Plunket Shield

So anyone following this? Our emerging talent?

Jeet Raval knocks up another 50. This guy looks the goods, and my pick is for him to be opening for the Black Caps in tests within two seasons. Avergaing 67 so far in FC cricket, with 2 hundreds and 4 50s from 12 Innings. And he's only 21. Having seen him batting in club cricket, I can say he does look class.

Kane Williamson. Surely he will be called up any time now.... sure, he's only 19, but if he's good enough, he's good enough. Making a bucket of runs at FC level.

Jason Donnelly. Possibly the worst start ever for a player at first class level. Took 1 for 250-odd against Northern last match, then returned figures of 1 for 97 and 4 for 150 against Central. Ouch.

McIntosh is scoring very big this year too though
Let's not rush to put Raval in the BCs yet... he's playing for a losing team and I've always believed picking winners makes sense

Raval for 2012 is my pick.

By the way, he scored 256 for Auckland when they won last year. Definitely a winner

Kane Williamson knocks up 192 to follow his 170.

This 17 year old for CD, Alex Milne has taken two 4 wicket bags in his first two FC matches, and a 3 wicket bag.

Chris Martin is averaging 40 with the ball this season.... hmmmmmm

Auckland have failed this season because they have no out and out firepower in their bowling attack.

Yup... And yet Sinclair is in the BCs.



gc.

He averages 40 because they include test stats in his figures bro

Let's say we pick Kane Williamson and he scores 0,3,5, 2

Let's just say.

What happens to him? Confidence shot, he never reaches the level he might. years later he finishes with a test average of 29, having averaged 45+ for his last couple of seasons, an indication of what MIGHT have been.

Erm, let's just say he goes in scores a hundred on debut?

You can 'say' all you want, but if he's good enough he'll be ready at any age.



gc.

Skippy scored 200 on debut, and look what happened to him...

Non-sequitur much?

Totally agree that if you're good enough, you should be in the team regardless of age. The rub is that the selectors have to give these natural talents* time and not drop them after one or two bad series.

*not saying this Williamson is a natural talent 'cos I've never seen him play, but teh point stands :>

Haha!

Agreed Gummi. Let's not forget that we could also pick him as a second spinner and bat him at 6 or 7 (or even 8 ) around Vettori and McCullum, our 2 most experienced test batsmen. He would minimise the risk of facing these hostile new ball bowlers (at least until they're tired). Only problem then, though, is that we're well stacked with middle order batsmen and are basically just throwing our bunnies to the lions at the top.



gc.

Urgh he made his debut when he was 24 dude ... nothing to do with being to young. He just doesnt have what it takes to bat in international cricket.

it's NOT true

For every Tendulkar, there's 10 Ken Rutherfords

In the NFL they KNOW it takes at least 2 years backup experience USUALLY - not every time - to become a quality starter at quarterback. Same with batsmen

How do you know he isn't the exception to the rule?

Also, and far more importantly, our FC cricket isn't of a standard that is testing enough consistently anyway. Spending 2 years in our bullshit FC competition isn't going to help him. He needs to be elevated to a higher level of competition and COACHING immediately to actually ensure that he progresses instead of stagnating.

Ken Rutherford is just as bad an analogy as Tendulkar - Rutherford was forced into facing the best all round pace attack of ALL TIME. This bowling attack isn't even the best Australian attack ever- stop acting like they're some kind of career ending force. It's pathetic.

As I said , if he's good enough, get him in there now.



gc.

Fact: Martin Crowe was 19 when he made his debut.

And look at his average for his first 3-4 years

If we'd waited, he'd have averaged 50+

J F Reid - best NZ bat ever - waited
M H Richardson - 2nd best - waited

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

You're calling Richardson a better bat than Crowe!?!?!?!?!?!?

Ladies and gentlemen, we have definitive proof that Vads has zero idea what he's talking about- and that stats mean FUCK ALL when taken within the proper context.

HHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA



gc.

Glenn Turner was also way better than those 2 and imo better than Crowe as well. Shame you started talking bollix Z cos I was going to back you up half way down this thread. Lets not debut Kane vs Australia, plonk him in there for whoever is next

Take away Crowe vs. Sri Lanka and he was nothing special
He murdered the WEAKEST Aussie team of all time in 84/85.

Jones was better against quality attacks... Crowe was aesthetically pleasing and that was that. Richardson faced some of the better new ball attacks of the recent period.

Actually NZ's 2 greatest batsmen were Martin Donnelly and Stew Dempster, but they're a bit before your time SMF so I ignored them