Cricket: One-days and test daze

Spare a thought for John Bracewell as New Zealand attempt to repair their already badly-dented reputation in the second test against Australia.

The former test spinner took over the coaching role last summer amid much hope and expectation, and, at a time when New Zealand were over-achieving in the test arena but proving horribly inconsistent on the one-day scene.

Fast forward a year, and Bracewell finds himself in charge of a side that's turned 180 degrees under his watch, becoming one of the most proficient of the world's one-day teams while performing dreadfully in the longer game.

New Zealand's well-deserved one-day success over Pakistan, South Africa, England and the West Indies has been comfortably matched by their appalling test record over the past 11 months, including a series loss at home against Pakistan, a missed opportunity against South Africa, a whitewash in England, and an embarrassing innings defeat at Brisbane.

Just like Bracewell's Gloucester county side - a modest four-day team but winner of seven one-day titles during his six-year stint - New Zealand have looked unconvincing on the test circuit, and, even worse, have often managed to squander commanding positions.

They were well-placed against Australia at Brisbane before losing by an innings; they had match-winning opportunities in all three tests against England, and were looking good against South Africa and Pakistan before succumbing at critical times.

Hurt badly by the team's spectacular collapse at the Gabba, Bracewell will need to receive a wall-to-wall performance from New Zealand at the Adelaide Oval, if only to boost confidence levels before Sri Lanka arrive in December, and Australia pay their reciprocal visit after Christmas.

The first football-styled manager-selector since the failed experiment with Glenn Turner, his coaching credentials are beyond dispute, but his selection performance has raised some eyebrows, particularly in terms of consistency.

The story of Hamish Marshall still beggars belief; a player pushed from pillar to post as the selection chief first championed him, then expressed doubts over him, and finally dropped him to make way for Craig McMillan who, in turn, made a complete pork chop of himself.

Ian Butler's non-selection at Brisbane was another interesting decision.

The Gabba was well-paced and bouncy, so much so that comparisons were being drawn with the old Waca surface at Perth, and it was no surprise when Glenn McGrath, Jason Gillespie and Michael Kasprowicz emerged as match-winners.

In the wash-up, Butler's pace was a crucial missing ingredient.

Bracewell clearly didn't think so when he dismissed the option at the aftermatch press conference, but the fact that New Zealand couldn't dislodge a couple of bunnies like McGrath and Gillespie spoke volumes about the lack of penetration.

It was also difficult to understand his thinking on the question of Mathew Sinclair, who couldn't force his way into New Zealand's dysfunctional top-order for the tour of England, despite a golden summer with the bat in domestic cricket and a useful contribution in the third test against South Africa.

But for an eleventh-hour shoulder injury suffered by Michael Papps, Sinclair would have even missed the visit to Bangladesh last month, and still seemed to be an unfashionable inclusion.

Then there was the decision to persuade Stephen Fleming against opening so that he could revert back to No 3, a move that now seems somewhat illogical in terms of the New Zealand top-order, where Sinclair (who is familiar with first-drop) is operating as a makeshift opener.

It was only a few months ago that Fleming was proving himself as a highly-effective opening batsman.

Quite why he wasn't left to develop himself in the position is still a trifle unclear, although by that stage Bracewell had a bee in his bonnet over New Zealand's lack of batting discipline, and there was some talk about Fleming being needed to steady the middle-order.

The difficulty sometimes is trying to read or understand Bracewell's wider philosophy, as he seems to swing dramatically in terms of personnel and job-descriptions, and appears to be developing a taste for the unusual selection.

Be that as it may, he is still a breath of fresh air when it comes to discussing the game, his ideas are always worth tapping in to, and he has retained a marvellous sense of humour - a pre-requisite for the coach of the New Zealand cricket team.

His mischief was to the fore after the Brisbane test, when he found a novel way of circumventing the strict rules against criticising the umpires, suggesting that if the match officials were always right as suggested, then the television replay technology was clearly inadequate and should be retired.

He was also quick to fire back when asked this week about his reaction to the comments from Darren Lehmann, who opined that New Zealand would have almost certainly suffered psychological bruising from the events at the Gabba, when they were bowled out for 76 and beaten by an innings and 156.

"I'm not sure about Darren's psychology credentials," said a straight-faced Bracewell.

"But it's good that he's thinking about life after cricket."