zimcricketforums.com

BATTING:

I think we lost the game when we lost the top order without any runs on the board. This happens to any team from time to time, and I thought we handled it quite well actually Taylor and Mutizwa putting up a century stand (156) at a very reasonable rate (at 5.05). This setup a very good platform to launch. We stuttered via Chigs (who unlike the top order, does this regularly now)...4.73 a drop instead of an acceleration.. Taylor moved things along at 7.80 in the last 5. All in all a competitive total of 231 IF our bowling was consistent.

Analysis:

Vusi has been very consistent of late, and was due a fail, and I can almost understand with the loss he has gone through. I am positive he will be back.

Chamu, showed in the last T20 what keeps teasing the selectors, but this is not often enough, and he has not really repaid their faith in him. If Gary would have a change of mind we would be totally sorted. In the absence of that, it really baffles me why we did not keep Taylor at the top and give Waller a run at either 6 or 4 (with Mutizwa the alternate). I was convinced that's how we would go, it seemed logical based on the form of Mutizwa and Waller. I hope common sense prevails next match.

Hami really needs to sort himself out. He is a class act and has the ability, I would hate for him not to live up to his potential. An 11 ball duck indicates a tentative player. He is naturally aggressive and should just play his game, that's his strength, I think he gets too tentative look at some of his dismissals of late, tentative caught in 3 minds shots. He also needs to learn to rotate the strike more, too often he relies on bludgeoning the ball everywhere, ends up hitting it too hard and finds fielders and thereby getting bogged down to his and the team's detriment. Learn a bit of fin-ace (sp?), not every ball needs to be clobbered for 6, look at Jonathan Trott for example, only 2 sixes in 38 innings, 25% of his 2232 runs are in boundaries, but a decent strikerate of 78. Next dropping may be permanent, and that would be a terrible fate...

Taylor, he is an asset, I see my friend hhm has already predicted he will fail, you normally make a lot of sense hhm, but once you have it for a player you just don't let go, in the 9 ODIs he has captained he has made 391 runs (second only to Vusi), including 2 centuries, 2 50s, at an average of 48.87 a strike rate of 77.73 (all despite a 0). Surely hhm that is form. A true example of leading from the front?
PS hhm get well mate, and I hope City thumps United this weekend...

Taibu, everyone fails every now and then (why wasn't he keeping?)

Mutizwa, being a fan I really enjoyed how his stuck it to all the doubters...take that!...I mean the guy has the highest average of 36 in the squad (albeit from 13 innings, that's with 4 50s, and a SR of 82), I mean the boy has hardly let us down when ever he's been called up, this all despite batting at 6 most opportunities, and aside Vusi, Brendan, Hami, Taibu,(who have had more innings) he has outscored everyone else this season 134 from 5 innings at an average of 33.5 (yes much lower than his alltime average)

Chigs, is not a batsman these days. Which means we are an explosive batter short these days. Which is a problem. Do we bring in Coventry (who also is a hit or miss)? But that would disturb the ballance (Chigs bowls). If we were to drop Chigs we would ideally need to drop a batsman (one could argue with his current form we wouldn't, as he isnt doing anything with the bat, hence we have already dropped a batter!), but seriously we would lose a bowler, in hope of getting an explosive batter. Despite wanting Waller in I'm tempted to say, drop Chamu and Chigs, move Taylor to the top. Bring in Coventry to 6, Mutizwa moves up with the rest domino style and Meth drops into 7. We solve the openning. Gain an explosive hitter at 6. And Meth can hold a bat (not the job we are bringing him in for), but I recon as a bowler he is better than Chigs, who is currently being selected purely on his bowling.

BOWLING:

I think the strategy was: "we are never going to contain these Kiwis, so go get wickets". This strategy would have worked, had we gotten a few quick ones, which alas we didn't get. What resulted was an attack trying everything and abandoning basics. I am a firm believer of suffocation as a strategy, and more often than not we do not try it. Drying up runs leads to pressure which leads to mistakes. Too many four balls releases pressure and builds batsmen's confidence and once that happens with players like McCullum around you are just inviting trouble. I would have said bowl consistant good lines and length, make it very difficult for the batsmen and be patient. 231 as low as it sound is close to 5 an over if you can keep them long enough at 4 an over you are likely to get under their skin as the RRR rises. I would have been happy with Jarvis being given a free reign in attacking, but the rest to maintain their discipline, Mpofu and Chigs are capable of that, the former moreso. We employed a desperate approach instead of a patient one. I can understand after the thrashing at McCullum's hands, but that was playing right into their hands! I also question the attack composition. 2 spinners? If that was QSC then maybe yes, but this was HSC. Meth was available to replace Vitori, why didnt we use him? Nothing against Utseya and Price, but horses for courses...this was an ideal opportunity to have a look at Meth.

Mpofu, tried too hard, took some pasting in his first spell, but was able to come back well in the second, had he been delegated to be the control whilst Jarvis had a go it may have been different.

Jarvis, not his best game but if I'm right about the strategy then we can't blame him, hhm, just like one good series doesn't make Vitori a world champ, I dont think one bad match should make Jarvis useless. I think we have something in these lads, and they will take some pasting from time to time but they are quality, and I long for the day you have to swallow your words!

Chigs, he may be atrocious with the bat, but to be fair his bowling has been decent of late. Yesterday like everyone else he wasn't miserly but wasn't terrible. I honestly believe Meth would do a better bet.

Utseya and Price, for containing options they didn't really do too well, but again I think team strategy was to "buy" a wicket, and this didnt work. I am not sure we are doing the right thing to go back to two spin attack. I would have sacrificed one of these for Meth. I'm convinced he would have been just as economic and with a better chance of getting a wicket.

On the whole it could have been worse, but then it could also have been better hoping for a better showing next time, and sign out with the team I feel would do better:

1. Taylor 2. Sibanda 3. Masakadza 4. Taibu 5. Mutizwa 6. Waller 7.Coventry/Chigs 8. Meth 9. Jarvis 10. Price/Utseya 11. Mpofu

Enjoyed reading the post-mortem. Fair assessment of our players in that game.

You know what guys, I spend a lot of time defending our players to a lot of other Saffers, far more vigorously than you do with me, so I won't do that with you in the ZCF!! I love Taylor. He's a great prospect. So I think you're mistaken about my views about him. A lot of what I say has been said multiple times by many other different people in this forum. The way I see it, with his frailities he won't always dominate Series for us because quality opposition can easily deal with him(while on the other hand the gutsy unconventional Taibu can continue to excel and elude many a plan of top quality teams and be our man of the series just as often or evn more). So at this rate, 10 years from now he will be an above average player. Please provide me with those stats in a different dimension. Split them between when we won the games, and when we lost. As a footnote in bold, kindly insert a bullet point identifying the opposition he has faced for the majority of those innings.

Taibu injured his thumb/finger I think. Contrary to what you say, Hamilton used to have finesse, until he reinvented himself into a bit of a bully. But then again Graeme Smith is the same and does ok (as long as the opposite left armers miss the mark). Solution is for him to go back to being Hamilton.

As for swallowing my words regarding Jarvis and Vitori that will never happen. Please don't confuse my proven assessment, that half-baked players from a poor cricket nation such as Zim (unlike Aus etc) will be mediocre players in international cricket, for a desire for them to fail. Based on our limited exposure in the calendar and their performances so far, it will be a long time before they are more than 'ordinary'. In fact, they might even have been dropped before that happens! We've got NZ now then away, again Bang followed by Pak at home, then WI away. At this rate, by the time the big boys come(Ind, SL, Aus & SA), their averages and economy rates will have hardly improved and ripe for further damage!! Quality batsmen who are watching them right now already have a superiority complex over them, especially after they were seemingly overhyped which set them up for a lot of scrutiny which revealed that they sheep in wolves clothing. My argument has always been that they should have been introduced round about the time the big boys come. At least that way we would understand when they were getting hammered, and would have confidence that they can recover&grow from all these thrashings when the smaller boys come again after that. Unfortunately it will only get worse. Of that there can be no doubt!! You have hope and faith in them - which we all share, however, to me the level of optimism you, and some, are displaying comes across as myopic vision and a refusal to acknowledge that they are starring down the barrel of a gun They will frequently come off horribly second best but somehow you manage to see beyond that, and as far as you're concerned in the name of development that should be acceptable. Fast forwards to 2015 and a lot of what I've pointed out will ring true.

Nothing hectic, but well-wishes appreciated! Only two results possible - score draw or a Utd win!!!

Knew I could count on you hhm mate, for a while I thought my thoughts were a wasted effort !


As for Taylor against the Test nations, he has the following HS and Averages (based on ODI):
145* v SA (ave 32.41),
128* v NZ (69.99),
119* v Sri Lanka (34.9),
118* v Bangladesh (29.2),
81 v India (46),
73 v Pakistan (31),
65 v Aus (35),
50 v WI (23.40),
he is human after all and his highest v Eng is 25 ave 13 (mind you this was back in 2004 when he was starting out). I suppose they will soon work him out, but safe to say, they haven't yet.

Since taking over captaincy:

Bangladesh: 10,3,4,106 (lost),0
Pakistan: 84, 50, 6 (all lost)
NZ: 128* (lost)

But I don't get why you would want to differentiate won and lost, more often than not if a few of his collegues would have come to the party the team would have won.

Thanks for the info on Taibu, and the spelling of finesse I knew it was something like that! , agreed on Hami, esentially what I meant I dont think beating the leather off the ball is working.

As for the bowlers, I don't think you are right in your assessment of my rating of them. I believe they have promise, I have said it countless times, they are not world beaters, hardly but they are not as poor as you say they are, that's all.

PS City 1-0 this weekend!