbabwe are at the same level as Bangladesh but believe me they are already light years ahead in terms of talent.
These players need the proper financial backing and aggressive mindset to win more games.

Go back to the Srilankan team in the 1996 World cup. They came out with two attacking openers and took everyone by surprise. This is exactly what this team needs, more aggressive players who are confident in their skills at the top of the order.

At the end of this test I realized I was wrong about Jarvis and wrong about Mpofu. These guys have justified their inclusion.

Right now they have core of about 8 players who are automatic selections and that is good. Alan Butcher needs to get the rest of his selections right like adding +Meth removing -Chakabva, -Utseya, -Chibhabha etc. Remember what happenned in the the 3rd odi when these players were absent. Zimbabwe won. Easy.

Some might argue that Meth conceded 85 runs. But did you hear Ross taylor say 320 was a par score. Intrestingly Meth was one of the few bowlers who bowled 10 overs in the game. If all the specialist bowlers had bowled 10 overs or bowled at the death they would have gone for a lot more.

Brendon Taylor should give Meth 7 or 8 overs to Meth with the new ball and I am sure he will either contain or take more wickets. He did not do that in the second odi or the third which was shocking.

In one dayers Zim has a fine middle order in Taylor, Taibu and Waller who can manipulate the ball at more than run a ball( this is better than Pak (minus Umar Akmal), WI, Bangladesh, on spinning tracks even Eng (vs Trott, Bopara, Bell who eat a lot more balls in the middle overs and have a much lesser range of strokes from what I have seen)).

If anyone watched WI vs England second T20 in England this year. WI lost the first odi and had no hopes for the second.They batted miserably and got 120 odd. But what was to come was simply spectacular. I have never seen anything like it. Out came a bowler called Santokie on debut who swung the white ball and then came Mathurin on debut an unconventional spinner. They destroyed the batting and WI won comfortably. Watch out for these guys who were only tried by WI after they had exhausted all their second string and third string options. There is a lesson here which is that if you dont try a player who you believe has sufficient talent to replace the incumbent you will never know. There is also a lesson that swing bowlers cause problems regardless of who is batting.

Even New Zealand did the same thing couple of years ago to find Guptill, Southee and Ryder instead of Sinclair, fulton etc.

I saw Meth and he swings it more than Santokie and is faster than Santokie. Zim will have to make bold decisions, replace some of the incumbents. Please dont say experience is better, it is only better if the experienced guy is a Tendulkar or a Ponting who is averaging in the 50's, otherwise the natural process of aging takes over where your eye cannot spot the line and length quick enough.

In one dayers and T20's Zim is losing it in the first powerplay and are always catching up. The openors eat away the balls and do nothing to inspire confidence or intimidate the bowlers. This has to change. What is the point of taking 40 balls to score 20 and getting out when you could have done it in 10 balls and have much better chance to win from there on.


Bowling wise they did not take wickets in the first 10 (this can be changed only if Meth plays now with 2 new balls) and Mpofu has to bowl first change and he does an excellent job of bowling a containing length.

Like I said and I repeat the management needs to give these guys more confidence on and off the field. When you play with a free mind you tend to do a lot better (like Taylor)

In summary, please dont construe my criticism as negative because people pay a lot of time and money to watch cricket and they should not settle for anything but the best!

very well said mate i like everyhting mentioned in this. you are 100percent right ! we need meth and cremer in the team both have talent with the bat and are genuine wicket takers !

[Jemisi]

I disagree Hhm. What is missing is the shades of grey. We are improving, but there is still a ways to go. Our worst game back was against Pakistan and even with a terrible collapse we made it well into Day 5. We want the team to get better, but what we have seen in the first three tests is at least as good as pre-strike efforts.

[betterdays]

Meth sould have played ahead of Ncube in my opinion.

No arguement there (or Chigs) - we lacked that extra bat

If NZ crush us in the return series, I hope all of you will be saying "what went wrong we should have beat them or at least run them close again"!

far more likely we'll be saying "see hhm, how well we did in Bulawayo - what were you complaining about?" bright spot mate, bright spot!)

we need meth and cremer in the team both have talent with the bat and are genuine wicket takers !.

talent is overrated - give me statistics to back this claim up. I'm in the diasporra and have not had visual access to cricket in a very very long time [pirated streaming aside - and the quality is woeful really] so for me it's not about their talent but about their performances (a reason I was not sorry to see Coventry or Matsi relegated to the bench)

Hamilton,(another really good attacking batsman), taylor, taibu,waller (5 batsmen)

Unfortunately i don't see the days of 34/4 after 16 overs as a distant memory ... so for me, 5 bats simply won't do...If Meth turns into a batsman who can bowl a bit then the two may end up playing but neither has cemented a spot after a fair few chances. BUT, i get what you're saying - they ARE both talented and performing to their potential could both make the Zim side with ease...