England v New Zealand, 3rd NatWest ODI, Trent Bridge June 5, 2013

Buttler's blitz lifts England but questions remain

  shares 74

England 287 for 6 (Bell 82, Morgan 49, Buttler 47*, McClenaghan 3-54) beat New Zealand 253 (Taylor 71, Tredwell 3-51)
Scorecard

They may have won, but England left Trent Bridge with many questions still unanswered ahead of their Champions Trophy campaign. While a victory over New Zealand - on the face of it a comfortable victory - was welcome, it did little to answer some of the unsettling queries this series has thrown up.

Most pertinently, they must ask themselves whether the outrageous contribution of Jos Buttler, in particular, and Eoin Morgan, in the dying overs of England's innings, vindicated the sedate progress of England's top-order in building the foundations of the late assault. Or whether the pair's remarkable counter-attack simply masked the flaws in another worryingly passive batting performance. There is, no doubt, some truth in the former, but there may well be rather more in the latter.

There are other questions, too. With James Anderson and Graeme Swann rested from this game but all but certain to play in the Champions Trophy, England provided opportunities to the likes of James Tredwell and Ravi Bopara. James Tredwell, in particular, was impressive which raises the conundrum of whether England might be best fielding two specialist spinners and which seamer would make way.

And while Ravi Bopara was far from fluent with the bat, he did help eke out 57 runs for the fifth wicket and bowl the most economical spell of all the seamers. Once again, on the eve of a major event, England's plans, their settled team and their role definition, are not quite so clear as they appeared a week ago.

Certainly England would be wrong to congratulate themselves too heartily on a dead-rubber victory over a New Zealand side who started the series ranked No. 8. For most of their innings, England batted with little intent or flourish and the New Zealand bowlers controlled them as a collie might some sheep. New Zealand still won the series 2-1.

Indeed, had it not been for the partnership between Buttler and Morgan - a ridiculous 62 runs from 22 legitimate deliveries - New Zealand would surely be celebrating only their second ODI whitewash (following the 3-0 victory in New Zealand in 1982-83) and England would be licking their wounds on their first home whitewash since Sri Lanka beat them 5-0 in 2006.

Buttler remains a raw talent. Later he missed a relatively straightforward stumping off the bowling of Joe Root - Kane Williamson, on 14, was the fortunate batsman - that might, another day, have proved crucial. There will be days, too, when his high-risk approach with the bat does not pay off.

But, when it does come off, it will be spectacular. Here, with an unbeaten 47 from just 16 balls, he delivered a most un-English display of hitting that made a nonsense of the prodding and poking from his colleagues that had preceded it. He turned this match on its head. Not just that, but he did it in a handful of overs. Very few players can do that. Even fewer of them are qualified to play for England.

While his team-mates, the admirable Morgan apart, struggled with their timing throughout, Buttler batted with the power and invention that underlined the talent that has seen him fast-tracked into this England side.

Not every stroke came off the middle of the bat - Buttler enjoyed a couple of fortuitous edges that ran to the boundary - but his boldness was rewarded and helped England plunder 76 from the final four overs. It was testament to a special talent, certainly, but also the nerve and hardwork of a young man who may well drag this England team into the modern age of limited-overs batting.

Buttler signalled the attack by thrashing a length delivery - the third he had received from Kyle Mills - over midwicket for six before producing his trademark ramp shot to the next ball - a perfectly respectable delivery outside off stump - that brought four to fine leg. The next delivery was clipped through midwicket for another four before Buttler shaped to ramp again but, seeing the ball well outside off stump, instead lifted it over short third man for another four. It meant Mills' over had cost 22 runs.

With two more sixes in the final over off Tim Southee, Buttler faced the final ball of the innings requiring five runs to set a new world record for the fastest ODI half-century. He could manage only two, however, so Sanath Jayasuriya's 17-ball record, set in Singapore against Pakistan in 1996, remains.

Morgan, with 49 from 40 balls, also impressed. Having taken 16 balls to score his first eight runs, he struck three sixes - two over long-on and one over long-off - to add the impetus that England so dearly required.

The ferocity of the counter attack - and its unconventional nature - appeared to unsettle New Zealand. Mitchell McClenaghan, who had been immaculate in claiming 3 for 23 from his first eight overs, conceded 20 from his final over, which included a succession of wides and no-balls.

Until the sixth-wicket paid came together, the England innings had struggled to move out of second gear. Ian Bell laid something of a platform with an innings of 82 off 96 balls, but failed to fully capitalise and none of his top-order colleagues could stay with him or accelerate as required.

McClenaghan, a scourge of England throughout the series, bustled in to trap Alastair Cook and Jonathan Trott with straight deliveries, while his third spell ended Bell's innings when the batsman drove to mid off. Root, dropped on 10, could edge just one boundary in his 50-ball stay and Bopara, thrashing around like a drowning man, could not find it at all in his 38-ball stay as England made Williamson, the part-time offspinner, look like Muralitharan.

New Zealand started their reply well. Martin Guptill, with unbeaten centuries in his previous two games, looked in fluent form and they raced to 70 for 1 before the end of the 10th over. While Stuart Broad, bowling with impressive pace, had Luke Ronchi caught at mid-on after he was late on an attempted pull, the seamers were, at that stage, proving expensive.

The introduction of Tredwell made an immediate impact. He might have been unable to take a first-class wicket so far this season, but he produced a perfect off-break in his first over here to bowl Guptill, pushing forward, through the gate.

Tredwell took some punishment later at the hands of the excellent Ross Taylor - who recorded a half-century in every game of this series - but eventually had his man caught on the midwicket fence (Steven Finn, realising he was going to topple over the boundary, throwing the ball to Tim Bresnan in the nick of time) and also had Brendon McCullum caught behind as he tried cut on too full for the stroke.

Root also struck in his first over, defeating Williamson's pull stroke with an off break, Colin Munro fell to his first ball, following one angled across him and, by the time Nathan McCullum was well caught by Broad running back at mid-off, the game was as good as won.

New Zealand could leave Trent Bridge secure in the knowledge that they know their side and their method, but this was an evening that belonged to Buttler.

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • landl47 on June 6, 2013, 2:31 GMT

    Actually, I think this type of game is what suits this particular England squad best. The top 4 (excluding Cook on this occasion) built a solid platform, if rather slowly, leaving Morgan and Buttler to come in and slog at the end, which is the way they are really effective.

    Then at last the England selectors woke up from their dream in which Dernbach is an international bowler and picked the type of bowling side they should have had all along, with Bopara complementing the 3-seamer, 1-spinner attack. Bopara was economical and with Root adding a few overs England's balance looked much better in this game. Neither Broad nor Finn had great rhythm (surely someone is pointing out to Finn that running up straight is much better than dancing about as he gets near the crease?) but they both picked up wickets and Tredwell got 3 key victims, including Taylor, which sealed the deal.

    This side, with Anderson and Swann replacing Bresnan and Tredwell, gives Eng its best shot in the CT.

  • RodStark on June 5, 2013, 22:34 GMT

    Well done, England, and especially Buttler, Morgan, and Tredwell. Now the problem is going to be figuring out the best line-up for the Champions Trophy.

    I got the feeling England were keen to find out whether a combination of Root and Bopara can be an adequate fifth bowler, and based on this game, I'd say yes. bopara in particular seems to be better at keeping the runs down than Dernbach or Woakes. However, if we go that way, then we only get to pick four out of Anderson, Broad, Finn, Bresnan, Swann, and Tredwell, and there are good arguments for all six of them.

    I think I would go for Bopara because we do need the extra batting, and I suppose I'd leave out Finn (no value to batting and tends to be a bit expensive) and reluctantly leave out Tredwell 9though I like the idea of having both him and Swann. Bresnan seems to be bowling quite economically, so I'd keep him.

    My team would be Cook, Bell, Trott, Root, Morgan, Buttler, Bopara, Bresnan, Braod, Swann, and Anderson.

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 19:55 GMT

    please publish this time - nothing of offence

    @Jordanious77 on (June 5, 2013, 22:49 GMT) I'm sure it was not biased. try the series menu etc though is it? I genuinely can't see it as a biased move

    @Hayden Field on (June 6, 2013, 0:17 GMT) Bopara still did a good job. You can say while NZ were consolidating or whatever( but Bopara bowled 6 overs meaning there were 11 overs when Ravi bowled etc so either Ravi did a good job or NZ batsmen should have done better against him.

    @GasPipe on (June 6, 2013, 5:58 GMT) Being that Cook and Flower are not likely to be on these boards I think you'll find many Eng fans in the same boat as you @bobbo2 on (June 6, 2013, 5:49 GMT) I think a bit of both. If NZ had won I think our fans would have cited the painfully slow start by our batsmen. I think it's human nature to look at our own side's failings more than anything.

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 18:56 GMT

    @Shan156 on (June 6, 2013, 15:04 GMT) I posted a comm. to you earlier but for some reason they didn't publish it. I think there were too many flattering comms from NZ fans like DeanAndrewKay , Hayden Field and Warren Smith etc. Re Pollard - he may be just a slogger but he's good at it and very dangerous.. India look to have huge batting depth. The whole of their line up looks realistically capable of scoring at over a run a ball

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 18:46 GMT

    please publish this time

    @Shan156 on (June 5, 2013, 22:25 GMT) I like your thinking here and am about to post similar myself but if you were only 2 have 2 test batsmen in the line up you'd need to chose 1 of 3 (Bell,Trott/Root) + Cook. I'm still (despite his record) not sure about Cook as a captain , esp for the 50 over game where you have less occasions to talk to your master and have to think on your feet more

    @CricketingStargazer on (June 6, 2013, 5:38 GMT) I wasn't one who howled re Ravi's inclusion but said at the time and maintain that he is seen as a bowling all rounder and no way does he come in before Jos

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 18:45 GMT

    @Dean Andrew Kayon (June 5, 2013, 22:00 GMT) Steady on there. NZ thrashed us in the 1st 2 ODIs and won the series. This match could have gone either way and without Buttler's efforts and the partnership with Morgan NZ would have won 3-0. I and other Eng fans said well played to NZ in the 1st 2 games and they played well in this game too but you have to see that it's human nature to criticise your own side more than praise the opposition - which BTW I see you aren't here - double standards? PS Bopara's pies went for 3.5 an over. Must have been made by Mr Kipling

  • kearon47 on June 6, 2013, 16:08 GMT

    Champions Trophy-England Team A.Cook, I.Bell, J.Trott, J.Root, E.Morgan, R.Bopara, J.Buttler, S.Broad , G.Swann, J.Tredwell, S.Finn.

  • Shan156 on June 6, 2013, 15:04 GMT

    @JG2704, Also, I think you may be giving too much credit to that IPL king Pollard. He is a mere slogger. He doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Gayle (anyone who can hit a 300 in tests cannot just be a slogger) or any other proper cricket batsmen.

  • nzforever on June 6, 2013, 11:22 GMT

    Kiwicricketnut; well said I agree totaly with you, I just cannot understand nz selectors logic in persistantly picking very average bits and pieces players my biggest grip is Franklin & Ellis. Franklin cant be trusted to bowl 10 overs as a 5th bowler he usually gets 3/5 before being hauled off for being too expensive & wicketless and his batting is shockingly average & very rarely gets above 20 so what exactly is his value to the team. Ellis should just never be near an international team. Re: Elliott i can live with him batting at 5 he at least constructs an innings and helps other build patnerships plus more useful and economical than Franklin with the ball.

  • 200ondebut on June 6, 2013, 11:14 GMT

    Just goes to show George hasn't a clue what he is talking about - ramp shot to mid-on!! Hahahaha.

  • landl47 on June 6, 2013, 2:31 GMT

    Actually, I think this type of game is what suits this particular England squad best. The top 4 (excluding Cook on this occasion) built a solid platform, if rather slowly, leaving Morgan and Buttler to come in and slog at the end, which is the way they are really effective.

    Then at last the England selectors woke up from their dream in which Dernbach is an international bowler and picked the type of bowling side they should have had all along, with Bopara complementing the 3-seamer, 1-spinner attack. Bopara was economical and with Root adding a few overs England's balance looked much better in this game. Neither Broad nor Finn had great rhythm (surely someone is pointing out to Finn that running up straight is much better than dancing about as he gets near the crease?) but they both picked up wickets and Tredwell got 3 key victims, including Taylor, which sealed the deal.

    This side, with Anderson and Swann replacing Bresnan and Tredwell, gives Eng its best shot in the CT.

  • RodStark on June 5, 2013, 22:34 GMT

    Well done, England, and especially Buttler, Morgan, and Tredwell. Now the problem is going to be figuring out the best line-up for the Champions Trophy.

    I got the feeling England were keen to find out whether a combination of Root and Bopara can be an adequate fifth bowler, and based on this game, I'd say yes. bopara in particular seems to be better at keeping the runs down than Dernbach or Woakes. However, if we go that way, then we only get to pick four out of Anderson, Broad, Finn, Bresnan, Swann, and Tredwell, and there are good arguments for all six of them.

    I think I would go for Bopara because we do need the extra batting, and I suppose I'd leave out Finn (no value to batting and tends to be a bit expensive) and reluctantly leave out Tredwell 9though I like the idea of having both him and Swann. Bresnan seems to be bowling quite economically, so I'd keep him.

    My team would be Cook, Bell, Trott, Root, Morgan, Buttler, Bopara, Bresnan, Braod, Swann, and Anderson.

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 19:55 GMT

    please publish this time - nothing of offence

    @Jordanious77 on (June 5, 2013, 22:49 GMT) I'm sure it was not biased. try the series menu etc though is it? I genuinely can't see it as a biased move

    @Hayden Field on (June 6, 2013, 0:17 GMT) Bopara still did a good job. You can say while NZ were consolidating or whatever( but Bopara bowled 6 overs meaning there were 11 overs when Ravi bowled etc so either Ravi did a good job or NZ batsmen should have done better against him.

    @GasPipe on (June 6, 2013, 5:58 GMT) Being that Cook and Flower are not likely to be on these boards I think you'll find many Eng fans in the same boat as you @bobbo2 on (June 6, 2013, 5:49 GMT) I think a bit of both. If NZ had won I think our fans would have cited the painfully slow start by our batsmen. I think it's human nature to look at our own side's failings more than anything.

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 18:56 GMT

    @Shan156 on (June 6, 2013, 15:04 GMT) I posted a comm. to you earlier but for some reason they didn't publish it. I think there were too many flattering comms from NZ fans like DeanAndrewKay , Hayden Field and Warren Smith etc. Re Pollard - he may be just a slogger but he's good at it and very dangerous.. India look to have huge batting depth. The whole of their line up looks realistically capable of scoring at over a run a ball

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 18:46 GMT

    please publish this time

    @Shan156 on (June 5, 2013, 22:25 GMT) I like your thinking here and am about to post similar myself but if you were only 2 have 2 test batsmen in the line up you'd need to chose 1 of 3 (Bell,Trott/Root) + Cook. I'm still (despite his record) not sure about Cook as a captain , esp for the 50 over game where you have less occasions to talk to your master and have to think on your feet more

    @CricketingStargazer on (June 6, 2013, 5:38 GMT) I wasn't one who howled re Ravi's inclusion but said at the time and maintain that he is seen as a bowling all rounder and no way does he come in before Jos

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 18:45 GMT

    @Dean Andrew Kayon (June 5, 2013, 22:00 GMT) Steady on there. NZ thrashed us in the 1st 2 ODIs and won the series. This match could have gone either way and without Buttler's efforts and the partnership with Morgan NZ would have won 3-0. I and other Eng fans said well played to NZ in the 1st 2 games and they played well in this game too but you have to see that it's human nature to criticise your own side more than praise the opposition - which BTW I see you aren't here - double standards? PS Bopara's pies went for 3.5 an over. Must have been made by Mr Kipling

  • kearon47 on June 6, 2013, 16:08 GMT

    Champions Trophy-England Team A.Cook, I.Bell, J.Trott, J.Root, E.Morgan, R.Bopara, J.Buttler, S.Broad , G.Swann, J.Tredwell, S.Finn.

  • Shan156 on June 6, 2013, 15:04 GMT

    @JG2704, Also, I think you may be giving too much credit to that IPL king Pollard. He is a mere slogger. He doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Gayle (anyone who can hit a 300 in tests cannot just be a slogger) or any other proper cricket batsmen.

  • nzforever on June 6, 2013, 11:22 GMT

    Kiwicricketnut; well said I agree totaly with you, I just cannot understand nz selectors logic in persistantly picking very average bits and pieces players my biggest grip is Franklin & Ellis. Franklin cant be trusted to bowl 10 overs as a 5th bowler he usually gets 3/5 before being hauled off for being too expensive & wicketless and his batting is shockingly average & very rarely gets above 20 so what exactly is his value to the team. Ellis should just never be near an international team. Re: Elliott i can live with him batting at 5 he at least constructs an innings and helps other build patnerships plus more useful and economical than Franklin with the ball.

  • 200ondebut on June 6, 2013, 11:14 GMT

    Just goes to show George hasn't a clue what he is talking about - ramp shot to mid-on!! Hahahaha.

  • Front-Foot-Lunge on June 6, 2013, 10:19 GMT

    Jos Buttler is the most exciting and talented player in cricket right now. Anyone who didn't see his remarkable and dynamic innings yesterday needs to get the DVD as it was a feat we haven't seen in any forms of cricket for a while. Just another promising England talent- what a batsman.

  • Damo_s on June 6, 2013, 10:13 GMT

    With Cook out for a duck I think England had to grind. It seemed slow at the time and they probably could have scored at 1 more an over without taking risks. However, England seem pretty bad at rotating the strike early in the innings. This is what the good teams are able to do and it sets a better platform. England dont, and this puts pressure on the lower order to make up the deficit. The same happened today but fortunately the pinch hitters came good and it worked out.

  • ArthursAshes on June 6, 2013, 9:53 GMT

    England have an unbalanced side look about them. The top 4 lacks a genuine power hitter, an opener like Trescothick or someone who could bat in any of the top spots like KP. Cook, Bell and Trott are too similar, struggle to step up the pace to a higher level. Root also looks similar, but does score faster. A lot of overs are usually gone by the time the power hitters Morgan and Buttler get in. Had he not been injured I'd have opened with KP at the expense of Bell. Ideally we need power at the 2 and 4 spots and it's too late to do anything about it now.

    As for the bowling I'd stick with 2 spinners, Swann and Tredwell. As T20 shows good spinners tend to get hit less than the quick and we have 2 good ones. Doubtful that Bopara gets in if we play 2 spinners though as England will stick with 3 from Anderson, Finn, Broad, Bresnan. So, Tredwell and Bopara might be fighting for one spot.

  • kiwicricketnut on June 6, 2013, 9:42 GMT

    alot of people saying england won because they finnally picked the right team, i would say nz lost the game for picking the wrong team. when will selectors learn not to pick these bits and pieces players, im all for a batter who bowls a bit (williamson) or a bowler who can bat a bit (southee) as long as they perform their main role but we pick so many guys who do neither well, franklin, munro, elliot, ellis and even n.mccullum fits this bill, i dont care how good your economy rate is he averages over 50 per wicket and a cameo is about it if we are lucky with the bat. you only need two genuine allrounders and one of those should be the keeper, if we pick more specialists we will win more games. wish the selectors would stop using pie charts and start using there brains.

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 8:56 GMT

    @The_bowlers_Holding on (June 5, 2013, 17:03 GMT) Yeah , I remember that WC too and have mentioned it before. I seem to recall we played them again in the final but with a different result. The rain was definitely lucky for Pakistan in that game but I also seem to recall (think it was in that WC) the semi final where Inzy did the business where it looked like NZ would win. Apologies if I'm getting my facts wrong re the latter

    @Juiceoftheapple on (June 5, 2013, 21:35 GMT) I do agree re England not thinking outside the box. They very rarely do. WI is possibly one side I wouldn't play a twin spin attack against. I think their 2 biggest danger men (Gayle/Pollard) would prefer spin to raw pace. Agree 100% re Bopara. I said that I wasn't against him playing in the side (when he was selected in the squad) but that he should NOT come in higher than number 7. The only situation where I'd bring him in higher than Jos would be if England lost 4 wickets early on a difficult pitch

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 8:55 GMT

    @jackiethepen on (June 6, 2013, 6:57 GMT) I don't recall the ball which Guptill got out to as a particularly adventurous shot. But there were 70 runs on the board so it was hardly like it wasn't working for him was it and it wasn't a particularly early wicket? I know you love these slow starts but I'm pretty sure if you asked most fans whether they'd prefer to be 31-1 or 70-2 after 10 overs of a 50 over game. the vast majority would want the latter.

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 8:55 GMT

    Just a sidenote . I wonder how Warwicks fans feel about the English selectors? It's just as well they have a big/deep squad but I reckon Woakes was never going to play the 3rd ODI and I wonder if they could have called up someone else rather than Rankin?

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 8:54 GMT

    Personally , I have always said that I don't like the balance of the batting up top in this side. While I see the merits of a solid if unspectacular start , scoring at 3 an over off the 1st 10 and leef than 4 an over off the 1st 25 is (unless in particularly tricky conditions) likely to be more harmful to the side - putting too much pressure on the batsmen below. I was also disappointed with Root's SR today. (before KP returns) I would rotate between Bell and Trott and after KP returns maybe inc Root in the rotation

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 8:54 GMT

    Re the game Ctd - Why was Bopara sent in ahead of Buttler when there were just over 15 overs to go? If it's because they wanted to protect their power hitters then why did he not come in before Morgan? Surely they don't think Ravi is a more dangerous player than Jos at that stage of an inns? - does anyone? Jos's inns (inc some fortune) came off but it won't come off (not at that SR) all that often and the problem is that if you don't give the guy any real responsibility then it will almost be ingrained into him that he has to start hitting from the word go. I'd rather see him be able to build an innings a little more and not be under AS much pressure to compensate for the plodders before him

  • Herbet on June 6, 2013, 8:47 GMT

    We know England like to 'build a platform', but I think they are taking it a bit far and putting undue pressure on the batsmen coming in later on. Bell took 21 overs to score his first 39 runs. That kind of scoring rate would have been familiar to Geoff Boycott and Mike Brearley in the early days of ODI's. England don't need all of Bell, Cook and Trott in the top 3. Cook is captain, so he has to stay, and Trott averages 50, so you can't really drop him, so that leaves Bell, and it seems harsh, but maybe he has to go, or drop to 4 in place of Root? England could maybe consider opening with Bairstow and tell him to go and hit it, if he gets out, who cares, Trott's in next to steady the ship. Bopara at 5 doesn't work either, he's too orthodox and just doesn't score quick enough later on, Morgan and Buttler should both be bumped up a spot. I think I'd go with Cook, Bairstow, Trott, Root, Morgan, Buttler, Bresnan, Broad, Swann, Tredwell/Finn (pitch dependent), Anderson.

  • CricketingStargazer on June 6, 2013, 8:42 GMT

    Normally I would be wary of playing two spinners in England but, with Ravi Bopara in the side, we are not committed to 10 overs from anyone.

    After this match, the selectors have some interesting questions. One assumes that Jimmy Anderson will be the first pick as seamer. What combination you use for the rest of the bowlers is uncertain. I would pick Tim Bresnan for one of the other places. James Tredwell has actually looked more effective than Graeme Swann, but that may be down to the fact that Swann was having to bowl with the batsmen utterly dominant, whereas Tredwell came on with far more control: play both and there is no room for either Broad or Finn. What combination of Broad, Finn, Swann and Tredwell is the optimum? While Finn and Briad were a big improvement on Dernbach and Woakes, both leaked runs far more than one would like and Finn still does not look completely on song this season but, both Broad and Finn can be lethal and can take wickets from nowhere.

  • JG2704 on June 6, 2013, 8:38 GMT

    Re this game , I still feel that we have too many accumulators in the side and too much is expected of guys like Morgan and Jos. Jos scored at an incredible rate and had his shot off the final ball had just a fraction more power on it (I believe) he would have had the fastest ever ODI 50 - albeit he had a few bits of luck. But if he had scored at just over a run a ball - which is still ok/good NZ would have won this game. I'm sorry but the result does not vindicate such slow starts and also this is supposed to be a relief from the attritional stuff played in tests. Vaughan's side were scoring faster than this in tests.I'm fine with building a platform but 31 runs off the 1st 10 overs is way too slow and at over 25 we'd still not got to 4rpo.Pathetic. Long term I wonder if it may have been better had NZ won this game as we can't expect Jos to score at a SR of nearly 300 too often and by winning this game I think Cook/Flower will either not see or ignore the problem.

  • Harlequin. on June 6, 2013, 8:37 GMT

    @gaspipe, as good as it would be to get Tredwell into the side, I think it would have to be at the expense of Swann or Bopara (whose medium pace has been a revelation on these shores!). If you played Swann, Bopara and Tredwell then you would only realistically be able to pick 2 quicks, and in English conditions that isn't really the right balance. And with Root as well, we probably have enough 'take the pace off the ball' options. In England, we should play Bopara (as a bowler only, the less we expect of his batting the better) but abroad we should swap him for Tredwell.

    I'd also like to add my congratulations to the selectors for finally realising Dernbach is as much use as an underwater hairdryer - better late than never.

  • on June 6, 2013, 8:24 GMT

    The catch of Taylor was the key point of the match, he would have single handedly won the match, if only Finn had stepped on the line, haha. but good game, and not as convincing as some English supporters seem to think.

  • on June 6, 2013, 8:17 GMT

    NZ won because at no stage in the first two games did England have their best side on the park. Come the CL England will have a full strength team. Different result.

  • on June 6, 2013, 7:54 GMT

    I would play two frontline spinners given the control they give Cook. The seam attack should be Anderson, Broad and Bresnan. Four of these five are decent batsmen and Anderson is always determined and a brilliant fielder too. No room for Bopara (overrated and given more than enough chances) and never again for Dernbach... Woakes is a W-i-P and will come again - needs to work on his length. So I would pick COOK, BELL, TROTT, ROOT, MORGAN, BUTTLER, BRESNAN, BROAD, SWANN, TREDWELL and ANDERSON

  • venkatesh018 on June 6, 2013, 7:17 GMT

    @Rod StarK: My XI is: Cook, Bell, Trott, Root, Morgan, Butler,Bresnan, Broad, Swann, Tredwell, Finn. If England come up against India one spinner(Tredwell) should be left out and replaced by Anderson in the playing XI. I don't like the top three batsmen together but given the squad the selectors have picked this is the best XI England can put on the field.

  • jackiethepen on June 6, 2013, 6:57 GMT

    I think George you have got this completely wrong by praising Guptills's 'fluent' attacking rapid start. Given his form it was the wrong approach for NZ because it cost them his early wicket and the platform was stymied. Taylor seemed to understand that. NZ lost too many wickets too soon. That is why they lost the game. England by keeping wickets in hand proved to be the right judgement. Buttler understood this perfectly and said he felt he had license to bat the way he did in the final 5 overs. That is HIS ROLE. It doesn't always come off. But he was perfectly placed for it. England lost Cook for a duck. Bell has been attacking the ball. This wasn't the time to do it. Partnered by Trott it was always going to be slow but in match situation it was right to keep wickets. Giles is known to favour this. Most teams are going to take this approach and build towards the final overs. The pressure on teams is losing early wickets if they have hitters down the order. Bopara not ready yet.

  • venkatesh018 on June 6, 2013, 6:31 GMT

    Five points from today's final match: 1) A top three of Cook, Bell and Trott in a ODI XI is the perfect cure for insomnia and disastorous for England as a one day side 2) Butler has to bad atleast at No.6 or earlier if possible. 3) Anderson is definitely not a certainty in an England ODI team 4) Tredwell is good enough to play in Tests, leave alone ODIs. 5) Bresnan's fiery spell should finish Dernbach's International career if the selectors have any common sense.

  • jmcilhinney on June 6, 2013, 6:31 GMT

    @bobbo2 on (June 6, 2013, 5:49 GMT), much like England did in game 2, NZ bowled poorly at the end because the batsman put them under pressure. NZ didn't just bowl wides and no-balls for no reason. They did it because they were having trouble finding somewhere to bowl to Morgan and, in particular, Buttler so they were trying unusual things. Most games are going to be a combination of one team losing the game and the other winning and let's not forget that, no matter how well you bowl, you're always reliant on the batsman making a mistake of some degree. Are you saying that NZ really earned Bell's wicket? I think that England have made the NZ bowlers look better than they are at times by batting very passively and they managed to make them look worse than they are at the end here by batting ultra-aggressively. It's a very good bowler who can maintain their line and length during an onslaught like that.

  • jmcilhinney on June 6, 2013, 6:25 GMT

    @GasPipe on (June 6, 2013, 5:58 GMT), because England will almost never play two front-line spinners, especially in England. If Tredwell could bat to a standard of, say, Chris Woakes then he might get a look in but England just can't bring themselves to move to far away from their formula. Tredwell has a significantly better average than Swann, although in significantly fewer games, but Swann has a better economy rate. I think Tredwell's greatest weapon is that he just doesn't look much. I think that he's hard not to under-estimate and that coupled with the fact that he does bowl well is a very dangerous combination for a batsman.

  • hhillbumper on June 6, 2013, 6:23 GMT

    I detect a pattern.Dernbach gets dropped and England win.He plays for Surrey and their bowling tanks. I just don't understand why he is ever picked for England. However I expect having bodged up our one day form again in near future he will be back once more with his variety of slower balls that will rain down on the crowd.

    As for Tredwell he is just not right for this England team.he takes wickets,is economical and has good control. I feel he should be dropped quickly so that we can bring in our next saffer import.

    Come on Miller. What are you thinking

  • jmcilhinney on June 6, 2013, 6:07 GMT

    I really do hope that Bopara can get it together with the bat because, as illogical as it seems, he really does seem to be a good 5 1/2 th bowling option. His pace requires the batsmen to force a bit more and he seems to be pretty accurate most of the time, which is something that Woakes and Dernbach failed to be. Maybe he bowled in a period where NZ weren't looking to take him on but this is not the first time he's bowled economically. He was quite successful in the last home series against Australia, when he made runs as well, and he unexpectedly bowled a full 10 against WI last time too because he was the most economical bowler in the team. He is, in theory, a better bat than Woakes and looks to be more effective with the ball at the moment so he seems the better option. It would be great if Luke Wright could be as effective with the ball because with his batting as well he'd pick himself.

  • GasPipe on June 6, 2013, 5:58 GMT

    As a New Zealand fan, I would like to ask the English something: why the heck is Tredwell not picked as often? Every ODI that I have seen him in - whether it be against us, India, or South Africa - he has been tremendously effective, taking wickets and being reasonably economical. I think England should be going in with a two-spinner attack of Swann/Tredwell when possible because he seems to good a player to leave out. Plus he's the type of bowler I quite like: an old-fashioned off-spinner who seems innocuous, but picks up key wickets.

  • bobbo2 on June 6, 2013, 5:49 GMT

    I feel NZ lost the game rather than England winning. Obviously. Great knock by Buttler but the NZ bowlers had a shocking last 10 overs with poor length and no balls and wides. With the bat NZ gave away wickets. Ronchi poor shot (on what appeared to be a no ball), Williamson lost his head and should never have missed the ball, Munro played a nothing shot, MCCullum's ball was too close to cut and Franklin hit it straight to the fielder. I think Elliot would have been. Far better no. 5 for NZ. Good head and could have knocked its round fo 20 overs.

    But England did well to win from where they were. Can't say I was impressed with NZ though.

  • jmcilhinney on June 6, 2013, 5:46 GMT

    @Mitty2 on (June 6, 2013, 4:16 GMT), I could be wrong but I kind of get the feeling that Bell is under instructions from the management to bat Test match style. England tried KP at the top of the order with great success, when circumstances required his being replaced and Bell was the man chosen, I was under the impression that Bell would be given license to play a free-flowing innings, if not in quite the same vein as KP. With the introduction of two new balls, England seem to have decided that plodding early is the way to go and have stymied Bell in the process. I think that Bell could excel if given free rein to attack and England would be under less pressure later. Sure, he'd get out early sometimes but that's what Trott is there for.

  • SherjilIslam on June 6, 2013, 5:46 GMT

    I just couldn't believe Eng benched Tredwell for Dernbach. Tredwell is too good a bowler to be benched in any conditions to me. I have seen him bowl against India, in India against the strongest spin playing batsmen, he literally took wicket in his first over in almost every game. I think tredwell should be played along with Swann, with Finn and Anderson as other bowlers in all the CT matches.

  • CricketingStargazer on June 6, 2013, 5:38 GMT

    I agree very much with @landl47. The balance of the side looks so much better. There were the usual howls of outrage at the selection of Ravi Bopara, but he played a blinder: a solid innings that laid the foundations for what followed and an excellent bowling spell, keeping things tight. Equally important, Eoin Morgan looked so much better for having had some middle time in the previous match and for being able to play himself in steadily.

    Having heard that Broad could miss the Champions Trophy and that Finn might miss most of the rest of the summer both played! They will be all the better for he run out, provided that they have no reaction, but no one has even mentioned what is possibly the bigger story: Tim Bresnan seems to have slotted straight back into the side and looks back to his best, adding further options to both the Test and ODI side.

  • Mitty2 on June 6, 2013, 4:16 GMT

    Cook, 0 off 9; Bell, 82 off 96; Trott, 37 off 53. All (very) good test players and all add necessary solidarity to the top order (see australia's 65 on a flat deck against mediocre seamers), but they just put too much pressure on the middle order. Maybe it's an anomaly, maybe it's just playing accurate medium pacers that's causing the problems and if they played the fast and (not but) inaccurate seamers of MJ and starc, they'll prosper, but without KP coming in afterwards England seriously need a quick scorer in the top order. Prior has been tried opening, and although im not sure his record is as good there, surely having a counter-attacking batsman at the top is better than one of trott/bell/cook who are seemingly more focused on their individual scores than the team requirements. After all, Prior is undoubtedly one of the most team-orientated players in world cricket, get him in England!

  • jmcilhinney on June 6, 2013, 3:21 GMT

    I also think that Cook and his advisers made another tactical blunder. He's certainly not the only because most captains seem to be simply ignoring the fact that they can call for the powerplay early and playing as though it's mandatory from over 36 to 40. England had Bell and Root at the crease and both were well set. They weren't going to get any more set, so why delay the powerplay? As it happened, they both got out just before it started and it was then wasted on two new batsmen who were scratching around. With the extra fielder in, it's actually harder for a new batsman in the powerplay. If they had taken the powerplay early then Root and Bell may still have got out and nothing would have been different but at least it would have shown some intent, which England seem to believe belongs in the last 5 overs and nowhere else.

  • jmcilhinney on June 6, 2013, 3:16 GMT

    Great to see some insightful comments from electric_loco_Randy4. Thanks for your input. Excellent innings from Buttler and certainly something that England would like to see him do more consistently, MS Dhoni style. While England may say that the result vindicates their approach though, I don't really see it that way. They seem to be painting themselves into a corner with only one way out on purpose and it puts immense pressure on Morgan and Buttler. I thought Bell was moved to opener to be aggressive, or at least assertive. He could strike at about 75-80 early and up that to 100+ at around the 40-50 mark. The management seems to have told him to be cautious though, to the point where he's scoring slower than Cook and Trott. That's simply a waste. I'm saying that they should go nuts but, with a limited amount of extra risk, they could go into the last 10 overs with 20-40 extra runs on the board and ease the pressure on the hitters.

  • Dr.Yeluri on June 6, 2013, 3:16 GMT

    English are the team with most technically sound batsmen and bowlers than any other country has present..! They rely very much, i mean very much on their middle order...! The top order and early middle order lack the potential to blaze to their best in shorter formats..! Which means once again bowlers are going to be key for England..!

  • on June 6, 2013, 2:26 GMT

    boyd rankin should not even be in the squad theres more talented younger players than him. Rankin should go back to ireland

  • class9ryan on June 6, 2013, 1:34 GMT

    Lots of chaos for the upcoming Champions Trophy for England, I feel they should include 2 spinners against sides which are not gr8 against spinners i.e Australia and New Zealand in their group. Maybe they use 4 seam attack against Sri Lanka. England have quite similar players at the top. That can work against a good bowling side but against weak bowling units like India, Sri Lanka that can hurt them in no. of runs. Saying that they have bunch of excellent players and may be the front runners in the competition along with Pakistan.

  • iceaxe on June 6, 2013, 0:50 GMT

    congrats to England. NZ lost it in the middle. Handy contributions by the tail ensured it wasn't a complete embarrassment. Good to see Taylor back in form. Jos really did steal the day though.

  • on June 6, 2013, 0:17 GMT

    Bopara bowled when NZ had to consilidate after a loss of a number of wickets. Those who had done the job and got hit while taking wickets left him in a better position as NZ was not as attacking

  • Jordanious77 on June 5, 2013, 22:49 GMT

    why are none of the articles for this game (nor was the preview) on the New Zealand page.... Thats terribly biast. I've been wondering where it was all weekend, just assumed one wasn't released. But OFC it's been published for England.

  • RodStark on June 5, 2013, 22:47 GMT

    And to follow up my previous comment, England need to be more flexible in their batting order during the course of a game. Their batsmen are made up of "dashers" and "builders", and it would be better not to have two "builders" batting together after, say, the 15th over. So when the next wicket falls after over 15 (assuming we haven't lost a whole bunch) I'd send in Morgan rather than Trott or Root, and then continue the pattern throughout the rest of the innings. Don't know why they always seem to insist on sticking to a pre-announced order.

  • BRUTALANALYST on June 5, 2013, 22:46 GMT

    England's top 3 is really quite impotent all quality stroke players but when on slower tracks or if they don't get off to quick start they got bogged down very easily.I would have Michael Carberry and KP added to the top 4 that would make them 1 of most dangerous Odi sides in the world with Butler and Morgan to finish.

  • Shan156 on June 5, 2013, 22:25 GMT

    England should be bold and drop some of the test class batsmen at the top or rotate them. No more than 2 test batsmen in the XI unless KP returns when we can play 3. Since Chef is captain, only one of Trott or Bell. As well as Trott has played, he could really slow things down and Bell has struggled to. So, there should be place only for one of them. Play a big hitter and a test batsman as openers, follow it with a pair of them, if the big hitter goes, then a big hitter enters; if a test batsman goes, then a test batsman enters. This can change based on conditions. They will be followed by Root, Morgan, and Buttler. We are more likely to lose a few games but that is the only way forward for Eng. in ODIs. Why not play Hales as an opener?

  • on June 5, 2013, 22:00 GMT

    Once again new Zealand get no respect! Without Butler and our flaling over against tredwell this could have been a 3-0 drubbing and rightly so but once again its England lost the games rather than New Zealand won the games and btw to the person who says franklins a dobbler what do you call bopara and his pies?

  • Juiceoftheapple on June 5, 2013, 21:35 GMT

    Look at the wickets Tredwell took - the danger men. His economy is always good. He's wily and experienced. And he can bat a bit. But will we play 2 spinners? no chance. I dont get why they dont think outside the box, Yardy in the T20 WC was a master stroke. Its all about run rate, Swann and Tredwell would strangle all sides except India and Sri Lanka, and if we play either of them then we might as well prepare a spicy fast pitch, cus we know they dont like it up em. Bopara is an intelligent cricketer, and his bowling is difficult to get away, theres no reason he cant come in after Buttler. And if we really want to go for broke and try and win this (if fit), then why not let the enigma that is KP bat at 3, or Root, and KP at 4. None of these players are untested at int level. But we wont, as we are conservative, and only have flurries of abandon when picking seam bowlers. Well done Buttler, I believe I was the first to shout 'Buttler for England' at Taunton and couldnt be happier for e.

  • glance_to_leg on June 5, 2013, 21:27 GMT

    Bopara for Dernbach surely. Actually maybe the guy who used to open the bowling for my village team would be an improvement over Dernbach.

  • 2.14istherunrate on June 5, 2013, 21:25 GMT

    That was a lot of fun as a game as NZ refused to die. Taylor once more oozed class and played a great knock.Tredwell could yet get a game in the CT as a second spinner at Cardiff,as here he showed again his reliability. One or two great catches marked the occasion as well as one or two valiant near misses,and Mills showed good intent at no.10 Conceivably NZ could get a final spot playing the way they did,while the Haemorrhage brothers were not missed except by the standard of their replacements, Bell was back to nearer normal and Morgan touched form but along with everyone else I was impressed by Buttler's maniac knock. At least the blues have gone for England again.

  • Baseball-Sucks on June 5, 2013, 20:47 GMT

    I've got a question. Is Ross Taylor the one who invented the slog sweep ? :)

  • iceaxe on June 5, 2013, 19:41 GMT

    NZ can still win this match too. They have plenty of time,... as long as they bat sensibly.

  • Shan156 on June 5, 2013, 19:12 GMT

    I have been calling for Tredwell to be included in the side even for the test series. He is a very under-rated cricketer in my opinion. He may not be as good as Swann but uses his limited skills very well and is passionate about his game. I say let's give Swann an extended rest and play Tredwell in the CT.

    It might be a dead rubber but it gives us the necessary impetus before a major global tournament. NZ may still win this one because Ross Taylor may pull a surprise with the tail but England have proved that they are a decent ODI team when they play the right personnel.

    Lastly, Good bye Dernbach. Please don't turn back in England colors.

  • MartinC on June 5, 2013, 19:06 GMT

    Well electric_loco that 'poor' England score ended up over 280 and NZ are currently 6 wickets down as I type with a long way to go. Good call though form certainly is temporary and class permenant but not quite the way you meant it.

  • on June 5, 2013, 18:50 GMT

    so what you a say england or new zealand

  • on June 5, 2013, 17:27 GMT

    Eoin Morgan is Irish though :)

  • Jadejafan on June 5, 2013, 17:22 GMT

    lol What a shame Butler just missed out on the fastest ODI 50 and Morgan 1 run short of his 50. Fantastic throw from Guptill :)

  • ricky8741 on June 5, 2013, 17:05 GMT

    commentator comparing buttler to gayle dhoni LOL

  • The_bowlers_Holding on June 5, 2013, 17:03 GMT

    Wise man once said to me "empty vessels make the most noise when whacked with a big stick" there are a few empty vessel posters I would like to prove that theory on. I remember England v Pakistan WC game when we bowled them out for about 51, then rain came and match was abandoned thus Pak not knocked out- they won the WC that year it is about peaking at the right time and a bit of luck.

  • on June 5, 2013, 17:01 GMT

    Most rubbish innings ive ever seen from a 'batsman' by buttler. Is this what the future of cricket holds for us? On another day hed have got out 10 times. Today he looks like a hero, but not one proper cricket stroke did he play. Extremely happy that 'England' are trying to make him look like such a hero.

  • Westmorlandia on June 5, 2013, 16:46 GMT

    Having just watched Buttler smashing it around and a score of 287 posted, I'm kind of loving all the comments below moaning about England. The fact is, two poor games is poor, but in proper perspective it is a problem rather than a disaster or a permanent state. England are a good one day side when they have the right bowlers - certainly as good as New Zealand (who are also much better than some people gave them credit for), even if not quite in the top tier.

  • 2.14istherunrate on June 5, 2013, 16:43 GMT

    At the start of the 47th over I reckoned England had to score 50 to get a respectable 273 to set NZ 274. Incredibly they smashed 285 ! Wow. Great work from Jos in particular and Morgs,with a bit of help from McM. Careers are thus shaped one hopes for JB.

  • bobbo2 on June 5, 2013, 16:40 GMT

    Clearly not a bad batting wicket, as was suggested earlier

  • on June 5, 2013, 16:39 GMT

    OMG JC Buttler 47* (16b 6x4 3x6) ST Jayasuriya survived..

  • Cover_drive_55 on June 5, 2013, 15:47 GMT

    England can still win this match. England bowling is strong today and more importantly Derbnach is not in there. Also NZ is likely to be undone today going by their consistency. England need atleast 240 on board which is definitely possible with 11 overs still to go...

  • nlpdave on June 5, 2013, 15:07 GMT

    It's pretty miserable performance once again by England who don't seem to know how this game should be played. To be so pedestrian against a pretty mediocre bowling attack with no threat whatsoever might indicate that a couple of scores are needed personally with not too much concern about the result. After all the series is already over. I expect the gap in class between NZ players and the rest of the 'top six' will be more ruthlessly exploited in the forthcoming tournament. Can you imagine Chris Gayle just pushing back James Franklyn's dobbers?

  • Shridharan.S on June 5, 2013, 14:24 GMT

    Boyd Rankin deserved to play this 3rd NatWest ODI at Trent Bridge,Nottingham.

  • Batmanindallas on June 5, 2013, 13:57 GMT

    trott and bell in at the same time-that is silly

  • electric_loco_WAP4 on June 5, 2013, 13:31 GMT

    intelligent fans knows all too well that class is permanent and form is temporary . So true when you see Eng in this series . Eng well living upto their 'class' . Sad that form deserted NZ short while in 2 match TS or they could have completed job left undone back home and trounced Eng 2-0 . Rain or no rain-:)

  • electric_loco_WAP4 on June 5, 2013, 13:25 GMT

    This England 'attack' went for 380 only the other day, and in that match 2 opposition batsmen barely got out and 1 of them with an extra 10 balls of Jade would ended up 220 odd n.o. 3-0 to NZ. It's to be expected of a team consisting of the weakest and least skillful top 6 in world cricket , barely score at 3.5 r.p.o in ODIs ,a spinner who doesn't turn the ball, a keeper who can't catch and a captain who can't lead. And all we hear from some quarters is how brilliant they apparently are, there in lies the stark contrast between reality and fantasy. These are just not the same standards that the top teams like CT favourites Aussies ,Pak ,SA .. in the world live by.

  • electric_loco_WAP4 on June 5, 2013, 13:25 GMT

    This England 'attack' went for 380 only the other day, and in that match 2 opposition batsmen barely got out and 1 of them with an extra 10 balls of Jade would ended up 220 odd n.o. 3-0 to NZ. It's to be expected of a team consisting of the weakest and least skillful top 6 in world cricket , barely score at 3.5 r.p.o in ODIs ,a spinner who doesn't turn the ball, a keeper who can't catch and a captain who can't lead. And all we hear from some quarters is how brilliant they apparently are, there in lies the stark contrast between reality and fantasy. These are just not the same standards that the top teams like CT favourites Aussies ,Pak ,SA .. in the world live by.

  • electric_loco_WAP4 on June 5, 2013, 13:31 GMT

    intelligent fans knows all too well that class is permanent and form is temporary . So true when you see Eng in this series . Eng well living upto their 'class' . Sad that form deserted NZ short while in 2 match TS or they could have completed job left undone back home and trounced Eng 2-0 . Rain or no rain-:)

  • Batmanindallas on June 5, 2013, 13:57 GMT

    trott and bell in at the same time-that is silly

  • Shridharan.S on June 5, 2013, 14:24 GMT

    Boyd Rankin deserved to play this 3rd NatWest ODI at Trent Bridge,Nottingham.

  • nlpdave on June 5, 2013, 15:07 GMT

    It's pretty miserable performance once again by England who don't seem to know how this game should be played. To be so pedestrian against a pretty mediocre bowling attack with no threat whatsoever might indicate that a couple of scores are needed personally with not too much concern about the result. After all the series is already over. I expect the gap in class between NZ players and the rest of the 'top six' will be more ruthlessly exploited in the forthcoming tournament. Can you imagine Chris Gayle just pushing back James Franklyn's dobbers?

  • Cover_drive_55 on June 5, 2013, 15:47 GMT

    England can still win this match. England bowling is strong today and more importantly Derbnach is not in there. Also NZ is likely to be undone today going by their consistency. England need atleast 240 on board which is definitely possible with 11 overs still to go...

  • on June 5, 2013, 16:39 GMT

    OMG JC Buttler 47* (16b 6x4 3x6) ST Jayasuriya survived..

  • bobbo2 on June 5, 2013, 16:40 GMT

    Clearly not a bad batting wicket, as was suggested earlier

  • 2.14istherunrate on June 5, 2013, 16:43 GMT

    At the start of the 47th over I reckoned England had to score 50 to get a respectable 273 to set NZ 274. Incredibly they smashed 285 ! Wow. Great work from Jos in particular and Morgs,with a bit of help from McM. Careers are thus shaped one hopes for JB.

  • Westmorlandia on June 5, 2013, 16:46 GMT

    Having just watched Buttler smashing it around and a score of 287 posted, I'm kind of loving all the comments below moaning about England. The fact is, two poor games is poor, but in proper perspective it is a problem rather than a disaster or a permanent state. England are a good one day side when they have the right bowlers - certainly as good as New Zealand (who are also much better than some people gave them credit for), even if not quite in the top tier.