INTERVIEW

New Zealand cricket has moved away from 'bits and pieces' players: Larsen

by Shirshendu Roy • Last updated on

Santner is a massive part of New Zealand's plans going forward. © Getty

"One of the analogies that I use.. we [New Zealand] are a dairy country. If you had to pick up a standard New Zealand full cream milk bottle and give it a shake and leave it, the cream rises to the top. If you said that was your talent base sitting at the top, that's what I am looking at as a selector. When you look at a place like India (we have a massive company called Fonterra at home), Indian cricket would be the Fonterra dairy factory, pick the entire factory up and give it a good shake, the cream that would rise to the top, woah! That's the difference between the talent base we have when compared to other bigger cricket countries."

Gavin Larsen, the New Zealand selector, is 55. From being the 'postman' who delivered each time with his bits and pieces abilities during his playing days to running the show at Wellington cricket to entering his third season as the selector, Larsen has a sniff of almost every block with which the country's cricket has been built. He's proud of how the sport has evolved as a whole and how New Zealand have stayed relevant in the race, a prime example of which is their adaptability through their transition from bits and pieces cricketers to generating more specialists.

For a country with a population of not more than four and a half million, New Zealand have used their resources to punch above their weight on more occasions than one. Larsen's not shy, rather forthright when he admits that they are a small country, a major reason which spills over to them being called the 'underdogs'. Yet, he is also proud of the massive ground covered by their High-Performance Unit in talent identification, grooming, creating a robust infrastructure and making the most of whatever little they possess. Wearing a selector's hat isn't the easiest job even in New Zealand as Larsen sheds light on how they have moved consciously towards giving players a longer run to prove themselves. Talent jumps off the page, he says but consistency is what they seek in not just trusting a player but also as they intend to build a bigger reputation of their minute cricket population.

Excerpts:

Given New Zealand is a tiny country, where does it stand against the bigger cricketing nations, from talent to infrastructure?

I say this with a great deal of respect and also envious of it, we have seen it with our own eyes here as well, the sheer talent that is coming through for Indian cricket and you would marry it now to the good infrastructure, things are going really well.

Kohli and his team, the way they can move players in and out and replace a player with another quality player almost effortlessly, it is a fantastic story. I also used the word 'envious', it is a signal to me and New Zealand cricket, we need to be very light on our feet, we need to be very vigilant around our talent ID and the High Performances programmes because we are not blessed with the sheer number of cricketers that emerge somewhere like from India. We do things very well but we are always going to be cognizant that we are not going to have the depth.

And in simple terms at the moment, our fast bowling stocks are in reasonable shape. The incumbent there are doing a pretty good job, the next tier of bowlers, we have probably got 6-7 or 8 bowlers, tucked them behind. When we came to pick this 'A' team, we had got a few injuries to be fair, we were talking about the bowlers who were sitting on our list.. I won't say that's a sequential list but we had got fast bowlers, about 12-13. But I've already signalled in terms of offspinners, left-arm spinners, wicket-keepers - we have got two or three of them with us on this tour, who we are desperately trying to accelerate and fast track them into international cricket with opportunities. Tom Blundell, Tim Seifert, Glenn Phillips, they are three young guys who are still cutting their teeth with the gloves, three good batsmen too. But from a wicket-keeping specialist point of view, there is still a lot of work. So we have got a wicket-keeping coach over to work with these guys. The point I am trying to make here is we have some sort of depth for some skill sets but for other, we are looking to work harder and keep scouring for it all over the country.

Cricket is New Zealand's No. 1 summer sport, yet not the No. 1 overall. How much of a fight is it to build an infrastructure while knowing the reality at the ground level? Is the system rewarding enough?

New Zealand is a sporting nation, we love the outdoors and being active, our children get brought up with sports, it is a part of our DNA. Rugby is our No. 1 sport in New Zealand but interestingly to me, football numbers - round ball - are actually greater than rugby numbers in New Zealand in terms of registered players. Rugby is the highest profile sport in the country but other sports have great participation too. Cricket is our No. 1 summer sport, no doubt about that. There are always larger expectations from the New Zealand cricket team, cricket is a massive part of our tradition. I won't say success is demanded but there's an expectation that our guys are always going to fight hard, putting up good performances on the world stage. What you need to marry into that is the size of our country.

It's a small country, four and a bit million people. Sometimes you need to pinch yourself a little bit and to keep things in context, we do things pretty well in New Zealand.

I think from a High-Performance perspective, you can always lift the bar. Our talent-idea with players, it's quite a shallow pool, there aren't many players in New Zealand that we don't know. Sometimes in India, I wonder how with 28 first-class teams compared to six at home, I imagine how your selection process would be and how it would work. Must be amazing behind the scenes. We need a very well oiled machine, we have a thorough scouting programme, we identify players from 16 at home, programmes put in place at our High-Performance pathways, programmes in each of our six Major Associations feeding up into our MA teams. MA teams are at the sharp end of our games, they play full season of cricket, pretty much wall to wall from about now. Plunkett Shield, which is our four-day games, we will have five matches now at the start of the season and five at the end of the season through February-March.

In between through mid of November, we play the white-ball cricket in Ford Trophy, then the T20 cricket in SuperSmash. It is good, vibrant, competitive as well. 21 central contracts now and there's obviously a lot of talk about it at home so as to who would get it. Each of our 6 MAs [Major Association] select 15 contracted MA players, which is 90 plus 21, 111 contracted players in New Zealand. When you compare that with other countries around the world, it is a skinny base that we deal with and it does tend to fall away from MA cricket to DA [District Association] cricket. For instance, Central Districts is one of our first-class provinces, it has got eight DAs under it and they are not resourced as strongly as MA, so it does tend to drop down to waters. It needs to be a stronger area of focus for New Zealand cricket to really develop more.

Chris Harris was one of those bits-n-pieces cricketers to emerge in the 90s ©Getty

How did New Zealand manage to churn out so many 'bits and pieces' cricketers through the 90s to the early 2000s?

I guess the time when I played, the playing conditions in New Zealand were suited to that sort of players. So, I got brought up on pitches which seamed around a little more than they do these days, a little softer and slower, so they didn't have the pace and bounce of these days. Consequently, the guys who bowled between 120-130 kph, hit the top of off regularly, bowled back of a length, sort of came into their own in New Zealand conditions. So you found most teams in New Zealand were structured in such a way that you had one or two players of that sort of ilk.

Every international team is on the lookout for a genuine all-rounder, more so a fast bowling all-rounder? New Zealand have been as much on the right path as they have missed the bus. Thoughts?

As a starting point wearing the selector's hat, I stress the word 'genuine all-rounders', they are like gold dust, invaluable to any team to create balance within it.

If you can slide in a genuine all-rounder at No. 6, someone who can double up as a frontline batsman and a bowler, that immediately offers a spot or two within the team. You might want to play a third seamer, you might want to play two spinners or bolster your batting.

We all acknowledge how valuable all-rounders are but they are a scarce commodity. We have been affectionately called 'bits and pieces' cricketers in New Zealand. I still think that we can count on one hand the number of genuine all-rounders. We are trying very hard to develop those options, Corey Anderson has had an extended run, so has Jimmy Neesham, to be fair to both and probably both would admit that they haven't put in the kind of consistent performances with both red and white ball that we would like. Corey is rehabbing from a back surgery, so we are not going to see him for some time. Jimmy has got massive opportunities to push his game forward and we have a lot of cricket coming forward. We are keeping an eye on developing such players in New Zealand. A long winded way of saying, they are like gold dust and we would like to have one or two such players putting their name up in the light and assisting us from a balance point of view.

How's New Zealand's repository of all-rounders? Whose shadows are they in - a Chris Cairns or a more recent Daniel Vettori's? How are they grooming this specific trade at the ground level?

We would like both. We would want to be greedy and have both a fast bowling all-rounder and spin bowling one too. That would be marvellous if we could have someone at No. 6 and one at No. 8, say your wicketkeeper will bat at No. 7 in red-ball cricket. Back in Daniel Vettori's time, we had Chris Cairns who played a lot of cricket and took the No. 6 role. He was an explosive, powerful all-rounder who would often perform on the big stage. Daniel, of course, was a frontline left-arm spinner. He refined his bowling and his batting got better too, he would bowl those ten very cheaply.

Mitchell Santner is a massive part of our plans, there are so many traits in him that I see in his play that is very reminiscent of Vettori, even down to their body language, they are very same coming from the same part of New Zealand, i.e Northern Districts. He's a very smart, savvy cricketer, still very young and in a way, still cutting his teeth into international cricket. We won't really position him where we could.. use Santner at first-class level for 'x' number of years before we felt he was ready to transition into international cricket. Probably, he got called in a lot earlier than one thought, so he's learning his craft on the big stage, which isn't easy. He has a lot of work-ons and he is aware of it. His bowling is getting better and we want him to develop his batting, so that we can push him to that No. 8 spot in Test cricket and float for us in white-ball.

In growing times of specialist roles in international cricket, has New Zealand's homegrown culture of all-rounders hurt them?

Honestly, we have moved away from the term 'bits and pieces' players now. I think we are well developed now in terms of our High-Performance programme, we have got very strong and robust succession planning, we identify the various skill sets across the three formats and obviously you matrix that up and see players who offer us in all three formats and others who are specialists. We are always trying to develop skills. It is very important to make sure that we are working towards a 'specialist' capacity. In a touring squad of 14 or 15, you have got players who are adaptable and flexible and have the ability to give you cover opportunities. When you travel away, you would want to have someone who is a backup wicket-keeper - might be someone who is a specialist batsman but who is not necessarily a frontline wicket-keeper for his major association but still his 'keeping is upto speed so that he can offer as a fullback option. In white-ball cricket, especially if you are coming to the subcontinent, you might have two spinners and but you would still need that third spinner who could be a batsman and can offer that - cover with his batting from 1 to 6, and bowl some 3-5 overs. We are very cognizant about it within selection.

While conditions aren't very conducive to spin bowling, there are quite a few who have come through the ranks quite strongly? Are New Zealand on the right track or is it still a 'work-on'?

Mitch is the frontliner, he's the No. 1 spin bowling all-rounder we have got. We have got depth (considerable) around the left-arm and right-arm offspinners in New Zealand. From a scouting and succession point of view, we have been very vigilant around those two areas. We have pretty well served with legspinners, we have Ish Sodhi and Todd Astle on this tour, we have got Tarun Nethula who has played for the Black Caps before and is a well-proven legspinner in our domestic cricket. Unlucky that he's not been able to play for New Zealand as much though. So to have three good legspinners from a shallow pool of talent, we have been quite lucky. It is the offspinners and left-armers we need to work more.

There's a fine line, rather a leap of faith when a selector backs a talent even when he is not providing great returns? As a selector, how long is the rope for such cases?

No easy answer to that. That's selection, there's always going to be a degree of intuition, gut feel, you spend time with players, you try to understand their character, their make-up, their strengths and weaknesses just as people. Performance is very important, that's the currency we deal in, batting is runs, bowling is wickets, RPO.. we know what all the numbers are, that's the baseline upon which you build selections. But there's always going to be interesting selections and dilemmas as selector. At the end of the day, if you are picking a list of 11, you probably name 9 or 10 in your mind. In our case, with Mike Hesson and Bob Carter, we debate about that last spot. In a touring team of probably 14 or 15, there would be a strong debate about two of the positions. It's no pure answer. I can stand on the boundary edge and tell you who's a good cricketer, talent jumps off the page at you and then they have to manifest that with performance and I stress on consistency. The trademark of Mike Hesson is that there's a degree of loyalty. Once Mike selects someone for the Black Caps, that player would be given a period of time to prove, who are good enough and can perform consistently at the top level.

How much has the selection scenario changed in New Zealand cricket?

I am moving into my third season, there are many number of people who would have come and gone but I am pleased with the consistency of our selection in terms of the loyalty shown. Maybe I could suggest that there was a period of revolving door selection - can't call it a policy for sure, neither philosophy. We moved players little bit quicker than we should have.

Nobody usually picks three-quarters of a squad and leaves it open to choose through an 'A' series. Where did this idea come from and what were the risks attached with it?

We were always targetting three or four games, we are still going to get those many games in. The guys flew over from New Zealand on 12th and by the time, they settled in Mumbai, we would have been done with the third game. A final decision on the balance before boys moved to Mumbai for the practice games and the ODI series.

Bigger picture is how did it pan out this way? We wanted more and more 'A' cricket because I think we have a real dearth of it. It's been a long time they have played any meaningful 'A' cricket, so to come here, it was great. The two boards got together and reached an agreement on that. The Black Caps tour was an 11th hour addition, it sort of came together nicely. We could slide in an 'A' tour on to the front of it, we would pick maybe if possible a true 'A' team, there would be guys who would get picked. It was circumstantial and unique. We normally don't do that but it has been received well by everyone at home and everyone accepts it is great opportunity. Certainly within the 'A' unit, there's expectations, heightened awareness that the performances are going to count.

If you had to point out one significant change in how New Zealand's cricket has evolved, what would it be?

Over the last 10 or 15 years (I finished 1999-2000), there's a massive improvements in structure of programmes, the advent of the Cricket Players Association which I think has created some healthy tension - positive tension - they challenge New Zealand Cricket, which has ensured that we keep lifting the bar at the High-Performance level. It's called the NZCPA (New Zealand Cricket Players Association), they are the representative body for all our first-class and professional cricketers in the country, run by Heath Mills, who is the CEO and does a very good job. There's a master agreement in place and it is basically a contract between NZC, NZCPA and the six Major Associations, those are the eight parties bound by the terms and conditions of the master agreement. Within the master agreement, which is a very broad and deep document that covers off every aspect of professional cricket in New Zealand.

Just as an example, pay and remuneration, grounds and facilities.. there's been a massive improvement on that front over the last 10 years. I started the interview by talking about slow, low pitches - ones which suited a player like me, I don't think the guys who bowl like me could get away playing on our pitches now, which is good, meaning that the game is always evolving. We are always lifting the bar in terms of quality, that's the impact that the CPA has had on our cricketing landscape, it shouldn't be underestimated. Also our New Zealand Cricket administrators, the board at a governance level has been taken to a point where no stone gets left unturned, which is very healthy.

© Cricbuzz

TAGS

RELATED STORIES