West Indies v New Zealand, Women's World Cup 2013, Mumbai February 11, 2013

West Indies beat New Zealand to move second


West Indies 207 for 9 (Taylor 49, Daley 37, Nielsen 3-27) beat New Zealand 159 (Priest 36*, Bates 30, Smartt 3-39) by 48 runs
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details

West Indies showed why they are known as one of the most improved sides in women's cricket with their first-ever win over New Zealand, beating the latter by 48 runs in a Super Six match to move to second place with six points. The defeat brought New Zealand's net run-rate to 0.952 against 1.079 of England, their opponents in the final Super Six match, which could well decide who faces Australia in the final. New Zealand meet England on Wednesday in a day-night game that will only matter if West Indies lose to Australia earlier in the day.

Refreshingly, Stafanie Taylor and Deandra Dottin were not the stars of the win, as allrounder Shanel Daley and offspinner Anisa Mohammed added 45 valuable runs for the ninth wicket, the highest partnership in the game, to push their side past 200.

Medium-pacer Tremayne Smartt then shocked the New Zealand top order with sharp, late inswing, though key batsman Sophie Devine was handed a shocker of an lbw decision off a thick inside edge. While New Zealand may rue some other marginal lbw calls that went against them, it was also their over-reliance on captain Suzie Bates that cost them.

Bates was at the other end when Devine, the only other New Zealand batsman to have made a fifty-plus score in the tournament, was given out off Smartt in the tenth over with the score reading 47 for 2. There were three other lbws in the innings, opener Frances Mackay falling to a Smartt inswinger, No. 6 Nicola Browne missing a sweep off Taylor and No. 8 Kate Broadmore caught surprised by a quick incoming Dottin delivery. While replays showed Smartt's, and particularly Dottin's, deliveries going down leg, Browne was struck just outside the line of off.

Apart from being unfortunate, New Zealand also suffered at their own hands, as they attempted two suicidal singles to point to lose Katie Perkins and Rachel Priest. Perkins and Bates had managed to steady the chase to an extent, but the former's charge from the non-striker's end reduced New Zealand to 76 for 4 in the 19th over.

Three overs later, Bates, the leading run-scorer in the tournament, slammed one straight back to the bowler Mohammed to depart for 30. Bates, like Taylor earlier, had looked in a different class compared to the rest of her team-mates and her fall all but ended New Zealand's chances. Though Priest slogged a few boundaries, there was little chance of her side getting close to West Indies' 207.

Mohammed, who had figures of 8.3-3-13-1, played a major role in West Indies getting as far as they did, along with Daley. Mohammed, dropped on 14 by Morna Nielsen at long-on, swung a few fours down the ground to make a quick 31. Daley, who came in with West Indies 104 for 5, ensured they batted the full 50 overs, knocking the ball around patiently before hitting out towards the end.

Taylor and Dottin made important contributions too. After Bates put West Indies in, Sian Ruck trapped Kycia Knight and Natasha McLean lbw early, both batsmen moving far across and missing pitched-up deliveries. Taylor responded with several emphatic cover drives to motor to 49 off 53 before Bates moved one away from a length to produce an edge to the wicketkeeper.

Big-hitting Dottin walked in at 82 for 4 and smacked her first delivery over extra cover for four. Bates took off her impressive left-arm spinner Nielsen in anticipation of more hitting. It made no difference to Dottin, who powered the seamer Lea Tahuhu for two more boundaries. After Bates was swiped to the advertising boards beyond deep midwicket, she brought back Nielsen, who needed three deliveries to remove Dottin. The first flew to the deep square leg rope, the third ended in the hands of square leg as Dottin went for 27 off 21.

The innings then meandered on till Mohammed arrived at 159 for 8 in the 44th over and put the total beyond New Zealand's reach.

Abhishek Purohit is a sub-editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Mark on February 12, 2013, 13:02 GMT

    Interesting point @jmc that the final games are, once again, not simultaneous. In this case West Indies are clearly prejudiced by the fact that, if they lose, both Eng and NZ will know exactly what result they need and how many runs they need to win by. As with the final games in the group phase, wouldn't it be fairer to all to play any remaining live matches simultaneously?

  • Dummy4 on February 12, 2013, 7:09 GMT

    I hope every team in this ICC World Cup - 2013 will play their best cricket and let the chips fall where they may. It's been an excellent tournament so far and even the less than perfect officiating hasn't fazed the ladies. If the budget is tight it is because ICC chose to make it so. What could be a better investment in women's cricket than having a World Cup tournament that was well run in every way? Poor umpiring ruins the game for everyone, participants and neutrals alike. All umpires make mistakes, yes, but there have been way too many in this tournament and some of the ones I have seen have been truly awful. Blatant errors! Sometimes I wonder if the umpire was fully aware of the laws pertaining to LBW.

  • Dummy4 on February 12, 2013, 6:30 GMT

    You become "a most improved side" with umpires like that.As for the dancing after taking wickets ,is someone going to explain to the W.I.girls that it more cringeworthy than cool ?

  • John on February 12, 2013, 5:29 GMT

    England play NZ after the WI play Australia so England and NZ have a bit of an advantage, especially the team batting second, in that they know exactly what they have to do get into the final. Of course, that becomes a moot point if WI beat Australia.

  • John on February 12, 2013, 3:04 GMT

    @James Packman on (February 11, 2013, 20:28 GMT), that's a complete crock I'm afraid. Australia may subconsciously ease up because they're already through but there's no way that they'd want to hand WI a confidence-enhancing win right before playing them again in the final. Australia is the better team but any team can win on their day so having just beaten Australia would be a great boost to WI going into a final against them. Australia have already beaten England and NZ so they will be confident that they can do it again and I'm sure that they'd love to go into the final with the mental edge of being unbeaten.

  • o on February 12, 2013, 0:54 GMT

    The 2 batsman that could of won it for NZ Bates and Mchlashan were caught and bowled respectively there were 2 bad lbw decisions and 1 marginal but at the end of the day there were also a couple not given I think the main wickets of Mcglashan and Bates won it for W.I anyway.

  • John on February 11, 2013, 23:30 GMT

    That was the best possible result for England. Now if Aus can beat WI and Eng beat NZ, it will almost certainly be Aus-Eng in the final. Of course, if WI or NZ win, England are out.

    I hope every team will play their best cricket and let the chips fall where they may. It's been an excellent tournament so far and even the less than perfect officiating hasn't fazed the ladies. Good for them.

  • Dummy4 on February 11, 2013, 20:28 GMT

    Australia will throw the game against West Indies so they face them in the final - remember where you read it first.

  • Krishna on February 11, 2013, 20:17 GMT

    I still see Australia and England in finals...hope west indies get something to cheer.