Massive collapse here for the Kiwi's, too bad aswell, they don't deserve to lose by 100 runs.

Some good signs for them, with the youngsters making some runs, and i don't think their bowling is a problem. They just need to get their opening pair sorted out.

I'd back them to beat England comfortably.

And thats that. For a while there I thought it was going to be a lot closer than it was - until the landslide which was bad even by NZ standards.

And so we look to Tuesday

__________________
never believe anything until it is officially denied . . .

Styris and Mills to return?

All things considered, and even though we lost, I'm relatively happy. Taylor looks great and it was good to see Fulton have a hefty knock. NZ needs Astle and Fleming to step up, but once Styris, Oram and Mills return to the side, things should get interesting. The big question is though, who should open NZ's batting?

__________________
http://www.myspace.com/the_world_championship

I heard 23rd January at Adelaide.

__________________
http://www.myspace.com/the_world_championship

It's strange the way that 10 batsmen together scored 100 runs.

__________________
Karthik Venkatesan

Some proper openers, maybe? Lou Vincent and Jesse Ryder to my mind for ODIs.

The Kiwis would have won this one today with Oram, Styris and Mills [on his ICCCT form] I reckon.

Vincent, Ryder, Fleming, Taylor, Fulton[replaced with Styris], Oram, McCullum, Vettori, Franklin, Mills, Bond

Realistically, there aren't many opening options for One dayers out there (many more with tests - Papps, Todd Astle, Bell) and I think Ryder showed a liking for Aussie bowlers in the Top End series last year. Shame Bracewell doesn't like him.

Time for Astle to retire, I'm afraid. He's looked awful for the past year or so. No use picking him on reputation if he can't buy a run.

Oh, and why was Symo MOTM when his bowling got carted and he scored less runs at a slower rate than the deserving Ross Taylor?!?

hmmm . . . both Vincent and Ryder are middle order players, I still feel Astle (Nathan) is NZ's best opening option in tandem with Fleming probably. If you look at the numbers he had a pretty good year just gone, he's just very much an 'at home' player

__________________
never believe anything until it is officially denied . . .

That's a little pointless really, as i could say we would have won by even more if Lee and Mcgrath were playing.

Symonds was MOTM because his contribution got us to a total which won us the match, whereas Taylors, despite being a decent knock, ended up resulting on the side of a 100+ loss.

No, Cameron White got you to a winning total. Symonds was very much the supporting role in getting to that position. Symonds bowling was hit for a few though, and the wickets of Bond and Patel - number 10s at the very best - and two less expensive overs at the end to tail enders don't make up for that.

In fact, I'd rather have seen White get MOTM than Symonds or a bit more luck from Hilfenhaus (two more wickets for him probably could have secured it IMO).

Despite Taylor ending up on the losing side, given it is his first international in Australia under pressure when NZ were 2-7, he deserved it.

And regarding Vincent and Ryder, yes they are middle order players in first class cricket, but I'm pretty sure I've seen them open a few times in one-dayers and they did pretty well. It truly is a problem position for the Black Caps at the moment.

I wasn't saying it to mean that the Aussies didn't deserve to win, purely that given the fact that the missing Black Caps are so integral to both the batting (Oram, Styris) and bowling line ups (all three) that they were pretty much scuppered from the start. No offence to Lee and McGrath, but the Aussies miss them a lot less than the Black Caps miss Oram, Styris and to a lessor extent Mills, not least for the additional batting and bowling options available. The Aussies don't really need the 'additional' batting of Lee and McGrath.