Adam Parore: Batting line-up all out of order

I've long been a fan of the work of the present selection panel but I can't fathom what was going on with the top order in the first test loss to South Africa.

And I wouldn't mind betting some of the panel are baffled too.

Here we've got a panel who chose two specialist openers in Michael Papps and Jamie How for the South African trip. They did that presumably because they wanted to use them during the three tests.

Specialist selections for a specialist role. The dropping of Lou Vincent barely a month ago is the evidence of this philosophical move.

But what happens? Both are sitting in the stand while another makeshift pair, Hamish Marshall and Peter Fulton, are left to carry the can. The result, against an attack superbly led by Makhaya Ntini, was predictable.

New Zealand had one warm-up game before the test. It is just about a golden rule that, barring injury, those to play the test get to play the lead-up match. Papps and How opened the one New Zealand innings at Benoni, Marshall was left out, signalling again the preference for specialists.

So what happened in the space of a few days between that game and the start of the first test to change the minds of the tour selectors - to all intents coach John Bracewell and captain Stephen Fleming?

What happened is that they have clearly got a different philosophy to the selection panel, which comprises Bracewell, Sir Richard Hadlee, Glenn Turner and Dion Nash. The panel pick the best man for the job - aware that our best opening batsmen are not necessarily our best batsmen. The tour selectors have elected to go with the best man philosophy.

Take Marshall. I think he's a better batsman than Papps. I don't, however, think he is a better opener, and so in looking for an opening batsman I would plump for Papps.

The panel share my philosophy; the tour selectors don't. They went for Marshall because they reckon he is a better player. The result is a final XI that was poorly balanced but made up of really good players deserving of selection, who are being asked to carry out roles that most of them are neither familiar with, nor very good at.

Dan Vettori's comments on the decision to use specialist bowler Kyle Mills as a No 3 batsman highlight this.

"Most of our batsmen are middle-order batsman and putting Kyle in at No 3 had the effect of pushing everyone back into their normal positions," Vettori said.

Unbelievable. This tells us that not only were the openers played out of position but also Fleming, Scott Styris, Nathan Astle and Jacob Oram were not comfortable with their allotted spots in the order in the first innings.

It also serves to highlight the problems inherent with selecting players based on whether they deserve to be dropped. In this case none of the middle order did but the failure to make the tough decision resulted in us once again picking four guys who want to bat No 4 or 5 and no one capable of handling the new ball.

To compound things we have two young guys who usually bat No 3 opening. If anyone bothered to ask them where they would really like to bat they would both likely say No 4 as well! You can begin to see the issue.

I suspect Hadlee, Turner and Nash have been on the phone over the past couple of days inquiring exactly what is going on. It also highlights Vincent's plight. He was mercilessly sacrificed in the quest for specialists, only to find that they are out of favour again.

So where to now? It's back to basics and that means giving guys roles they are familiar with - particularly if the pitches are going to be as challenging as that used for the first test. This means the tour selectors and the panel need to get themselves on the same page, otherwise it's looking like 3-nil.

At least one of Papps or How must play at Cape Town next week, returning Fulton to No 3. This means someone deserving will be left out. Yet that appears not to be an option.

By the way, Mills bowled well when he got the late call to replace Shane Bond. That's what he was selected for, not to bat at No 3. Just as Papps and How were selected for their particular roles.