Our best averaged over 50 with the ball?

After Martin Guptill's massive knock down in Hamilton which guided the Blackcaps to victory, I held off sharing any post-match thoughts as I usually do; what more is there to say than 'Guppy went bang'. We've seen Guppy do it before and we'll see Guppy do it again, as long as this Blackcaps ODI team has Guptill, Kane Williamson and Ross Taylor in it doing their thing with the willow, the Blackcaps will generally be competitive.

On the biggest stage (of the series) though, our Blackcaps crumbled and the disparity in quality or most notably where these two teams are at ahead of the Champions Trophy was put in the spotlight. The quality of Guptill, Taylor (1x100, 1x50, 48.75avg) and Williamson (2x50, 36.50avg) kinda just covered up the holes in the Blackcaps and they are holes that we are none the wiser as to how to fill.

There's so much water to flow under the bridge before the Champions Trophy that I'm going to have to resist writing about it every week, or I'll go mad. Right now we know that the three world-class batsmen of ours will form the foundation or our batting group and the only other box-ticker was Jimmy Neesham. Neesham ticked a box or two, although he's not going to be scoring consistent runs or serving up six quality deliveries each over just yet.

Y'all know that I prefer having Tom Latham in the team as a wicket-keeper/opener and that view has only been strengthened. Luke Ronchi didn't exactly snap up his chance with the bat (as he's done previously) and I'm still a bit lost as to what the decision-makers think of the Guptill/Latham opening combination as Latham's scored most of his big knocks alongside Guptill.

Latham isn't just competing with Ronchi, he's also battling against Dean Brownlie and Brownlie had a high-score of 34 in five innings', averaging 19 for the series.

Whatever your opinion is on this, it's nothing short of a shambles. Latham, Ronchi and Brownlie all failed to stand up and snatch a massive chance to seal their spot. That's a concern because they failed to do so against a quality ODI team and we've seen these three enjoy various levels of success against weaker opposition, yet against a rampant South African team they just all sucked.

Chuck Neil Broom in there as everyone was loving him when he was scoring runs against Bangladesh, however he lost his spot in the team thanks to his failures in three innings'.

Aotearoa's best bowler (Trent Boult) averaged 44.83 and conceded 5.80rpo in five games.

South Africa's best bowler (Kagiso Rababa) averaged 17 and conceded 4.22rpo in four games.

Should we be concerned that Boult averaged over 40 with the ball and that Tim Southee averaged 56.60/6.04rpo? These two are apparently our best bowlers, bowling in home conditions and we saw the South African bowlers move the ball around more potently. Rabada is a gun and we all knew about him, but guys like Duaine Pretorius, Chris Morris and Andile Phehlukwayo aren't exactly household names or talents that had casual fans frothing with anticipation to see bowl (Rabada has me frothin').

Rabada, Pretorius, Morris and Phehlukwayo all had better averages than Boult and Southee.

Only Morris (5.94rpo) conceded more runs than Boult (5.80rpo) and Southee (6.04rpo).

I'd rather not get overly dramatic about Boult and Southee, it's just important to highlight this issues. The Blackcaps aren't beating the world's best teams, or winning the Champions Trophy with their two best bowlers averaging over 30 (let alone over 40 or 50). Worse than that, it's hard to see this Blackcaps bowling attack in general ripping through a decent batting line up.

The issue here is a question of who is better? We don't quite have anyone who is really competing with Southee and Boult, ensuring that they feel some pressure for their position in the team. At the moment it feels as though they are still dining out on past glory, safe in the knowledge that they won't be dropped. Whether someone has the kahunas to drop either of them is an interesting thought.

How will we know if we have bowlers who can put pressure on Southee/Boult if Lockie Ferguson is only selected for one game? Or Matt Henry isn't selected at all? Or if Neil Wagner has been told that he's probably never going to be considered for ODI cricket? Or if *insert young/old seamer here* simply isn't given a chance?

I mean shit the bed; heaven-forbid Ish Sodhi and Jeetan Patel are selected to play more than two games. If our best bowlers are spinners, then there's nothing but a very traditional mindset that is stopping the Blackcaps from rolling out their 'best' bowling attack.

Why is the idea of playing three spinners so foreign? If Patel's opening the bowling, then he should be able to be selected over Southee/Boult.

It feels as though there isn't a willingness to give someone else a run, just to try it and see who does what. Without that, Southee/Boult know they will be selected regardless.

Post-series, I've caught the same vibe as I had pre-series; the Blackcaps need to be creative and have some funk if they are to win the Champions Trophy/beat good teams. Traditional methods and safe selections will get the Blackcaps wins against teams they should always beat, especially in Aotearoa. They need all the weapons they can get.