Keeping the boss happy

Email Feedback Print

Posted by Down_with_Down_Under on (February 26 2009, 23:25 PM GMT)

ECB wanted to start T20 Pro League similar to IPL with the partnership of Alan Stanford. Guess what happened to Alan Stanford, he is on his way down hill at 1000mph speed, and investigated for Fraud by US. ECB angered BCCI and see what happened to Alan Stanford, he was sacrificed and ECB's dream disappered. Lets blame BCCI for everything and with all sort of Hollywood style imaginary theories. Some blogger nammed ,dsachit, here brought up India's win against SL few weeks ago and Blamed BCCI for SL's defeat. If Indian wins Toss and scores 300 runs and wins One-day game, the BCCI gets blamed tat they forced SL board to make tailor made conditions for India. Well what happened to SL batting then? Why blame BCCI that SL lost the Toss? Why blame BCCI for the impotent display of home team in front of the home crowd and familiar conditions in SL..

Posted by Down_Under on (February 26 2009, 22:17 PM GMT)

So Mr. Mark Richardson, I wonder what happened to your theory here? The guys are not keeping the Boss happy and it doesn't seem quite like playing Golf with your Boss atall. Your so called boss actually lost in first T20 and proved the backbne of your theory completely wrong. Uhh.. I will pray for you Mark, so Boss can win the second T20 and you can save your face..hehehehehe

Posted by aaditya98june on (February 26 2009, 20:59 PM GMT)

Not only pepple like Mark, but quite a few of New Zealanders ( and Australians i suspect)cant accept the fact that Cricket is no more an exclusive white man 's game with rules being framed in the Home Country i.e. Britain ( Surprisingly i found English dont seem to really object to not being the sole authority on cricket). Well hard luck Mark, you can do nothing about it except may be write petulant pieces in Cricinfo. The money is in India and so is the viewership and more than that fortunately for Cricket and unfortuntely for you, not many New Zealanders ( and Australians) think like you.

Posted by aks83 on (February 26 2009, 16:09 PM GMT)

As an Indian fan reading this article and associated comments makes me feel a little ticked off to say the least. I think Mark forgets two very important components in India's arsenal - Zaheer Khan and Ishant Sharma. They are rated by many as the best new ball pair around and are head and shoulders above the Kiwi new ball attack. No doube Indian batsmen will struggles somewhat but i think so will this ordinary Kiwi batting line up against a quality attack - something India did not have last time. Plus lets not forget those games were closer than you make it sound. India have done well abroad over the last few years in all conditions and its time to give the team some credit. Mark think about what you are saying before making such irresponsible comments. I am sure Daniel Vettori - being the fierce and respectable competitor he is - would not enjoy your article either. AD.

Posted by bringbackleegermon on (February 25 2009, 22:11 PM GMT)

Mark does make a good point, Indian cricket has money and NZ Cricket does not. It's a sad fact of the modern game. However, every country tailors their pitches to the home team, no matter who is coming. Surely we must be allowed to do the same. If the touring side are good enough, they can score the runs. Besides, I think if you walked down Auckland City and asked how many people feel cheated if Tendulkar doesn't cart our boys all over Eden Park, you would be in for a long night and maybe a few black eyes as well.

Posted by shaynonz on (February 25 2009, 21:03 PM GMT)

Hi Indian fans, how did the game go last night? Looks like the better team won aye.....Mark is 100% right, and what do you guys know about cricket.

Posted by truthspeaker on (February 25 2009, 19:16 PM GMT)

I see many India bashing postings from Pakistanis and British and Aussies who find any vehicle to attack BCCI - It is now beyond jealousy - the rubbish written by Richardson if found to be true - will only make me happy - India finally commands the power it truly deserves- which is dictate types of pitches, types of scores, margins of victory etc so, the talent of Ishant, Zaheer, Sehwag, Sachin pale - only Ponting, Lara, et al count - what a joke so, be it - now the cricket nations have to live with it - with the source of revenue, salaries India needs to be worshipped - Love it - either way

Posted by pubudu on (February 25 2009, 16:00 PM GMT)

good article, a very good one. indians always goes home crying when ever some one defeats them and speaks about conspiracy etc. they complain about umpaire refferels bcause usually the indians are the people who gets benefit of the doubt most times because every umpaire in world doesn't want to loose job by making bcci angry. they will win the contest to best cry babies by a quite a margin

Posted by dsachit on (February 25 2009, 13:40 PM GMT)

It has to be admitted there is some truth in Mark Richardson's Opinion. Sadly enough India's Megalomaniac attitude towards cricket is disturbing.All cricketing nations are keen to impress India- as we saw in the recent Sri lanka - India series. Sri lankan pitches have been slow in the last few years.At the R Premadasa typically teams score around 220. But we saw India amass scores in excess of 300.Aided with the toss and these tailor made conditions India romped home.The Sri Lankan authorities were keen to impress Crickets Big Brother. Maybe that's why Arjuna Ranathunga who criticized the IPL and angered the BCCI by allowing ICL players to play domestic cricket was sent home.Teams have to prepare conditions that suit their style. Not to see some ''greats'' who scored most of their runs on placid batting tracks and ''legends'' who cant face the moving ball score hundreds and fifties.

Posted by occa on (February 25 2009, 13:30 PM GMT)

Yes lets provide Indias flat track bullies with some slow dry,flat wickets and make them feel at home, so they might want to come back.HARDEN UP FELLAS! thats why its called international cricket,if all the pitches around the world were like Indias there wouldnt be test cricket,it would be limited overs only,or baseball, no wonder India produce the batsman, who wouldnt w ant to b at on those featherbeds!!!

Posted by MuraliBhat on (February 25 2009, 05:31 AM GMT)

If there is a competition for bragging and whining... Mark wins hands down. What surprises me is people from down under are also "Cry Babies". We have seen Ponting crying in his pants after defeat on a spinner friendly pitch in India. If India won any toss and batted second in last tour, result would have been totally different. kiwis would have their tails between their legs Writing this he has not insulted Indian team, He has insulted NZ board and their players.

Posted by navrocks on (February 25 2009, 05:20 AM GMT)

richardson is looking at one side of a coin. i wonder how he would react were newzwaland to face a dust bowl at the wankhade. i guess he would cry his head out trying to get acclimatised to the turn and cracks.india failed ion their tour last time around because they were given similair testing(unfit)conditions in that tour. anyway it was not as if the kiwis got 500 and india got bowled out below 150. they were all low scoring affairs in any case.

Posted by InnerEdge on (February 25 2009, 03:56 AM GMT)

What a load of tripe from Rigger!! The people most disapointed with this and in my opinion should sue him wouldbe Dan Vettori and his mates....if what mark says is true and should be lent any credence, why should Dan and co practise or even bother getting up in the morning....NZ board might as well play the Waikato second XI for this series, Actually, why bother playing at all-just hand over trophies for all 3 formats to India...eh Rigger..?!! I'm Indian living in Auckland and can say that these commemnts have raised the ire of most Kiwis i know and work with....No harm in the host nation preparing the pictches etc to suit their strengths but to suggest that the Indian money power has a role in this is preposterous to say the least....Here's hoping for an good series...

Posted by rewihendrix on (February 25 2009, 03:52 AM GMT)

The reason we won last time was simple. In seaming conditions, our pace bowlers (Bond etc) were better, and our batsmen were also (marginally) better. This time however, we have no Bond, and India has Zaheer Khan and Ishant Sharma, who are both in good form. Therefore, we have a better chance of winning by utilising the skills of Vettori and Mills (who swings the ball, rather than seaming it), and some of our young aggressive batsmen. It's ridiculous to say that we've changed the pitches to appease "the boss". Although please, please, please BCCI, let us have Bond back!

Posted by helen_mucus on (February 25 2009, 03:17 AM GMT)

A bizarre article. No-one will be happy to read this - we've heard from Indian fans, but Mr. Richardson has come very close to saying the kiwis are looking to throw games for financial gain. This "playing the boss at golf" analogy is insulting to ALL concerned. India are entirely justified in expecting better pitches than in 2002, but if he has evidence of anyone in NZ cricket (or even Indian cricket) saying the overriding intent is to generate a "sense of goodwill" by pandering to India's top order at the expense of the home attack he really, really needs to show that. There are hints here of something more substantial that a more courageous or talented writer might have explored, but in the absence of specifics it's all just tabloid-style rubbish. It would make for a much less sensationalist article that probably wouldn't get so many comments but would be far more interesting and valuable. It's the sort of thing a real journalist might do.

Posted by nick_japan_2007 on (February 25 2009, 02:58 AM GMT)

mustufa, you're right. It's a shame he got all those runs as a test opener and gets to write for Cricinfo while you're stuck writing bitter comments on his blog. NZ would tour more if they got more invites. Money rules the modern game.

Posted by cvam on (February 25 2009, 02:54 AM GMT)

Finally, they all admit to have traded their jock straps for knee pads. Things are now how they were/should be. We promise to be kind masters/paymasters ;)

Posted by PPRK on (February 25 2009, 02:49 AM GMT)

To all Dale Steyn lovers out there. Check his stats as a bowler without BD and you will notice what a big difference it makes to his bowling averages and strike rates.

Posted by shirish_m on (February 25 2009, 02:42 AM GMT)

Person with only 38 tests and mere 4 ODIs in his little sack should think a bit before saying a single word about professional cricket and its associated elements. By making the statement of "Keeping the boss happy", he only wants to expose Kiwis to prepare for an excuse. Though these days the NZ team is performing well, this article can make them to stray from their standing efforts.

Posted by Aahd on (February 25 2009, 02:09 AM GMT)

Good article indeed. It sums up how cricket is being played these days, unfortunately. Or it would if Mark Richardson is correct in his assumption on the types of wickets being prepared. India have a great side, the best I believe, in world cricket these days but if New Zealand don't give them green tracks to play on like is common for NZ wickets, they are not doing the game justice. Green and swing friendly wickets are a part of cricket, and with the sort of stoppages you see in NZ usually, batting friendly wickets would rarely get you full games played anyhow. In fact, green wickets are NZ's only chance of salvaging a few games here, I think its great how the home side gets its 'forte' advantage in bilateral series, they should not give it up...its what makes tours so gripping.

Posted by Akash.Sethi on (February 25 2009, 01:58 AM GMT)

MARK RICHARDSON is already started thinking like a loser. What a contrast to the fighting NZ spirit.. Stop making excuses if you loose... Grow up. It was one of the worst article i have come across on cricinfo, and im a daily reader of cric info. what a shame for Mr. Richardson...

Posted by PradeepR on (February 25 2009, 01:43 AM GMT)

This is in reply to johnfrancis' post that his comments didn't get posted. Mine met the same fate too John. Looks like cricinfo didn't have the b...s/guts to post our comments, but they've no issues posting such a useless article such as this on their website. Probably our opinions were a bit too strong for their website.

Posted by LisaDun on (February 25 2009, 01:42 AM GMT)

Vivid and honest description of the difficult pitch and weather conditions in New Zealand. Can't understand why some readers are criticising Mark Richardson. England, Australia, South Africa, and New Zealand teams complain about the heat, humidity, food, and slow turning pitches that they have to contend with when touring the subcontinent. Well, Richardson has the common sense to recognise that teams from the subcontinent don't find the conditions in Eng, Aus, NZ and SA all that friendly either. These are the sort of challenges that make international cricket more interesting.

Posted by cricfan2 on (February 25 2009, 01:08 AM GMT)

Ridiculous article! I can't believe Cricinfo acutally posted this nonsense. Let me start by saying that I am an Indian and love my cricket team no matter what. The 2002 series was lost by India fair and square. ICC and the cricket boards of both nations agreed at the end of the tour that the pitches (which were flown in for the matches!) were under prepared. Both batting teams suffered as a result and nobody enjoyed the cricket. I, for one, say bring on the green pitches. But for heaven's sake let the pitches be well prepared!! India has done well on its recent tours to Australia which included a test victory in one of the bounciest pitches in the world - Perth. So, let the pitches in NZ be green, but well prepared, and let's enjoy some good cricket. And please stop providing excuses BEFORE the series has even begun!!!

Posted by SearingYorker on (February 25 2009, 01:07 AM GMT)

So, Mark, did BCCI beg in Wellington or did NZC grovel in Delhi? BCCI wanted additional matches to compensate for the Pak series. Simple economics suggests NZC stands to gain when BCCI is the one requesting. In fact, if anything, NZC could have bargained for a 3-0 test, 2-0 T20 and 5-0 ODI whitewash (greenwash?) if BCCI was concerned about its revenues and losses. Trust me, there'd be many more happy campers in the visiting team if they see green pitches than there would be in the home team - or do you really suggest Broom, Elliott, Taylor, Guptill and Ryder would fare better on such pitches when compared to Sehwag, Gambhir, Yuvraj, Tendulkar and Dhoni? The only reason NZ won in 2002 was because they won the toss in tests and had Shane Bond at peak speed and fitness. None of the NZ batsmen came to terms with the pitches. India were hopeless on those pitches but we know who's got to the #2 position in world cricket since then, don't we? Or were all matches played in India for 6 yrs?

Posted by One_Religion_Cricket on (February 25 2009, 00:41 AM GMT)

All countries prepare doctored pitches. So be it. The only difference is that NZ themselves have a lot of trouble playing their own pitches. Kind of defeats the purpose.

Posted by bhelgarh on (February 25 2009, 00:05 AM GMT)

I am sure Mr.Mark Richardson you already know what will be the outcome of the Mathces. So you are making the lame excuses in advance that why New Zealand will lose the series. You are certainly not aware of the prowess of Ishant Sharma and Zaheer Khan. You have no idea how Inida has transformed under the leadership of M.S.Dhoni. But don't worry, you will be in no illusion when the matches start. Mark you have a right to stay ignorant though.

Posted by is0587 on (February 24 2009, 23:45 PM GMT)

I wanted to compliment Mr Richardson, which I forgot to do in my last post. Mr. Richardson, you are a genius. You have created a perfect win win situation. If NZ wins, its 5 thumbs up! But if India wins, credit goes to Kiwi hospitality for being great hosts. Well done! I really envy your imaginative preparation of excuses.

Posted by fununlimited on (February 24 2009, 23:43 PM GMT)

Bravo Mr. Richardson. If New Zealand wins, well good job and well played. If India wins, oh that is only because of the friendly conditions offered to them and because NZ played at half strength to please them. Now I have no problem accepting that the Indian team was embarrassed in 2003 but I am quite certain not even the supporters of New Zealand would appreciate those kinds of short test matches on green tops. How about competitive pitches like in Australia? Wasn't that an option? Did it have to be one extreme or the other? I find your "keeping your boss happy" analogy disgusting. It implies that the Kiwis would play a weak game just to make sure India doesn't stop touring.

Posted by Down_Under on (February 24 2009, 23:32 PM GMT)

sa08366- I hope you're not generalizing as Aussie are very good folks. I understand the behaviour of Ricky and some of the players is not acceptable over the last few years, but the Aussies can not be judged based on the behaviour of these hand full of guys..

Posted by Down_Under on (February 24 2009, 23:28 PM GMT)

Junoonis, I am not sure what prompted you the write what you wrote. Are you out of your mind? If I have to take a guess then you don't really watch cricket and just come here once in a while and check the stats of players. You may need to ask Ponting the Best and KP the maestro on Ishant and Zaheer. Zaheer may not have too attractive stat as he admited he was never been able to justify his talent mainly due to the fitness issue until he got a stint at English County Cricket a year ago. He is entirely different bowler now then he was before. I compare Ishant with Mitchel Johnson, a quick learner with enormas talent. In short this Indian team is very very good team, although I will not rank him at Top just yet. They will have to defeat SA in SA.. On Mark Richardson's column, I think he is joking to say more politely. Didn't Windies just play on the wickets that weren't lively atall? Didn't Aussie played there not too long ago on about the same wickets?

Posted by TamilIndian on (February 24 2009, 23:22 PM GMT)

I would have advised Mark to just check the latest Test and ODI rankings before writing - which someone rightly pointed out undermines both the teams/officials involved.

Posted by johnfrancis on (February 24 2009, 22:45 PM GMT)

Suprisingly my previous comment did not get posted, wanted to see if this one does.

Posted by is0587 on (February 24 2009, 22:26 PM GMT)

In competitions, there's no such thing as keeping the opponent "happy". That takes away the concept of "competition". New Zealand needs pitches fit for international cricket, which was not the case back in 2002, rather than pitches that suit the Indians. I would love to see India win but not because they were appeased with nice friendly surfaces. Lets accept for a second that India cannot handle the green wickets and are scared. And NZ again "stitches" them with totals that never exceed 250-300 and games never last a second over 2-3 days, would you want a dull series like that? I certainly wouldn't be wasting my valuable time watching that. If you really think you need to please the boss, lets have competitive pitches that are fit for international cricket. Make NZ cricket more interesting, make the games last. Stop this appeasement and "making the boss happy" business.

Posted by vip76 on (February 24 2009, 22:00 PM GMT)

This article can be defined in one simple phrase 'Funny but not hilarious' One of the most silly reasoning article I have ever read. A question for cricinfo... do you have a dearth of writers who can present better articles than this one...

Posted by soumyaparida on (February 24 2009, 21:08 PM GMT)

Going by this article, all the playing countries are bound to make India friendly pitches. And so you expect India to win almost all matches henceforth. I suspect Mark is just putting on a disclaimer in case NZ faces something similar to Australia. NZ has always been a great cricket team, regardless of how the Inidans are playing right now, NZ & SA always gave me worries. There is something in these 2 teams India doesnt quite decipher. Even if I am an Indian, playing against SA I expect SA to win and NZ would be 50-50. And be sure Mark, whether India loses or wins, we still put in the money to it. Because we love Cricket.

Posted by vparisa on (February 24 2009, 21:06 PM GMT)

Richardson you are joking..aren't you? Agreed that India lost badly in 2002 in both tests and odi but exactly a month later, the same Indian team sent the kiwis home packing in the World Cup (Super Six encounter) on a wicket which equally supported bat and ball. NZ still did not cross 200 in that match. What India lacked in 2002 was in the bowling department. No team crossed 200 in the 2 tests. NZ had one of the best fast bowlers called Shane Bond and Indians were playing without srinath and Zak was relatively in experienced. Things have changed since then, India won their tests in South Africa(New Wanderers) and Australia(Perth) on wickets that were considered the fastest pitches in the world. India beat England in seaming conditions as well. With good batting conditions this time around, New Zealand cricket has done a favour to themselves. If it were green tops i would give India 3-0 and I bet black caps would not have crossed 200 in any of the tests. yours is a biased article

Posted by Dr.D on (February 24 2009, 21:05 PM GMT)

Mr. Richardson makes a good point. NZ cricket players and officials perhaps are not as patriotic as the Australlians. Great NZ players like Stephen Fleming, Scott Styris, Shane Bond, etc, have left for more money to play in india for IPL and ICL, respectively. Whereas Australlian Captain and Vice Captain, Ricky Ponting, and Michael Clarke have put their country first and have declined to play for IPL this year in order to prepare for the Australlian team tours. If a player/s or an organization can be disloyal or "sell out" their country for money, what else are they willing to do. It really makes you wonder about what really transpired in 2002. What was the reason behind building below standard pitches? is it because NZ criket wanted money from the big boss (indian cricket) to build better pitches or build up the bowling stats of their mediocre bowling line up against a strong batting side (like india's), in order to gain some publicity and acknolegement.

Posted by Gareth_Griffis on (February 24 2009, 20:46 PM GMT)

To all the Indian fans: Please don't say that NZ is lining up excuses for losing. MARK RICHARDSON is lining up excuses for losing, not New Zealand. As for the pitches, NZ should be providing green ones. We are a green country, it rains a lot, our pitches are always green. If NZ prepares flat tracks with no help for the seamers, then we might as well have just played in India. It is good to have some different pitches around the world, so long as they are better than the 2002 tour. Those pitches weren't green, they were poorly prepared.

Posted by Bumpster on (February 24 2009, 20:31 PM GMT)

This article gives me the impression that NZ is ruled by money and that India pays NZ cricket wages. Surely this is not true? In 2002 when NZ won, they had Bond as the spearhead of their attack. 7 years later...India are a more complete unit and have two bowlers who can swing it. I dont see NZ giving any trouble to India and i dont think money has anything to do with it. if it did, then what mark Richardson is hinting at (a weakness in morality from NZ cricket) is true. And obviously thats silly as NZ are a very sporting and good nation.

Posted by Adhil.mothie on (February 24 2009, 20:25 PM GMT)

A poor piece by mark,is he saying,nz will rather take the money instead of using every weapon to beat ind,thats rubbish,asusual we will shoot ourselves in the foot & miss a trick here yet again like we did in aus to draw the chappell-hadlee trophy so that we dont give ourselves a great chance of winning the series.are you going to get green pitches in ind.LIKE HELL! so why not go with green wickets.if we get bowld out for 90,so what? is india going to make 500,LIKE HELL.if they do than luck is with them.nz tactics have definitly faded

Posted by omarkhan78 on (February 24 2009, 19:46 PM GMT)

What difference does it make if the pitches assist fast bowlers or spinners? If you cant win with your playing 11 then you are not a better team....

Posted by Thames on (February 24 2009, 19:44 PM GMT)

"...However Messrs Tendulkar, Dravid and Co can rest easy this time round... Why? Well, because New Zealanders and New Zealand cricket understand who pays the wages nowadays and this tour for the Black Caps is very much the scenario of playing your boss at golf. You need to put up a good account for yourself if..." - this takes away the credit from all the players who train hard and give their best for their country - Indians or Black Caps. As far I can see, the author has indirectly questioned the current NZ team's ability to match India, trying to prove something else. There were some good observations, but wrongly phrased.

Posted by sa08366 on (February 24 2009, 19:34 PM GMT)

New Zealanders come across to most Indians as very decent, sporting, well-mannered, hospitable people and cricketers. Unlike with the Aussies, it is very easy to like them! So regardless of the controversies generated (including this article), I think that impression will always stand.

Posted by FAnon on (February 24 2009, 19:06 PM GMT)

How odd. Its acceptable and justifiable to produce seaming bouncy fast grass covered tracks but not slow spinning bare ones. Not coincidentally one set is manly, a test of courage, and intrinsically Western, the other insidious treacherous and Oriental - yet another petty narrative of the Orientalist discourse that pervades cricket. Pathetic really, not being able to play lowly and underhanded spin, which takes real skill. Think Laxman, Tendulkar, Dravid, Lara, Vaughan, Ponting, Pieterson etc etc.

Posted by SSRajan on (February 24 2009, 18:48 PM GMT)

Nonsense article. It is condescending, patronising an downright insulting to indian cricket. The only reason you want a flatter pitch is not because india pays the wages, but because if you prepare a pitch that is 50% of what it was before, your batsmen are simply not good enough to handle india's pace bowling attack. May be harbhajan will not even get a bowl. So face realities and stop insulting other people.

Posted by StJohn on (February 24 2009, 18:14 PM GMT)

One or two of the comments complain about "the home side [NZ] starting with an unfair advantage". That's a wee bit rich coming from Indian fans where your own home pitches give you a bit of an advantage too and visiting teams need some time to get used to them. The better analysis, picked up by one or two comments, is that it is preferable to have a more balanced battle between bat and ball. Clearly the ball won outright last time round and the matches were too one-sided (in favour of bowlers) as a result. India are stronger now than 6 years ago and NZ are weaker. Let's see what happens on the field and leave it at that!

Posted by saffronfury on (February 24 2009, 18:10 PM GMT)

Have you considered that -unlike in 2002- India is considered to have the best pace attack in the world, and hence NZ Cricket is shying away from the prairie pitches?

Posted by Manzar_Alam on (February 24 2009, 18:09 PM GMT)

I dont agree with most points by Richard, by most Indians took it too personal... India never made so called sporty wickets so which most of them are crying in this article, always underprepared spin wickets.. every nation has right to prepare whatever pitch they think help them to win, and reg Indian performace in Perth and all dont forget that it all happened when wickets were at its best for batting and second no McGrath and Shane Warne on last tour... No doubt Indian batting lineup is always been great but struggled in seaming conditions and firt time Indian got two fast bowlers Ishant and Zaheer and the way all Indians are thnking that they can blow up all batting line ups as they are the best bowlers ever... just wait and watch if NZ prepare seaming tracks India will lose...becuase Indian bowlers will not able to handle it and Indian batsman cant play anyways in these conditions....

Posted by Alexk400 on (February 24 2009, 17:46 PM GMT)

Patronizing india is a bad idea. NZ need to understand they do not have BOND there to remove indian openers. Vettori is clever captain. But do he have arsenals to match india. I doubt he has unless ross taylor mccullum and oram clicks and also hope few yopungsters clicks. I want NZ play tough not give an inch. Then only india respect and want to tour NZ. Green picth do not matter for india because they have sharma who can turn square with his inswingers on green pitch. I want every game to go to last ball. I hope Nz play to lose. That will be bad advertisement for Newzland.

Posted by AgileEntrepreneur on (February 24 2009, 17:33 PM GMT)

The wickets in 2002 were sub-standard as others have pointed out. Also even the New Zealand didn't do too well in their home conditions and doctored pitches - just one look at the abysmal scores tells the story. What's not so obvious from the scores is that New Zealand also won most of the tosses (including both tests) and chose to bowl first. This was a lucky break for them as batting last decidedly an advantage as you know the target you were chasing while the team batting first couldn't really set a reasonable target that couldn't be chased down with infinite time.

Posted by Kochikkaran on (February 24 2009, 17:21 PM GMT)

Wow, I didn't even bother to read this completely! What a thrash! Give us a green top and our bowling line up will rip through yours? remember SA preparing a green top for this bowling line up? They will never make that mistake as long as Zaheer is around! They will miss Sreesanth, but Ishant will more than make up for that. Add to it, Munaf and Irfan, I don't see even Australian's having a chance, let along NZ...

Posted by Junoonis on (February 24 2009, 16:35 PM GMT)

Most of Indians here are making a big deal about Ishant and zaheer opening bowling.. Are you out of your mind? zaheer is a mediocre bowler with average above 34 in test cricket. What is so special about his bowling? He bowled good in couple of matches and that's about it. Ishant on the other hand is a good future prospect but at the moment, he is a average bowler with ordinary record in test and ODI's.

Posted by Sarat on (February 24 2009, 16:32 PM GMT)

I do not think Vettori, his team or any New Zealander would be happy to read this article. Mark is directly accusing them of being sold out to the money Indian Cricket brings in. Secondly he is concluding that Indian might beat NZ this team. Just as how India is very good to beat at Home, NZ is very good to beat at home too. Stop insulting your own country mate. If you ask NZ is still the favorites. At least in the test matches. Coming to pitches, Mark, do you really believe that NZ is making pitches to impress India (who is currently bringing in the most money). England and Australia were bringing in most of the money to Cricket in the last decade. So do you think Indians made seamer friendly pitches in the 80s and 90s to impress the Aussies and the English? Sledging is okay if it is done by players on the ground. Not by ex-players like Mark.

Posted by saffron_white_green on (February 24 2009, 16:19 PM GMT)

First, thanks to everyone of those who have come out in the unequivocal support for INDIA. I would like to shift it a level higher. Mark, you are absolutely right in narrating the woe tale of 2003. But, leave apart the different batting which is arriving, I personally as an ardent Indian fan am PRAYING that NZC dish out greener tracks than in 2003. Regardless of the batting strength India are bringing with them, the bowling attack in India is unimaginably better than the last one which arrived in NZ. I truly then would be eager to see which team goes back cribbing.

Posted by mevich on (February 24 2009, 16:16 PM GMT)

With NZC set to make so much money with every day of cricket being played in this series, it is inevitable that they see that the test matches last the distance and hence better pitches this time. Their advertising campaign for the series("Rockstars of Cricket") being a testament to this. Last time round you had Stephen Fleming yielding so much power in NZ cricket that he got what he wanted and that was to expose the chinks in the armor of the Indians-their susceptibility to swinging conditions. He was hell bent on winning and he knew he had the right ingredients in his team to win. Still by no means I support NZ to prepare such wretched pitches. But I just appreciate the fact that NZ was using home field adv. to the max in order to control a rampaging batting line up. It would've been exciting to see what happened if at all Fleming was the captain now. I'm sure he would not be as condescending , though preparing the pitches of 2002-03 would horribly expose his weak batting line-up.

Posted by DevChennai on (February 24 2009, 16:07 PM GMT)

Tough to give an adj. for an article that has made Mark more famous now than his BlackCap days. Even if we give the benefit of doubt to Mark for the intent, I fail to understand the economic connection & being nicer to Indian batsmen, when all the test playing nations follow the FTP, except when the tours are canceled for non-cricketing reasons. May be we can invite Mark to write for 1 last time, explaining the economic implications of IND getting battered by NZ this time too. Constant bickering from non-subcontinental teams on the Indian tracks that aid spin has inadvertently made Team India a better touring side that can win matches at Durban and Perth, but also give Jason Kreza a dream debut! The teams that crib always crib, no matter where they loose, HOME or AWAY! Tracks are FAIR ONLY when there's a balance between BAT and BALL. No matter whether the ball spins or seams. Does NZ wants to lick for money than win matches FAIRLY and get people into their stadia? 1k char not enough!

Posted by Cricket_Crazzy on (February 24 2009, 16:01 PM GMT)

Mark, like the previous commentor said, kudos to you for completely shattering the soft corner Indian fans have for Kiwi cricketers. Well, we won't let one rotten sulking apple (who couldn't be man enough to suck the pressures of international cricket long enough) spoil our impression of guys like Dan and Brendon.. Oh btw, we all saw how you rolled out the red (rather dry) carpet to Jerome Taylor, you commentated that game, didn't you Mark? Eat them apples..

Posted by Waikato_FC on (February 24 2009, 15:59 PM GMT)

There's a whole lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth in these comments! Rigger was a great opener, but his job is to engender debate and create controversy - it's what journos do, otherwise they're not doing their jobs ... What exactly is wrong with wanting to improve the conditions for both sides? - after the last tour was guilty of providing poor tracks and rubbish weather ... Yes NZ Cricket wants the money,Indian cricket has a lot and we have little, but that is a long way from the primary motivation, which is to show India and the cricketing world that we CAN compete on a world stage, and that we CAN provide sporting conditions ... So give it a rest boys and just enjoy the cricket!

Posted by thedaredevils on (February 24 2009, 15:46 PM GMT)

hello mark,why do you people get fussed up because india is becoming the powerhouse.Last time you people produced not pitches but grasslands .It was your meek way of winning.Such impotent and useless bowlers you had that time.When australia was winning everthing and controlled cricket in the 70s nobody complained.Why now?Why dont you people play some proper cricket rather than producing these horrible tracks.Why are you saying that new zealand in order to appease the BCCI will produce sporting wickets ?You and your horrible nation have not even a single player who averages more than 50 for atleat 10 years.Sachin tendulkar does not need to prove to sadists like you that he can play in seaming conditions.Have you forgotten the 100 he made in Wellington?Atleast try to give a fight to India and produce some sporting wickets.

Posted by tapanreddy on (February 24 2009, 15:44 PM GMT)

The highest score NZ amassed in 2002 was 247 the truth was that the pitches were seamer friendly and the scores tell story. In the second test NZ were bowled out for 94, need I say anymore? Sachin and Dravid got a half century in one inning and a 30 odd in another one averaging 25 and 34 respectively. India 161 and 121; New Zealand 247 and 36/0 India 99 and 154; New Zealand 94 and 160/6 Now Mr.Richardson who needs to run for cover? The scores say it all, you dont have to be ashamed of it as you seem to think. The truth is that this time around you dont want to prepare grassier pitches coz we have a better seam attack. I will bet my bottom dollar on the fact that we will win the series 3-0 if you prepare similar pitches as Zaheer and Ishant will rip through NZ batters! Enggh said I dint know that people can stoop to such levels!

Posted by Vkarthik on (February 24 2009, 15:14 PM GMT)

NZ team is generally liked especially guys like Vettori. But this Mark single-handedly has managed to generate animosity towards his team from large section of Indian fans.

Posted by jeswant on (February 24 2009, 15:09 PM GMT)

Mark, we Indians are fanatical about our cricketers and anything remotely critical about them is often not received well! I totally agree with you that our guys are likely to have a much better time this time around thanks to the money involved in cricket in India.I agree with Mark on most of the issues discussed but it may not be fair to be unduly critical about the performance the last time they were there because the pitches were not worthy of test cricket and probably last time too, like now the Indian board did not insist on enough warm up matches to get used to the conditions.The Indian board if they wanted could hire grounds in New Zealand and get even local test players to bowl to them for weeks to get used to conditions because the board can pay them the kind of money the NZ cricketers can only dream about.However an inept set of administrators ensure that the same mistakes are repeated and therefore the home team starts with an unfair advantage.

Posted by Sportz_Freak on (February 24 2009, 14:53 PM GMT)

Hilarious. Loving this. the so called slightest slight regarding indian cricket and all the trolls come out. Lets ignore the fact that most of what Richardson said was true. Yes india did win in a few places most noticably perth but what no one mentions was that it was not a green seaming wicket. It was "supposed" to be one but was far from it. Also, ishant et al may be really good pacers but to swing it in COLD wintry windy conditions is different from swinging it elsewhere. Lastly, the last time India encountered a REAL pacy wicket. Dale Steyn and company (the worlds best pace attack) blew them away inside one session.

Posted by pathan1 on (February 24 2009, 14:47 PM GMT)

By removing grass, the pitches are doctored to slow them down reducing bounce and movement off the pitch. Now this wouldn't be because India have a much more potent pace attack than NZ at the moment, would it ? Oh no, its actually because NZC doesn't want to offend the visitors by actually beating them. Why not just hand them the victory trophy and spare us condescending speeches ?

Posted by vik_ster on (February 24 2009, 14:35 PM GMT)

Mr. Richardson first puts up excuse for NZC not being able to make good wickets last tour: *weather So he does cover up for NZC. Now that weather is good this time of the year, he doesn't think that could in general be the reason for getting good wickets? Where does money come into picture? I have to agree i quite enjoyed Mr. Richardson's innings in those two tests that season. But then with such green wickets, the toss too probably played an important part. In both games Newzealand won the toss and elected to field first. But win is a win, but if i were from Newzealand we would rather brag about holding the aussies to a draw in a test series in australia rather than bragging about how we showed someone good in Newzealand. For all its worth, india would rather tout their victory in Perth last year more than the series win against australia in india. Also with such green wickets matches can go anyway..all you need is lasith malinga to show someone real good...whats money got to do???

Posted by bigbang on (February 24 2009, 14:23 PM GMT)

No one disagrees that the Indian board sets scruples aside when it stands to gain. The way it acted in the Zimbabwe issue was shameful. Having said that, I cannot help but feel that this piece is a rather simplistic deconstruction of reality. To declare that the NZ board is going to prepare pitches that help the visiting team is insulting to both NZC and BCCI. It is a surprising statement, coming from an ex-cricketer. The golf example implies that India lose, no matter what the outcome of the series! I am sure Vettori would disagree with the author's pronouncements as vehemently as Dhoni, if they happen to lay their eyes on this piece.

Posted by andy2000 on (February 24 2009, 14:12 PM GMT)

Firstly, after reading this article I wonder if the author had the same mentality ('playing the boss at golf') when he was an opening batsman for NZ. No wonder they kicked out this lame boss sucking fool out of the squad. Secondly, this article tries to make excuses for NZ team in case they lose. Now, as far as genuine cricket lovers are concerned, nobody likes to see their national side lose, but to comprehend that they lost only to earn some riches or to make the Indian side to tour more frequently is likened to betrayal of your nation by your own army. Also, apart from the pitches and conditions, the main factor to decide this series will be experience. India has everyone except Ganguly (Kumble didn't play in 2002 series). NZ have lost the likes of Astle,Fleming,Mcmillan,Bond,Tuffey,Styris.What are their chances of winning, despite the notions about pleasing the boss or not, preparing greentops or 'brown dry carpet' or that NZ is the windiest place in the world.

Posted by AsherCA on (February 24 2009, 14:11 PM GMT)

If Mark Richardson is to be believed, NZC have already decided to chuck matches to India in order to "keep the boss happy". ICC anti-corruption squad, are you reading ? If Mark's comments are unfounded, NZC would do well to sue him & Cricinfo for publishing this drivel. If NZC is unwilling /unable to sue, it means the charges are appropriate, in which case, ICC should take appropriate action against NZC. Cricinfo moderators of course have the option suppressing this post from me since it calls a spade a spade.

Posted by esarun on (February 24 2009, 14:07 PM GMT)

If it's a ploy to unsettle the Indians by engaging in that great antipodean tradition of 'psychologica warfare' then it's a cheap tactic. Did Richardson ever make a significant contribution to NZ cricket during his brief career as player? I think not. But now that he's far removed from the actual battlefield, it's so easy to call the bravery of these Indians into question. Indians under Dhoni play with a steely resolve. The New Zealanders will soon see that slights such as these will not be taken lightly.

Posted by rajesh51 on (February 24 2009, 14:03 PM GMT)

I agree that India doesn't tour New Zealand as much as they tour Australia. But that's not because of the bowler friendly conditions as you say. Tours to AUS are more marketable than tours to NZ. NZ lacks big names in the team to generate interest in Indian public (But they are very good as a unit). Big names like KP, flitoff, Hayden, Ponting, Jayasuriya, Smith etc. make the series with their teams more marketable. NZ had Bond, who is still worshiped by all my friends. But unfortunately lost him to ICL. McCullum is the biggest name in present NZ team.

Posted by SearingYorker on (February 24 2009, 13:27 PM GMT)

OK, so what's the real problem Mark? Do you want a piece of the IPL pie? Or do you feel India shouldn't have defeated your cousins in the CB series, not humbled them at Perth (none of which, by the way, your illustrious nation has been able to achieve)? I mean, come on, this coming from an international cricketer? Is that what John Bracewell discussed with you in team meetings? If so, I must say NZ cricket is in a sorry mess. India got bowled out for 66 and 100 in Durban and walloped the Saffers in Jo'burg on a similar wicket. India's record at Headingley and <pick your fav Aussie ground> was nightmarish and we've still beaten the English and Aussies fair and square (inspite of Mark Benson, Bucknor and the likes) in their own backyard. I would say NZ better prepare seaming, yo-yo wickets otherwise you remember the treatment Sehwag meted out to your bowlers in the last ODI series, right? This time, he has Yuvraj, Dhoni and Gambhir for company - and oh, the small matter of the Master.

Posted by KiQass on (February 24 2009, 13:12 PM GMT)

Looks like Mr Richardson is expecting NZ to lose and is giving excuses already. Pitches that support not only seamers but batting and spin also are called sporting pitches, and from reading this report, looks like NZ has just learnt how to make sporting pitches. Also I havn't heard of other countries where India toured in the past year pandering to them like this. Does this mean for the right price NZ will 'roll over' and 'play dead' like a good dog?

Posted by Anwarrior on (February 24 2009, 13:02 PM GMT)

I'm from pakistan and I rarely follow an india-new zealand game or series, in effect i'm much more attracted by an india-australia or india-pakistan series but after reading this article full of bad taste written by mr mark, i'll surely follow this series and hope that india win all of their games! a white wash in tests, odis and twenty20... after all, as mr mark said, NZ players are more interested in money than in playing and winning cricket games...

Posted by omarkc on (February 24 2009, 12:47 PM GMT)

if india can make pitches like kanpur 2008 to shamelessly do anything to win matches why cant new zealand simply continue their tradition of producing seamer friendly wicket. whtever happened to good old home advantage? if india didnt make sure their pitches dont offer anything to the oppositioin they wouldnt be the third ranked team in the world right now. when india was an extremely mediocre team in the 90s and 80s they were still winning at home, just goes on to show you how much home advantage some sides can achieve just by making pitches that load the game in their favour

Posted by cricfan06 on (February 24 2009, 12:44 PM GMT)

pretty bad article..very controversial. I would say, last time, india were outplayed...this time, may be different.. but to say that NZ is preparing nice wickets just to attract india back is ludicrous.. may as well accuse them of match fixing..i.e india won't come back if they lose, so lets jst lose so we can benefit from a $20m pay out next year too.

Posted by thatsy on (February 24 2009, 12:30 PM GMT)

No matter how this article may seem, I would - as a cricket supporter - want NZ (& others) to prepare pitches however they want to. After all, they should have the home advantage. More grass, more seam/pace friendly - do whatever it takes, just get it to your liking & conditions your players can exploit. I fully support this, just don't over-do it. A side-track to this would be staging test matches in neutral venues. Eg: IND & ENG play in RSA or AUS, just to see how teams fare in conditions not favourable to either.

Posted by sreeg on (February 24 2009, 12:28 PM GMT)

Mr.Mark, first of all, the Indian batting is different from what it was before. Please dont call it seamer friendly pitches in 2003. They were lousy tracks. If india or pakistan had prepared such pitches, NZ would have gone home complaining and cribbing. Second of all, look what we did to Aussie recently in perth where they claimed it's seamer friendly pitch. When Aussie lost ponting complained that the pitch is no longer the same. Looks like the Kiwis have cooked up their execuses already. And good job at that. Thirdly, the current NZ team don't have the batters or bowlers who have proved on these so called seamer friendly pitches. Finally, these articles can please the NZ readers (no offence to them). Indian fans are well aware of Kiwi record at home and away, and we know what to expect

Posted by mrgupta on (February 24 2009, 12:24 PM GMT)

I feel sad, does Mr. Richardson mean that NZ play Cricket just to earn Money rather than to Win matches and have some glory for their country? Does he mean that NZ are the brighter student in the class who has to forfeit his good marks so that a Rich classmate can give him money and top the class instead of him? Can he please check the test records of NZ and India and see that since Jan 2003 NZ has won Away tests only against Bang and Zim and India won test against every country. Does he mean that all the Indian wins abroad were due to the fact that Aus, SA, Eng etc were trying to please us? Is that why Aussies lost at Perth, English and WI lost the Series to us? Mr. Richardson, Cricket is not played for Money, its a Great Sport, i request you to please not to malign it.

Posted by mooney55 on (February 24 2009, 12:24 PM GMT)

There's a difference between preparing "seamer-friendly wickets" and just plain bad wickets just as there is one between "spin-friendly wickets" and "underprepared wickets." While some Indian nationalists may appreciate the latter, many do not. Richardson comes across a plain ol' NZ-nationalist. Secondly, India has not toured New Zealand much at all since 1968 (the first tour). There was a gap of 9 years between 1981 and 1990 and 8 years between 1968 and 1976. If you remove the one test in 1994, then there was another eight year gap between 1990 and 1998. Thirdly, why do New Zealanders care so much about India touring them? If Indian cricket is that obnoxious, then do without them. It's been only *seven* years since the last tour, after all. Fourthly, it is a stretch to say that Indian batsmen were "humiliated" in 2002. A humiliation is when your batsmen don't do well but the opposition scores at will. That's not what happened in that series where the best innings score was 247.

Posted by PPRK on (February 24 2009, 12:18 PM GMT)

Slysta, the Australian: (They know that India would have returned much sooner than this had they experienced good batting wickets last time, rather than embarrassment!) Like what India did to Australia at Perth? And what was that? A batting wicket? Where Australia were 15/3 at one stage and their wannabe great batsman was made to look like a beginner by..... well, a beginner!!

Posted by vissu295 on (February 24 2009, 12:12 PM GMT)

Very interesting observation! But sentences like "embarassing this powerful cricket nation" are definitely written in poor taste and no wonder you got such responses from my fellow Indians.

Posted by Parth_Pala on (February 24 2009, 12:05 PM GMT)

How is it that after India beat South Africa on their bounciest fastest pitch, beat Aussies at the WACA again bouncy and seaming, beat England in Nottingham their most notorious pitch, that people wonder we don't thrive on green tops? This side is completely different to the one that toured in 2002, its been five years people. Indians and the Indian team more specifically want green tops, have you seen the bowling lineup recently? I mean come on we are one of the two best opening pairs in the world. It would be ridiculous to suggest India can't compete. Even IF Bond was in the lineup it wouldn't make much difference (p.s he chose to quit NZC cause of bad pay not cause of Indian pressure no board would allow rebel leagues , why is when the English and Australians did it against Kerry Packer it was not hypocritical and pushing their weight around?). Point is NZ can't compete with this Indian pace lineup it would be stupid for them to prepare green tops, and not cause of the BCCi.

Posted by SriramNatarajan on (February 24 2009, 12:02 PM GMT)

India did not lose to just NZ but they used to lose to every other team in away matches. The whole world knew India were poor travellers. If Mark's theory is true, then cricket's much more money starved nations like SriLanka should not have provided spinning pitches in the recent Ind-SL series. If that is the reason why NZC is changing the pitch conditions then one must pity the future of NZC. Indian batting line up has always been star studded and they are always in pressure. Now the state of NZ cricket is such that NZ should play golf-with-boss game with all the test playing nations and Mark Richardson should keep on writing this article for some more years.

Posted by thedoctorinbeijing on (February 24 2009, 12:00 PM GMT)

Well, its economics why there's been a 6 year gap in touring New Zealand. It really doesn't make much economic sense for the BCCI. The timing of the matches played there doesn't suit India where going by the last tour's experience, most of the matches got over before majority of the viewers got off the bed. Needless to say, this doesn't draw a bee line of advertisers wanting their ads placed where no one will see. In turn fetches less revenue for the TV channels who with experience bid a lot lesser for New Zealand tours. Scenario changes quite a bit when pitches ensure that there is some fight by the Indians, Test matches go beyond the 3rd day and ODIs don't finish before 6 AM Indian Standard Time. People might get to watch it, unlike last time. Soyeah, the humiliation of the Top 6 does come at a certain price.

Posted by plumbunion on (February 24 2009, 11:54 AM GMT)

Nice article. Indeed in 2002, the powerful Indian batting line-up was humbled. Their frailties against the seaming ball were horribly exposed. It is also true that NZ won the toss in all but of the games that it won (and on each occasion except one, Fleming put India in). All except one match was close with NZ losing at least half its side chasing modest totals. No batsman from either team scored a century in the tests. Only the author of this piece averaged over 40 in the tests, courtesy a typically hard fought 89 and a not out innings (the next best was Dravid with an average of 32 from either side). In its next tour that year, India beat every team except Australia to make the finals of the ODI world cup. It is mere conjecture to speculate the results if India had won a few more tosses and put NZ in. More importantly, it certainly didn't make for entertaining cricket. I hope we don't see a repeat this time.

Posted by Golandaaz on (February 24 2009, 11:50 AM GMT)

So NZ puts more emphasis on money than country. They are willing to gamble the win in return for monetary riches. Mr Richardson implies that NZ have a better chance of winning on green tops but they will forego that opportunity in favor of Indian money. So this piece is really critical of NZ cricket. Wow! hats off to him. It takes courage to admit this in the age of IPL bashing. Anyone thought the 2-3 day tests in 2002 were a good advertisement for test cricket? This also explains why New Zealand has a losing record against Australia-England. They were the bosses for so long. Now expect NZ to have winning records against them. NZC should take offense to this article. For India it is a sign that NZ is already lining up excuses, thought I believe its anyones series, green top or not

Posted by Slysta on (February 24 2009, 11:25 AM GMT)

The Indian reaction to this article is just bizarre - I am Australian, and I think Mark Richardson is spot-on. He points out that India are much stronger than NZ in most conditions (obvious), and that NZ's best chance would lie in greentops a la 2002-03 (also true). Yes, India have Zaheer and Ishant this time, but can they use the conditions as well as the NZ guys who have grown up in them? Maybe, maybe not - but we won't find out this time! NZ will prepare wickets India considers "fair", no matter what disadvantage to NZ, because NZ Cricket knows it can't afford another 6-7 year gap before India returns again. (They know that India would have returned much sooner than this had they experienced good batting wickets last time, rather than embarrassment!) Nowhere does he suggest match-fixing or anything like it. His only criticism of India is that its famed top six was outshone by their NZ counterparts on green pitches last time, which is a fair and accurate assessment.

Posted by PPRK on (February 24 2009, 11:20 AM GMT)

To BobsSexyTime That bit about Shane Bond is a dubious argument. NZC did nothing to keep him interested nor did they do enough to retain him. Hence he went to the ICL. To blame it on the BCCI is to make excuses for the incompetence of the NZC who, incidentally, Mark R worked for! (or so you claim).

Posted by sandyman on (February 24 2009, 11:00 AM GMT)

It is very interesting ploy Mark has tried here. It is a clever way of negotiating inevitable into your own favour! It will be a win-win situation for NZ, either way!! Though I'm not familiar with the political scenario of New Zealand but Mark will make a very good politician, hands down! It is unfortunate that he tried cricket first!

Posted by Roys11 on (February 24 2009, 10:59 AM GMT)

I still remember the thrashing which India got in New Zealnd.But dont forget one thing Mr Mark Richardson,the tears in the eyes of your captain Stephen Fleming when India thrashed them and kicked them out of world cup 03.Remember that match in South Africa...I think that tour really changed Inidan mentality in approaching pace and made them a much better team in seamer friendly conditions.Ecept for 2 tests in South Africa and 3 tests in Australia India has not lost a test match in seamer friendly conditions.

Posted by PrasBNG on (February 24 2009, 10:49 AM GMT)

Well well Mr. Richardson! You've certainly set my train of thought racing. You certainly have a point. No denying that the Indian board is one of (if not the most) richest boards in the sporting world. But hark! before we all get set to go on this joy-ride on BCCIs money-muscle bandwagon, pray enlighten us - if India indeed had that kind of power to make other cricketing nations kow-tow to it, why does the Indian team have such a dismal record in the holy grail of cricket - the world cup!? All India has to show since the glory days of 1983 is one final and two semi-final appearances. NZ has done better in most editions of the world cup. And now, all of a sudden, the wise men of NZC wake up and decide to favor the visitors with benign playing conditions? Sorry Mr. Richardson, it doesn't fit in. Even allowing for creative license, it boggles the mind to realize the implications of what you're saying. The ghost of match-fixing is yet to be laid to rest completely.Don't awaken it!

Posted by TheDoctor394 on (February 24 2009, 10:26 AM GMT)

Don't worry, Mr Richardson. :-) I'm not sure how much of this I agree with, but I hardly think this is horribly biased or terrible journalism or... well... anything else so many bewildering readers have said. It's an interesting article at the very least, and does give some food for thought.

Posted by Sridhu on (February 24 2009, 10:20 AM GMT)

Naughty article. Smells a bit too; why India's economic power should dictate the pitch conditions is not very clear. It is also very close to accusing cricket NZ of match-fixing. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you! This purported inability of the Indian batsmen to play on green tops is a myth that has been regularly demolished in every country right from the 70s. What the Indian batsmen are capable of is committing harakiri and that does not require any specific assistance from the pitch. It is somewhat like the lemmings - they all just decide to jump off the cliff en masse. Normally this behaviour is interspersed with some sublime showing on either side. This is not unique to Indian either - Pakistan, SriLanka, South Africa, England & of late, Australia are all guilty. Now, Mark, you couldnt lose whatever happens. That having been said, do you really want to see both teams score below 100 and have matches finish in under 3 days?

Posted by sachin420 on (February 24 2009, 10:20 AM GMT)

ok here we go, still in state of denial.... come on guyz is it really that hard to swallow that teams from sub continent can beat australia, england or new zealand in their own backyard????? new zealand is not laying green wickets because their bowling attack cant keep up with zaheer and ishant..... even india's change bowler munaf patel is better than new zealand's main bowler. Great teams dont find excuses like bad pitches or weather, they find a reason to win. india was outplayed last time period. remember the wickets last time were portable. they were prepared out of the ground, it was some synthetic crap. if india didn't touch 200 then how many times did new zealand crossed 200 ????? its not like new zealand beat india very comfortably, they had very tough time competing in their home grounds. bottom line..... india has the best new ball pair and probably the second best bowling attack after SA. do your research before you give your fingers any trouble.

Posted by concerned_cricketer on (February 24 2009, 10:05 AM GMT)

Nice attempt Mr Richardson. I haven't read a more badly disguised anticipatory bail application :-). Even Bangladesh and Zimbabwae were braver than this. Considering the beating that all countries except saffers have taken from India in the recent times it's not rocket science to know that New Zealand are very likely to be beaten black and blue. After all it is the land of fantastic men like Hadlee and Chatfield. There is no need to offer any excuses - it will never be because NZ are any lesser than any other team but because of the large amounts of money available to Indian cricket to use towards developing a strong team and a willingness on the part of it's once incompetent administrators to select talented players from all parts of a huge country of more than 1200 million people. So there's no shame in being beaten by India. NZ curretly does not have the talent to challenge the current Indian team. Don't worry. You will only be laughed at if you go down without a fight. Good Luck.

Posted by sidgupta on (February 24 2009, 09:56 AM GMT)

For Ralph_McTell... why dont you look at the comments, read them clearly, understand the sentences and then make your comment. No one says that you should not prepare pitches that suit the home team. But its the whole idea that NZ would not prepare the same pitches as of 02-03 series simply because they want India to tour again is bizarre. Talking abt the pitches prepared in 02-03 series it must be said that you just shouldn't prepare a pitch that finishes a Test match in 2 days. What happened in Mumbai in 04 was also criticized heavily. Comments like "They were dispatched and sent packing. They were laughed at, ridiculed, and their bravery brought into question." are in poor taste. So please read the article again and see what its saying.

Posted by sachin_sachin on (February 24 2009, 09:56 AM GMT)

The boss analogy was hilarious. I hope NZ don't play cricket the way Mark writes his articles. Mark - You are FIRED.

Posted by Matt_in_London on (February 24 2009, 09:47 AM GMT)

Have you guys even read the article? He's not saying NZ are better players, he's saying that the pitch conditions were created to nullify the indian batsmen (which it did). It's obvious that india won't want to come to NZ if they get ill-suited conditions and get beaten: hence why pitches will be different this time. India makes up 2/3rds of cricket's worldwide revenue. This tour is very important financially for NZ cricket.

Posted by swami_psg on (February 24 2009, 09:45 AM GMT)

Yet another poor article by Mark! What is not understandable is India has played better than any other country in the last 2-3 years in Australia, South Africa and England which are genuinely seamer friendly conditions. Also not to mention the under prepared New Zealand pitches in which Chris Cairns got banana curved in-cutters which he can't normally produce in condition other than New Zealand. In all, Mark has pessimistically defended New Zealand just in case New Zealand gets beaten badly. Nice try - but pathetic!

Posted by agniupadhyay on (February 24 2009, 09:45 AM GMT)

Mark that was a valiant attempt to create a win-win situation for your team, if they win you can brag more, if they lose you would say, read my obnoxious article, they are victims of non-cricket issues! Grow Up, Mark! India is a very good team, and New Zealand had always been tough opponents, especially in their own backyard. Anyone can win. As cricket afficiandos we would want good cricket.And stop being stupidly sarcastic and surreptitiously sensational. It would get you nowhere. I hope you surely know what that means.

Posted by BobsSexyTime on (February 24 2009, 09:42 AM GMT)

It's kind of ironic that Indians are going on about how much stronger their pace attack is...well, how about if NZ had Shane Bond? The very cricketer who is banned from playing international cricket by NZC because of pressure from the BCCI. Doesn't that prove Marks point? NZ's best player can't even play because of pressure from the BCCI!

Posted by BobsSexyTime on (February 24 2009, 09:40 AM GMT)

Didn't NZ win the first test in 2002 by ten wickets? That's a hiding no matter how bad the pitch was. To be honest, the pitch is no worse than the current pitch in the SL-PAK game were a 1100 runs have been scored at the loss of 11 wickets. AS for the people taking shots at Richardsons cricketing pedigree...he's a former test opener that averaged in the mid-40's. Often on seaming wickets. That's a lot better than anyone here, and he's a lot more qualified to comment on NZC than anyone here...he did work for them remember.

Posted by gripusa on (February 24 2009, 09:31 AM GMT)

ha ha ha, i loved it, great way to express ur feelings, yes i would love to see our sub continent players going there and prove themselves that they can play in green top pitches (because for all my indian friends, greatness just does not come with so much runs ,it also come with adaptability and i remember dravid did play couple of good innings which proved that you got to be technical sound to play in such games).

Posted by Alex72 on (February 24 2009, 09:29 AM GMT)

Cheap Opening Shot Mr Richardson!

Posted by deysk on (February 24 2009, 09:25 AM GMT)

Good Joke Mark! Keep it up! We want to listen more from you after the upcoming series!

Posted by usmanfcs on (February 24 2009, 09:22 AM GMT)

I for one gree with what he wrote, i mean as a host u have the right to prepare the pitches that are in your best interest. Thats what they did in 2002 and it worked but he is making the point that the amount of money that the turing indian side attracts is huge so what if they stop visiting nzl in future because of 'very' batting conditions? its a valid point. he is not saying that they are throwing games, they are making conditions friendly enough for indian batsman to survive, else a backlash from BCCI will be inevitable. cudos to him for saying things out loud that most of us are afraid to say anyways...

Posted by EddieFreddie on (February 24 2009, 09:16 AM GMT)

Mr. Richardson, Any one who has played or seen any cricket will tell you the conditions of the pitches last time India visited. Being an ex-international cricketer, these comments are uncalled for and insensitive. Now even if India wins fair and square, you already have a reason. I was looking forward for this series and now after reading your article, even India wins you have taked away the charm out of it.

Posted by kavalier on (February 24 2009, 09:09 AM GMT)

Hey guys!! Dont get worked up. Nice article and does have a some interesting points.

Posted by Ralph_McTell on (February 24 2009, 09:02 AM GMT)

The reaction of many Indian fans to this article is bizarre. From the last few comments: "weird", "poor and badly researched...crap", "not worthy of comment...you guys are afraid, very afraid", "ridiculous and sarcastic". Pray tell, what's the problem? So New Zealand successfully prepared green tracks in 2002, is it really such a crime to mention? For what it's worth, I thought the article was a good read.

Posted by srihurry on (February 24 2009, 08:34 AM GMT)

Good script Mark.You can write a book titled 'Ways to believe you have won in spite of losing' and turn it into an Oscar nominated movie. The most ridiculous and sarcastic article I have ever come across and written by a former International player who himself could survive only for a few years at the highest level. I think even as a commentator you are not going to survive as this article shows your ineptitude towards the game and how weak a student you are of it.

Posted by spinkingKK on (February 24 2009, 08:31 AM GMT)

This article is not worthy of a comment. Mark, are you out of your mind? You think India publicly wanted to play Australia more often because Aussies were so weak? Get real man!! You are right, the pitch will be different this time. That's only because you guys are afraid. Very very afraid. You guys are getting stomach problem when thinking of the prospect of facing Zaheer and Ishant in the green top. 2-0 or 3-0 India is inevitable.

Posted by sidgupta on (February 24 2009, 08:17 AM GMT)

maybe Mark just wants to talk about that series. Its probably the only series he averages 40+.

Posted by Edgedandtaken on (February 24 2009, 08:13 AM GMT)

Nice to see you playing a few shots though, Mark!

Posted by 1983worldcup on (February 24 2009, 08:10 AM GMT)

Whether it is Kanpur (just to satisfy our "Indian Power" friends) or Basin Reserve, bad/skewed playing conditions produce flawed displays. Look at stats for the leading Newzealand bowlers in that series: DR Tuffey 2 50 19 113 13 8.69 JDP Oram 2 48.5 10 122 11 11.09 SE Bond 2 56.1 16 196 12 16.33 We know what Bond can do on any wicket - but others?

Posted by sureshnarayan_8 on (February 24 2009, 08:08 AM GMT)

Dear Mr. Richardson Its prety sad to read that you doesnt have any confidence towards your own team that you have been plyed.The way you are mentioned about who pays better than who plays better in terms of all the format, alone stands for the present Indian team has been achived so far.How can u critizie a plyer like Tendulkar since he has scored more runs than the current NZ team ever scored in test cricket.The comments you are written along shows how confident team NZ in this series.Cricket seems to be a gentlemans game and as a coloumist please add some kind of desency while you are writing any articles on the cricinfo.

Posted by shaynonz on (February 24 2009, 08:07 AM GMT)

This article served its purpose, look at all the feedback it got....it got people passionate, angry, interested. Isn't that what good jounalism is about at the end of the day, well done Mark and Go Kiwi's.....Smash 'em Indians.

Posted by TJPa on (February 24 2009, 08:07 AM GMT)

Former New Zealand opener Mark Richardson is now a television commentator and cricket columnist >>should be taken off this respected panel for writing such a poor and badly researched article. maybe he needs to retire and give us all a break from having to read his crap.

Posted by Krissh_M on (February 24 2009, 07:52 AM GMT)

Mark's intention was to catch as many eyes as he can and he won it for sure!!!

Posted by sidgupta on (February 24 2009, 07:47 AM GMT)

Mr. Richardson, I am afraid your comments are just ridiculous. You are suggesting that NZ have all the talent in the world to beat anyone but its just that they are a poor cricketing nation and therefore have to throw games to survive. If that wasn't the case they would just steamroll indiao or any country for that matter. He needs to look at the scores of the test matches last time. He makes it seem like NZ made 500 and then bundled out India for 100 each time. Just to be clear, none of the NZ batsmen gave a good account of themselves that time either. We need to wait and watch. I am hoping that on so called 'brown surface' NZ gets skittled for less than 150. Perhaps that might cause Mr. Richardson to think about this weird column.

Posted by kaushal29 on (February 24 2009, 07:46 AM GMT)

Ridiculous! India is a better team at the moment and the general trend for wickets all around the world is closing in on something like Mohali. It's outrageous to blame your own board's money mindedness for it. I'm sure everyone would like a piece of Indian pie but what is being suggested here is absolutely offensive to any cricket lover. Batsmen from both teams struggled last time but India didn't win due to the lack of bowlers. Now that we do have probably the best seamers and swingers in business, NZ would not go ahead and prepare a green top? I can recall when they last did that when Pak with W&W toured and were routed. How difficult would that be for Mark to fathom instead of blaming India and BCCI and IPL and Money for all things bad?!?!

Posted by ngupta on (February 24 2009, 07:44 AM GMT)

"Little did we know that the boss, Indian cricket, was not impressed, We had embarrassed this powerful cricket nation, and in particular what they were most proud of - their top six batsmen." "Well, because New Zealanders and New Zealand cricket understand who pays the wages nowadays and this tour for the Black Caps is very much the scenario of playing your boss at golf." These lines seem to imply that international matches are a staged affair in which the result is already known, as compared to a fair game in which the best team wins. I find this article ridiculous.

Posted by mirchy on (February 24 2009, 07:40 AM GMT)

Ha Ha Ha Richardson. Good try but transparent. On the one hand you accept the superiority of the Indian batting, on the other you acknowledge that the only way you can beat them is by producing cow (lamb) pastures. By introducing the elements in your essay you've only managed a de facto alibi for what you consider a likely loss of the NZ team. Personally, I think the NZ team deserves a lot more than your defeatist attitude. They are a good fighting team that took the Aussies to the wire in their own backyard. Effectively what you are implying is that the NZ board have bought into the good books of the BCCI - which, if true would be tantamount to match fixing. I disagree vehemently. I suggest, having recognised that both the batting and bowling depts lag behind the Indians, the Kiwis have found themselves in a predicament from which their only chance, unlike the last tour, is to offer fair pitches. If that happens, kudos to the NZ Board and shame on you for your diabolical "essay".

Posted by biju on (February 24 2009, 07:39 AM GMT)

I am Indian and I completely agree with Mark and also it creates concern in me of the genuineness of the game.If a previous test player like him can say that it is all drama ,what is the point in watching cricket? Is it not match fixing?If India wins In NZ this time,it will be just at the mercy of NZ looking at their prospects in IPL.

Posted by ngupta on (February 24 2009, 07:34 AM GMT)

This article is written in poor taste and the arguments that the author lays out seem to be childish. You seem to be suggesting that NZ will lose because of the nature of pitches produced by themselves. Thats absurd! Why don't you appeal to the NZ cricket board to produce the kind of pitches that you want.

Posted by vikram__r on (February 24 2009, 07:28 AM GMT)

Mark Richardson.. You are an absolute disgrace to the cricket writers community. How you can manage to write such rubbish after having played cricket internationally, is beyond me. For your information India has won test matches abroad in SA, Aus, Eng, WI, Pak and SL in the past 2-3 years. They have managed to beat Aus (actually thrash Aus) in a test series recently. Why are you Kiwi's so spineless as to prepare pitches to suit the guests? In any case the pitches prepared for the 2002-03 tour were not upto the mark because it did not provide an even contest between bat and ball. It is not like you Kiwis were scoring 100s for fun while the Indian batsmen were getting stuffed. 2-3 day test matches are acceptable as a one off. But in this series every pitch was substandard enough to render the batsman redundant. Do you think you are going to get more visits from the Indian team if your team gets trampled over by the Indians?

Posted by kshitizv on (February 24 2009, 07:27 AM GMT)

I guess this is a poor article with some sort of cheapness in it. It seems more of a potential excuse as biasreporter and others have already pointed out. If NZC actually does any changes keeping such things in mind, it would be a poor call at their side too. I agree that the pitches in New Zealand are deadly and may be they should improve (as we say that the subcontinent pitches should be more lively). But motivation for doing so should be sporting spirit and not the reason mentioned by Mark.

Posted by Edgedandtaken on (February 24 2009, 07:27 AM GMT)

Haha...anticipatory bail, Mark?

Posted by passionate.indian on (February 24 2009, 07:24 AM GMT)

seriously mark richardson you have lost your sanity... one can write such a pathetic piece only after one's mind has gone for a jog... anyone who knows even an iota of cricket can foresee the black caps being hammered in both the test and one dayers... they only stand a chance in the 20-20s if any... and i say this inspite of the fact that though i am an indian , i am a great fan of the black caps... somewhere down the line i get a feeling that the only person who thinks the way the article has been written is mark richardson and no one else... mark, you never did anything good on the field... atleast dont prove your insanity and stupidity off it...

Posted by wizman on (February 24 2009, 07:10 AM GMT)

This is about as predictable as it gets! NZ should produce whatever kind of wicket they like. They should make it suit their bowling attack. Why not!? You would think their bowlers being brought up on such wickets would bowl well on them. As for idiotic "you're anti-Indian" ranting that goes on, and how inferior NZ are without Shane Bond, you just have to look at why they don't have Shane Bond to make sense of the rest of the article.

Posted by saikarthigeyan on (February 24 2009, 07:03 AM GMT)

Mark has found a knack of escaping out in case NZ lose here. He doesnt seem to leave any stone unturned.I doubt if Wages are paying such a big role as to changing pitches, then I doubt isnt money playing its part on performances too (i also mean match-fixing here). Is that the only thing they care for to get into IPL and make money. Grow up guys !! Dont spoil the spirit of the game.

Posted by Kattadurai on (February 24 2009, 06:42 AM GMT)

This article shows the ineptitude of Mr.Richardson on cricket comments. I could hardly believe the NZ cricket would make dry wickets to please the Indian board, when during pre-Christmas series against Windies they had hard wickets.Everyone knows WI is not a financial powerhouse and in addition NZ were desperate to win that series. It seemed to me that Mr.Richardson was suggesting Sachin, Laxman, Dravid are good at only batsmen friendly conditions and is really a defacing comment. Their acumen and talent have been proven beyond doubt. This article is kind of finding excuse for the inevitable result of the series (India Winning). By saying this I am not being over ambitious or under estimating the Kiwis but they are in a transition phase and most of their promising youngster are finding their feet in international arena.

Posted by Sandeep_Kulkarni on (February 24 2009, 06:40 AM GMT)

Well, if the pitches will be suitable for batsmen, the kiwis too have a batting line up, don't they? Why do you sound so worried, Mr. Richardson?

Posted by SujithBabu on (February 24 2009, 06:34 AM GMT)

Point1 :-- When NZ tours India and encounters remotely turning tracks, they are called under-prepared tracks. Talk about bigoted views. Point 2: -- Even in 2003, India was the leading money generator as fas as cricket goes. Point 3:-- In the last 7-8 years or so, India has won series in England, West Indies and won test matches in Perth, South Africa etc. Let the New zealanders bat against Zaheer, Ishant etc in seamer friendly conditions and find out who turns out better. Point 4: May God bless you Mark. Point 5: Who bothers !!!

Posted by biasreporter on (February 24 2009, 06:31 AM GMT)

Wow! Shocking article. If I understand it correctly, Mr. Richardson is saying the following: NZ can beat any side in the world if it so chooses but since it is a poor cricketing nation, it has to kowtow to the countries that have money. Of course in that past that was England and Australia, thus NZ could never beat them. Now that it is India, the boss I mean, NZ cannot beat India. But of course that begs the question, "Why did NZ not win in Australia?" If this is Richardson's way of gloating, it is done in poor taste. If it is making excuses for a potential defeat, well, we will let you have that.

Posted by gagguv on (February 24 2009, 06:24 AM GMT)

Mark's comments seem more like advance excuse for the NZ performance to come! He is making us believe that NZC is hell bent upon making decent profits on the national honour of NZ. Last time around it was a lottery. Who so ever wins the toss won the match. Getting all out for 94 by NZ was not a great proof of batsmanship. I remember quotes doing rounds that instead of stadiums it seemed that matches were being played in parks.This time around NZ pitch staff cant even dream of preparing "sporting" pitches. Dhoni is a lucky captain. He wins most of the tosses and so NZ will always play a catching up game. If NZ cant beat lowly ranked West Indies what they are hoping for in this series?

Posted by Achiles on (February 24 2009, 06:21 AM GMT)

Richardson is talking like if New Zealand prepared green tops they have a chance! Zaheer ,Ishanth can bundle up the Kiwis within a session. I had witnessed the last series, the pitches were under prepared and were not ideal conditions for cricket.

Posted by Rezaul on (February 24 2009, 06:20 AM GMT)

I completely disagree with Mr. Richardson. I am confused with his intention of this article. Most of the people accept that Zaheer, Ishant is the best effective opening bowling pair now. So, if NZL make seaming wicket then they will bring their own downfall. Because it will NZL batters who suffers more than Indian experienced batsmen. So, only way to compete with the tourists will be making a sporting wicket. What is interesting about the article of Richardson is that he feels India is far better team now than in 2001 so he just tried to switch attention to monetary benefit and all those craps. I think at last he has learned a trick from his once upon might neighbor Aussies. We better keep ourselves away from these nonsense views. Focus on cricket only. Try to play fair!

Posted by jokerbala on (February 24 2009, 06:15 AM GMT)

All I can say is that NZ have not been consistent in their pitch preparation.Why is it that when Aussies toured the ODI scores where 300+ which would even be chased down subsequently?Because they were afraid of Mcgrath and co make mockery of the home batsmen?When India toured, 150 was a winning total.The NZ board prepares different pitches for different teams.At least the Indians don't resort to such horses for courses or courses for horses tactics ,if the pitches are bad they are bad for all.

Posted by Da_Punjabi on (February 24 2009, 06:11 AM GMT)

In India, we have a story of swan, and a fox, who treat dinner at each other's home. Fox serves food in a plat, which swan couldn't bow down enough to digest. She gets mad, and thinks of a revenge. When the Fox arrives at her house, she serves him the food in a bottle neck pot. So you can all imagine where this story is going, so know that I am against this kind of home advantage. If subcontinent has dead pitches, Island nations have deadly pitches. Australia has recognizable pitches. But it would be shame on India, if they cannot play on any pitch with that kinda team. So NZ can bring on anything they want, but if test match lasted 2 days last time, it would last only for 1.5 days this time. And paymaster is no excuse. In fact, it is a lame excuse, and an insult for professional sport. Only West Indies, and England would be interested in such excuse, as they just have finished selling cricket soul to a fraud billionaire.

Posted by MaxLuther on (February 24 2009, 06:10 AM GMT)

Richardson, As per you, NZC is a spineless organisation owing its allegiance to the Indian Cricket Board ? Any sane person would differ, unless you are privy to certain confidential information. At the moment, the best pace bowling attack is the Indian one of Ishant + Zaheer , duly supported by a long list of young pace bowlers (currently they have at least 3 or 4 top quality pacers to back Ishant & Zaheer). Spin is now a weakness for India. Vettori would be a better bowler than Harbhajan (who is now a run restricting flat bowler rather than a wicket taking genuine spinner) ... the other spin options for India are unknown and untested names (sorry, apart from Kumble & harbhajan , even the Indian fans would not know the names of the back-up spinners). So if NZ were to prepare seaming tracks they would be preparing for disaster at the hands of the Indian pacers, whereas neutral or spinning tracks would serve NZ much better.

Posted by GaneshS on (February 24 2009, 06:02 AM GMT)

Richardson...Please have a closer look at the history...you seem to have very short memory. NZ never dominated India in New Zealand except in 2002-2003. Although India did not win any series...but the series was always very close. In 2002-2003, India was a favorite to win the World Cup. But with ulterior motive, NZ tried to dent the confidence of India with doctored pitches. Even then, the only batsman to score hundred was Sehwag...if you still remember. Team Mat Won Lost Tied Draw NR W/L Ave RPO HS LS Year India 5 1 2 0 2 0 0.50 31.17 3.51 482 138 1990 India 1 0 1 0 0 0 0.00 38.33 4.60 230 - 1992 India 5 2 2 0 1 0 1.00 34.86 3.74 255 246 1994 India 1 0 1 0 0 0 0.00 16.00 3.49 160 160 1995 India 1 0 1 0 0 0 0.00 28.20 3.12 356 208 1998 India 6 2 2 0 1 1 1.00 40.50 4.43 416 230 1999 India 4 0 4 0 0 0 0.00 14.36 3.37 219 99 2002 India 5 2 3 0 0 0 0.66 15.34 3.25 200 108 2003

Posted by Haider_Mahmud on (February 24 2009, 06:00 AM GMT)

Mark you very rightly put both the points across. Indian cricket is like a real monster these days. Everyone wants to be in their good books and by allowing India more cushion as compared to the horrific last tour would go a long way in making New Zealand an interesting market for India both in terms of rivalry and future tours.

Posted by jayray999 on (February 24 2009, 05:59 AM GMT)

Mark's clairvotant. If he isn't reading peoples' minds, he is predicting when the Nor'easter will blow and when the Nor'wester will not. In this he draws upon all his subjects of specialization: politics, geography, biology and human psychology. Everything that is, except a physical examination of the pitches he consigned to dustbowl status without a thought to their curators' reputations. Enjoy conspiracy theories? Here's one, Mark Richardson style. Is Mark's article a journalistic fait accompli being presented to NZC? If so, how does it work. Have the BCCI's billions being working overtime to secure the Indians a "brown, dry carpet" that stretches all the way from Hamilton to Christ Church? Or is this a ruse hatched by Shane Bond and his ICL ilk to shame NZC into NOT going brown this summer? Alas, not being Mark Richardson I am not privy to such intercontinental intrigues. But I can tell you what is brown, dry and steaming: Mark's article. Rattle your dags and give it a royal flush

Posted by ElementaryJeeves on (February 24 2009, 05:57 AM GMT)

Dear Mr.Richardson, While your article might make for sensational, 'Oh Look what those capitalist bastards are doing to us' Journalism. There is little to no evidence to back what you are saying. By your own admission, "New Zealand is not that dissimilar to England", where, if you might have the common sense to do some research you would have discovered, India beat England the last time they toured there. This is not to suggest tha India will have an easy time in New Zealand. But the fact remains that they have an extremely strong bowling attack and competence in batting, including, very critically, a much more stable opening partnership. So if India beats New Zealand it won't be because New Zealand let them. The suggestion is far too immature and not becoming of an international player.

Posted by jazzaaaaaaaa on (February 24 2009, 05:55 AM GMT)

I agree with Mark Richardson here, its unfortunate but true. And its not fair, India produce either batsmen's paradises or dry wickets to suit their spinners and reverse swing, and yet when they're not happy with anything away from home, they're not happy. I dont like the perception that a good/great wicket is a batsmen friendly wicket. To me a good wicket is like the one at the Gabba. Favours the seamers for the first 2 days, then batsmen for the next 2 days and the spinners on the last day. I also like seeing wickets that favor seem movement, that test series in 02/03 was probably the best test series i saw as a neutral. Batting wickets like the one in Pakistan at the moment turn the game into a bore, seaming wickets are alot more exciting, balls going past the outside edge, stumps flying, diving slips catches, batsmen either surviving grimly or throwing the bat at it knowing they will get out by trying to just survive, its great! And because its low scoring, the matches are tight!

Posted by ghaski on (February 24 2009, 05:54 AM GMT)

Your post implies batting friendly pitches as some sort of abomination which the NZC will stoop to only for the sake of money. Well, in Hamilton last time, all the 4 innings put together came out to be something like 500 runs. If this time the pitches are prepared to yield a better tussle between the bat and the ball, I wonder who is going to complain, except for hard core NZ fans who want their team to win at the cost to the spirit of the game. If might actually makes things right, nothing like it.

Posted by jollyjugg on (February 24 2009, 05:44 AM GMT)

BRAVO MARK RICHARDSON, All these comments coming from some one who was real nobody Who was virtually not known anywhere outside nz. For your kind information Mark, all those batsmen's greatness wont be diminished or they wont be embarrassed because some kiwis in non descript island produced a pitch where they normally graze their cows. With a couple of weeks more of adaptation i am sure the contest would have gone neck and neck. It is good to read your comments Mark, but pray tell me what is your achievement in cricket field. Have you done anything in any of the sub continent countries. How many centuries have you scored? Have little dignity in describing the whole incident. Every one who saw the contest can tell nz took advantage of ur conditions and good for u for doing so. As far which team was good when conditions were even for bat and ball it was settled in south africa couple of months later. NZ didnt even manage 150 and lost with half day to spare. oh Mark blame the pitches.

Posted by CharuKhopkar on (February 24 2009, 05:42 AM GMT)

Mark, The last time India toured NZ, both sides found the pitches - prepared to suit NZ bowling - almost unplayable and NZ was nearly hoisted on its own petard. Trying paint the BCCI as the villain of the piece for the forthcoming series is old hat and very unoriginal. Australia tried it in 2008 but it didn't make their pedestrian performance look any better. If you're looking to make excuses for NZ being thrashed by India this season, try a bit harder. As far as the weather is concerned, the Indians aren't trying to weasel out. It's game on and let the better team win.

Posted by DAN22 on (February 24 2009, 05:41 AM GMT)

When New Zealand makes grassy wickets its called using "home advantage" and when India makes rank turners its bad sportsmanship. If NWZ makes unprepared pitches for this series(and still lose) we should invite them to Kanpur and make rank turners. But then NWZ cricket doesnt have reputations to lose does it?

Posted by HundredPercentBarcelonista on (February 24 2009, 05:37 AM GMT)

I don't know if Mark intended the tone of this article to be patronising but it was on a number of levels. I hope the curators prepare green tops. That is what home advantage is all about, isn't it? It's not like the Kiwi batsmen covered themselves in glory in 02-03, they were just lucky to win the toss on most occasions and having the best of conditions. We all saw how India ran through their lineup just weeks later in South Africa.

Posted by Uppi on (February 24 2009, 05:36 AM GMT)

Mr. Richardson you say 1. "Why? Well, because New Zealanders and New Zealand cricket understand who pays the wages nowadays and this tour for the Black Caps is very much the scenario of playing your boss at golf." 2. "However, this could be the last time New Zealand fans see these great batting names of Indian cricket on our shores, and both nations may feel cheated if seaming wickets nullify the Indian batting machine." and also 3. "In the Tests we need a session or two of movement, followed by a batsman-friendly period, and then some turn and variable bounce later on. " which is the definition of a good test wicket. My point - The three reasons contradict each other. Why needlessly sensationalize what would have been a god technical article on how to play on NZ pitches

Posted by Majr on (February 24 2009, 05:33 AM GMT)

India's worst in New Zealand was when they toured that country in December, when as the author says the conditions were of extreme cold. Also, India had only just started getting over their 'poor travellers' tag with John Wright becoming their coach a couple of years before that. Though they did very badly on that occasion, they went on to do well in the World Cup in South Africa . Since this time around, they will be playing in end Feb and early March, I am sure the conditions will be more conducive to cricket as it was in during the World Cup of 1992 when most of the matches were evenly contested. Richardson sounds very patronising in his comments but he will probably see that the current bunch of Indians are not just rich. They are committed to proving to everyone that they are a talented lot. New Zealand does not have to play only as well as the Indians to get the pay cheques. Indians are hospitable to a fault and importantly, remember only the warmth and generosity of a host.

Posted by HarishVS on (February 24 2009, 05:31 AM GMT)

This is a poor account of what happenned in that last tour. The highest total of the host team itself was only 247 and most of their top order batsmen were not making any big runs to say they were very comfortable while facing our pace bowlers. In reply to India's 99, NZ was dismissed for 94 and to reach the winning target of 160, they had lost 6 wickets. This cheap and very ordinary cricketer Mark Richardson himself did not make any big runs and was dismissed by our pacers cheaply in all the innings except a single fifty plus score in that series. Zaheer got 2 five-fors. All this is enough to conclude that the pitches were doctored as they were very scared of our famed batting strength then. Mr Richardson cool down yourself! Whole of the world know what Dravid, Tendulkar, Sehwag and Co. are capable of, in any pacy, seamy or bouncy wickets. Given the form Zaheer & Ishaant are in, NZ might struggle to put even a total of 100 in any inning, if similar pitches are ordered for tests.

Posted by truthspeaker on (February 24 2009, 05:29 AM GMT)

It is a biased opinion Mr. Richardson - India will face problems with the windy conditions in Wellington - But then India beat Australia in Perth, the second windiest city in the Australia-New Zealand area So, give India its due - second, India possesses a very strong seam attck in Ishant and Zaheer - New Zealand will get a bigger dose of what they will dish out to India - third, Indian batting is more diverse now with variety so, New Zealand is not really very generous - the funny fact is all countries that deride india's fear against pacy wickets - please beware - your own batsmen are not faring that well - How about Curtly Ambrose's spell in Australia and in west indies against England - England could muster only 45 years ago so, India has done better against pace and in pacy wickets

Posted by gamer007 on (February 24 2009, 05:22 AM GMT)

I think this is one of the worst ever articles written on cricinfo. The tour in 2002-2003, both teams fared badly except that new zealand was just a little bit better.In the past 3-4 yrs Indian team has won all around the world in swinging conditions. Please do your research before posting such articles.

Posted by r1m2 on (February 24 2009, 05:21 AM GMT)

All I can say to New Zealand, is best of luck against Zaheer, Ishant followed by Praveen/Munaf even Irfan. Please do make seaming pitches for India. We know how good you are on them yourselves, by the LACK of seam-movement when Australia tours. If you can restrict the Indian batting machine to 100 with your medium-pace trundlers, that might just be 100 runs too many for your batting line-up against the Indian pace arsenal. Really, wishing you best of luck!!!

Posted by riteshjsr on (February 24 2009, 05:20 AM GMT)

Agree that India were miserable during the 02-03 tour to NZ. However, it was not as if NZ amassed scores in excess of 300 while India could not even manage to score half as much. Both teams posted low scores, primarily because matches were played on grounds which were probably used for cultivation during the off season! However, we all expect the pitches to be more sporting this time around, and no, it has nothing to do with India's financial muscle because the BCCI was equally powerful in 02-03. The pitches are likely to be relatively beningn because India boasts the best bowling attack in the world. The pace of Zak and Ishant with the wind behind them will be too much for Taylor and Co who are used to facing the dibbly dobbly bowlers in NZ. So it's the Kiwi batsmen who will face chin music and hear the sound of the ball swishing past their ears. Moreover, this Dhoni-led team is fearless and will play their brand of aggressive cricket regardless of the situation. Beware Kiwis!

Posted by TheChowmeinWarrior on (February 24 2009, 05:08 AM GMT)

"When India last toured New Zealand, in December 2002, we stitched them up all right." Hardly, you may have won the first test by 10 wickets, but 247 is hardly a towering score. And you were rolled over for 94 in the 2nd test, which incidently was less than the 99 we made. The pitches prepared for that series were shocking, so much so that your own Stephen Fleming apoligised for the quality of the pitches offered. And I don't think I like the tone of your article that suggests that NZC will roll over and let India have their way with them, just because of the money on offer. It does a diservice to both India and New Zealand cricket that you'd even suggest something like this. It's irresponsible tabloid journalism and something I wouldn't normally associate with Cricinfo. It's insulting to me that you, a person who's a barely qualified hack, is allowed to get up on a soapbox and bleat your pretentious nonsense in the guise of an 'expert opinion'

Posted by Gundus11 on (February 24 2009, 05:05 AM GMT)

Though the blog makes sense it does not feel good if you are a Indian supporter. Indian supporters would love if the same kind off pitches as that in 2003 are dished out this time, because it would give us a chance to gauge this team that gives us a hope that we finally have a team that is not only best on paper but also has the determination to be achieve that distinction. And to most Indian supporters the Indian cricket team and BCCI are two different entities. We love Dhoni, but do not understand Modi. So to say India will now win because other boards are ready to suck up to BCCI is hard to accept. Zaheer and Ishant are now finally trying to bring India out of the 'spin-win only' mode. They would love a seaming, bounce track. Ponting can answer the best about questions regarding Ishant. And finally there is a captain who is ready to tell his men 'what you see there is a 22 yard strip, forget what is under it just play your game'. So, lets hope for a fair game and less suckers.

Posted by canuthinkofaname on (February 24 2009, 05:05 AM GMT)

Apart from the reasons mentioned above, it is also worth noting that india was asked to foot their own bills for lodging and laundry last time around, a courtesy which is usually expected of the host nation. No wonder then india dint feel like touring for so many years. Its better mark helps new-zealand to become a better host than to point fingers at the tourist's apparent incompetency!

Posted by debapriyo on (February 24 2009, 05:02 AM GMT)

Mark, do you really think this time the series is likely to be more competitive because NZC want to keep India happy? You are indicating something which is close to 'betting'. Playing golf with boss? Come on!! All of India know that their batsmen struggle in seaming conditions and NZ is one team which is not that good but still troubled India in this decade, both home and away. India have done far better against AUS and ENG (again, both home and away). We Indians are waiting for this test now - to see if this time our players can do better than last time. In my personal opinion, NZ is a good team, they have a team spirit and India is, by no means, the favorites this time. NZ almost won the ODI against AUS in AUS! We expect this to be a tough series and are looking forward to it. Please do not try to dilute the spirit with such talk! When you won in 2002, most of us didn't blame you, but blamed our players. But this time we have better pace attack. Will hear you over the TV then.

Posted by jamrith on (February 24 2009, 04:58 AM GMT)

It looks like Mr. Richardson is getting his excuses ready before the series begins. By comparing it to "playing" golf against one's boss, he is effectively saying that the NZ cricket board and players will throw the matches. That is not only in poor taste, it is insulting to the Kiwis and the Indians. One does not associate such gutter journalism with New Zealand, one must assume that the so-called "writer" has taken some tips from across the Tasman.

Posted by RajitD on (February 24 2009, 04:49 AM GMT)

Mark, India was funding world cricket even in 02-03. It is just that NZ produced seriously sub-standard wickets which produced exactly 3 fifties over the two matches, both teams put together. And two of them came from Indians. While it is true India lost, remember that Sachin, Dravid and Viru all average higher in New Zealand than what you ever did. Teams have to find a way to cope with conditions, but wickets are in your control. The onus is on you to produce grounds that last 5 days. As it is most Kiwi grounds have absurd dimensions and even a 5 year old can tonk sixes over fine-leg and covers at Eden Park.

Posted by reghu007 on (February 24 2009, 04:43 AM GMT)

I definitely do not agree in what you are saying, especially the way it has been put forth even though its partly true. India might be the big boss financially, however the last time around when even the home team struggled to make 200 in tests, with a score of less than 100 also (scoring less than India in fact in the first innings), 26 wickets falling in a day - is absolutely ridiculous for test cricket. Just because the home team scraped through for test wins does not given them the right to be bad advertisers for test cricket. It would have been nicer for renowned cricketer and writer like you to accept the fact and acknowledge that the wickets be improved in "quality" for a level playing field for both teams and advocate good test cricket!

Posted by SachinIsTheGreatest on (February 24 2009, 04:43 AM GMT)

A couple of days ago I wrote directly to CI editorial(I know they didn't even read it and anyway, don't give a damn. After all there is some sadistic pleasure involved in bashing India. Why would SDM win 8 oscars otherwise?), that India bashing is quite encouraged on the website. I think publishing this article proves it. To actually state the BCCI was "angry" because of the wickets India got in 2002-03 is way too low a shot even for a cheapo like Mark Richardson. If the BCCI would have been angry, New Zealand wouldn't have had a hope in hell to come to India and play out a drawn series. India would have given them a Mumbai wicket so Fleming could have gone crying to the ICC. Oh and so much for Indians not able to play on seamer friendly wickets, India hasn't lost a test series in England since 1996, won on a green-top at Johannesburg and "swung" the Aussies out at Perth. Oops, how did that happen????

Posted by mk49_van on (February 24 2009, 04:36 AM GMT)

Oh this is a new low. The pre-emptive-whine strike - "We lost because India will not come back if we beat them". What a ready made excuse, and nothing India can do to disprove/challenge it - short of losing. This from a squad where only Vettori may be chosen if a joint team were to be fielded - but even that likely not since he would be competing with Harbhajan. Boy, these Kiwis do sound a lot like the English.....

Posted by nambu on (February 24 2009, 04:21 AM GMT)

This is one of the most ridiculous piece of writing i have seen in cric info. Newzealands pace attack is totally toothless in the absense of a certain shane bond. This article is like an anticipatory bail for the upcoming series. We all know what Ishant and Zaheer are capable of doing. The newzealand batting is also nothing great to write home about. So if at all the pitches are batting paradises its just an effort to nullify the advantage that india has as a team.

Posted by a_k_tuteja on (February 24 2009, 04:21 AM GMT)

When WI toured NZ last year, slow tracks were made. Was it because of money being offered? I guess not. So, NZ will make same kind of tracks because they would like the game to go for 5 days and not end in 2 days. Moreover, last year we say SA complaining against turning track in Kanpur. What prevents India from making same kind of complaint if match ends in two days and teams struggle to make 100 in their innings?

Posted by CoolAL on (February 24 2009, 04:20 AM GMT)

I cannot believe how full of themselves some people sound. I also don't think this genius gets it. The green seaming wickets are not the issue. After all, NZ had to play on those same wickets too. Therefore, winning or losing is not the question here. India has lost and lost badly before and will lose again. The world will not come to an end. And I say bring it on. This time we have the bowlers who will exploit the conditions unlike last time. Who knows .. your batsmen may not be able to stand the heat. What the board and the people of India do not appreciate is the vilification of its players. Calling into question their courage and manhood. Forgetting this is a game. I realize you have play very hard to win but why go to these lengths. I am not saying NZ is anywhere close to Oz, but this kind of behaviour is clearly not going to win you friends. So, stop being patronizing and try to beat us. Use all your tricks. Don't hold back. Good luck to you. Just be civil..that is all.

Posted by aditya_sd on (February 24 2009, 04:18 AM GMT)

KUDOS Mr. Richardson for the article....couldnt agree more!!! ppl who disagree are either oblivious to the way the cricketing world functions these days or are plainly in denial! having said that the indian batting line-up has performed well in all conditions over the past decade but every side has its weaknesses and the 2002-03 tour party suffered on wickets that were over-friendly to seamers and largely unsuitable for entertaining cricket. and the prevalence of similar wickets in domestic matches has cost the home team dearly....no batsman of high quality who can perform consistently in tests after the retirements of astle and more recently fleming....it'll be good for NZ in not only financial but also cricketing terms if they produce sporting pitches this time around and in the future.

Posted by Sanchonz on (February 24 2009, 04:13 AM GMT)

"India has the best new ball attack in the world"...? I'm pretty sure Dale Steyn and Makhaya Ntini just destroyed Australia with a pretty impressive new ball display, didn't India rely on their spinners to do most of the damage against the very same team? Still, NZ has the best captain, spin bowler, wicketkeeper-batsman, and ODI bowler in the world (never mind that 3 of them are the same guy).

Posted by PushCannon on (February 24 2009, 04:00 AM GMT)

Mr.Richardson, I haven't seen a more biased article in my life before. You apparently could not carry your lofty cricketing standards to the pen. 2003 was an aberration. since then the indian team has accomplished quite a lot in all kinds of tracks: England, WI, Australia and South Africa. So lets not talk about India being scared on green tops. On the contrary this actually applies to New Zealand. India currently has the worl'd best pace attack,and a green top will be self destructive to the ameturish batting that NZ possesses. I didn't see you mention this even once in your article. the baby attack the NZ has cant trouble indian batsmen on any kind of track. So we are talking about a potent foreign attack vs a baby domestic batting, as well as a amateuer bolwing ttack against the best batting lineup. It does not take an einstien to predict what pitch will be prepared.

Posted by stumpedim on (February 24 2009, 04:00 AM GMT)

haha good stuff, up em good Kiwis!

Posted by redneck on (February 24 2009, 03:56 AM GMT)

honestly i would hope the wickets produced for nz v india test series would be the same regardless of who new zealand are playing!!! the very thought of tailoring pitches to suit the visiting nation are obsured! new zealand should make a traditional kiwi wicket! im all for rolling the red carpet and being good hosts to which ever team is touring off the field but once it comes to the matches itself home ground advantage should be sort after!not that im saying doctoring pitches is the way to go, just prepair the wicket as it would normally be done for any other international match! i can guarantee that india would never produce a wicket not typical of the sub continent(apart from a overly friendly curator at nagpur in 04 who paid the price after)as it would be giving away their home advantage im mean look no further than 3rd test india v s africa last year! boss or no boss new zealand no one likes a brown nose!

Posted by jopa on (February 24 2009, 03:37 AM GMT)

I do not agree with your post, you seem to dislike that Indians are the paymasters, but would love to get the bebefit. The wickets will be made more suitable for batting, not because Indians are the pay masters, but because India has the best new ball attack in the world. A sea of difference between the side that toured 6 years ago and now is that, Indians tour well broad now. Nobody is afraid of swing and seam now. A certain Ricky Ponting will bear testimony to that. It is in NZ interst to have batting wickets, or you will hear the chin music.... A certain individual named John Wright, will know better. When this tour is done, i hope you will bring on your old theories back. Is this an advance excuse for the NZ performance to come...?

Posted by aditya87 on (February 24 2009, 03:36 AM GMT)

Hey, the pitches were horrible for both sides last time around...I remember in Hamilton India were bowled out for 99 and New Zealand for 94!!! What kind of pitch is that??

Posted by Gizza on (February 24 2009, 03:30 AM GMT)

Mark, also keep in mind that India's pace attack is stronger than New Zealand's this time around. The likes of Ross Taylor, McCullum and Elliot will be blown away by Zaheer Khan and Ishant Sharma. On the other hand, the Indian batsmen in recent year have learnt to cope with non-subcontinental conditions. Tendulkar, Sehwag, Dravid, etc. have scored plenty of runs in England and Australia.

Posted by skalwani on (February 24 2009, 03:26 AM GMT)

Preposterous observation! I think the NZ players will give it their all and use local conditions to their advantage.

Posted by Homer2007 on (February 24 2009, 03:24 AM GMT)

Mr Richardson, To quote a former captain of yours - "you were one of the most boring players to watch and from what I've seen so far in your commentary, it is crap. ". Finishing matches in 2 days does nothing for the TV revenues; and the NZC understands it as much as any cricketing board. Which is why the wickets will be flatter and more batsmen friendly this time around than in 2002/03. That being said, I would dearly love for a repeat of the 2002/03 wickets. For, while India may get rolled for 161, will New Zealand even manage 100 - in both innings combined? Cheers,

Posted by qalandar4 on (February 24 2009, 03:22 AM GMT)

Richardson read my mind; I was just talking about this the other day and had made the same prediction. However, it isn't fair to omit one other reason why NZ will likely not have such difficult wickets this time as they did last time: because given Zaheer's and Ishant's current form, India's new ball pair is better than NZ's, even if they are unused to the conditions (Zaheer was man of the series in england in 2007, and against Australia in 2008; Ishant was man of the series against england recently).