Adam Parore: We badly need some honour to bring home

At the risk of sounding unduly negative after day one at Adelaide, it is crucial New Zealand are not beaten in the second test.

Let's face it. They were cleaned out comprehensively in the opening match at Brisbane and that simply added another grim chapter to a dreadful test year for the Black Caps.

Another loss in Adelaide and there's no question New Zealand will drop into the second division of test teams.

Excluding the series in Bangladesh, New Zealand have now lost five proper tests on the bounce - at home to South Africa, three on the disastrous tour of England and in Brisbane last weekend.

At times things have looked as bad as the grim days in the early 1990s, when I was just starting out in the test team. We had some shockers back then, and some of what's gone on this year has been no better.

Now, if they depart having copped a double whacking from Australia, what state of mind will they be in when the three-test series at home starts in March?

And how will Australia be viewing their opponents? Like sharks circling for the kill, I'd suggest.

I always advocate a positive, attacking philosophy, partly because it is the best form of defence and partly because if you want to succeed in cricket you need to be on the front foot, so to speak.

But if I was Stephen Fleming this morning, I'd be looking to attack for 30 to 45 minutes, trying to pick up another couple of wickets while the second new ball is still hard and shiny.

If that hasn't worked, then he should defend and keep things tight, and wait for Australia to slip up.

Remember, the Aussies cannot help but attack. That's the way they play their cricket. It's generally worked spectacularly for them. They don't like the waiting game. Patience is not their batsmen's strongest suit.

The Adelaide pitch is an absolute belter and I doubt Australia could bowl New Zealand out twice - even allowing for that second innings carnage at Brisbane.

If New Zealand bat well, it will almost certainly mean at least one, or not two batsmen could get hundreds.

That would be a huge morale booster and it will mean a little more credibility is restored ahead of the home series.

There is a temptation at times like this to go out and bat like demons to try to catch up and put yourself in a position to win.

New Zealand's batsmen received plenty of advice from Australia's commentators on this issue in the first test.

I thought Mark Richardson summed up the situation perfectly in his fine column in last weekend's Herald on Sunday: You had idealists telling realists what to do.

Anyone who knows anything about cricket should recognise this Australian attack is among the best going around. It's not simple.

On this pitch, if a batsman gets settled the runs will come. That doesn't have to be done by crashing a couple of boundaries each over. Rotating the strike keeps the board ticking over and can unsettle the bowlers.

But first things first: don't lose.

I was pleased for Paul Wiseman yesterday. There had been an issue of whether he was worth playing as off-spin support for Dan Vettori or if another fast-medium option, Ian Butler, or a sixth specialist batsman would have been a better bet.

Wiseman had been picked with this test in mind and on this pitch he had to play. He hasn't bowled badly in the last two years and he does get guys out.

Okay, he's not in Vettori's league, but picking him is no token gesture.

Should the quicker Ian Butler have played instead of leftie James Franklin? It's probably a bit like the Craig Millan-Hamish Marshall selection for the Brisbane test. There's pros and cons each way.

Neither is demonstrably superior to the other, and in this case you are weighing up Butler's superior speed with Franklin's ability to swing the ball.

I didn't see it swing much yesterday.

Still, Fleming has to take a punt at times. Unfortunately that one didn't work out yesterday.

Adam Parore is a former New Zealand wicketkeeper