New Zealand doom and gloom thread

[SteveNZ]

Couldn't care less about one boxing day test in the grand scheme of things, tbh. I want more test cricket in general. Doesn't have to be a special occasion.

I completely hear your sentiment. However, it would be the pinnacle of a lot of these guys' careers - playing a Boxing Day Test in front of what, 50k or so? Yes World Cup final, but they all say Test cricket is the No.1 and playing a Boxing Day Test would be as good as it gets.

And selfishly it'd be the pinnacle of my support of this team (again I was at the World Cup final, this would far outstrip it).

I can't see the justification for Pakistan over us, we'd have to be a bigger drawcard. But who knows how these things work

 

[NZTailender]

I completely hear your sentiment. However, it would be the pinnacle of a lot of these guys' careers - playing a Boxing Day Test in front of what, 50k or so? Yes World Cup final, but they all say Test cricket is the No.1 and playing a Boxing Day Test would be as good as it gets.

And selfishly it'd be the pinnacle of my support of this team (again I was at the World Cup final, this would far outstrip it).

I can't see the justification for Pakistan over us, we'd have to be a bigger drawcard. But who knows how these things work

When you think about it, we'd be the third best option for a Boxing Day test when you talk about the realities of it all.

England and India are the biggest draws, obviously, and so would South Africa - except they do their own Boxing Day test.

West Indies were lackluster. Pakistan would really be only strengthened by ex-pats but their current team really isn't up to much in Tests. Don't think Sri Lanka ever have been given one, and the time would've been when Murali, Sanga and Jayawardene were knocking about, quality wise. Something amazing would have to happen for Bangladesh and Zimbabwe to be considered. So really, unless you have England and India touring every two years, the best draw after that is NZ, both in terms of quality and in terms of ex-pats who will turn out to support the touring side.

 

[Bahnz]

I completely hear your sentiment. However, it would be the pinnacle of a lot of these guys' careers - playing a Boxing Day Test in front of what, 50k or so? Yes World Cup final, but they all say Test cricket is the No.1 and playing a Boxing Day Test would be as good as it gets.

And selfishly it'd be the pinnacle of my support of this team (again I was at the World Cup final, this would far outstrip it).

I can't see the justification for Pakistan over us, we'd have to be a bigger drawcard. But who knows how these things work

I actually strongly doubt this. Sure from a pure quality of cricket perspective, NZ right now is a better bet than Pakistan. But the average aussie viewer who doesn't know that much about cricket but tunes in every boxing day probably doesn't have the slightest clue about the current international rankings. They'll probably consider Pakistan a bigger drawcard than NZ, as Pakistan has a stronger history than NZ and has produced more great players. Equally, Pakistan would draw a much larger international audience, and therefore would be more marketable from CA's perspective. I do think NZ is probably ahead of all the others (WI, SL, BANGERZ), but I think the main thing working in NZ's favour over Pakistan is simply that Pakistan toured Australia more recently than we have, so there's less risk of viewer fatigue.

 

[NZTailender]

I actually strongly doubt this. Sure from a pure quality of cricket perspective, NZ right now is a better bet than Pakistan. But the average aussie viewer who doesn't know that much about cricket but tunes in every boxing day probably doesn't have the slightest clue about the current international rankings. They'll probably consider Pakistan a bigger drawcard than NZ, as Pakistan has a stronger history than NZ and has produced more great players. Equally, Pakistan would draw a much larger international audience, and therefore would be more marketable from CA's perspective. I do think NZ is probably ahead of all the others (WI, SL, BANGERZ), but I think the main thing working in NZ's favour over Pakistan is simply that Pakistan toured Australia more recently than we have, so there's less risk of viewer fatigue.

I remember my cousin being in Perth for work and took extra days off to attend the 2004 Test only to feel shortchanged as it was over just after he turned up to day 4 (his first day). Overall, I remember there being a general feeling that "they're pretty **** now" before I left AUs and I doubt it has gotten much better. The memories of Akram and co will have faded much in the same way they have for the once mighty WIndies.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo

 

[Athlai]

I remember my cousin being in Perth for work and took extra days off to attend the 2004 Test only to feel shortchanged as it was over just after he turned up to day 4 (his first day). Overall, I remember there being a general feeling that "they're pretty **** now" before I left AUs and I doubt it has gotten much better. The memories of Akram and co will have faded much in the same way they have for the once mighty WIndies.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo

Pretty crazy that NZ has more draws (and wins) than Pakistan, West Indies, Sri Lanka combined in that period.

 

[SteveNZ]

I actually strongly doubt this. Sure from a pure quality of cricket perspective, NZ right now is a better bet than Pakistan. But the average aussie viewer who doesn't know that much about cricket but tunes in every boxing day probably doesn't have the slightest clue about the current international rankings. They'll probably consider Pakistan a bigger drawcard than NZ, as Pakistan has a stronger history than NZ and has produced more great players. Equally, Pakistan would draw a much larger international audience, and therefore would be more marketable from CA's perspective. I do think NZ is probably ahead of all the others (WI, SL, BANGERZ), but I think the main thing working in NZ's favour over Pakistan is simply that Pakistan toured Australia more recently than we have, so there's less risk of viewer fatigue.

You're so right in that the average Aussie fan has NFI about any touring side. Hell, they're still over there scratching their head how England are 3-0 up when they expected to belt them.

As I said, I don't know how these things work. I'd be gutted if we didn't prove a much more enticing proposition to Pakistan. But remember, in 2015 the West Indies got the Boxing Day Test over us, did they not? And got thoroughly smacked from pillar to post?

 

[Immenso]

You're so right in that the average Aussie fan has NFI about any touring side. Hell, they're still over there scratching their head how England are 3-0 up when they expected to belt them.

As I said, I don't know how these things work. I'd be gutted if we didn't prove a much more enticing proposition to Pakistan. But remember, in 2015 the West Indies got the Boxing Day Test over us, did they not? And got thoroughly smacked from pillar to post?

It's not as simple as that though. David White and NZC don't/didn't want to give up their own post-Xmas cash cows to play in an Aussie cash cow.

It's something fans and nz media want, not something nz cricket administrators are overly keen on. White (I think it was) did concede on the publicity of a Melbourne Boxing Day test.

But they would rather play 3 ODIs than host their own test, so if thinknit will take some arm twisting for them to want play a foreign test.

They're wrong, but that's how they saw it last time.

 

[NZTailender]

It's not as simple as that though. David White and NZC don't/didn't want to give up their own post-Xmas cash cows to play in an Aussie cash cow.

It's something fans and nz media want, not something nz cricket administrators are overly keen on. White (I think it was) did concede on the publicity of a Melbourne Boxing Day test.

But they would rather play 3 ODIs than host their own test, so if thinknit will take some arm twisting for them to want play a foreign test.

They're wrong, but that's how they saw it last time.

Yeah IIRC there was an article that basically said we could've had it, but NZC opted for home ODIs to make money.

 

[SteveNZ]

It's not as simple as that though. David White and NZC don't/didn't want to give up their own post-Xmas cash cows to play in an Aussie cash cow.

It's something fans and nz media want, not something nz cricket administrators are overly keen on. White (I think it was) did concede on the publicity of a Melbourne Boxing Day test.

But they would rather play 3 ODIs than host their own test, so if thinknit will take some arm twisting for them to want play a foreign test.

They're wrong, but that's how they saw it last time.

Fine. (the following is not a go at you) If they want to govern like that, where the almighty dollar trumps over all else, they might find their product becomes irrelevant over time. But that's OK, given a CEO like White is only looking to hit his financial KPIs rather than actually hold a responsibility to the game. Maybe it's the Board's fault for holding the CEO to the wrong objectives.

Drive the romanticism and relevance of Test match cricket out the door and the shorter forms will follow. It'll end up being a franchise sport. Players won't forgo riches around the world to play exclusively in coloured clothing.

 

[Athlai]

Wonder if they're aware that building the mystique around NZ cricket will get/keep more fans than just trying to maximise JAMODI $$ while it lasts.

 

[Immenso]

Wonder if they're aware that building the mystique around NZ cricket will get/keep more fans than just trying to maximise JAMODI $$ while it lasts.

No.
Otherwise we'd prepare for test tours with warm up games. Our A team would tour and our U19s would play Youth Tests.

None of them generate immediate or measurable revenue. All of them , in an uncertain world, are worthwhile ongoing investments to secure or improve NZ's place at the table with the sweet, sweet ICC revenue and lucrative inbound tours.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Fine. (the following is not a go at you) If they want to govern like that, where the almighty dollar trumps over all else, they might find their product becomes irrelevant over time. But that's OK, given a CEO like White is only looking to hit his financial KPIs rather than actually hold a responsibility to the game. Maybe it's the Board's fault for holding the CEO to the wrong objectives.

Drive the romanticism and relevance of Test match cricket out the door and the shorter forms will follow. It'll end up being a franchise sport. Players won't forgo riches around the world to play exclusively in coloured clothing.

It could be argued this is already starting to happen with the fairly dreadful crowd at Westpac Stadium for the first 20-20 vs Pakistan the other day.

 

[Athlai]

It could be argued this is already starting to happen with the fairly dreadful crowd at Westpac Stadium for the first 20-20 vs Pakistan the other day.

Didn't think the crowd at the cake tin was bad at all. The second innings had it looking pretty packed out.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Didn't think the crowd at the cake tin was bad at all. The second innings had it looking pretty packed out.

It said on the big screen eight thousand and something ... there were a lot of bays that had nobody in them at all (about half the stadium, perhaps).

 

[Athlai]

It said on the big screen eight thousand and something ... there were a lot of bays that had nobody in them at all (about half the stadium, perhaps).

8k seems like a pretty good number for a t20 against a team that isn't England/India/Australia?

 

[The Hutt Rec]

8k seems like a pretty good number for a t20 against a team that isn't England/India/Australia?

Maybe, I’d have thought 10-12 would be more what they’d hope for. Might be way off though.

 

[Bahnz]

Nah, it's a poor crowd, especially given that it's a holiday. I remember last time we played a T20 against WI (back in 2014, before the World Cup boom), that drew in over 11,000 spectators.

It's spectator fatigue really. NZC scheduled 3 games in Wellington (tbf they originally scheduled one in Napier, but that had to be cancelled) against the same team (and not a particularly competitive one) within the span of a fortnight. People got bored.

 

[The Hutt Rec]

Just looked up the last international 20-20 played at the stadium, it was vs Pakistan as well, 22 Jan 2016, and got a crowd of 15,252 (source is the Westpac Stadium annual report).

 

[Bahnz]

I mean, I went to the T20 at the stadium, and it was probably the most bored I've ever been at a cricket match. You knew within the first 20 minutes how things were going to play out, and the rest was just waiting for it to happen. I have a friend who's a big cricket fan and is normally keen to go to any game no matter the opposition. But in this case she cancelled on the day because she just wasn't interested in watching NZ blow away Pakistan's top order for the umpteenth time. I imagine there were a few thousand more who thought similarly to her.

 

[Athlai]

Maybe, I’d have thought 10-12 would be more what they’d hope for. Might be way off though.

Way off IMO. This is actually a big improvement. 2015 had a number of 7.5 k for Pakistan ODI, 6.3k for SL ODI. They did get 15k vs. Pakistan in 2016 for a deciding T20 game when they were 1-1 all. But yeah it's pretty abnormal to see 10k+ for any non-Australia/England/India game in the big stadiums.