NZ's key to success!

[zen]

Many fans underrate NZ as it does not have the depth on paper that some of the other teams possess. However, NZ cricket is not about depth (because of limited pool) but how its key players perform. If we go back to the 80s, NZ was among the top test sides. It was able to compete because its super-players raised their hand. For e.g.:

 

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team New Zealand

Start of match date between 1 Jan 1985 and 1 Jan 1992

Qualifications wickets taken greater than or equal to 20

Ordered by bowling average (ascending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 7 of 7

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Span	Mat	Inns	Overs	Mdns	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	Econ	SR	5	10
Sir RJ Hadlee	1985-1990	36	59	1532.5	364	3985	196	9/52	15/123	20.33	2.59	46.9	18	5
EJ Chatfield	1985-1989	27	44	1100.4	340	2425	75	6/73	10/124	32.33	2.20	88.0	1	1
JG Bracewell	1985-1990	29	45	1012.5	252	2626	73	6/32	10/106	35.97	2.59	83.2	3	1
W Watson	1986-1991	9	15	398.0	109	1000	27	6/78	6/90	37.03	2.51	88.4	1	0
DK Morrison	1987-1991	22	35	749.1	134	2650	70	5/69	6/133	37.85	3.53	64.2	5	0
MC Snedden	1985-1990	15	23	512.5	122	1380	35	5/68	5/82	39.42	2.69	87.9	1	0
SL Boock	1985-1989	10	15	373.5	106	1030	20	5/117	5/84	51.50	2.75	112.1	1

 

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team New Zealand

Start of match date between 1 Jan 1985 and 1 Jan 1992

Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 1000

Ordered by batting average (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 7 of 7

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
MD Crowe	1985-1991	40	66	8	3391	299	58.46	7443	45.55	12	12	3	399	8
AH Jones	1987-1991	20	36	5	1703	186	54.93	4213	40.42	5	6	1	134	8
JV Coney	1985-1987	19	29	5	1041	111*	43.37	2230	46.68	2	5	0	102	3
MJ Greatbatch	1988-1991	19	31	5	1105	146*	42.50	3133	35.26	2	5	1	123	2
JG Wright	1985-1991	40	73	4	2907	185	42.13	7722	37.64	7	14	3	341	7
Sir RJ Hadlee	1985-1990	36	49	8	1304	151*	31.80	2495	52.26	1	6	3	141	13
IDS Smith	1985-1991	43	59	10	1265	173	25.81	1941	65.17	1	6	4	163	5

 

 

As we can see above, it is basically a Hadlee-Crowe team. With Jones also supporting Crowe in batting. Others chipped in here and there. But NZ 's super players are so good that they can make their team competitive even when playing against the best teams like the WI of 80s. Hadlee is probably the biggest match winner in tests, while Crowe was the best averaging batsman among those with 2k or more runs in the above period.

 

The performance of super players is one of the NZ's secret of success. In tests, if one of your batsmen gets a big score and if one of the bowlers gets bucket load of wkts, the team is set. Which is one of the reasons, I put NZ AT11 in the top half along with WI, Aus and SA. On paper, they may lack depth (underrated) but it is their super players that can make the difference. Hadlee-Bond-Crowe-Williamson-etc is what I look at. And you know these guys are going to step it up "big time" to cover for any lack of depth. 

 

On the other hand, Ind's  (and also Pak's) super players can disappoint even though the team can look good on paper. Many times, ppl complain about "a lack of support", when it is relatively much better. We also focus on fringe players. If Ind has to do well on consistent basis away , the super players would need to step up big time. In the series against Aus, we saw Pujara step up. In Pak, we saw Sehwag do it. In WI, we saw Gavaskar do it. We need more such performances on a consistent basis by our key players!

[zen]

In this test too,  key players Williamson got an 80 odd and Boult cleaned out Pujara and Kohli, the two best test batsmen 

 

[SrinjayDutta]

Nz plays with character, but their players are not extraordinary barring williamson, Taylor and boult. India's players are definitely more talented, but gutless. Just intelligent bowling with correct field setting has brought them wickets today. 

[Deleted_User_1]

NZ has always been a team of few talents, but the talented ones have put their hand up and done their done their job. From Glenn Turner in the 1970s, Hadlee in 70/80s, Martin Crowe during 80s/90s, Shane Bond in the 2000s, they have had some quality players. 
 

Heck, India won in NZ in mid 70s with just spin and this Bewda/Chokohli led team!

Edited February 23, 2020 by Audiophile

[cricketpitch]

Key to success is playing at home like all the other teams in the recent past. If this series was in India they would have struggled as well. India has been extremely poor and NZ have just done what they do best at home. Nothing to look here. They have always been a good side at home and someone who are a difficult team to beat in their own conditions.

Edited February 23, 2020 by cricketpitch

[Cricket_Fan]

55 minutes ago, cricketpitch said:

Key to success is playing at home like all the other teams in the recent past. If this series was in India they would have struggled as well. India has been extremely poor and NZ have just done what they do best at home. Nothing to look here. They have always been a good side at home and someone who are a difficult team to beat in their own conditions.

Finally someone gets it. They got thrashed in Australia few weeks back and even lost a Test in Srilanka who are practically minnows now. Now, they’re playing at home. Let them win some series outside their home and then we can hype them up.

[Vilander]

Won toss. All margin calls went their way. Slow bowlers suited to the condition. Luck. Patience. Skill and execution. 

[Adi_91]

Off late, their keys to success has been to play India.