Time for the Real Deal: World Cup Preview

As I type this, the kiwis have suffered a couple of setbacks in their preparation. They just lost to Bangladesh yesterday - if the West Indian conditions are slow and low, people forget that even they are a reasonable side - and there are injury concerns over Mark Gillespie, a first-choice player. Coming on the back of that heady series against the Aussies, it leaves the kiwis back on earth for the time being. But how far will they go in the tournament? Are they capable of winning it? With some cautious optimism and a bit of pure hope, I'd like to think so.

Kiwi world cup sides have been at the receiving end of certain cliches, such as 'workmanlike', 'unspectacular but effective', 'no stars but work well as a unit', 'dark horses'..you get the picture. This time however, the side seems to possess more of an individual and collective spark, despite big names such as Nathan Astle and Chris Cairns retiring over the last couple of years. They seem to have overcome the stereotypes to a large degree: now they have a side rich in youth and experience (how much does that count for?), some glamour (the name's Bond..), good clean hitters, and a range of bowlers (even though six medium pacers is a bit too much for me). The reason I'm optimistic about our semifinal chances (anything goes after that) is the apparent self-belief and the knowledge that 'we are indeed contenders', which is something that's been more noticeable in the last year. The successful return of McMillan and Vincent to the side best illustrates this. Both players have been dynamic on the field and outspoken off it, which suggests a confidence level taht can only be good for the side. In previous world cups, NZ were always 'raising their game' (to borrow another cliche) against the big guns. This time, they know their 'game', is up there with the best. Having said that, the gulf between the top eight teams is too narrow for me to suggest any team has a better chance than the other. I still say we have a side which should reach the semi finals.

The reasons for caution: I think the selectors erred in going back to Daryl Tuffey. He tried hard against the Aussies in those three games but with so many medium pacers already in the squads, I thought we needed another slow bowling allrounder for flexibility, namely Chris Harris. Apparently Harry was competing with Macca for one allrounder slot so that was that, but that's another example of the inflexible thinking that Bracewell and Flemign seem prone to at times. Two things, which have traditionally been New Zealand's strengths, could well cost them a couple of games this time around. The first is the slow bowler's slot to support Daniel Vettori, someone to take the pace off the ball, the 'dibbly dobbly'. Jeetan Patel is a genuine 'flight' bowler whose mode of attack is unfortunately a liability at times. Scott Styris is supposed to perform this role but his form with the ball fo late has been terrible. And I'm not convinced of Macca's ability to bowl ten full overs. The other is the fielding. The number of dropped catches this year has been shocking; wonder if there's been some catching virus sweeping the side, so noticeable has it been. Fielding could be the difference in a close game, and NZ will testify to this. The batting looks good at the right time, but it's no secret that the batsmen prefer harder, quicker tracks as opposed to slower ones. The jury is still out on how the pitches will play.

Jacob Oram, injured finger and all, is the best example of the enigma this side is. His batting has moved up a few notches in the last couple of years, and has been outstanding lately. His bowling, however, has lost the reliability factor it once had. The fact that he is the only genuine allrounder means that NZ have to play him for the sake of balance. But the irony is they perhaps need him to fire more with the ball, as his ability to get through ten overs saves a lot of trouble for the captain. It's another story that Oram sees himself more as a batsman (as evident from his performances at the test level). His efforts, even more than Shane Bond's, will influence the way some of the games go. Few people actually remember that he had a good 2003 World Cup as a bowler.

It promises to be a wonderful and nerve tingling World Cup, and not just after the super eights get underway. The pessimist in me holds my breath, however, because the first round does promise and upset or two from the minnows.