Richard Boock: Musical chairs well out of tune

Spare a thought for Lou Vincent this weekend as New Zealand battle South Africa with yet another untried opening combination.

Vincent, remember, was the poor sod sacrificed on the selectors' altar of experimentation in February, when he was cut as the incumbent opener despite making 92 in his most recent test innings and a double-century against Sri Lanka last summer.

The creative reasoning at the time was that the Auckland right-hander, although making bags of runs in reality, was not up to the job in theory, and that other players were better suited to the role, among them Hamish Marshall, Jamie How and Michael Papps.

It was a bold call even then, considering the facts of the matter.

Marshall had never before opened in a first-class match, How had yet to play his first test and Papps was best known for his tendency to take the short ball clean between the eyes.

As if that didn't sound odd enough, there was also a suggestion from coach John Bracewell that Vincent had cooked his own goose by expressing a preference to bat down the order, where he had performed so creditably last summer.

Well, all the theory in the world cannot hide the reality now.

The strategy that led to Vincent's axing has been exposed as naive and idealistic, the sort of thing you might tolerate in junior and high-school sport but never at test level.

It's hard to draw a different conclusion after How and Papps missed selection in the first test team and usual No 3 Peter Fulton was instead handed the dubious privilege of opening the batting with Marshall.

This is not to say that the new pairing will not be without its supporters.

Marshall plays best on flat pitches such as the one at Centurion, and Fulton, despite having little or no experience in the position, has looked like an opener from the moment he was picked.

But what the latest move confirms is that, for the sake of a whim - nothing more than a miscalculated guess, really - the blossoming career of Vincent was sent into freefall, the confidence and trust built over a period of 12 months wasted.

It's worth remembering too that, when announcing the decision to dispense with Vincent and to promote Marshall and How instead, Bracewell emphasised it was time to bring the curtain down on the concept of "makeshift" openers.

Now he's got two of them.

But it's not just Bracewell who should be in the firing line today. Everyone who participated in the decision to axe Vincent should be asked to re-examine their processes, particularly fellow selectors Richard Hadlee, Glenn Turner and Dion Nash.

It's hard to think of a bigger clanger - omitting an in-form player on a hunch that doesn't come off.

And in terms of Bracewell's confidants, it wouldn't be a surprise to discover the hand of NZ Cricket's high performance chief Ric Charlesworth in the mix somewhere, either.

The highly decorated Australian is well known across the Ditch for promoting radical selection initiatives, and Bracewell has admitted that they discuss a variety of topics, including team composition.

It might be a long bow, but is it really just a fluke that Charlesworth's arrival has coincided with the musical chairs selection policy?

Whatever the explanation, the bottom line is that Vincent's career has been needlessly damaged (to what extent remains unclear) and that New Zealand are still no closer to a solution at the top of the order.

His shabby treatment follows a series of ruthless and hardline moves from the selectors this summer, such as the pressured retirement of Chris Cairns, and a close call with an extremely peeved Nathan Astle.

In an ideal world, or in Australia, the strategy might have some merit, in that there's always enough contenders to take the place of the incumbents, and plenty of potential champions to step into the breach.

But this is the New Zealand cricket team; there's no room here for idealists.