New Zealand cricket October 24, 2010

A trans-Tasman T20 domestic tournament

From Alan & Philip Sutherland, Australia

From Alan & Philip Sutherland, Australia

The recent four-nil drubbing of the Black Caps by an improving Bangladesh, while good for cricket generally, must shine a spotlight on where New Zealand are heading with their domestic game.

The simple fact is that New Zealand is not a large country and cricket is not its national sport. In the hearts of most New Zealanders, cricket will always come a distant second to the All Blacks rugby team. With just over four million people, New Zealand has a smaller population than three of the six Australian states. Therefore, the task in running a quality domestic competition is so much harder for New Zealanders than it is for their Trans-Tasman neighbours.

In other sports, like netball, rugby, soccer and basketball, New Zealand has solved this problem by joining an Australasian competition. This could well be the future of Antipodean domestic limited-overs cricket too.

The main argument for such a move is an improved competitiveness for player development. During the 2010 Champions League Twenty20 tournament, the Central Districts hardly set the world on fire. They were easily a class below South Australia and Victoria. In a joint competition, two New Zealand teams (rather than six), possibly representing either of the two islands, would face the six current Australian states.

The other sports have shown that crowds will come to watch a local team play an Australian one, especially if they can reasonably be expected to see their side win. Home matches scheduled in a number of venues on both islands would help strengthen the local spectator base.

That is not to say that one would want to see the end of the Plunket Shield. There is no great merit in joint first-class arrangements, but one would hope that an increased exposure to tougher competition in the shorter versions would feed back into the Plunket Shield and, therefore, into the Test team. Playing under diverse Australian conditions will do up-and-coming New Zealand cricketers no harm at all. Neither will it harm Australian cricket, for the benefits flow both ways. Scheduling would become tighter, yet there is so much to gain that it must, at some point, be considered.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • testli5504537 on July 6, 2012, 11:00 GMT

    syed anwar hussein fiji and papua new guinea should start a combined pacific island comp(like the west indies)

    have fiji,tonga,samoa,new caladonia,vanuatu,solomon islands,nauru,cook islands and papua new guinea compete in a domestic comp the best players play in a combined pacific islands team that can try to qualify for world cups

    how the side may look is 3 from fiji,3 from p.n.g,2 from tonga,1 from vanuatu,1 from samoa,1 from solomon islands and so on.

    instead each country trying to qualify for world cups individually(fiji played in the 1975 world cup) in which they have no chance, as a combined team they would qualifying alot easier and have a chance.

    if they pooled thier funds rather than get individual funding they could do alot more with thier money.

    japan are currently in the pacific island division(why i dont know they would better off in asia) and each year they have a combined team,my idea is a combined team minus japan

    you would need a airline company to sponser it

  • testli5504537 on July 6, 2012, 10:00 GMT

    i originally hated the concept of 20/20 cricket and thought it would attract poor crowds like domestic 50/50 over cricket,it still my least favourite form of the game,but fans love it i must admitt i was wrong on 20/20,you get crowds of 10000 people per game,unbelivable crowds for domestic cricket(i think thier was 35000 to a international 20/20)

    i think you could add 2-3 new zealand sides(auckland,wellington and christchurch) into the 20/20 bbl to help new zealand cricket,australia used to play new zealand every year when 20/20 was still hit and giggle(ricky ponting hit 98(n.o) i remember)

    as some points out australia has 3 states with bigger populations than new zealand you could easily add 3 new zealand states to the sheffield shield(auckland,wellington and christchurch),i reckon the new zealanders would lift to play australia,

    in the a-league thiers a kiwi team,in the nrl thiers a kiwi team,in the netball thiers a kiwi team,in the basket ball thiers a kiwi team so it can be done

  • testli5504537 on August 16, 2011, 11:52 GMT

    NZ are a good limited overs unit, only non-asian team in the WC semis, maybe Australia should join the NZ league for that and our blokes could play in the Sheffield Shield - the longer game is what they need more competition in.

  • testli5504537 on April 25, 2011, 4:34 GMT

    this is a good idea, but 3 teams from New Zealand would be more beneficial. The 6 current domestic teams should be divided into pairs to make t20 teams. Auckland with Northern Districts, Central with Wellington and Otago and Canterbury join for a Southern Team. This would allow for New Zealanders tendency to support regions and the area they are associated with, rather than a straight North/South cut which may not draw as much support. This would also give NZC a bigger pool to select from for limited overs. Keep the Plunket Shield as it is. Churrr

  • testli5504537 on February 15, 2011, 9:17 GMT

    sad fact is a full strength nsw or vic team is stronger than the blacks caps. Therefore the number of nz teams would need to be limited - 3 max though 2 would be good. It would work best for t20 as crowds in aust average around 20K

  • testli5504537 on January 5, 2011, 8:28 GMT

    New Zealand will benefit greatly from this....not 2 teams but two pools of six, with a semi and final... it has benefitted aussie rugby with super 12/14/15.. and kiwi league with nrl, kiwi basketball with nbl, kiwi soccer with A-league...... kiwis can get imports like gayle, rana, pollard, etc, and it will be will re-ignite some old rugby rivalries, auckland vs nsw, canterbury vs qld....i love it, bring it on aussie

  • testli5504537 on November 2, 2010, 12:32 GMT

    happy birth day mitchell johnson i m big fan of your.s

  • testli5504537 on November 1, 2010, 4:58 GMT

    Oz what are you on about?? The Australian Premier League?? I assume you are writing about the extended Big Bash League which will feature 8 city based teams. This will be a T20 competition, in which crowd numbers have experienced a massive growth over the last few years. More like 15000 at a match not a few 100. I think 40000 between vics and nsw last year.

    Anyway I think 2 New Zealand teams will eventually join this extended Big Bash League. But I doubt they will ever play 1 day or 4 day cricket here.

  • testli5504537 on October 31, 2010, 15:11 GMT

    A great rivalaray between these two countries!!!

  • testli5504537 on October 30, 2010, 20:50 GMT

    Another point I'd like to add re: Franchises, if I had the money to buy a stake in a T20 Franchise, I would want a guarantee from Cricket Oz, (& NZ if included), that there would be NO International cricket scheduled for OZ & NZ players for the duration of the competition. This is the main reason why Domestic cricket is poorly attended in Oz. It has been many years since a Shield Final was played when all Internationals were available. If all players were available, + one import rule for Oz teams & say 2 imports for NZ, there is no reason why the comp could be played with around 12 teams. Ithink that the playing list NSW has accumulated could easily account for 2 teams, I would like to see a top end franchise made up of local talent + a few recent retirees (Haydn, Martyn, McGrath & Gilly), play out of a duel base of Darwin & Townsville + maybe a Port Morseby game to spread the game. Ultimately no guarantees for International players involvement = low return on invest. = unviable event.

  • No featured comments at the moment.