Cricket: Strange goings-on at cricket's top level

By DON CAMERON

There is increasingly strong evidence, during the early days of Zimbabwe's tour, that the lunatics are taking over the running of the New Zealand cricket asylum.

First there was the disaster of the Basin Reserve pitch for last week's most promising test, leading to the captains hitting each other with their hand-bags when neither could contrive a result in the rain-shortened match.

Then came the last-minute ruling that Tama Canning was some 30 months' short of a residency qualification for today's first one-dayer at Taupo.

These were laced by the arrogant attitudes of Craig McMillan and Nathan Astle after their first-innings centuries at the Basin, mixed with the press-agentry and media-baiting of the new chairman of selectors, Sir Richard Hadlee.

The New Zealanders, especially David Trist, who is no stranger to waffling circumlocution when pressed for a short, sharp answer, said they were not responsible for directing the preparation of the Basin pitch, which was approaching rigor mortis by the time Stephen Fleming saved New Zealand's face by winning the toss.

Then why did a national selector ask Wellington president Don Neely, an expert on the Basin's behaviour and a former chairman of selectors, about the future wisdom of New Zealand playing two spinners against Zimbabwe - this question seven weeks before the test?

And why did Neely find the pitch fully covered on his nine daily visits to the Basin closer to the time of the test?

Trist said the groundsman had been asked for a pitch with much the same water content (the figure is 29 something-or-other) as in previous years.

But who decided the pitch should be constantly covered - the surest way to kill off any grass not removed by close mowing?

Neely and Wellington are proud of their "pohutukawa" tests at the Basin.

But no one could take any pride from the abominable piece of lifeless dirt the two teams were offered for their lightweight contest.

McMillan and Astle recognised a batting "pay-day" when they saw the slow, low bounce. They needed patience and concentration.

They did not need the obscure signals with their bats when their centuries arrived.

Afterward, Astle chose not to talk to the print media. McMillan did, mentioning he and "Nath" enjoyed answering their critics, but claiming that their bat-waving semaphore was sending a private message.

Then why send it in such a public fashion? Were they attacking the newspaper critics, or perhaps Hadlee, who tends to leak thoughts and theories like an over-worked colander?

While it is difficult to differentiate among Hadlee's private comments, his new-found selectorial pulpit, his public newspaper column remarks, and the separate stories so often an extension of the column (we imagine he writes it), one thing did emerge.

Hadlee huffed and puffed, publicly, that he was concerned at the erratic batting of the New Zealand middle order in the recent tests in South Africa.

He even made the comment that the vote against Hamish Marshall retaining his place was 3-1.

Since when have New Zealand cricket selectors had formal votes on certain players, rather than reach a consensus by discussion? And if they did have a formal vote, why on earth release the numbers?

There is one other selector who might also like to point out that he voted for Marshall.

And when Hadlee announced the one-day side on live television (and one felt that Ian Smith, a very expert television commentator, did not really have to genuflect before giving Hadlee the microphone), there came the ridiculous comment that he had not named McMillan and Astle in his concern at the batting.

With a smirk, or was it indigestion, Hadlee said that he had merely criticised the "New Zealand middle order."

The subsequent critics had added the names of Astle and McMillan. He had not named them.

In his fatuous way, Hadlee had also leaked that there could be a "bolter" in the one-day side - and only 24 hours before the team announcement came the information that the "bolter," thinly disguised as Tama Canning, could not play because he was far short of having four years' residency in New Zealand.

No matter, Hadlee had another arrow in the quiver.

He trumpeted the promise of James Franklin when the Wellington bowling novice was picked for the Basin test - and did not the team management tell him that the two-spinner combination was early in the playing frame?

When Hadlee named Franklin, with the skimpiest one-day bowling background, for the New Zealand one-day squad, he mentioned that the selection panel must have one eye on the World Cup in 2003. The selectors must nurture talent for that future event.

So Franklin was a trial choice. An experiment.

New Zealand have been "talking down" the Zimbabweans since they arrived, and Hadlee's gratuitous comment that the tourists act as New Zealand's trial horses rather strengthens that impression.

They might be used to this condescension, but not from people in long, white coats.