They may not have the money and large pool of players like India to attract athletes to take up a sport that is popular in just about a dozen countries. They also may not have the cricketing tradition and culture that England and Australia claim, and which has sustained the game's appeal among their populace. Yet, New Zealand, with a population of about 50 lakh, are in the third final of an ICC event over the last two and half years.
They were in for heartbreak in the first final against England, in the 50-over World Cup, due to a flawed boundary countback rule to determine the winners in case of a tie even after the Super Over tie-break. The rule has since been amended following a huge furore, especially after England won the cup without winning the final.
Also read: You don't come halfway around the world just to win a semifinal, says New Zealand's Jimmy Neesham
New Zealand were, however, not to be denied the inaugural World Test Championship title in Southampton this June when they tamed favourites India to win an ICC Trophy for the first time since their only World title till then -- the ICC KnockOut Trophy (rechristened the Champions Trophy later) -- in Nairobi in 2000. Then too, India were at the receiving end.
At the risk of sounding pedantic, New Zealand did benefit from the seaming and swinging English conditions that suited their style of play in the 50-over World Cup in 2019 and the WTC final in 2021. But what explains their fairytale run to the final of the T20 World Cup in the UAE, where India and Pakistan were overwhelming favourites but both have been knocked out at various stages of the competition?
This is New Zealand's fourth final in the last six global events including their loss to Australia in the 2015 World Cup. Irrespective of whether the affable Kiwis beat their trans-Tasman rivals in Sunday's final for a maiden T20 World Cup or not, they would have overachieved, given the constraints they operate under.
To put things in perspective, there are more kids pursuing cricket in Bengaluru alone than the whole of New Zealand put together. In fact, cricket is distant second in terms of popularity compared to rugby, whose appeal among Kiwis is as skewed as cricket's among Indians. It's, therefore, remarkable that New Zealand, despite a limited pool of personnel to pick from, have managed to produce players capable of matching or beating the best in the business and across all three formats on a consistent, sustained basis.
Also Read | T20 World Cup finalists Australia, New Zealand to continue rivalry with short T20I series in March 2022
There was no exaggeration when former England skipper and TV pundit Mike Atherton remarked that New Zealand were the strongest team across all formats at the moment.
"They are through to another World Cup final, they were a sliver away from winning the last World Cup in 2019, they are the World Test Championship winners," Atherton told Sky Sports after Kane Williamson's underdogs stunned strong contenders England in the first semifinal.
"Across formats, you would have to say they are the strongest team at the moment so congratulations to them, a fantastic achievement with limited resources in terms of personnel and money and things that we've often talked about."
You may not find them as flamboyant as the Indians or as excitable as the Pakistani cricketers. They certainly don't have the firepower of England or Australia, nor do they play the free-spirited brand of T20 cricket that the Caribbeans are known for when in form. What New Zealand bring to the table, though, is a clinical approach.
It of course helps that despite their excellence globally over a long period of time, they are often reduced to perennial underdogs and therefore aren't weighed down by the pressure of expectations like India or Pakistan. But it's not possible to consistently punch above your weight, if that isn’t doing the Kiwis gross disservice, in global events without the requisite skills and matching temperament.
Not many teams fear New Zealand but it's equally true that they are afraid of none. They are more process oriented, where substance takes precedence over style; aesthetics are sacrificed at the altar of a cold, calculated approach. It may appear boring at times, but it gives them the results they want on most occasions. If one still harbours doubts, well-schooled England might settle the debate.
Watch the latest DH Videos here: