Australia v West Indies, 5th ODI, Melbourne February 10, 2013

Voges ton sets up Australia clean-sweep


Australia 5 for 274 (Voges 112*) beat West Indies 257 (Charles 100, Johnson 3-50, McKay 3-52) by 17 runs
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details

Johnson Charles was seven years old last time West Indies beat Australia in an ODI in Australia. For much of the second half of this game, it appeared that Charles was going to ride his luck and steer West Indies to victory but not even his maiden century could end 16 years of Australian dominance at home. Under the captaincy of Shane Watson and without several of their best players, Australia completed a 5-0 clean-sweep thanks largely to Adam Voges and his first international hundred.

Voges scored an unbeaten 112 that rescued Australia from a shaky start after they were sent in by Darren Sammy and they were able to post 5 for 274, a very competitive total given the absence of the injured Michael Clarke, David Warner and George Bailey, as well as Matthew Wade and Glenn Maxwell, who have already flown to India for the Test series. In reply, West Indies had their ups and downs but with Charles and Kieron Pollard at the crease they remained firmly in the contest.

Even after Charles' fortune ran out, Pollard and Devon Thomas managed a couple of thumping sixes and brought the equation to a very gettable 48 off six overs, but somehow they just couldn't quite find the intensity to bridge the gap. Thomas was run out for 19, Pollard drove a catch down the throat of long-on for 45 and their hopes fizzled out. By the end 24 were needed off the final over bowled by McKay and West Indies lost their final two wickets.

It meant that Australia extended their record to 17 consecutive victories over West Indies in Australia. Last time West Indies won an ODI against Australia in Australia was in January 1997, when a team led by Courtney Walsh beat Mark Taylor's men in Perth. They began their chase hoping to end that drought but the loss of Kieran Powell, caught at slip off Mitchell Johnson in the second over, was not ideal.

Charles and Darren Bravo put together a 106-run second-wicket stand before Bravo sent a Xavier Doherty ball in the air to mid-off, and Dwayne Bravo followed for 13 when he was bowled by Johnson. That brought Charles and Pollard together.

Charles played some impressive strokes on his way to a century, including a six crunched over long-on against Ben Cutting and a four slashed behind point off the next ball. Those shots came in the same over that Charles survived a caught-behind appeal on 55 when an attempted pull bounced off his arm; Australia's review of the not-out call resulted in a difficult Hot Spot call and in the end the third umpire Nigel Llong felt unsure if the ball had grazed the edge of the bat before hitting Charles.

That over was a microcosm of the way Charles played in this innings: risk and reward. He was dropped twice, at slip by Aaron Finch off McKay on 7, and on 77 at deep cover by the substitute fielder Ryan Carters off James Faulkner. Another perilously close call came next ball on 79 when Charles was given lbw and asked for a review. The ball clearly came off the bat onto the back pad, but it may also have brushed the front pad before the bat. Again, Charles was given the benefit of the doubt.

He made the most of his opportunities, finding the boundary eight times including a dab past the wicketkeeper off McKay to bring up his century from his 120th delivery. Remarkably, it was his first hundred in any form of elite cricket, including first-class, List A and Twenty20. Perhaps the moment got to him, for he was out next ball when he lazily tried to swivel McKay around the corner and lobbed a catch to short fine leg.

The Australians had done well to ensure such a healthy target after Tino Best rattled them with two wickets in the first three overs of the game. That included Watson, who played on to a bouncer first ball of the game. Later, the Australians were wobbling at 4 for 82 but a century partnership between Voges and Brad Haddin launched the recovery before Faulkner joined Voges for some quick late runs. Voges finished unbeaten on 112 and Faulkner on 31 and during their partnership the wheels really fell off for West Indies, who leaked 100 runs in the final ten overs.

Singles and twos were far too easy and Voges was also finding the boundary, including with a crunching six over long-on against Best in the 50th over. Voges had brought up his ton from his 97th delivery with a hastily-run two and he celebrated like a man who thought the moment would never come. That would be understandable, for Voges made his one-day international debut nearly six years ago and since then has been almost permanently on the fringes of the national side, playing 17 ODIs but never more than three in a row.

Like Charles would later, he made the opposition pay for giving him a life on 7 when he was put down at slip by Sammy off the spin of Sunil Narine. His half-century came from 64 balls and he had good support from Haddin during a 111-run fifth-wicket stand that prevented West Indies capitalising on their impressive start. Eventually Haddin was caught at deep midwicket top-edging a swivelled pull off Kemar Roach but by then Australia were well set.

Australia had been in early trouble due to a couple of fine catches which accounted for Phillip Hughes and Shaun Marsh. If only West Indies' sharp catching had extended to Sammy holding Voges on 7, a 16-year drought might have been broken.

Brydon Coverdale is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Rony on February 12, 2013, 12:02 GMT

    Besides bad bowling,WI Batsmen are throwing wickets at Inapprppriate times.Gayle is a super player and he will definitely find form and needs to be in the team.Apart from Gayle,Samuels and Pollard they had to find the right batsmen for the correct Slots.Again in batting they are putting Bravo in the first five which is a huge mistake because he will throw wicket at times eventhough he is a good hitter.I doubt his brother Darren Bravo deserves these many oppurtunities since he is either not scoring or very slow at situations when team requires more.In these series the biggest of the errors they committed is that they did'nt picked at leat two of their frontline fast bowlers together,ie they should have picked at least two from Best,roach and Holder in every match.Aussies exploited these very much.Hope WI will corrct their mistakes and perform much better.They can do that becz they are having some talent ie the most important thing eventhough their Strategies and Tactics are very wrong..

  • Rony on February 12, 2013, 12:01 GMT

    Bravo is not the man for West Indies to bowl in final overs against Quality sides like Aussies.If frontline bowlers are not bowling in the final overs then they will always conceding too many in end.

  • Rony on February 12, 2013, 12:00 GMT

    How long WI are going to continue with the terrible Team Selection?If they had selected the correct team then they should have won atlest two matches,Main problem is thier bowling.Already thier frontline bowlers are not good enough.To make the matter worse they are bowling 30 overs by part time bowlers. Rusell, Bravo,Sammy and Pollard are not frontline bowlers.Maximum 20 overs only WI can afford with Rusell,Bravo,Sammy,Pollard even if they all are playing(With out russell it si only 10 overs maximum becz Russell is having some pace atleast).Pollard deserves to be in the team with his batting and feilding.Russell also right becz he is somewhat a bowler and good hitter.But Sammy, the Captain can't be in the team for his bowling alone.If he plays,then he had to batwell and up the order.They might win one T20 WC underhim,but in ODI's it is not psssible to conceal some weak players under some match winners.

  • Andrew on February 12, 2013, 6:24 GMT

    @Kenbene on (February 11, 2013, 0:46 GMT) - I think the problem is, that most of the WIndies team is use to only being on the field for 20 overs! I was at the MCG on Sunday & the WIndies really dropped off in intensity as the match wore on. I have been a fan of Sammy, but he seemed one of the worst culprits, I'll stand corrected if he has an injury, but he looked like an old man in the field. The WIndies fieldsmen in the main dawdled after the ball & let the ball boys throw the ball back to them, this basically never happenned when Oz fielded. Even tossing the ball back to the bowler often involved the ball dropped or bounced over to the bowler or the bowler having to pick the ball up. When Oz fielded, from the time the ball was dead, to the time it reached the bowler, 4 or 5 players had touched the ball & it never touched the ground. Dunno if they just aren't use to playing past the 20th over, but they really seem to compete till then & diminish.

  • Andrew on February 11, 2013, 23:31 GMT

    @funkybluesman on (February 10, 2013, 22:28 GMT) - I agree. The ICC need to train the upires up on the protocol of being 3rd Umpire. Unless the direction has changed recently, the 3rd Umpire's role was to ADVISE the on-field umpire as to whether they have seen anything that should change the decision. I was happy enuff for Charles to have been given not out for the caught behind (I thought he knicked it), benefit of some doubt. I did not think there was enuff evidence to overturn the LBW appeal, yes there was an edge, but from what I could see, it looked clearly like the front pad was flicked 1st. As the decision was given out originally, I felt that should of stayed. On a slightly different matter - I thought Faulkner was run out (didn't matter much either way), & that Thomas's should NOT of been given run out (I konw run outs are not strictly speaking UDRS) - it seems technology use has deteriorated over the last couple of years?

  • Andrew on February 11, 2013, 23:20 GMT

    @Shaggy076 on (February 11, 2013, 11:16 GMT) - it's funny the ols "if Samuels had played" line, given that Samuels career average against Oz in ODIs is 17! @AhmedEsat on (February 10, 2013, 3:44 GMT) - if you want to see who has NOT had a fair go in the Oz team - look up Voges career ODI stats, is 17 games have been over about SIX YEARS! Look up Ferguson (a 40+ ODI average), these guys have far BETTER claims to an ODI spot than Khawaja. ATM - Khawaja is playing for a top 3 spot, this is where most of his experience is in List A's. That means he is up against Watto, Warner & Hughes directly, & the #4 spot is Clarke's. No" prejudice" by anyone other than yourself! @Mitty2 - your negative comments about Henriques is poor. You cannot say that Henriques stats are misleading & then build up Faulkner's. Have a look at ALL the Tassie bowling stats - they are ALL incredible - does that suggest ANYTHING to you? It should, that said - I am happy how Faulkner has grabbed his ODI chance!

  • Dummy4 on February 11, 2013, 14:42 GMT

    Its not about blaming Sammy as a captain, but as a member of the squad . He contributes with nothing, absolutely nothing, and it damages the balance of the team.Like Micheal holding said" Sammy is an average player and would have never been a part of WI team, if it was not for the politics. I am very big fan WI and it hurts me to see this sorry state of WI cricket.

  • Graham on February 11, 2013, 11:16 GMT

    DanielShah : West Indies could have won all 5 games if they had Ambrose, Holding and Viv Richards. Not sure what your point is they didnt have him and you never know what would have happened if he played. But the way West Indies destructed from winning positions I still think it would have been 5-0 with Samuels playing. You also should know Clarke and Wade missed a game, Bailey, Starc Watson missed 2 games, Warner, Pattinson & Hilfenhaus also missed all 5 games.

  • Dummy4 on February 11, 2013, 10:59 GMT

    Windies could have won at least two of the matches in this series if they had marlon samuels still with them. I am surprised not that noone has noticed this.

  • Basil on February 11, 2013, 10:06 GMT

    Too many people blame Sammy. One person suggests DJ Bravo as captain. I swear people in the Carribean confuse him with Kallis because to a non-West Indian he is a very average over-rated player. Bravo is a no7, that's it. 7th best bat and 5th best bowler. Oh, maybe before we blame Sammy we ask what was going through Deonarines head. He should have been there supporting Pollard to victory not throwing his wicket away....