Well yeah, for the quality of test cricket you're probably right atilla. The issue would be though if you keep playing against rubbish nations, you're not really giving those teams any chance of becoming good test nations, because you're only testing yourself against rubbish.
I think the ICC needs to get involved in some form or fashion. I mean, you can understand the West Indies going through lulls - they're not heavily populated, and they're not a wealthy group of nations. Bangladesh, you can understand, because they are extraordinarily poor financially. Zimbabwe, financial disparaties are huge in that country and there's enormous political turmoil. But what is New Zealand's excuse? I would see a time in say 15 years where Bangladesh with its population and love for cricket that they can be a good test nation. I can't see it with New Zealand.
New Zealand needs to quickly look at its first class system. To have six first class teams in a nation that size is always going to mean average cricketers are getting guernseys. It sohuld be four max. There should be a strategy involved around their quality of pitches too. A decade ago they were all green tops. Now I hear they're practically batting paradises. There has to be variety. Pithces that spin, pitches that are fast and bouncy, pitches that are green. Put players under pressure more regularly. Allow spinners to learn to be more than guys who bowl 20 overs in a day to give their pace bowlers a rest. The other thing that MUST happen is the return of regular and full, extended NZ "A" team tours and tournaments, so that the group of players on the fringe learn how to play on different surfaces, against a high quality of opponent, so that going on an international tour isn't so much of a tough experience in terms of pitches, and in terms of quality, the gap is somewhat bridged.
R&B Bear, Bangladesh DID beat them. Comprehensively about 3 years ago in an ODI series. In Bangladesh currently I think New Zealand is every chance of losing.
Fast Eddie, agree with most of your list. Not sure on Bracewell. I thought he was easily the best of the main attack in terms of the length hit, which is crucial in South Africa. Wagner, I don't agree with, early on he was getting a lot of knicks through third and fourth slip down to the third man boundary. Could easily have got wickets early on. The bloke who basically appointed Hesson was Buchanan, in that it was his over the top involvement that forced John Wright to give it away.
