Cricket fans have a right to gasp as the Trent Boult for England series has not been considered

Fred Woodcock is Stuff’s national sports editor and former cricket writer

OPINION: As the New Zealand bowlers were being whipped around the Bay Oval in England’s first Test, many cricket fans were asking the same question they had been asking just a few days earlier – where the hell is Trent Boult?

It’s a topic that has lit up cricket fan pages online and cricket water cooler conversations, with most punters rightfully left wondering what on earth the Black Caps brain trust are doing?

The fourth most prolific wicket-taker in New Zealand’s Test history was not part of the home team that suffered a blow in the first Test and will now try to salvage a series tie in the second Test in Wellington.

A brief background, as Stuff cricket writer Ian Anderson explains: Boult became a free agent last year because he didn’t want to be on call for all forms of international cricket in an increasingly crowded schedule, now sandwiched between a string of lucrative domestic Twenty20 leagues. .

Basically, he can choose when and who he plays for. It also means New Zealand Cricket has replaced him in their centrally agreed 20-man squad. The Black Caps had to carry on without him and priority was given to players who were available for every game.

However, if Boult is available and NZC want to pick him, he can still play for New Zealand, as he did in last year’s T20 World Cup and will hopefully do so in this year’s 50-over shows. Basically, we look at top events.

Here’s the thing; The home Test series against England is a pinnacle event in every sense. OK, if the Black Caps were at full strength, you can understand why they would ignore Boult. But they weren’t. Kyle Jamieson is out of the series and Matt Henry missed the first Test due to the birth of his child, though is back for the second.

So, instead of Boult, they went to domestic workers Blair Tickner and Scott Kuggeleijn. Another journeyman, Jacob Duffy, was also ahead of Boult in the queue.

An argument? What kind of message would it send to Ticker, Kuggeleijn, Duffy et al who did all the hard work to be ignored by someone who had essentially walked away from the Black Caps?

This claim has been supported by former Black Cap Dion Nash, who felt that a special advantage given to someone like Boult could cause conflicts within the team.

Sorry, this is pro sports, the flagship league, and you don’t get a test cap just because you put up some hard yards or your nose might go out of joint. You still have to be good enough and better than the other options. The best players available should have been picked for this series, which means Boult.

The divisiveness argument is questionable – I don’t see how the majority of the team wouldn’t have welcomed a player of Boult’s calibre, realizing that clearly put them in a better position to win the Test series.

It’s also an entertainment business – fans part with their hard-earned money, either attending in person or watching on pay TV, and they deserve to see the best New Zealand team possible.

Sure, if it was the Sri Lanka series, or if the Black Caps weren’t underpowered, it’s a perfectly acceptable decision. But these are special situations.

As former England great David Gower said: “Maybe it’s time to give him a game if he’s willing.”

Of course it was about time. If it’s not time, when is it? Surely that means we will never see Boult play Test cricket again.

Read more about how Stuff manages the difference between opinion and reporting by its editors.