New Zealand Cricket

Ben Stokes had just donned his Andrew Flintoff costume at Lord's, with the almost-capacity crowd sensing a Test was slipping away from New Zealand. England, having seized control, sensed it too. Brendon McCullum later admitted New Zealand had as well. 

Stokes' capture of Kane Williamson and McCullum in consecutive deliveries had whipped Lord's into a frenzy. The famous venue was almost delirious; it was "rocking," said Alastair Cook. In such circumstances, it's an implied duty for those facing the deluge to buckle down. Precautions must be taken. The batsmen in the middle must channel their inner-Allan Border, their inner-Geoffrey Boycott. Perhaps their inner-Steve Waugh. They must be gritty and dogged. Up for a scrap. 

Or that's how the thinking goes, anyway.

New Zealand's attitude: to hell with the thinking. 

Corey Anderson strode to the middle following the departure of his captain. After negotiating Stokes' hat-trick delivery (or was it Flintoff's?), he dug out a yorker from the first ball of the tattooed redhead's next over. 

Then: four, dot, dot, four and six. 

If the first boundary had been routine—a clip off the legs—the second was anything but: Anderson cleared his front leg and took a baseball swing. Wallop. For a moment, there was that peculiar silence at Lord's that occurs when something truly unexpected interrupts the elation, fans everywhere turning to one another with quizzical looks on their faces, wanting confirmation that just happened. 

"We continue to play a style of cricket that gives us our greatest chance," McCullum said afterward. One in, all in. If McCullum jumps, they all jump. At Lord's, even in defeat, Anderson showed us that. The series now at Headingley, Luke Ronchi late on Friday did the same. 

In characteristic fashion, the captain had shown the way early on. At 68 for three, the ball seaming and darting on a lively surface in Leeds, McCullum sent Stuart Broad into the stands over cover-point from the first ball he faced. Risk? Reward. 

Whips, drives and hooks quickly followed, with McCullum racing to 41 from 27 balls prior to tea. Immediately afterward, he attempted to do to Stokes what he'd done to Broad. He failed. He found Mark Wood at mid-off. "Sometimes it comes off and looks great," the Kiwi skipper has said before, the suggestion being that "sometimes it doesn't." McCullum, a fan of horse racing, is happy to live with the odds. 

So too, it seems, is Ronchi. Understandable given his path to the Test team. 

Ronchi is a New Zealander, born in Dannevirke on the north island, who made his international debut for Australia. He's also competed for Australia A, Western Australia, the Perth Scorchers and the Mumbai Indians. Attacking cricket is in his veins. And now he's captained by McCullum. 

It's a cocktail for flat-out cricket. 

On debut, the right-hander nervously edged Wood over the slip cordon from his first ball in Test cricket. Seventeen balls later, he had 26. Thirty-one later, he had 44. Thirty-six later, he'd reached his maiden Test 50, a colossal six over mid-wicket getting him to the milestone.

"But two men were out on the fence and New Zealand were on the edge of disaster at 199 for five," critics will say. "Doesn't matter," New Zealand will tell you. 

Some emphatic drives—a lofted one off Broad over mid-off was the pick of the bunch—quickly followed. Broad then sent two men back on the hook and started with the short stuff. Ball one: Ronchi swivels and hooks but misses. Ball two: Ronchi swivels and hooks, but picks out James Anderson at fine-leg. Out. 

Ronchi knew the odds, played them and lost. But in the New Zealand camp, it's accepted. More than that, it's embraced.

"I'm sure our guys will continue to play the same style," McCullum had said after Lord's. From some captains, such a line may have felt like a plead; from McCullum, it was an order. And McCullum's orders are followed. 

Thus, when Mark Craig took strike following the loss of Ronchi, the response was predictable: a daring drive on the up through cover for three. Next over, a smash through mid-wicket for four. 

By day's end, New Zealand had lost eight wickets in just 65 overs on a bowler-friendly surface. But they'd also thumped 297 runs in the process at almost five runs per over. 

Unfazed by the risks, New Zealand continue to play their way. The McCullum way. 

Tim Southee is the archetypal English seamer. Tall, slippery in pace and capable of getting late movement in the air, he is a bowler who could have been born in the Shires.

Instead, though, the New Zealander will be looking to heighten the gloom around English cricket during his side's short tour that sees them play two Tests, a five-match ODI series and a one-off Twenty20 international.

They open up against England at Lord's, a venue that visiting bowlers can find tricky to get used to.

There is the slope to come to terms with, not to mention the sheer weight of history you feel when stepping out on to one of the most famous sporting venues in the world.

Yet the fresh-faced Southee—who looks like the kind of man that any set of parents would love their daughter to bring home to meet them—should relish the opportunity to play there.

The last time he visited the home of cricket, he recorded career-best match figures.

He claimed 10 for 108 in the series opener two years ago, with his six-for in the second innings setting up the opportunity for the tourists to go on and win the game. 

That victory, however, never materialised due to a dreadful batting collapse from the Kiwis: They were steamrollered for 68 to lose what had been a tight match by the substantial margin of 170 runs.

Still, Southee had become just the second New Zealander to take 10 wickets in a match at Lord's (the other being Dion Nash), as well as putting his name on the illustrious honours board with his haul of six for 50. 

The 26-year-old may not have Test statistics that dazzle—he has taken 136 wickets in 39 appearances at an average of 30.61—but take a deeper look at his career numbers and you see how much he has improved.

He made his debut at the age of 19 (versus England at Napier), and immediately marked himself out at the highest level with five wickets in the first innings.

Yet from 2008 to 2011 his performances were inconsistent. He was having to learn his trade on the job, and there were growing pains along the way.

However, from 2012 onwards he has been superb for his country. Take a look at his year-by-year breakdowns, per ESPN Cricinfo:

He certainly seems to like playing against England, and not just in the longer format.

While Trent Boult was the star performer with the ball for the Black Caps at this year's Cricket World Cup, it was Southee who destroyed Eoin Morgan's England side in a group-stage fixture in Wellington.

He picked up seven for 33, including a spell of five wickets for eight runs. Nick Hoult wrote in his report for the Telegraph: "Southee bowled wide of the crease to maximise any movement, yorking and out-thinking England's batsmen. His first spell knocked over the top order but it was his second that was so damaging."

Fresh from stints in the Indian Premier League, Boult and Southee will be in tandem again for the first Test, which gets underway on May 21.

They should relish the chance to face an England side with a stand-in coach in Paul Farbrace, a captain in Alastair Cook who is seemingly always under pressure and a middle order missing the presence of Kevin Pietersen, who—in case you haven't heard—won't be selected this summer.

Forget about the Ashes later this year; England have their hands full dealing with Southee and the rest of the New Zealand side first.

Martin Guptill has been recalled to the New Zealand Test squad after a string of good performances for the nation's one-day team during the Cricket World Cup.

An opening batsman of moderate tempo and a world-class fielder, Guptill has every chance to find his way back into the playing XI after a two-year absence. New Zealand's lack of quality at the very top of the order has been evident for a long time, with no one making the spot their own since Mark Richardson's departure a decade ago.

Guptill's run of form in the World Cup, which included a mammoth 237 not out against the West Indies, should make him a logical choice. He plundered runs all around the ground, making use of his classical straight game while also working the ball square as well as he ever has.

That he has had little success at Test level in the past should be of little consequence. Indeed, even in the limited-overs format he has struggled to perform over the past few summers. That he found form at such a crucial time suggests there is no reason he cannot do it in the Test arena as well.

In saying that, there is no escaping his underwhelming Test record, which eventually saw him dropped. Averaging a shade under 30 with his only two centuries coming against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, it is not a record that bolsters confidence.

All too often he would give his wicket away and his inability to move his feet against spin was often shown up, leaving him reaching out with his bat in all sorts of ugly positions. To be fair, that has been symptomatic of New Zealand cricket for a long time and Guptill is by no means alone.

Perhaps it is why their openers have struggled so much. In recent years there have been a few prospects, but none who ever kicked on.

Most recently, Peter Fulton was persisted with for a while, although this was more or less solely based on one match where he made back-to-back centuries against England at Eden Park. He was another who tended to get caught on the crease reaching and struggled with pace or a moving ball. Last year it was decided they should move on.

Hamish Rutherford, Fulton's opening partner for the majority of his latest tenure, is another who has been persisted with, although unlike Fulton, he remains in the team. The hard-hitting left-hander who likes to free his arms off the back foot made an instant impact on the Test scene, scoring 171 against the English on his home ground in Dunedin.

Since then he has done virtually nothing. Never again has he reached triple-figures and only once has he surpassed 50, while only reaching 30 three times outside of New Zealand.

He seems to have been living on borrowed time for a while, primarily due to New Zealand's lack of a decent replacement.

Guptill seems as though he may be just that. At least he has been hitting the ball well and has confidence at the international level.

The relative newcomer to the team, Tom Latham, looks to have the other opening spot locked up. A brilliant mover of the feet, and probably New Zealand's most stylish opener since the experiment with Stephen Fleming, Latham has an impressive record, averaging 40.23 in his nine matches. 

Latham's ability to move his feet to play spin effectively allows him to push on past the initial opening period and make some meaningful contributions. His two centuries and three half-centuries have all come away from home, with the centuries coming against Pakistan on turning wickets.

The ability to play spin will not matter so much in England. So that has to be a plus for Guptill in the bid to partner Latham. His experience with Derbyshire has given him exposure to English conditions, which tend to consist of green pitches, lush outfields and overcast conditions which allow the ball to swing.

It is worth noting that these conditions will make Guptill of extreme value in the field too. Conditions that favour swing should see the New Zealand bowlers find plenty of edges, making Guptill's quick reactions and excellent hands in the gully important in turning these edges into wickets.

He may yet end up in the covers, though, where he is just as effective given Kane Williamson has been so successful fielding at gully in recent times.

In the outfield Guptill is as good as most, too, possessing outstanding pace to restrict the batsmen and boasting a good arm.

There may be a reluctance to deviate from what is tried and true. But you feel if Guptill is ever to get another chance at the game's purest form at its highest level, then this is it.

New Zealand play matches against Somerset and Worcestershire at the beginning of May, before the first Test against England on May 21.

All statistics courtesy of ESPN Cricinfo.

New Zealand may not have been successful in winning the Cricket World Cup, but Martin Guptill had a tremendous March and is our batsman of the month.

The Black Caps opener played five games and scored a colossal 448 runs at an average of 112, with a best of 237 not out coming against the West Indies.

He may have felt a little overshadowed by the explosive Brendon McCullum at times, but Guptill was consistently superb for New Zealand at the top of the order.

He began well with 57 against Afghanistan in their Pool B game on March 8 and then followed that up with 105 against Bangladesh in the final group match.

His 237 came next in the quarter-finals, and while he did not quite capitalise on good starts in the semi-final or the final, he can now reflect on a strong month.

Guptill has been in and out of the team in recent years, so perhaps this tournament can be the catalyst for him to become a regular member of the Black Caps lineup.

Standout Performance

Guptill's standout performance from March is also one of the best innings in the history of the Cricket World Cup—and not only because it is the all-time record score in the tournament.

He was dropped by Marlon Samuels having made just four and went on to punish the West Indies in the best way possible.

Guptill reached 100 in the 35th over and then accelerated at an alarming rate to take New Zealand's total—and his own—even higher.

In just 23 balls after reaching his century, Guptill celebrated 150 and then blitzed his way to 200 in another 18 balls.

In a World Cup quarter-final, with the eyes of the cricketing world upon him, Guptill delivered in the best way possible at the best possible time.

The Coming Months

New Zealand have a well-earned break from international cricket for the month of April, although it is likely many of their squad will play the domestic Plunket Shield.

The following month, the Black Caps are well and truly back in the swing of international competition as they travel to England.

On tour in England, New Zealand will play two Tests, five one-day internationals and one Twenty20 International before departing in mid-June.

After a brief break to recharge their batteries, it promises to be an interesting May and June for the Black Caps, who then travel to South Africa in August.

Brendon McCullum won the top prize at the New Zealand Cricket Awards last night. The New Zealand captain beat out a long list of contenders to win the Sir Richard Hadlee Medal for New Zealand Cricketer of the Year after another outstanding summer both with the bat and in the field.

Having recently capped off one of their most successful seasons ever, there were predictably a number of players putting their hands up for the top award.

Perhaps most unlucky was No. 3 batsman Kane Williamson, who won Test, One-day and Twenty20  Cricketer of the Year. A below-average showing at the World Cup no doubt hindered his case. Alongside Williamson, Trent Boult has put on a bowling master class of swing bowling in all forms of the game and it would not have been a surprise to see him win the top award too.

But it is hard to complain with the decision. McCullum's impact went far beyond his explosive batting in limited overs cricket, or his run-making in the longer forms of the game. 

No, it was his aggressive captaincy, effort in the field and overall classy manner that has made him so influential for New Zealand cricket over the past 12 months.

At the World Cup he was somewhat revolutionary in his tactics, prepared to set attacking fields to give his bowlers the chance to take wickets. His risks were always calculated, and the way his plans fell into place were huge in New Zealand's run to the final.

His effort in the field exemplified his team's attitude. Fielding at mid-off, mid-on or in the covers, he would chase down every ball with intensity and hurled himself at the ground to save boundaries.

Nowhere was this more evident than in the World Cup final, where with the odds stacked against his team, McCullum continued to attack, recognizing the only way to win was to take wickets. Likewise with the opposition requiring fewer than 10 runs to win, McCullum was still chasing the balls as hard as he could to the boundary, throwing himself at the ball to limit the runs.

It was intensity that the rest of the team picked up on and became the defining characteristic of this New Zealand team.

Despite it all, McCullum never let his aggression extend beyond the boundaries of the game. He never lowered himself to the type of sledging behaviour that his countrymen despise. There were never any complaints, or send-offs, or dare we say it, threats. Somehow it just would not have counted or meant anything had they won the World Cup, but done so in classless way. 

That, as much as anything, is why he deserved to win the award, because it is all of those things New Zealanders like to see and value in their heroes. Someone who will succeed, but do so in a classy way. Regardless of whether sledging, or hostility toward opponents is wrong or right, it is the New Zealand perspective that is important here, as this was of course, the New Zealand cricket awards.

Others to win awards were Kane Williamson (Test, One-Day, Twenty20 and Batsman of the Year), Trent Boult (Bowler of the Year), Suzie Bates (Women's Player of the Year), Andrew Ellis (Men's Domestic Cricketer of the Year), Amy Satterthwaite (Women's Domestic Cricketer of the Year) and Ross Dykes (Bert Sutcliffe Medal).

There has been a feeling amongst New Zealand cricket fans that their team has been disrespected by their neighbours across the Tasman. Despite their success in recent years, they have received little credit from Australia. So often it feels the call has come across the Tasman, "You haven't done it against Australia."

It is a call that has left New Zealanders frustrated, with a "well why won't you play us?" sort of response.

That the two nations are so close in proximity, yet have played so little cricket against one another in recent years, seems wrong. In past eras, there have been some great contests between the two rivals, but a lack of interest in recent years has seen the Australians look elsewhere for competition.

It has been suggested that this is financially motivated, that New Zealand is not a big enough draw card for viewers. There is the argument that New Zealand's lack of form prior to 2012 made them an unworthy opponent. Then, of course, there is the fact that their summers coincide, meaning they are often both hosting home series at the same time.

Perhaps the last point holds validity. The prior two should not be used as arguments, however. While money no doubt comes into the equation, it should not be at the expense of the game itself. As for New Zealand's run of poor form, that is nothing new.

New Zealand's player base is such that they are an up-and-down nation in cricket, capable of inconsistently putting out a strong team. Every strong New Zealand team has been preceded by a weaker one, primarily made up of the same players while they were being blooded.

To not schedule a tour based on their current form shows either a lack of respect or pure ignorance to cricketing history.

However, there is hope that this will now change.

The two nations met twice during the latest Cricket World Cup, each winning on their home grounds. Quality can no longer be used as an argument.

Australia, as strong as they are at home, have been vulnerable at away venues in recent years. They have lost three of their past four away Test series, including a recent drubbing by Pakistan—the same Pakistan team New Zealand drew with 1-1.

If they were to play a Test series against New Zealand in New Zealand, would they really be any better? Would their batsmen handle the two modern-day sultans of swing, Trent Boult and Tim Southee, in an environment where the ball will swing, and with a red ball that moves better than a white one?

Or would the Australian bowlers really cause the same problems for the likes of Kane Williamson, Ross Taylor, Brendon McCullum and BJ Watling when time is not an issue and those men can play their natural games?

It is hard to know. The last time Australia were in New Zealand was the 2009/10 season, and the time before that was in 2004/05. Even at home, Australia only played their neighbours three times in this time period, all of which were two Test series that seemed to be seen as warm-up series for the Australians.

Five series—four of which were only two Tests—in 10 years does not seem like many. In that time, Australia has played England in six series, each being five Tests long. While the Ashes has plenty of history, cricket needs to be about more than just two teams, and in terms of quality, scheduling England on such a regular basis could hardly be justified at the moment.

In ODIs, the last time the two countries met outside of an ICC tournament was in the 2009/10 season, where Australia won an away series 3-2. Hardly one-sided and certainly based off that result, it is hard to understand why their neighbours have not had another crack at them in the past five years.

The last time the two teams met in a series in Australia, in 2008/09, the series was drawn 2-2.

There is a hope that after a strong showing at the World Cup the Australians will afford their neighbours more respect. While a two-match Test series is scheduled for the end of the year in Australia, it still has the feeling of being a warm-up series, being pencilled in for before Christmas. 

A Boxing Day Test at the MCG is what New Zealand fans would love to see. Not only would it be a great spectacle, it would provide their players with valuable experience of playing in the world's most imposing arena.

This might still be a way off, but as reported by Stuff, a return of the Chappell-Hadlee series that provided many thrills throughout the mid-late 2000s is looking likely. It is not a Test series, but it is a start, and at least they are moving in the right direction.

Australia take on New Zealand at the Melbourne Cricket Ground on Sunday to decide which co-host will win the Cricket World Cup.

Before the tournament began, many predicted these two as the most likely finalists—both sides looked strong on paper. During the competition, both have benefited from playing on home grounds, have been buoyed by big crowds and have squads suited to the conditions.

But few would have predicted the key role the oldest player left in the competition could play.

Trent Boult and Mitchell Starc have both lit up the tournament with fast, aggressive and accurate left-arm swing bowling. They are the first and second leading wicket-takers, respectively. Brendon McCullum and Steve Smith, among others, have sparkled with the bat.

But a 36-year-old, bespectacled, bearded man from Auckland could well be the difference between the two teams.

The two sides are evenly matched in many respects. Both contain fast aggressive bowlers, power-hitters and accomplished batsman. The difference lies in variation: The Kiwis have a world-class spin bowler, the Kangaroos do not. Glenn Maxwell has occasionally been effective, but he does not offer nearly as much to the Australian attack.

Daniel Vettori, like the majority of left-arm spinners, does not look immediately threatening. His role in the side is generally understated. He goes about his work with unassuming vigour, ambling in to bowl his finely tuned deliveries. Flight, deception and variation are his assets.

But he hasn’t gone under the radar completely; 15 wickets, sprightly fielding, a spectacular catch and a dramatic role with the bat in New Zealand’s semi-final success over South Africa have seen to that.

What is perhaps more impressive is his control. Vettori has conceded just 19 boundaries from a total of 425 balls bowled. By comparison, semi-finalists South Africa and India’s premier spin bowlers, Imran Tahir and Ravichandran Ashwin, both conceded over 30.

The result is that Vettori has a miserly economy rate of 3.98-an-over at the World Cup. On average, he takes a wicket for every 19 runs he concedes. He builds pressure through a tight line, unerring accuracy and variations of pace and spin. He is the perfect foil for New Zealand’s impressive pace bowlers.

In 2014, NZ played 16 ODIs. Vettori played 5, Boult 2, Elliott 0. Kiwi selectors have made some inspired decisions for this tournament.

— Andy Zaltzman (@ZaltzCricket) March 24, 2015

Vettori’s experience is also a much-prized asset. He has played 294 ODIs over an 18-year international career. In that time, his calmness under pressure, professionalism and attitude have stood out.

If New Zealand are bowling to defend a total, under the lights in front of a partisan crowd on Sunday, Vettori is the man captain McCullum will turn to.

Although the Melbourne venue seems to benefit the Australians, it will also suit Vettori’s style of bowling. The MCG has a large outfield, and it will take a sweet strike to generate pace and clear the boundary. The Kiwi fielders will know they are in the game.

Australia have scored heavily in the final 10 overs at this World Cup. If Vettori can take wickets in the middle overs, he could curtail one of the opposition’s biggest strengths.

Vettori has said it is “pretty obvious” that Sunday will be his last ODI for New Zealand, per the Daily Mail. His final ODI will be his 295th and most important to date. He could prove to be the match-winner in New Zealand’s first ever World Cup win.  

New Zealand have forever been portrayed as the underdogs, the dark horses or the outside bets. Their performances in this tournament have well and truly dispelled that myth. Inside a raucous MCG on Sunday, they will be a well-rounded team who, in the shape of Daniel Vettori, have an edge over their opponents.

The Cricket World Cup Final could not have been scripted any better. Co-hosts New Zealand and Australia seemed destined to meet each other in the final of the 11th Cricket World Cup and now, that destiny is a reality.

In terms of sporting rivalries, there are few bigger. It is not one fuelled by political or religious backgrounds. Indeed, outside of the sport, the nations are fierce allies. The rivalry, tension and at times hate, comes purely from not wanting to lose to the other in the sporting arena.

Over the years, the rivalry has left us with some unforgettable memories, ones which only add to the feeling every time these two meet. 

Who could forget Australia winning the Bledisloe Cup for the first time in 30 years back in 1979? Despite being a trophy most New Zealand fans did not know even existed, the Wallabies held the cup aloft as they performed a victory lap, much to the disgust of the New Zealand rugby public.

It cut deep and since then, the All Blacks have placed utmost importance on their trans-Tasman battles.

In 2000, the anguish was clear as John Eales kicked a last-minute penalty to beat the All Blacks and to retain the Cup, having lost arguably the greatest game ever played in the first leg of the series.

There was New Zealand's triumph over the heavily favoured Australia at the 2008 Rugby League World Cup, Australia's revenge five years later and the brutal scrap between Greg Dowling and Kevin Tamati.

In the netball arena, the two nations have played out many epics, so often in the finals of World Championships and Commonwealth Games.

And of course, there was the most iconic of them all: the 1981 underarm incident. New Zealand never quite forgave its foes for it and 34 years on, the feelings of discontent linger.

It was typical, in a way, of why Kiwis dislike their Aussie neighbours so much. The classless arrogance and hostility displayed by the Aussie fans—win at all costs and let the opposition know about it if you do—is not something that goes down well with their Kiwi foes.

Remember Australian Michael Clarke's spray at English James Anderson, telling him to get ready for a broken arm? Or the constant sledging from the likes of Mitchell Johnson, Shane Watson and David Warner? Or perhaps the undeniably biased nature of the Channel Nine commentary team, made up largely of former Australian players?

Even as recently as this week we have seen it. Australia Today host Karl Stefanovic referred to Kiwis as the "dole bludger army" and also sledged Indians in a way that some say had racist connotations.

Going back to an earlier era, there was the crowd hostility of the early 1980s, which saw New Zealand's Glenn Turner and Richard Hadlee verbally assaulted by the fans and opposing players alike. It was perhaps the first period where Australia actually felt threatened by the New Zealand cricket team, and they reacted with hostility.

Perhaps, they should have taken it as a compliment. It sure did not go down well, though, as can be seen in Turner's and Hadlee's books, Opening Up and Rhythm and Swing, respectively.

Outside of cricket in recent times, there have been most memorably the Quade Cooper incidents of 2010 and 2011 and George Gregan's "four more years" taunt after the 2003 Rugby World Cup semi-final. 

Off the sporting field, there is been contention, mostly over Australian's tendencies to claim bits of New Zealand as their own. The dessert pavlova and the great racehorse Phar Lap are two examples of this.

It all feeds into this dislike that drives New Zealanders to want to beat Australians so much more than anyone else.

Of course, they are often up against it. Australia is a country with a much larger population and are amongst the elite in world sporting competition, constantly punching above their weight against even bigger nations.

Yet, when it comes to big brother playing little brother, or Australia playing New Zealand, you know anything can happen.

New Zealand prefers to silence vocal neighbours with performances and does so often through the extra motivation and lack of fear that comes with playing the Aussies.

Australians are more driven by the fear of losing to a country they feel they should not lose to. Certainly, in terms of consistency, they do have one over their neighbours. By sheer weight of population, they can put out strong teams on a more consistent basis than New Zealand in every sport other than rugby union. Indeed on the rugby union field, the New Zealanders are the ones who feel that they should not lose. 

The result is an intense feeling of passion every time the two nations meet.

For the 11th Cricket World Cup to have New Zealand and Australia meet in the final as co-hosts in an event both are passionate about is something of a dream finale. They have been the two best teams at the tournament and played out a classic in the pool stages, in which there was nothing between either team.

It is fitting that it is less than a month away from the 100th anniversary of the Gallipoli massacre, a day remembered by both nations every year on April 25, otherwise known as Anzac Day. 

That is the thing that makes this rivalry so good. The hate only extends to the sporting arena. Outside of it, they are the fiercest of allies. They stand shoulder to shoulder, fight together and remember their fallen together. There certainly is an "us against the rest of the world" feeling to it.

Sunday will no doubt have some sort of Anzac feeling to it.

But do not think that means there will be any mercy—both teams are there to win. This will rank alongside the great moments, perhaps even as the greatest moment, in this sporting rivalry's illustrious history.