Napier Test Preview

After the Australia tour, I had a lot of stuff lined up to post about - NZ's year in review, India's disastrous tour of Australia - but as is often the case after a win, I was too lazy to get back in the game. Zimbabwe's return test (they hosted NZ in Bulawayo last November) starts tomorrow which left me no choice but to try to start posting regularly again.

COMPARING THE SIDES

For an excellent quick man-by-man preview, check out Ben's post on Crucket.

Although NZ made some good strides in international cricket in 2011 (including the wonderful win in Hobart), they still lie below everyone barring Bangladesh in the rankings, and the gap between them and the Zimbabweans isn't that wide, really. That they were able to win by just 34 runs in Bulawayo is probably a fair reflection. NZ's bowling - their weak link in the Bulawayo test - is much stronger now with the four seamers who bowled them to victory at Hobart, plus Vettori. The batsmen, however, have taken a few steps backwards since. Barring Dean Brownlie, no one really enjoyed a good tour of Australia, and they've had nothing but T20 cricket since. Much responsibility awaits.

Zimbabwe will certainly miss the presence of the much improved Vusi Sibanda, but the batting has a pretty steady look to it. The middle order of Taylor, Taibu, Waller and Chigumbura all had their moments when NZ visited in October, and the bowling is pretty sharp as well - Jarvis, Vitori and probably Keegan Meth will be a handful in the conditions. Tricky opposition they will be.

THE PITCH

Napier is considered a batting paradise, in the league of the Adelaide Oval. Pakistan were able to to escape with a draw in the last test here after a low total in the first dig. However, the word is that NZ have ordered a grassy, bowler-friendly wicket this time around. I find this puzzling for a couple of reasons: 1) This allows the lesser side an opportunity, and makes things even more difficult for struggling home batsmen looking for form. 2) NZ are going in with five bowlers (including Vettori), which usually makes more sense on a batting wicket - a long tail in a greentop test is a cause for concern. The Hobart test itself was a conclusive instance of such a move backfiring on the home team. Interesting viewing ahead.

BATTLE FOR THE WICKETKEEPING SPOT

Following the dumping of Reece Young (a tad unfortunate, it must be said) after the Australia tour, BJ Watling and Central's Kruger van Wyk were both included int eh squad as wicketkeeping options, and the relative merits of each have been the subject of much debate. David summed up the state of things extremely well in this post. It turns out Watling has won out.

Personally, I was on Kruger's side in this battle. The need of the hour was clearly for a test-standard gloveman who could also contribute well enough with the bat. Watling, while a keeper in his junior years, has been only an occasional gloveman for Northern Districts, and I get the feeling his batting has gone backwards in the last year or so (it wasn't long ago that he actually opened for NZ); he looked quite terrible at no.5 in the Bulawayo game from memory. van Wyk, while being a regular keeper for Central, has superior batting stats at the FC level.

So cold logic wasn't what John Wright decided to apply here. Clearly, he is backing a hunch that Watling is the solution to the void left by McCullum, though both Watling and van Wyk did reasonably well in the warm-up game. So we'll have to hope BJ doesn't blow it, though for some reason van Wyk is a guy I'd like to see make it big. I don't think he'd be the worst player to have around the fringes of the side for a while.