Mark Richardson: All's well after opening win

* Correction: Teams are seeded based on their performance in the previous tournament (in England last year). The top seed in Group B is Sri Lanka (beaten finalist in 2009), the second seed in that group is New Zealand and third seed is Zimbabwe. The seedings determine which group they are placed in. After that, the teams are on their own. Having lost to NZ in its opening game, were Sri Lanka to lose to Zimbabwe, it would of course be eliminated. Similarly, having lost to Australia, Pakistan must now beat Bangladesh to progress regardless of the fact it is top seed.

Mission accomplished for the Black Caps yesterday but by the way the tournament is structured this was just another practice game for both teams.

Sri Lanka are assured a place in the super eight stage by virtue of being seeded number two. So, effectively, the only teams playing for real in group B are New Zealand and Zimbabwe.

It's the same in group A, where top seeds Pakistan are guaranteed progression and Bangladesh and Australia need wins to advance.

The rule that says the top two seeded teams progress regardless is ridiculous.

Imagine what could happen. Sri Lanka play Zimbabwe before New Zealand and don't need to win that game. If they lose, they can do Zimbabwe all sorts of favours.

Zimbabwe would still need to beat New Zealand, but they would force New Zealand into a must-win scenario.

Likewise, the Black Caps' win over Sri Lanka was a close one, which means their net run-rate is marginally in the positive.

So even if Sri Lanka beat Zimbabwe, they could still do it in a way that keeps Zimbabwe's net run rate close to New Zealand's.

What I'm suggesting is that Pakistan and Sri Lanka are in a position to underperform to help their tournament chances. They can give the minnows a better chance of qualifying for the super eights, making them less than super but more importantly taking out the threats of Australia and New Zealand, both with tournament-winning potential.

I'm sure this won't happen but, with the latest allegations of 'fixing' coming out of the IPL, I'm also sure the ICC don't want to see its current cash-cow come under scrutiny.

I don't think these scenarios will happen in New Zealand's group because what I saw yesterday morning was very encouraging.

Commentator Nasser Hussain clearly agrees because he said that, regardless of the result, both teams should progress deep in the tournament because they are ideally suited to cope with the conditions which should be relatively similar at most venues.

What he was referring to was the slow bowling options.

Daniel Vettori made a bold but very good decision to open with Nathan McCullum. It was brave because of the fielding restrictions in place in the first six overs.

Vettori has a lot of slow bowling options at his disposal when you also consider Jacob Oram and Scott Styris, and Tim Southee does not need to strain for extra pace.

The slower conditions should also help New Zealand's batsmen. They like to hit the ball in front of the wicket, thus happy to make their own pace.

It's not ideal for Brendon McCullum but Jesse Ryder, Oram, Styris and Ross Taylor are all very good going straight or to midwicket, which is an important area when taking on the holding ball.

The other thing that was evident was that, even with a full list of bowlers, and no doubt the best T20 bowlers on offer, New Zealand bat strongly right down to nine. And even Southee, at No 10, is reasonably accomplished.

One game down, and all's well.