Australia in England 2012 June 27, 2012

Australia chase All Blacks' dominance

65

Australia's blueprint for sustained supremacy in world cricket is being informed and inspired by the New Zealand All Blacks' enduring domination of international rugby. Encouraged by the rugby grounding of Cricket Australia's team performance manager Pat Howard, Michael Clarke's team and the pathway beneath them are being shaped with New Zealand's century-old dominance of the oval-ball game as a major influence.

As part of Australia's push to rise again in the world rankings, all Cricket Australia contracted players are now assessing themselves according to the individual player program used by the All Blacks in the lead-up to their 2011 World Cup victory. Earlier this month, New Zealand rugby's high performance director Don Tricker and their player development manager Mike Anthony were the keynote speakers at CA's sports medicine and coaching conference in Canberra.

CA are also looking closely at the relationships fostered by the All Blacks with New Zealand's five Super Rugby professional club teams, to better aid the movements of players and coaching philosophies between the states and the national team. Much as Super Rugby added another layer to a system that had once flowed seamlessly from provincial sides to international level, so Twenty20 club teams are adding complexity to the task of managing players from state cricket to ODIs and Tests.

Howard told ESPNcricinfo he aspired to the sort of long-term performance level that New Zealand have kept up for decades, despite being among the smallest nations playing the game. A similar goal was outlined in last year's Argus review.

"I try to refrain from going to rugby because obviously it's where I'm from, but on a world scale the All Blacks are very hard to compare against - a nation of four million people who over a 100-year period have been extremely dominant in a world sport," Howard said ahead of Australia's ODI series against England. "They constantly innovate, and they turn players over a reasonable amount, so there are some learnings there for us."

One of the central tools being brought over from New Zealand to Australia's cricketers is the individual player plan used to assess performances, strengths and weaknesses. These questionnaires allow the players' own views of themselves to be cross-referenced with coaching and selection judgements, resulting in more rounded and constructive discussions of ways for each player to improve.

"We have adopted it and it's gone quite well," Howard said. "So very much being player-led, the players take their individual player plans and look at where they're performing well, or areas to improve on, and we obviously support it with the coaches and the sports scientists to address those gaps. Also for the coaches to say 'we thought your strengths were here, you think they're there, let's actually use that as a discussion to assess the reality'. It is a good affirmation for some players and coaches to look at different parts of players' games.

"New Zealand have used it for a couple of years and the fact is that the players get the input into really being able to sit back and assess their own game. I think that's an important part of reflecting. They'll often think about their core skill, but whether or not they're physically in great condition, mentally in great condition, assessing all the parts of their disciplines where they can look for that edge to get into the team.

"Just the ability to reflect is important, and to a certain point it doesn't matter where it comes from, as long as it comes from a sound place with some reasonable background. Someone else has nicely tested it for us, which is a great thing."

In Canberra, Tricker and Anthony presented to the nation's coaches on how New Zealand had created the right environment for success. Howard said that while CA could take plenty of succour from the All Blacks' ability to stay at the top of rugby despite repeatedly facing other larger countries, he acknowledged that New Zealand's focus on the game and its smaller geographical area made several of their measures more easily employed.

"There's no magic bullet, and funnily enough they used that term as well. You need to have a combination of things to make sure your environment is something that helps you excel," Howard said. "But we've got to take their processes and try to take them over a far larger geographical area. New Zealand is a little bit like England, a little bit smaller, and obviously the geographic divide of Australia means you have to run those different satellites a little more strongly.

"But they were very big on player plans, dealing with sports medicine but also sports medicine being a balanced part of decision-making - it can't drive decisions but it helps form them. Those things were very good messages and support coaches making good decisions and in a cricket sense coaches with their selection panels.

"They presented very well, had some very similar ideas and concepts for where we want to go, and also some things that we're already doing, so the confirmation of our methods was also good for us. Obviously they come from a very successful environment. It was pretty meaningful."

Howard's non-cricket background has proved to be an asset for CA in combination with experienced cricket minds like those of the coach Mickey Arthur and the national selector John Inverarity. He said the search for outside ideas had so far been fruitful, though always leavened by the need to adhere to basics.

"Don Tricker, the guy heading up New Zealand rugby, has a softball background. And the fact he came from an environment outside rugby in that country, was huge," Howard said. "The ability to come in and question things is a good thing. We've got some guys on this tour from outside as well, so I think it's important to assess yourself against your competitors, but also other sports."

Daniel Brettig is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • zenboomerang on June 29, 2012, 6:13 GMT

    Seems Brettig is really stretching what Howard actually said "I try to refrain from going to rugby" & "there are some learnings there [player management]"... All Howard has done is look at some performance techniques that the All Blacks have been using for 2 years which have proved successful, culminating in a WC victory - after all, Howard is our Performance Manager for CA... As for Oz looking to become dominators for over 100 years, well that is just a media beat up...

  • on June 28, 2012, 16:10 GMT

    well this is ridiculous. A lot of people forget that cricket is Australia's NO.1 SUMMER SPORT. The winter is divided among AFL, League, Rugby and Football. No point making excuses by stating rugby is NZ's no.1 sport. One thing I could never understand is why our cricket team can never be as successful as our rugby team(s). One obvious thing is poor management of the game from grass roots to senior levels. We do punch above our weight in CWCs but we aren't a consistent cricketing nation.

  • SpadeaSpade on June 28, 2012, 15:36 GMT

    Firstly I was very opposed to Pat Howards appointment, but its not his fault that CA hired him. We need only look at what Aussie rugby teams have done under the coaching of arguably NZ best rugby coaches Mitchell & Deans. Neither the Wallabies nor the force have achieved anything great under their rein. Last time i looked the wallabies had won more world cups than the All blacks. Australia lost its dominance due to the retirement of 3 of wisdoms all time greatest players. and the revival was only stifled but Pontings rigid captaincy. I predicted great things for the ausies under Micheal clarke and I'm still firm in that belief, under his leadership the team is moving forward, his willingness to bowl a spinner and throw the ball to part timers on gut feeling or use unorthodox field settings are just a few of the qualities that he has restored to this team that sadly went to water under punter. Let Pup dictate whats required not someone with no cricket bacground.

  • zn264 on June 28, 2012, 14:53 GMT

    Wow there are some extremely jealous rugby fans commenting on this article! The All Black are the best team in the world by a mile and always have been. Just look at the most recent results! Aussie struggle to beat the Welsh, SA draw with England, the Scotts can't score tries...and da da da da da dahhh The ABs smash the Irish by 60 points. Oh and yes the world cup, well funny things happen in world cups, but I would rather keep the number one spot than worry about trophies (even though we currently have that too). Now to beat the Windies...c'mon black caps!

  • Shafi79 on June 28, 2012, 14:09 GMT

    well if their planning on modelling themselves on the All Blacks ... maybe they can also take a cue from the South African cricket team ... under achievers at every world cup :p Seriously though hailing from Sri Lanka, love my rugby as much as my cricket and have always been a huge fan of the All Blacks ... had to wait a long time since 87, for that second world cup win though ... Aussies arent going to win too many world cups if they plan on emulating the mighty All Blacks :D

  • Slobberdog on June 28, 2012, 13:29 GMT

    @Franko333: That's probably more a reflection of the level of Indian professionalism rather than some kind of magic potion possessed by the NZ Rugby Union administration. The perception is that most Indian cricketers are not hard trainers. Clearly many are poor fielders with low physical fitness levels. They don't practice on the types of playing surfaces found throughout the world (that matters in this game - and it's a weakness shared by numerous teams). When foreign coaches try to force professional work ethics on the team, they run into trouble. India relies mostly on raw talent from their giant population pool and, so far, that hasn't been enough to become consistent world-beaters.

  • ed.dixon on June 28, 2012, 13:21 GMT

    Huh? Why aren't Australia basing themselves on the Australian cricket team that was pretty well unbeatable for 15 years or so? Or is this Australia tacitly admitting that actually they were just pretty lucky to have 4 or 5 of the best players in history turning up at the same time and that the coach, as Warne so memorably put it 'is just a bus for getting you to the matches'.

  • KiwiRocker- on June 28, 2012, 10:36 GMT

    This is laughable stuff! Finally, I got an oppertunity to comment about something New Zealand related. While, I admire the persistent dominance of All blacks for more than a century but it does not help when you actually do not win when it matters! England won the rugby world cup in 2003 despite being an average team as they believed in winning ugly. All Blacks have only won world cup twice and choked at many important occasions...There are some ridiculous comments being made around here by Indian fans who have no clue what All Blacks are and so on..All Black have been dominant because each New Zealand player takes a huge pride when they wear the black Jersey..Indian cricketers can never match that. India's most ove rated player of All time Tendulya only plays and cares for records..What exactly has he won? Pat Howard will be best advised to look at model of Steve Waugh's era Australian team as they are dominant and had a mental edge over opponents!

  • BoundaryCrtitic on June 28, 2012, 9:55 GMT

    One thing i would like to point out. The World Cup of rugby was an after thought, prior to 1987 there was no world cup, it was based around tours. The All Blacks dominance was well established prior to that. Yes, the All Blacks have got a habit of losing the one off games at the pointy end of one competition every four years. But, in the last 50 years only England, Australia, South Africa and France have beaten the All Blacks. 1953 was the last time Wales have beaten New Zealand and no other national team have. If that is not a dominant record, I don't know what is. So I can understand why people maybe looking at how to emulate this.

  • cricketcritic on June 28, 2012, 9:44 GMT

    I'm not convinced CA needs to do this, but NZ have been extraordinarily successful in rugby. They've won the WC twice, made the finals every other WC and ranked no. 1 consistently from year to year. Contrary to popular belief they also have fewer playing numbers than countries like France and England - so not a bad example to follow if you must

  • zenboomerang on June 29, 2012, 6:13 GMT

    Seems Brettig is really stretching what Howard actually said "I try to refrain from going to rugby" & "there are some learnings there [player management]"... All Howard has done is look at some performance techniques that the All Blacks have been using for 2 years which have proved successful, culminating in a WC victory - after all, Howard is our Performance Manager for CA... As for Oz looking to become dominators for over 100 years, well that is just a media beat up...

  • on June 28, 2012, 16:10 GMT

    well this is ridiculous. A lot of people forget that cricket is Australia's NO.1 SUMMER SPORT. The winter is divided among AFL, League, Rugby and Football. No point making excuses by stating rugby is NZ's no.1 sport. One thing I could never understand is why our cricket team can never be as successful as our rugby team(s). One obvious thing is poor management of the game from grass roots to senior levels. We do punch above our weight in CWCs but we aren't a consistent cricketing nation.

  • SpadeaSpade on June 28, 2012, 15:36 GMT

    Firstly I was very opposed to Pat Howards appointment, but its not his fault that CA hired him. We need only look at what Aussie rugby teams have done under the coaching of arguably NZ best rugby coaches Mitchell & Deans. Neither the Wallabies nor the force have achieved anything great under their rein. Last time i looked the wallabies had won more world cups than the All blacks. Australia lost its dominance due to the retirement of 3 of wisdoms all time greatest players. and the revival was only stifled but Pontings rigid captaincy. I predicted great things for the ausies under Micheal clarke and I'm still firm in that belief, under his leadership the team is moving forward, his willingness to bowl a spinner and throw the ball to part timers on gut feeling or use unorthodox field settings are just a few of the qualities that he has restored to this team that sadly went to water under punter. Let Pup dictate whats required not someone with no cricket bacground.

  • zn264 on June 28, 2012, 14:53 GMT

    Wow there are some extremely jealous rugby fans commenting on this article! The All Black are the best team in the world by a mile and always have been. Just look at the most recent results! Aussie struggle to beat the Welsh, SA draw with England, the Scotts can't score tries...and da da da da da dahhh The ABs smash the Irish by 60 points. Oh and yes the world cup, well funny things happen in world cups, but I would rather keep the number one spot than worry about trophies (even though we currently have that too). Now to beat the Windies...c'mon black caps!

  • Shafi79 on June 28, 2012, 14:09 GMT

    well if their planning on modelling themselves on the All Blacks ... maybe they can also take a cue from the South African cricket team ... under achievers at every world cup :p Seriously though hailing from Sri Lanka, love my rugby as much as my cricket and have always been a huge fan of the All Blacks ... had to wait a long time since 87, for that second world cup win though ... Aussies arent going to win too many world cups if they plan on emulating the mighty All Blacks :D

  • Slobberdog on June 28, 2012, 13:29 GMT

    @Franko333: That's probably more a reflection of the level of Indian professionalism rather than some kind of magic potion possessed by the NZ Rugby Union administration. The perception is that most Indian cricketers are not hard trainers. Clearly many are poor fielders with low physical fitness levels. They don't practice on the types of playing surfaces found throughout the world (that matters in this game - and it's a weakness shared by numerous teams). When foreign coaches try to force professional work ethics on the team, they run into trouble. India relies mostly on raw talent from their giant population pool and, so far, that hasn't been enough to become consistent world-beaters.

  • ed.dixon on June 28, 2012, 13:21 GMT

    Huh? Why aren't Australia basing themselves on the Australian cricket team that was pretty well unbeatable for 15 years or so? Or is this Australia tacitly admitting that actually they were just pretty lucky to have 4 or 5 of the best players in history turning up at the same time and that the coach, as Warne so memorably put it 'is just a bus for getting you to the matches'.

  • KiwiRocker- on June 28, 2012, 10:36 GMT

    This is laughable stuff! Finally, I got an oppertunity to comment about something New Zealand related. While, I admire the persistent dominance of All blacks for more than a century but it does not help when you actually do not win when it matters! England won the rugby world cup in 2003 despite being an average team as they believed in winning ugly. All Blacks have only won world cup twice and choked at many important occasions...There are some ridiculous comments being made around here by Indian fans who have no clue what All Blacks are and so on..All Black have been dominant because each New Zealand player takes a huge pride when they wear the black Jersey..Indian cricketers can never match that. India's most ove rated player of All time Tendulya only plays and cares for records..What exactly has he won? Pat Howard will be best advised to look at model of Steve Waugh's era Australian team as they are dominant and had a mental edge over opponents!

  • BoundaryCrtitic on June 28, 2012, 9:55 GMT

    One thing i would like to point out. The World Cup of rugby was an after thought, prior to 1987 there was no world cup, it was based around tours. The All Blacks dominance was well established prior to that. Yes, the All Blacks have got a habit of losing the one off games at the pointy end of one competition every four years. But, in the last 50 years only England, Australia, South Africa and France have beaten the All Blacks. 1953 was the last time Wales have beaten New Zealand and no other national team have. If that is not a dominant record, I don't know what is. So I can understand why people maybe looking at how to emulate this.

  • cricketcritic on June 28, 2012, 9:44 GMT

    I'm not convinced CA needs to do this, but NZ have been extraordinarily successful in rugby. They've won the WC twice, made the finals every other WC and ranked no. 1 consistently from year to year. Contrary to popular belief they also have fewer playing numbers than countries like France and England - so not a bad example to follow if you must

  • on June 28, 2012, 7:53 GMT

    Australia should model themselves on themselves. Highest winning ratio of any test playing nation, Most World Cups, a decade and a half dominance in test cricket....whereas the All Blacks have underachieved at every turn in a sport that is a virtual religion in NZ. If teh last World Cup was not held in NZ,they would not have won it - pure and simple. Is that what CA want's to emulate?

  • on June 28, 2012, 6:59 GMT

    Well I've read quite a few responses to my earlier comment.I'd like to accept that I was mistaken in claiming that no Kiwi batsman has ever averaged above 40.Fine.

    It is still SAFE to say that FEW Kiwi batsman have averaged so high.Hardly anyone among the current crop atleast.Martin Guptill, Ross Taylor and Kane Williamson still average in the 30s, though one would expect them, particularly Mr. Williamson to have an average above 45.In any case, an average of early forties isn't great by any standards.....Excuses!Excuses!

    I guess I'd rather focus on Indian sport and leave our Kiwi friends to focus on their own.New Zealand is a beautiful country with wonderful people.

  • LALITHKURUWITA on June 28, 2012, 2:10 GMT

    No asian test cricket playing country cna compete with SL in Rugby.

  • Franko333 on June 28, 2012, 1:01 GMT

    The idea that the All Blacks are dominant simply because NZ care more about rugby than anyone else is wrong. That's a factor but if that was the only factor India would totally dominate cricket. They care about cricket more than anyone else and are a massive country compared to NZ so why aren't they No.1 year on year if the care factor is all that matters?

  • popcorn on June 27, 2012, 22:14 GMT

    Australia has ALWAYS been the forerunner in ELEVATING Skills in Sport.From Biomechanics to the COE at Brisbane,Australia have "thought" cricket to better performance.Like bringing Mike Young, a baseball coach to improve fielding. Pat Howard reminds of John Buchanan, who thought of innovative ways of Coaching and raising the Aussies' game. Small wonder then, that Australia were the Number One ranked Test Playing Nation for over a decade,winning 16 Tests, consecutiively,not once, but twice,4 ODI world Cups,of which 3 were in succession, and two Champions' Trophies in succession.

  • Frank_Rizzo on June 27, 2012, 21:08 GMT

    They should model themselves on Professor Hafeez, Professor of DUCK

  • JimDavis on June 27, 2012, 20:00 GMT

    First thing to know is which positions in the team need to be filled by battle hardened experienced players and which positions should be filled by talented youngsters

  • Essex_Kiwi on June 27, 2012, 17:53 GMT

    @whatawicket - please tell us which 6current All Blacks were born outside of NZ? I'll give you a clue - only one, Ben Franks, and he was born in Australia. Sorry, but Julian Savea, Ma'a Nonu, Ben Tameifuna, Victor Vito etc are all born and bred Kiwis. In future, please back up your comments with facts.

  • Slobberdog on June 27, 2012, 16:41 GMT

    The very first comment by Sinhaya probably sums it up. Rugby Union is a religion in NZ and achieves nowhere near the same level of popularity elsewhere in the world. That is not the dynamic in cricket. That is why NZ has been so successful for so long, not because it's necessarily the most professional and innovative outfit on the planet. To expect the Australian cricket team to produce All Black-like results by implementing All Black-like practices would be ridiculous. Then again, 'blueprint for sustained supremacy' might be just media talk.

  • Riderstorm on June 27, 2012, 16:25 GMT

    I support the willingness of CA to innovate and improve. I would be really happy if this innovation focusses more on the shield cricketers eliminating the time to acclimatise to international cricket.

  • fataquie on June 27, 2012, 16:24 GMT

    Aussies should model over themselves based on their dominance of cricket for well over 100 years including over 50% of all international trophies.

  • kingofspain on June 27, 2012, 16:09 GMT

    I'm sure there are some aspects of NZ rugby's player development practices that are worthy of emulation. However, we should also acknowledge that part of the reason for their dominance in rugby is that NZ cares far more about rugby than pretty much any other nation on Earth.

  • on June 27, 2012, 15:57 GMT

    Whatawicket, who are the players you are thinking of? By my count the only player born outside NZ was Ben Franks, who was born in Australia (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_national_rugby_union_team#Current_squad). You have to realise, too, that NZ is an immigrant nation, and a huge number of Pacific Islanders move to New Zealand. It would be incredibly bizarre if we didn't have any foreign-born players in our sports teams, given that something like 25% of the population was born outside NZ.

  • on June 27, 2012, 15:38 GMT

    How about pre-match HAKA to begin with ? ...

  • 12th_man on June 27, 2012, 15:19 GMT

    The sports are quite different but the idea from C.A is a good one. As far as rugby goes, the World Cup is the pinnacle of the sport but in cricket this is not the case as test cricket is seen by the players and the purists as everything. To make test cricket mainstream and exciting to attract more people and make it more accessible night tests need to be introduced soon.

  • cmnz on June 27, 2012, 15:17 GMT

    @whatawicket Could you enlighten me as to which 6 of the 21 all black squad were not born in NZ? I have been through the squad and can't see a single one. Just because someone is of polynesian descent doesn't mean they aren't a NZer.

  • StevieS on June 27, 2012, 15:14 GMT

    Another thing to be taken into account when looking at New Zealand batting averages is when a player shows potential aka Martin Crowe and today Kane Williamson they are rushed into the national team, if he was Australia he probably would have been about 26 when picked for tests hence his average would most likely be higher.

  • CreamIce on June 27, 2012, 15:14 GMT

    Australia has already had a 13 year dominance period between 1995-2007.

  • Selassie-I on June 27, 2012, 15:06 GMT

    Maybe if they spent more time in the nets and less time messing about trying to be a rugby team they might be able to reclaim the ashes.

  • Bollo on June 27, 2012, 14:49 GMT

    Just for the record, NZ have won 19% of the test matches they have played, India a princely 24%.

  • on June 27, 2012, 14:21 GMT

    @RandyOZ Perhaps for the first time ever I agree with you, if Australia want a model of dominance in a sport the Aussie team that dominated after the fall of WI seems a better example than the all black, what with being a cricket team and all that. As for inevitable Aussie dominance, nothing inevitable about it looking at your young batsmen and spinners.

  • YorkshirePudding on June 27, 2012, 13:58 GMT

    @Posted on (June 27 2012, 09:28 AM GMT), you might want to look up Martin Crowe, CS Dempster, JF Reid, Alan Jones, GM Turner, and Mark Richardson, all had averages above 40. The point of the article is that the aussies want to have a similar win ratio to the All Blacks, which Isnt really attainable in Test cricket, but could be in ODI's and T20's

  • whatawicket on June 27, 2012, 13:08 GMT

    randyoz i can see the good and bad in all countries and have an open opinion on all cricketing matters.although australia has only been a holiday destination i guess iv seen more state cricket in more states than most. if everyone would do similar these forums would be more pleasurable

  • whatawicket on June 27, 2012, 13:02 GMT

    mervo i have said before when writers have used the united nation 11 tag with regards to england. the number of islanders playing or have paid for NZ and a lesser extent for AUS. to tell a young islander of say 15/16 that have the attributes to make a good rugby player, come to NZ or AUS we will give you the highest education you require and in turn you will play rugby for us, who would say no. i counted 6 out of the 21 pool of NZ players who played and beat ireland at the weekend were born outside of NZ and could have played for their country region ( and who play internation rugby union) . the US in their collage system do this all the time, but at least the vast majority of then are US born.

  • on June 27, 2012, 12:53 GMT

    Inspiration from the All Blacks? So the Australian cricket team is planning to go 24 years before their next World Cup? :eek:

  • StevieS on June 27, 2012, 12:43 GMT

    TaaHa Schaikh Martin Crowe 45, Andrew Jones 44, Glenn Turner 44, Bert Sutcliffe 40, Stephan Flemming 40 and probably a few I have missed.

  • TrickyKid on June 27, 2012, 12:37 GMT

    @ TaaHa Scaikh. I'm not much of a cricket nerd but Ross Taylor and Ryder plus Fleming, Richardson and Crowe all averaged over 40 with the bat. I'm sure there are more: Jones, Turner... NZ produces bowling friendly conditions so when you play there half the time, your average will be lower. Many promising cricketers also play rugby and go in that direction, such as the current All Black full back.

  • AdrianVanDenStael on June 27, 2012, 12:34 GMT

    Agree with takenaback. It's a bit premature to get worked up about models for sustained supremacy with Australian cricket in its current state. They've had a good year, but are still building. Get back to no.1 and win at least one world cup like they used to first: shouldn't be talking of "sustaining" supremacy when they don't have supremacy in the first place

  • IndianInnerEdge on June 27, 2012, 12:29 GMT

    The gr8 part about Aus cricket has always been the willingness and ability to innovate, think outside the square, get a fresh aproach and basically honestly and ruthlessly self examine themselves and their setup. I feel with the resurgance of England and the Saffers being so strong, the chances of one team dominating are very less, like the AB's in rugby. The way to go for aus cricket is thru their shield cricket which still is the best domestic setup. Not a bad idea to emulate someone like the legendary AB's, wish the cement heads @ BCCI would show some pro-activity in even thinking about India's test future, leave alone having aspirations about emulating someone like the AB's....wishful thinking!

  • landl47 on June 27, 2012, 12:10 GMT

    Great idea. Now all CA has to do is ask NZ Rugby how to play the outswinger or the ball lifting off a length, and they'll be all set.

  • Kiwi-Jake on June 27, 2012, 11:56 GMT

    @Taahu, You are mistaken: Though the amount of Kiwis who have averaged 40+ isn't that big, there are some: Fleming, Crowe, Turner, Jones, Sutcliffe and the great Mark Richardson being notable. Ross Taylor and (somehow) Jesse Ryder are also averaging over 40, and Brendon McCullum's average is climbing. One would also expect Kane Williamson to finish his career with an average hovering between 40-50. It's true, we haven't done brilliantly in cricket, but in all fairness I say we do alright considering our extremely limited player pool (4mil population + cricket not exactly being a big sport in NZ compared to other test playing nations).

  • on June 27, 2012, 10:17 GMT

    @5wombats - Rugby isn't just about World Cups, and I think it is more around an 80% win raito at the international level. World Cups are a bit of a joke, yes NZ does slip up when they are expected to win but look at the last one, We smoke France in the pool game, France loose to minnow team (was it Tonga?? Cant recall) also in a pool game and then they almost win the final. If they did good for them but that doesn't have the qualities of best team in the world. Aussie has there moments in rugby but we DOMINATE them as hbkbibboobobo said.. The AB's are the benchmark and that is why our players / coaches are so sought after. Very smart move from Pat Howard. Any team can learn a lot for the AB's management / culture / structure. Why haven't the muppets in NZ cricket thought of this???? Fact is no international can come close to the AB's and what they have achieved for over 100 YEARS!!!! Aussie were quite brilliant for 20 years in cricket but that'll be hard to get back.

  • jplterrors on June 27, 2012, 9:29 GMT

    Howard sure does have alot of sense what a great idea to emulate the most dominant side in any code ever.

  • on June 27, 2012, 9:28 GMT

    New Zealand are better off with rugby.They simply can't play cricket too well.At best they can be the surprise package and produce 1 or 2 class cricketers.

    If I'm not mistaken, no Kiwi batsman has ever averaged 40+ in Test cricket.Secondly, I heard a lot about All Blacks' win/loss ratio against Australian rugby team being 97:41....but what about the cricket record...????

    For the record, this is a cricket website.

  • jmcilhinney on June 27, 2012, 9:24 GMT

    @RandyOZ, that you for that concise explanation of why we see you commenting on threads about England.

  • RyanHarrisGreatCricketer on June 27, 2012, 8:57 GMT

    I think all teams can adopt this position of high performance manager to link national teams and boards and act as a sounding board for captains. Once you have this post and specialist coaches for batting , bowling and fielding , you dont need a redundant post of head coach , becos a good captain can definitely use these four guys to plan for a reasonable period and then lead by example. And use the HP manager if needed.

  • hbkbibboobobo on June 27, 2012, 8:36 GMT

    @ 5wombats, in New Zealand v Australia games all time In total, New Zealand have won 97 of the showdowns, Australia have won 41 and have drawn 5 times. That's dominance in any man's language. New Zealand may underperform in world cups but against all teams all time an over 75% win record

  • takenaback on June 27, 2012, 8:34 GMT

    Yes that's all good and it won't hurt but Australia's biggest problem is the lack of batting talent and I don't see anything coming through. Let's hope we don't follow the All Black habit of falling over at the final hurdle as they did on many occasions up until recently.

  • ejsiddiqui on June 27, 2012, 8:18 GMT

    I like the idea of getting ideas from other sports e.g. We can get many ideas about how to spin the ball in air from Baseball. Please don't talk about WC only when we talk about All-Blacks. All Blacks mean century-old dominance.

  • StevieS on June 27, 2012, 8:16 GMT

    5wombats get real, dominance means being consistently dominant, tri nations NZ have won it 10 times, Aussie and SA 3 times, head to head played 143 NZ won 97 Australia 41 times. One off compititions mean squat in the grand scheme of things.

  • on June 27, 2012, 8:03 GMT

    I would love to know what G. Smith, A. B. de Villiers and Johan Botha have to say about these Ausie efforts to rise to the no. 1 spot in cricket again. Perhaps I will ask them on their Facebook pages . . .

  • Morgsy on June 27, 2012, 7:49 GMT

    Wombat5, do you actually know anything about rugby??? Like ANYTHING??? The ABs have been playing rugby for well over 100 yrs and their winning percentage has never dipped below 80% The All Blacks have a winning record against every other rugby playing country, including Australia, South Africa, England and France. In over 100 yrs Ireland have never beaten the ABs at all...not once, ever...

  • slippingsillypoint on June 27, 2012, 7:46 GMT

    @5wombats .Mate, the All Blacks have won over 75% of all games they have ever played.I'd call that rugby dominance! Two world cups,more Tri nations,Bledisloe's and Super titles than the rest. Anyway, I think Pat Howard is onto a winner here, Learn from the most successful team's!

  • Mervo on June 27, 2012, 7:23 GMT

    The All Blacks are a multi nation team and hard to beat. Fiji, Tonga and Solomons have been trying to get approval for a Pacific Islands team and/or a Super Rugby franchise for years but are constantly blocked by New Zealand. The All Blacks would lose half their players and never be a force again if that happened.

  • RandyOZ on June 27, 2012, 7:05 GMT

    We should simply be basing our team on the world dominating one of the last 20 years. No team got anywhere near us, and I can tell you where it starts - Shield cricket. Also good to see the poms on here looking really worried about the inevitable extended period of dominance from Oz once again.

  • Mary_786 on June 27, 2012, 6:02 GMT

    I hope we do as well as the All Blacks, but the fact is that our batting is too weak at the moment. We need more youngsters in the batting lineup

  • 5wombats on June 27, 2012, 5:31 GMT

    What NZ rugby dominance? Aus - follow that "model" if you like! Aus won the rugby World Cup twice, NZ won the world cup twice. What dominance!? @KURUWITA - good to see you! Loved your comments in the 2010/11 Ashes - looking forward to more!

  • jonesy2 on June 27, 2012, 5:20 GMT

    ha this is what ive been saying for awhile now. australia have the depth to be the allblacks of cricket. i dont think domination to the degree of the allblacks is possible for any international sporting team but something similar is something the baggy green can achieve

  • Sulli001 on June 27, 2012, 4:03 GMT

    Its a shame NZC hasn't/can't adopt the same system...., instead we leave it the hands of an Australian analyst.

  • jmcilhinney on June 27, 2012, 3:26 GMT

    Given that Australia have already had a period of extended dominance in world cricket, I'm not necessarily convinced that trying to model themselves after a rugby team is really going to make a significant difference. If it was as simple as that then surely they could simply model themselves after themselves 10 years ago. There are obviously various factors that are at play, including a significant improvement by England, but the main reason that Australia are not the dominant team that they were is that the players they have available now are just not as good as they were. No amount of backroom tinkering with the elite team is going to change that. I understand that every little bit helps and they need to attack the problem from multiple angles but I just don't see this making all that much difference.

  • LALITHKURUWITA on June 27, 2012, 3:16 GMT

    All Blacks is the NZ religion. Unfortunately NZ cricket could not or does not want to adopt what AB's has done in player's high perfomanance programs.

  • Buckers410 on June 27, 2012, 2:49 GMT

    He's great for the job and i wish him well. Aus will rise again

  • on June 27, 2012, 1:55 GMT

    dont forget even though all blacks won the WC, France Owned The 2nd half of that final,

  • kensohatter on June 27, 2012, 1:45 GMT

    Great news so happy to hear the Australian set up being proactive about getting back to no.1 in the world. Pat Howard has been good for australian cricket and the argus review has been a good stepping stone in shaking up the administration and getting some fresh ideas. Shame that McDermott couldnt stay on as bowling coach because he was getting some results with the young fast bowling crop however im sure that issue will also get resolved. Its this self examination and ruthlessness in selection that will ultimately keep us competitive and eventually dominant

  • Sinhaya on June 27, 2012, 0:28 GMT

    NZ has the advantage of being diehardly passionate about rugby union. Aussies as a whole are into many sports unlike NZ. So that way I doubt if Australia can really get to the height NZ got to in rugby union in a consistent way. No matter how dominant Australia will be at home, they wont whitewash a sub continent team in the sub continent as they will not be the greatest against spin bowling. Australia has a good bowling attack now but their batting is indeed flimsy.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Sinhaya on June 27, 2012, 0:28 GMT

    NZ has the advantage of being diehardly passionate about rugby union. Aussies as a whole are into many sports unlike NZ. So that way I doubt if Australia can really get to the height NZ got to in rugby union in a consistent way. No matter how dominant Australia will be at home, they wont whitewash a sub continent team in the sub continent as they will not be the greatest against spin bowling. Australia has a good bowling attack now but their batting is indeed flimsy.

  • kensohatter on June 27, 2012, 1:45 GMT

    Great news so happy to hear the Australian set up being proactive about getting back to no.1 in the world. Pat Howard has been good for australian cricket and the argus review has been a good stepping stone in shaking up the administration and getting some fresh ideas. Shame that McDermott couldnt stay on as bowling coach because he was getting some results with the young fast bowling crop however im sure that issue will also get resolved. Its this self examination and ruthlessness in selection that will ultimately keep us competitive and eventually dominant

  • on June 27, 2012, 1:55 GMT

    dont forget even though all blacks won the WC, France Owned The 2nd half of that final,

  • Buckers410 on June 27, 2012, 2:49 GMT

    He's great for the job and i wish him well. Aus will rise again

  • LALITHKURUWITA on June 27, 2012, 3:16 GMT

    All Blacks is the NZ religion. Unfortunately NZ cricket could not or does not want to adopt what AB's has done in player's high perfomanance programs.

  • jmcilhinney on June 27, 2012, 3:26 GMT

    Given that Australia have already had a period of extended dominance in world cricket, I'm not necessarily convinced that trying to model themselves after a rugby team is really going to make a significant difference. If it was as simple as that then surely they could simply model themselves after themselves 10 years ago. There are obviously various factors that are at play, including a significant improvement by England, but the main reason that Australia are not the dominant team that they were is that the players they have available now are just not as good as they were. No amount of backroom tinkering with the elite team is going to change that. I understand that every little bit helps and they need to attack the problem from multiple angles but I just don't see this making all that much difference.

  • Sulli001 on June 27, 2012, 4:03 GMT

    Its a shame NZC hasn't/can't adopt the same system...., instead we leave it the hands of an Australian analyst.

  • jonesy2 on June 27, 2012, 5:20 GMT

    ha this is what ive been saying for awhile now. australia have the depth to be the allblacks of cricket. i dont think domination to the degree of the allblacks is possible for any international sporting team but something similar is something the baggy green can achieve

  • 5wombats on June 27, 2012, 5:31 GMT

    What NZ rugby dominance? Aus - follow that "model" if you like! Aus won the rugby World Cup twice, NZ won the world cup twice. What dominance!? @KURUWITA - good to see you! Loved your comments in the 2010/11 Ashes - looking forward to more!

  • Mary_786 on June 27, 2012, 6:02 GMT

    I hope we do as well as the All Blacks, but the fact is that our batting is too weak at the moment. We need more youngsters in the batting lineup