Nikhil_cric
T20I Star
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2011
- Runs
- 32,290
This team cant even beat Bangladesh at home unless conditions suit them . They are an excellent team in swinging/seaming conditions but are absolutely terrible on flat/bouncy/spinning wickets.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

They missed Williamson & Taylor
But credit to the Tigers they were awesome. No superstars like Tamim or Shakib to cause issues in the camp
No, NZ are generally a v good team at home, and decent away, and NZ made it count in the wtc final. bringing your A game in a one off game is a skill in itself.
This team cant even beat Bangladesh at home unless conditions suit them . They are an excellent team in swinging/seaming conditions but are absolutely terrible on flat/bouncy/spinning wickets.
NZ was number 1 for a few months. NZ was not ranked 1 before this match.
They are not #1.
However, NZ should be worried that they need a green track to win even against BD.
India and not NZ is the #1 ranked team.
https://www.icc-cricket.com/rankings/mens/team-rankings/test
Bit like AUstralia winning world T20 after losing 5 T20 series.
I'm talking about the period when they were the #1 side in the world I.e. until just before their tour of India.
It is not hard to see why NZ made it to rank 1.
Last 4 years not including the current series,
At home: played 8 test series Hosted Pak, WI, India, Eng, SL and BD - won 8 test series [ Obvious missing teams are Aus and SA who were most likely to beat NZ in NZ]
Outside of home: played only 4 test series - Won grand total of one test series. Lost in Aus. Lost in Ind. Didn't win in SL. Won in Eng.
That's the reason I never rated NZ that high. They still played well to win those home series, but the entire rank was due to playing twice the number of test series at home without playing Aus and SA in that duration.
Rank can be chalked up to schedule. It is much harder to maintain rank 1 than simply claim it due to schedule. If you maintain it for a couple of years then it undoubtedly means that you are the number one team.
I never saw NZ as number 1 team despite being ranked 1.
Which makes their WTC win even a bigger joke. I would a SENA team beating India in India or a subcontinent team beating a SENA team in a series of over WTC anyway. Beating a team in a single test at a neutral venue is the least impressive thing in cricket.
Which makes their WTC win even a bigger joke. I would a SENA team beating India in India or a subcontinent team beating a SENA team in a series of over WTC anyway. Beating a team in a single test at a neutral venue is the least impressive thing in cricket.
<b>Which makes their WTC win even a bigger joke.</b> I would a SENA team beating India in India or a subcontinent team beating a SENA team in a series of over WTC anyway. Beating a team in a single test at a neutral venue is the least impressive thing in cricket.
WTC win by NZ was not a joke for me, they played well to win.
WTC format itself is a joke format. The format is a joke because you can cherry-pick 6 teams. You can play 2 tests and you get the same points for beating WI at home vs beating Aus/Ind away. Does not make any sense. And to end it all, the final is just one test in a random country. It should be 3 tests in 3 different conditions, then we will be talking real championship. Imagine if NZ had to face Aus in Aus or India in India. It won't be a fair condition for NZ. Fair would be to have 3 finals in 3 different conditions.
Pinnacle for me to performance of away series against top teams. Then how well you do at home. Combining both, you see the ranking trend over a long period and that's mostly accurate.
WI won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for a long time
Aus won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for a long time
Ind won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for some period
SA won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for a long time.
Eng won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for some period.
Ind won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for a long time.
You simply can't occupy rank 1 for a long time without winning home and away enough. Getting there for 2 months or winning WTC due to scheduling is not a substitute. WTC has done one good thing though with so many bad points I highlighted. It made sure that top teams try to win all tests. I like that over boring draws.
No need to over react. Australia lost to Bangladesh in 2005
How can NZ be the weakest number 1 team of all-time?
They dethroned India, and in 5 Tests in 2020 and 2021 against India (2 at home, 1 neutral venue, 2 in India) the overall record reads:
New Zealand 3
India 1
Drawn 1
So it goes without saying that NZ can't be the weakest ever Number 1 team, because India were much, much worse.
in test cricket?
in test cricket?
That's why I don't watch Test cricket, T20 and IPL is the real deal How can NZ be the weakest number 1 team of all-time?
They dethroned India, and in 5 Tests in 2020 and 2021 against India (2 at home, 1 neutral venue, 2 in India) the overall record reads:
New Zealand 3
India 1
Drawn 1
So it goes without saying that NZ can't be the weakest ever Number 1 team, because India were much, much worse.
This team cant even beat Bangladesh at home unless conditions suit them . They are an excellent team in swinging/seaming conditions but are absolutely terrible on flat/bouncy/spinning wickets.
I agree - NZ can only win on swinging wickets & that has been its weakest point.
There are seaming wickets, and swinging atmospheres but not “swinging wickets”.
Fact:-
The NZ team under Kane Williamson is a better team than Indian team under Virat Kohli.
The 2020 Australia win didn't had Virat Kohli and this NZ loss didn't had Kane Williamson. Neither did the NZ team that run away with security threats had Kane Williamson.
But whenever Kane Williamson is there, he has got the better of Kohli's India.
Agree. In other words, India’s wins without their first choice captain playing don’t count.
Fact:-
The NZ team under Kane Williamson is a better team than Indian team under Virat Kohli.
But whenever Kane Williamson is there, he has got the better of Kohli's India.
Fact:-
The NZ team under Kane Williamson is a better team than Indian team under Virat Kohli.
The 2020 Australia win didn't had Virat Kohli and this NZ loss didn't had Kane Williamson. Neither did the NZ team that run away with security threats had Kane Williamson.
But whenever Kane Williamson is there, he has got the better of Kohli's India.
Most of their home wickets are flat these days.
They could be improved by a couple of good spinners.
The wickets were definitely not flat when India toured. They manipulate their wickets based on the opposition just like everyone else.

Absolutely.
They were flatties on the last England tour. I thought the climate had changed so they don’t get green seamers any more?
Absurd! Strength of a team is not only judged by how they did against India and NZ. What about the record of these 2 teams against, say Australia during 2020 and 2021?
To show India in a bad light, you are cherry picking as is your wont.
No I'm not. I'm pointing out that NZ keeps beating India, so they are clearly better than them.
Really? What stopped India from winning against this NZ team in NZ then?
Irrespective of the outcome of this series, this is a great win from Bangladesh. This is even bigger than India's win against Australia in Brisbane test. Unfortunately this win won't be aplauded as much as India's win against Australia due to obvious reasons.
Also if India can beat New Zealand in Australia then using the same logic Bangladesh can also beat India in New Zealand now.![]()
MZ do t have a great home record either. They lost to the 2 sides that that can compete well in these conditions- SA and OZ. And they beaten like minnows the last time they toured OZ, India, SA etc.
Indian fans seem to have a bit of a vendetta against NZ after the WTC humiliation.
Instead of praising Bangladesh there is a lot of negativity shown towards NZ.
NZ deserve to be Number 1 on the back of some tremendous performance and by winning the final in style.
They don't have the depth to sustain a top ranking over an extended period of time and thats mainly due to a lack of bench strength compared to Aus & India and the fact that imo their domestic system will struggle to consistently produce players of top tier calibre.

No I'm not. I'm pointing out that NZ keeps beating India, so they are clearly better than them.
No I'm not. I'm pointing out that NZ keeps beating India, so they are clearly better than them.
No I'm not. I'm pointing out that NZ keeps beating India, so they are clearly better than them.
Climate has never stopped teams from making the pitches that suit them.
WTC win by NZ was not a joke for me, they played well to win.
WTC format itself is a joke format. The format is a joke because you can cherry-pick 6 teams. You can play 2 tests and you get the same points for beating WI at home vs beating Aus/Ind away. Does not make any sense. And to end it all, the final is just one test in a random country. It should be 3 tests in 3 different conditions, then we will be talking real championship. Imagine if NZ had to face Aus in Aus or India in India. It won't be a fair condition for NZ. Fair would be to have 3 finals in 3 different conditions.
Pinnacle for me to performance of away series against top teams. Then how well you do at home. Combining both, you see the ranking trend over a long period and that's mostly accurate.
WI won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for a long time
Aus won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for a long time
Ind won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for some period
SA won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for a long time.
Eng won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for some period.
Ind won home and away - Occupied rank 1 for a long time.
You simply can't occupy rank 1 for a long time without winning home and away enough. Getting there for 2 months or winning WTC due to scheduling is not a substitute. WTC has done one good thing though with so many bad points I highlighted. It made sure that top teams try to win all tests. I like that over boring draws.
Partly agree. The issue with a best of 3 final is there's simply no space in a very compressed international calendar for it. Anyway, if a team is truly the best - surely they should be capable of winning a one-off Test ?
I also don't mind teams gaining the same points regardless of opponent strength - you don't get extra in a World Cup or Champions Trophy for beating a higher ranked side. Plus those who play a higher % of Tests against bigger teams (the Big 3) would be disproportionately favoured. Besides we already have the ICC Rankings which reflect opposition strength.
Where I agree is there should be a proper home and away system where each team plays everyone.
But we know why this compromise system exists where teams only play 6 series - the Indian Govt will not sanction a Test series with Pakistan.
Let us also praise Bangladesh for overcoming the test champions.
NZ are just a lucky team, their WTC win in ENG was pure luck.
Indians were cold and isolating with no match practice while NZ were well prepared having got plenty of practice in the local conditions.
On level playing field NO WAY Nz wins WTC match...
....
Let's not go that far. NZ had also beaten a full strength acclimitized Indian team in NZ in 2020 as well. Indian batsmen struggle in grassy conditions.


Stop crying. NZ were deserving winners of WTC. They showed an intent, played a series before WTC final whereas Indian players were busy playing pyjama league. I said this before WTC final that Indian fans will use this tried and tested excuse of not getting enough practice before WTC final after losing the match.![]()

Marooned;11507162[I said:]They are in steep decline now post Wattling and Taylor. [/I]That takes nothing away from the amazing team they were across formats over the last 5 years or so. Their cycle seems to have ended but they can be very proud of what they've produced over the last few years.