I think the point of it though Kiwi is that success starts at home. Not necessarily in winning at home, but in creating a grassroots environment that identifies talent, nurtures it and develops it, mainly via competitive domestic competitions and then eventually into a national team setup that is professional and competitive. I've had many conversations with Kiwi friends at the Silverfern rugby forum about this over the past 10 years. This isn't really the thread for it as it will disappear soon after today, but the main problem in Enzed cricket is not in talent identification, as you have players who are talented. It's in the fact that you don't have a strong grassroots to develop the talent to the point where you can consistently be competitive in international cricket in turn.
It's a fallacy that just playing series against bigger teams makes you better, if that was the case then Bangladesh would be a lot better by now. South Africa was competitive after decades of international isolation. You need to improve your grassroots and your domestic setup because that's what creates a sustainable competitive advantage in sport. That's why the Wallabies have always struggled against the ABs or the Boks - we can pull out the odd victory and can beat the NH sides because the quality is there, but the players struggle against top tier competition because we don't really have a strong domestic comp to bridge the gap between grade rugby and Super Rugby. NZ cricket is no different. Your domestic competition is mediocre and that leads to inconsistency in your national side. Now there's merit in your comment about the fact that a country of four million only being good at one sport but I don't really buy that argument because it wasn't that long ago (20 years, maybe you weren't old enough to watch it back then) that your team was extremely competitive with not just Australia but with other countries. It's about grassroots investment in cricket. And the main responsibility with that rests with the NZ Cricket Board - not Australia, not England, or India or anyone else.
Regarding not giving teams Tests or w/e. I totally agree about 2 Test series and the fact that they are a waste of time. Unfortunately, at the end of the day this is the professional era and cricket boards need money to cover their overheads and put money back into their grassroots. There are reasons why countries like OZ, England and India are money spinners - it's because crowds in those countries go out to see the matches like they have this summer. I reckon close to a million people went thru the turnstiles to see what ended up becoming a one sided series this summer. Compare this with India vs SA where they would have been lucky to get 100,000 in 2 Tests. But it's just just a case of haves vs have nots - it was only 10 years ago that the West Indies consistently were given 5 Test series in both England and Australia and they combined hardly have a population much bigger than yours. Deliver the results and there will be a much stronger case for longer series from everyone.
I don't think it's really fair to rain on our parade or diminish the achievement of the OZ side just because you are feeling bad about NZ not getting the same 3 or 5 Test opportunity as England or India. You just need to lift the standard, and as I said that starts at home - at the grassroots.
