On Jacob Oram..

[Flem274*]

Basically, we all know he won't be around for much longer. He is extremely important to the NZ side and one of the best allrounders in the world. A few questions I'm interested in seeing opinion on:

1) How long can he last as an allrounder?

2) If he quits bowling, should we selct him as a top five specialist bat

3) Is Grant Elliott a suitable replacement for tests and ODIs?

4) If not, do we have an extra bowler or batsman?

5) Is Jesse Ryder a possibility as a fill in?

6) Corey Anderson is highly likely to be a strong candidate in four years time, but if Oram does not last that long, is it wise to pick a teenage allrounder, even one as promising as Anderson?

Not good times ahead in terms of NZ allrounders. Fingers crossed Big Jake can hold on and be an excellent allrounder for a long time.

 

[PhoenixFire]

On 3...

I quite liked the look of Elliot when he played in the ODIs against us last summer. I thought that he showed that you don't have to be prodigiously talented to be a good one day player. I mean he didn't blow the world away, but I think that he did well and should be given another chance for the NZ ODI team if there aren't better youngsters coming through. He strikes me as a poor mans Paul Collingwood without the big hitting ability.

 

[Richard]

1) How long can he last as an allrounder?

Honestly, there's just no way of knowing for mine. Just have to hope.

2) If he quits bowling, should we selct him as a top five specialist bat

Not sure TBH.

3) Is Grant Elliott a suitable replacement for tests and ODIs?

Not a chance, Elliott is a totally different player. Damn good ODI batsman I think, but a bowler who's never going to be that good. Oram on the other hand is a fine bowler and improving batsman.

4) If not, do we have an extra bowler or batsman?

Bowler. Always have five front-line bowlers IMO.

5) Is Jesse Ryder a possibility as a fill in?

I seriously hope not, Ryder is useful as a death-overs fill-in on the basis that "everyone who bowls there gets smashed, at least if front-line bowlers bowl earlier they might get decent figures, while Ryder will get smashed earlier as well" and nothing else.

6) Corey Anderson is highly likely to be a strong candidate in four years time, but if Oram does not last that long, is it wise to pick a teenage allrounder, even one as promising as Anderson?

Dunno much about Anderson, but picking teenagers for international cricket is never, ever a good idea even though occasionally it won't backfire.

 

[Flem274*]

On 3...

I quite liked the look of Elliot when he played in the ODIs against us last summer. I thought that he showed that you don't have to be prodigiously talented to be a good one day player. I mean he didn't blow the world away, but I think that he did well and should be given another chance for the NZ ODI team if there aren't better youngsters coming through. He strikes me as a poor mans Paul Collingwood without the big hitting ability.

I like him for ODIs definitely.
He's not a Collingwood as such, Collingwood is more of a batsman who can bowl a wee bit. Elliott is an allrounder.

Pretty sure I remember some big hitting from Elliott in conjuncton with Scott Styris against England.

However his main asset, which has even been identfied on the domestic scene, is scoring runs when no one else does. ATM he's going to have a high workload thanks to our batsmen.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I was more referring to his batting style when comparing to Collingwood actually. His batting is quite one dimensional as I remember, he scored a majority of his runs down at 3rd man, nothing wrong with that obviously, as it seemed to work quite well.

 

[Polo23]

1) How long can he last as an allrounder?

2) If he quits bowling, should we selct him as a top five specialist bat

3) Is Grant Elliott a suitable replacement for tests and ODIs?

4) If not, do we have an extra bowler or batsman?

5) Is Jesse Ryder a possibility as a fill in?

6) Corey Anderson is highly likely to be a strong candidate in four years time, but if Oram does not last that long, is it wise to pick a teenage allrounder, even one as promising as Anderson?

1. Not too much longer i'd guess. The bowling will go sooner rather than later.

2. Yes.

3. ODI's, yes..tests no. Elliott's bowling isnt strong enough to be a genuine test all-rounder.

4. Neither, Oram plays in the top 5. Franklin 7.

5. Like Elliott, his bowling isnt strong enough to be a test all-rounder...it is handy, and he could bowl a few overs here or there but he is a batsman.

6. I'd suggest Anderson will be in the team earlier than in 4 years. Perhaps 2 or 3. If you are good enough to play, you are good enough to play, regardless of age.

 

[Athlai]

1) Well his bowling was on the decline before blossuming again recently. He could go for another week or for many years. Injury's are a fickle thing, though in reality he can't be going for too much longer you'd thing.

2) He would have to put his head down and improve as a batsman, the current Oram isn't good enough, though possibly in ODI.

3) No and No. Elliot is decent but his bowling is innocuous and his batting isn't the best. It would just be a case of trying to replace Oram as opposed to actually figuring out the best possible team.

4) The whole team setup would change I think. Franklin would change a lot about the team though.

5 & 6) Ryder and Anderson have much to prove. We don't need a replacement really. It would be great if we had one but how many teams in the world have a genuinely great allrounder? Flintoff? Kallis? You'd be hard pressed to name many more legitimate allrounders, even Symonds is weak on the bowling and Watson is still slightly unproven. It'd just be the passing of a great era in NZ allrounders.

 

[Polo23]

2) He would have to put his head down and improve as a batsman, the current Oram isn't good enough, though possibly in ODI.

Why isnt he good enough? His batting record is better than all the current batsmen in our team.

 

[Athlai]

Why isnt he good enough? His batting record is better than all the current batsmen in our team.

I look at him and I see a pretty average batsman. A guy who does fine at the domestic NZ level but will struggle in the long term internationally.

 

[krkode]

Oram strikes me as the kind of player that Chris Cairns was.

Maybe that's just cuz they're both pretty big and they're all-rounders... hmm...

 

[slugger]

elloit reminds me of c harris.. just someone hows just kinda there with bat and ball, you look up at the score sheet and hes on 40 odd and you dont know how he got there.. or a wicket or two but know one says look out elloit on to bowl or elloitt in the middle wacth out for the fire works etc... as coney sez a noodles the ball around...

anderson looks good a nice 80 odd down the order the other day i didnt check he bowling stats...

 

[Athlai]

Elliot is a 2nd hand version of Chris Harris. Same mould without the talent.

 

[Bahnz]

1) I reckon he'll try it for one more season at home, but the next time he gets injured, I believe he'll call it quits.

2) Tricky. He has a good record, but he has some serious technical flaws, particularly against fast short pitch bowling and quality spin. Maybe if he focuses solely on batting he could remedy these, or maybe without the confidence of having bowling as a back up he'll get worse. We'll wait and see.

3) No and Yes.

4) For the moment, batsman. Our frontline seam attack is our strength at the moment, and Oram adds much more as a batsman than as a bowler.

5) More useful than a lot of people give him credit for...but no.

6) At the moment Anderson isn't really an all rounder. Wait and see whether he develops his bowling over the next few years.

 

[sanga1337]

1) Hard to tell. If I were to make an estimate it would be 2-4 years.

2) Not sure about five, but I would definitely select him as a number 6 batsman just for his ability to dig NZ out of trouble, particularly in ODI's and also for his ability to really hit the ball hard

3) Seems reasonable in ODI's but his bowling will most likely be ineffective in tests

4) A batsman. If NZ's top order didn't collapse all the time then maybe they could think about the extra bowler.

5) Really don't know as I've never seen him bowl. Although Judging from his FC record he definitely looks like a useful bowler, but I wouldn't classify him as an allrounder.

 

[Polo23]

I look at him and I see a pretty average batsman. A guy who does fine at the domestic NZ level but will struggle in the long term internationally.

It's funny you say that, considering he has done very well in the long term (unless you don't consider 31 tests long term...) compared to our other 'batsmen'. If Oram doesnt make the top 6 then neither should How, Redmond, Taylor, Flynn or McCullum.

 

[Polo23]

he has some serious technical flaws, particularly against fast short pitch bowling and quality spin.

That sums up our whole batting lineup pretty well really.

NZ groundsmen really have to start producing some quicker, bouncy pitches.

 

[NZTailender]

Basically, we all know he won't be around for much longer. He is extremely important to the NZ side and one of the best allrounders in the world. A few questions I'm interested in seeing opinion on:

1) How long can he last as an allrounder?

2) If he quits bowling, should we selct him as a top five specialist bat

3) Is Grant Elliott a suitable replacement for tests and ODIs?

4) If not, do we have an extra bowler or batsman?

5) Is Jesse Ryder a possibility as a fill in?

6) Corey Anderson is highly likely to be a strong candidate in four years time, but if Oram does not last that long, is it wise to pick a teenage allrounder, even one as promising as Anderson?

Not good times ahead in terms of NZ allrounders. Fingers crossed Big Jake can hold on and be an excellent allrounder for a long time.

1. At the same rate he contributes currently, two years.

2. Yes. He should be batting at 5 now instead of McCullum.

3. ODIs yes. I don't ever see Elliott being a Test class player unless he drastically focuses on improving his batting and forgetting about his bowling.

4. Depends tbh. In ODIs we currently have Mills, Southee, Vettori, Patel/Martin/other seamer, Oram + Elliott, Styris & Ryder. If you take Oram out of the picture completely, IMO Elliott is good enough to bowl 10 overs, and we have Styris and Ryder as alternate options if he (or anyone else) is getting a bit of tap.
Tests is quite a bit different, because as far as specialist bowlers go IMO Oram wouldn't be good enough to be picked on his bowling alone these days, but he's streets ahead of the other part time options like Ryder or Elliott. As it's been mentioned if we had Franklin back it'd help a great deal. But, as it stands, Oram's Test bowling contribution is excellent at home (average of 22) while away he's simply more of a containing bowler who picks up a couple of wickets here and there at the most. I can't really make my mind up on this one, but if we have Vettori and Franklin in there, we could afford 3 other specialist bowlers, otherwise I'd call in a replacement batsman.

5. Possibly in ODIs, his bowling is certainly better than I originally thought it was. Wouldn't pencil him in as 5th bowler for a full 10 but as a 6th bowler he'd be perfect, eventually taking over the Styris-type bowling role. Tests, would be like Astle, partnership breaker type bowler.

6. Maybe, depending on Domestic form IMO as he should have to earn it. If he has (and has had a pretty darn good start this season) then blood him in T20Is in the same way we did Taylor, Ryder and Southee, see how he handles that before getting him into the ODI side. Wouldn't play him in Tests for a few years yet, though.
Edit: Taylor played ODIs first, my mistake. Could've sworn he played a T20I first.

 

[Athlai]

It's funny you say that, considering he has done very well in the long term (unless you don't consider 31 tests long term...) compared to our other 'batsmen'. If Oram doesnt make the top 6 then neither should How, Redmond, Taylor, Flynn or McCullum.

I was talking about Elliot.