Yeah New Zealand comprehensively the better side over that time. The only thing I would say is we picked a much better group of players for this series and who knows how competitive this squad would have been in New Zealand last year. They certainly couldn't have been worse as Taylor and Roach were moving the ball as much as Southee and Boult in this series whereas Gabriel and Best didn't move it off the straight.
As I said earlier, I reckon the teams are even on talent but NZ have the match winning mentality that has been developed over the last 3 series and by having a relatively settled side. I'm hopeful now that we are selecting stronger teams and have nearly stumbled upon the best xi, we can start developing that ourselves, starting with a thumping of Bangladesh in a couple of months.
I disagree. The Windies have markedly improved in the last couple of years but they still rely an awful lot on consistent performance of their settled stars ( Gayle, Bravo, Chanderpaul and Ramdin) - this is the first series I can recall in quite some time where younger players stepped up for the Windies in Holder, Braithwaite and Blackwood. In the case of Holder and Blackwood, it's the first time I can recall (possibly since Bravo) that people playing in their debut matches stepped up and performed for the Windies which is heartening to see.
I took heat for saying that the NZ first class scene was much better and of a higher standard than the Windies but I'll reiterate that I still believe that and will point to the performance of our younger players, or players who have recently come back into test cricket after a while in domestic - you've got Watling, Latham, Boult, Neesham, Anderson and to a lesser extent Craig all coming into the side after either periods of absence (Watling) or for their first few series and stepping up with performances that assist in victories. The Windies still require their old stalwarts and experience hands to play above average games for them to have a chance (i.e Bravo and his tonne, Gayle spanking 80 quick runs, Chanderpaul's consistency throughout, Ramdin chipping in with late order runs) - where as NZ are getting as much out of players entering test cricket in the last two years as they do the guys that have been around for the last five to six years. That's a big difference in being consistent, because you can't rely on your stars constantly performing.
Signs are great for NZ - has a top tier seam attack in Wagner, Southee and Boult and there is no reason they shouldn't play 60 to 70 tests together in the next six or so years. I've seen signs in Craig that he could improve enough to be a promising bowling all rounder, similar to the role Vettori used to play for us. He won't be as successful as Vettori, but then with our seam attack he doesn't need to be.
We're starting to generate competition for spots in 3, 4, 5, 6 with Neesham, Anderson, Ryder, Mitchell, Ronchi and Munro all looking like they could do a job for us there. We have a near world class batsman occupying 7 for us.
If Latham can continue his form from domestic through to international as per his start, we may have unlocked one of the openers we require and this season in domestic, we're seeing a tonne of established middle order players with track records of success make moves towards opening the batting (i.e Brownlie) but it's still a hole in our line up that holds us back.
Be an interesting couple of years, especially if Taylor can get out of throwing his wicket away, we somehow integrate Ryder back into the side and our selectors start putting our best 11 on the park, rather than a project 11 around what-ifs - i.e "What if Sodhi wasn't utterly ****."
