I dunno, it was impressive, but power-hitting by itself doesn't really do it for me tbh. You see so many 6s and 4s in T20s that a batsman doing it in an ODI on a good pitch when his team are chasing barely more than a hundred is nothing to get the blood pumping. There's no tension, no drama - if he'd got out playing like that the balance of the game wouldn't have shifted at all.
Plus, it was the second game in 3 days at the same venue, where SL batted first and folded meekly and then we tonked a few as we easily chased it down. We've played what, 8 or 9 ODIs against Sri Lanka in New Zealand in the last year or so? With 3 more to go. How does that scheduling make sense? I would rather have had a 3rd test and 3 ODIs.
Oh yea a close match would be far more interesting. But I'm hardly going to complain about our bowlers doing well at stopping them score and our batsmen chasing down the target well and easily, as they are both good things.
Sure it would be great to play Aus, India and SA more but that's not going to happen, i'm sure even the organizers weren't expecting us to shark all over Sri Lanka like this.
and I always love a batsmen having a crack and having boundaryfest in a ODI more than a T20. T20's are a bit of fun to me, nothing more. Awesome batting in ODI's are my favorite batting, so I loved watching Guppy go ballistic (the 200 in the WC is one of my favourite sporting achievements to witness).
I mean Id rather we play Sri Lanka lots than nobody, maybe Sri Lanka is all they could get, and maybe the number of tests weren't all NZ's choice either.
Honestly if your choices were the Sri Lanka tours in their current state or no cricket in that time, what would be your choice. I'm just enjoying it for what it is, us doing well over a good cricketing country.