Who has scored four golden ducks in the 2019 World Cup and has a batting average of 11.85? It’s not one particularly out-of-form batsman, it’s actually a pair of out-of-form batsmen.
Those figures belong to New Zealand’s opening partnership from their last seven matches.
Martin Guptill and Colin Munro started the tournament in fine style, putting on an unbeaten 137 to chase down Sri Lanka’s total.
This promising opening matched turned out to be a false dawn. In the Kiwis’ seven subsequent matches, the highest opening partnership has been 35 and the longest their openers have lasted is 9.2 overs.
By comparison, the average opening partnership across all teams at the tournament is 44.37 – meaning the Black Caps’ opening partnership in their last seven games has performed about 75 per cent worse than the average.
These poor performances have put immense pressure on the middle order. Three times now, Kane Williamson had to stride to the middle in the first over. Twice, he faced the second delivery of the innings.
The job of an opening partnership is to create a solid foundation for the rest of the order to flourish. New Zealand’s openers have been setting a foundation for their team on the softest of sands.
In their earlier games, excellent performances by Williamson, Jimmy Neesham and Ross Taylor enabled the Black Caps to score enough runs to defeat Bangladesh, Afghanistan, South Africa and the West Indies.
Kane Williamson (Photo by Alex Davidson/Getty Images)
However, this flimsy top-order meant they were unable to put enough runs on the board to seriously challenge Pakistan, Australia and England.
In some respects, New Zealand have bought these struggles upon themselves. They started the tournament with two openers, Guptill and Munro, who are effective on flat wickets but lack the technique to succeed in testing conditions. Their backup, Henry Nicholls, is a converted middle-order batsman who has only played six of his 43 matches as an opener and averaged 22 in those games.
So, what are the side’s options?
If they stick with any two of Guptill, Nicholls or Munro, they are relying on batsmen who have so far shown an inability to deal with the best bowlers in the world in difficult conditions. Their most technically adept batsmen are Williamson and Taylor, however they are firmly ensconced at three and four, and neither have opened in one-day internationals.
The only other alternative is Tom Latham.
Latham has been an effective opener in ODIs, averaging 46 in 37 innings, but he is also their wicketkeeper and opening may be too much of a burden to place upon a relatively inexperienced keeper, who has endured a tough tournament with the gloves.
Latham has also been having his own struggles with the bat, averaging only 16 across the World Cup, although he will hope his score of 57 against England may herald a return to form.
Barring the most extraordinary of results, the Kiwis will make the semi-finals. However, if their openers are unable to set a more stable foundation, then it is likely that their World Cup will end having been little more than a speed-hump on Australia or India’s path to the final.
Republican
Guest
Despite NZ suffering from a bout of head down batting 'rot' they have been afforded a crack at the the final, courtesy of Pakistans lower run rate. While undeserving of their place in many respects, NZ have the capacity and potential to peak now. I reckon they will get past India and narrowly lose to England in the final. Australia are cactus given the disruption to their line up caused by injury to key players. Mother Albion will easily account for them in the semi.
Jacko
Guest
Geez at least NZ could beat SA......Where is the Aus batting and bowling rotting from cameron? Rotting from the sandpaper up perhaps? A very derogatory headline there cameron
Zozza
Guest
NZ can beat anybody, and any of the four remaining teams win their next two games, and you hold the Cup aloft. What is concerning to me though is the body language the last few games. I don't get it. You are playing for your country in the home of cricket, to win the greatest short form prize. Break the shackles and go out there and see ball - hit ball. Too many theories, too much caution. Just go for it, Kiwis.
Fox
Roar Guru
Do your homework Taylor has been the best performed ODI batsman after Kholi before the WC and is ranked three in the world and Boult is ranked no2 in the world with the ball. Fergusson is one of the top 3 bowlers in this WC so far. NZ attack has the best economy rate of any attack in WC from overs 15-40. Guptil may not be firing but he has been regarded as one of the very best ODI batsmen in world cricket for a while now - and he is due - Latham has found some form and I think should open with Guptil and I don't think the Australian middle order is strong - Maxwell has not done much except in in one match - Stonis hit and miss and the Australian tail has been - quite frankly - rubbish. Cary, Smith ( who is not as good as Williamson or Taylor in this format) - and the openers have done the job for Australia. If Guptil fires then its game on and especially if NZ bat first on these wickets it would seem.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Agree. I think as the weather is getting warmer and the wickets drier, the balance continues to shift more in Aus advantage over NZ. The kiwis bowling has looked the most threatening on the greener pitches and with overcast conditions. Leaving aside the consistent inconsistency of most of the NZ top order, I think this may explain NZs "drop" in performance in the last week or two.
bobbo7
Guest
Exactly - they have all lost chasing and NZ have only batted first once. Yes NZ have some issues but remember teams like Australia have only chased once and lost - second innings runs on these pitches have been hard to come by. Look at England the other day they made 200-1 or whatever in 30 or so and scrapped to 300 because the pitch slowed / ball aged.
anon
Roar Pro
I think NZ, India, England are all danger match ups. We're very vulnerable chasing. Make no mistake. Our bowling won our matches against NZ and England. Our frontline bowlers have been incredible.
jameswm
Roar Guru
I'm not expecting an easy game, but would expect the Aussies to win in these circumstances 8 times out of 10. NZ have batting class with Williamson and to a lesser extent Taylor, but that doesn't combat Warner, Finch, Khawaja and Smith. The Aussie spinner is better, as is our group of quicks. Cummins at first change? Still, the Kiwis have talent and in a one off game, anything can happen.
Cameron Boyle
Roar Guru
I think this is a really good point. It's easy to overlook structural weaknesses when a team is winning. Whilst there have been issues with NZ's opening combo for much of the tournament, it has really only come to a head once they have started losing matches. The problem is that it is now too late to make significant changes to the team. They really have to hope that the current players can work through their poor form to give the Black Caps a better start.
Cameron Boyle
Roar Guru
You're right about how form can change in an instant. And Guptill does have a strong overall record which suggests he can turn it around. Considering he has been an ODI player for 10 years and over 170 matches, it is unlikely he will change his game dramatically. However if he can rein it in a little, it would be more beneficial to NZ as a whole.
Cameron Boyle
Roar Guru
I would agree that is probably New Zealand's best team. My only concern is that it is a front line bowler short. Assuming Boult and Ferguson bowl most of the first ten overs, it would leave New Zealand with little wicket-taking alternatives through the middle overs. Most of the bowlers in that team above are better defensive than attacking bowlers which could be a problem if wickets aren't taken early. Whilst Henry has his weaknesses as a bowler, he at least offers another aggressive bowler.
Brian
Guest
They may as take a risk My XI would be Guptill Latham Williamson Taylor Blundell Neesham De Grandholme Santner Sodhi/Henry - depends on pitch Ferguson Boult Munro and Nicholls can't buy a run son no point. Might as well promote Latham to give Williamson some shine off the ball and bring in Blundell who won't do worse then Munro or Nicholls.
Cameron Boyle
Roar Guru
Blundell is an interesting case, I agree he is talented and a potential alternative. It would be a big call to select a player to make his debut in a WC semi. Also it may unsettle the balance of the team were Latham to have the gloves taken from him. A keeper is heavily responsible for the tone set by the fielding side.
Targa
Guest
Oops "two" not "too"
Carlin
Roar Rookie
I said this at the start of the NZ International Summer in January. Not selecting Will Young for the Sri Lanka series was a mistake. He was in form for NZ A and was a good opportunity to blood him and prepare him for batting cover in the World Cup Squad. He also scored a lot of runs against Australia in May then opted to have shoulder surgery.
Targa
Guest
Tom Blundell is a better keeper than Latham and is with the squad, but hasn't played in this tournament. BJ Watling is also a better keeper but didn't get picked because he scores too slowly. Glenn Phillips (http://www.espncricinfo.com/newzealand/content/player/823509.html) and Tim Seifert (http://www.espncricinfo.com/newzealand/content/player/625964.html) are too very exciting keeper-batsmen who have been unlucky not to have played more.
Lancey5times
Roar Rookie
I think the kiwis are a victim of there own soft early draw. Of course everything seems fine when you are winning but having played one or two of the big sides in the first half of the tournament may have forced Nichols into the side a little earlier and with a few games under his belt against the lesser sides who knows. Also Latham is an odd selection in so many ways. Is he an excellent keeper that they need to accommodate somehow? No. Is he a dashing bat in the style of a Butler, Dhoni, De Kock (even Carey) that makes up for his keeping? No. Is there not a part time keeper who can score at a decent clip in NZ?
Paul
Roar Guru
I'm not sure I would have chosen that headline for this piece, Cameron, but your comments are accurate - to date. The pitches being used in recent games have seemed far more tame than in earlier matches and don't forget last game, they lost an opener early to a wrong decision. No argument Guptill in particular needs to get through the first 10 overs, THEN play the expansive shots. It doesn't take much for guys at this level to come good and it wouldn't surprise at all to see the openers make runs before the tournament is over.
Riccardo
Roar Rookie
I'm not sure we will be a speed-bump for Australia this time around. There is no doubt history weighs against us when we play Australia who have been excellent really, but we have beaten them before and can do so again, especially when they're expecting an easy ride in that 1st semi. No fear. That is the key. See off Starc, add a little bit of luck and focus. Take your chances and you never know...
Bobbo7
Guest
Bat first in the semi and I reckon NZ are every chance. Australia have chased once and lost. India England and NZ have lost chasing. NZ has the team to make a 250 plus total - plenty more if they get going. My team for the semi... 1. Guptill 2. Latham (found a little form last game and is a Test opener - they need to keep Williamson away from the new ball for a few overs and he is far better placed than Munro to see of Starc) 3. Williamson (spinning option as well) 4. Taylor 5. Nicholls 6. Munro (with a few overs of dibbly dobblers) 7. Neehsam (batting and bowling well) 8. de Grandhomme (has some form with bat and ball) 9. Santner 10. Ferguson 11. Boult Genuinely bats to 9. 30 Overs from Boult, Ferguson and Santner 20 from Neesham, de Grandhomme, Williamson and Munro, noting Neesham, de Grandhoome and Williamson have bowled quite well. If NZ get a start there is plenty of firepower in the middle with Munro, Neesham and de Grandhomme and they can float one of these up the order to pinch hit too.