@Cyclops said in West Indies tour of NZ:
Nicholls is a good batter. It's a testament to our strength these days that he's not the centre piece of our batting order (there are plenty of sides from the 90s and late 2000s/2010s where he would have been).
He did okay at test level. I don't really remember him ever really looking like he belonged though. He did well to cash in against some weak touring sides and also had a few innings where he'd look like he'd figured it out but would then struggle again afterwards.
I felt like about 3 summers in a row he'd be one test away from being dropped only to score to a century (sometimes being dropped a few times along the way).
Based on his domestic performances my hopes were that he'd become an able deputy to Kane with an average in the low 40s. He's never looked like being that. That's what I'm disappointed about, I'm not trying to write him off as someone who has been a total zero.
That's accurate and the emergence of Mitchell ( especially ) and Ravindra and Conway plus the promise ( still frustratingly unfulfilled ) of Young has meant he's on the outer. That depth is good for NZ cricket.
I don't think it's realistic for too many of our guys to have records like KW ( once in a blue moon ) or Taylor ( who in any other era would have been our absolute best batsman )
Even the best sides will often have that mid 30s battler in the middle order.
( and he might plunder a massive unbeaten double ton to get that average over 40 vs what is a poor Windies test team )







