Chris Rattue looks at the pros and cons of the Black Caps new seven-year schedule with Australia. Is it really worth it?
1) New Zealand have become the Harlem Globetrotters of world cricket so why were the players so reticent about participating in the first ever day-night test? This should be right up their alley - a bold new venture and all. It is hard to know these days if we are hearing what the individual players really think because the players' association dominates these discussions publicly. A survey by the association found that 17 of the 20 contracted cricketers were opposed to day-night tests. But surveys are funny old things - they can be slanted. To fully understand the results, you actually need to know how the questions were framed and have the answers to analyse. Best to retain a healthy scepticism when it comes to surveys.
2) Day-night tests are a fascinating prospect and someone has to take the leap - so might as well be us. There are areas of concern, to be fair to the players and their union. Equipment manufacturers Kookaburra says the pink ball to be used is exhaustively tested and merely a red ball with a fresh coat of paint. But we've heard that sort of thing before. Fairly recent sports history includes a rugby ball and World Cup football which appeared to have minds of their own. Australia's state cricketers were quite grumpy about the pink balls after trials, saying they were dead and put a dampener on attacking batting and bowling. Night vision is a huge issue. But nothing ventured nothing gained - which is our new cricket credo after all.
3) Goodwill towards New Zealand is flowing around the cricket world and the new-found respect is great, but don't put the house on it lasting yet. The Big Three - India, England, Australia - aren't noted charity workers, so getting anything in writing is a big plus. But this is a bit like getting free steak knives bundled with a new car. The new seven year deal with Australia includes 10 tests - take out the upcoming summer matches, and that equals five tests in six years which is hardly worth breaking into dance for. More than anything, it shows how badly we've been treated in the past. Short form cricket is the future no matter what the traditionalists hope to cling to, so having a swag of one-day games in place is worth popping a few corks over. Hopefully a great rivalry will ensue. The important thing is for New Zealand to win and keep the Aussies interested. Bottom line: sport is big business and sales talk is sales talk. The proof about the power of this new cricket deal will be on the field, not on paper.
4) All power to Brendon McCullum and co. for leading our cricket into the brave new world. But is the all out attack mode a national policy, or simply the way McCullum plays or how New Zealand is perceived to play under him? What happens when he retires or takes a break, as is happening now. Will the rest of the world still be so be enamoured with Kiwi cricket when McCullum isn't there? Our cricketers aren't the All Blacks, who have a seemingly limitless pool of attacking options the rest of the world struggles to match.
