New Zealand XI v England XI, T20, Whangarei

New Zealand XI edge past England in warm-up

ESPNcricinfo staff

February 6, 2013

Comments: 43 | Text size: A | A

New Zealand XI 171 for 7 (Latham 64, Devcich 33, Broad 3-24) beat England XI 170 for 5 (Morgan 51*, Buttler 51) by three wickets
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details


New Zealand XI's Tom Latham plays a sweep shot against England XI, New Zealand XI v England XI, T20 Tour match, Whangarei, February 6, 2013
Tom Latham top-scored in New Zealand XI's successful chase © Getty Images
Enlarge
Related Links

Solid performances from the top-order batsmen helped New Zealand XI pull off a thrilling three-wicket win over England XI in the second Twenty20 tour match in Whangerei on Wednesday. Set a target of 171, New Zealand XI managed a last-ball victory after losing the first practice match on Tuesday by 46 runs.

The stand-out performance for the hosts came from Canterbury batsman Tom Latham, who built on the good start by the openers Hamish Rutherford and Anton Devcich, scoring a brisk 64 off 38 balls. Subsequently, at one stage it looked like New Zealand would win with a few overs to spare.

However, England made a strong comeback, taking three wickets in seven balls to give themselves a shot at victory. Luke Ronchi and Latham were dismissed in the penultimate over by England captain Stuart Broad and Dernbach then dismissed Doug Bracewell off the first ball of the 20th over. It was left to pacers Matt Henry and Andrew Ellis to score the required runs in the final over.

New Zealand XI put up a better bowling performance compared to the first practice match and managed to keep the England batting in check till the 12th over when Jos Buttler joined Eoin Morgan at the crease. The two brought in their good form from the previous game, adding 87 runs in 8.2 overs before Buttler, who made an unbeaten half-century in the previous match, was dismissed for 51 off 31 balls by Neil Wagner.

England opener Michael Lumb said his side was not too disappointed with the tight finish. "We did drag it back well. They could have run away with it easily but we showed a bit of fight and I think it's a good sign we can take away. Unfortunately, we didn't get the result we wanted but the game went to the wire and that should hold us in good stead if we get some close games in the next few days."

Latham was disappointed about his dismissal but was relieved to be back among the runs. "I have been struggling a little bit this season, but I have started timing the ball better and getting into the right place," he said.

England will play New Zealand in the first of three Twenty20 internationals from February 9 in Auckland.

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by JG2704 on (February 8, 2013, 9:30 GMT)

@R_U_4_REAL_NICK on (February 7, 2013, 22:36 GMT) Don't think we can purely blame Giles re lack of Yorkers. We were doing similar when Flower was in charge

Posted by JG2704 on (February 8, 2013, 9:27 GMT)

@CS - Tredwell went for similar runs to Finn in this match , so even when our number 1 spinner fails our number 1 pacer fails. I've just been through the economy rates (spin vs pace) from 2012 and only done home matches in T20/ODIs. I'm not surprised that spin comes out on top economywise but it is only 7-5 in favour of spin. However in 3 of these matches we had only one spinner/spin option and in 1 that was Patel. And this was purely in England. Patel is difficult to define but he is definitely more of a batsman than a bowler. His stats will tell you that. In T20s/ODIs he is as (if not more) effective as a bowler. Maybe he's somewhere in between a part timer and a full time spinner. In tests you could never call him a full timer. Re Saturday's side , I'd have Root in for Bairstow for sure and anyone for Jade but I can't see any more changes than that - and that's presuming they make these changes

Posted by CricketingStargazer on (February 8, 2013, 7:47 GMT)

@JG Yes and Tredwell went at 10... When there are only 20 overs these pace v spin statistics for a single match are meaningless. So, you are saying that Samit is in mainly as a batsman when we have all manner of young, talented batsmen to pack the middle order? It's true what you say about pace v spin. Often taking the pace off the ball is very effective (I believe that the best England figures in an ODI are still by Vic Marks opening the bowling v Aus, with 5-20) and spinners were not regarded as having a place in T20 initially until it was realised that they can be extremely economical. However, even so, not many sides will play 2 spinners unless the conditions are very favourable, which isn't that common in New Zealand: you normally want to reinforce your pace options. Anyway, no big issue. I just though don't feel that this side was the XI that we'll see playing on Saturday. We'll see. :-)

Posted by R_U_4_REAL_NICK on (February 7, 2013, 22:36 GMT)

@JG2704 (post on February 7, 2013, 18:09 GMT): spot on mate. I think you'll find mostly spinners are dominating the shorter formats in bowling tables. People tend to only look in the wicket's column on score sheets for bowlers, which is fine for tests because 20 wickets wins a match - but for the shorter formats it's (mostly) economy rates all the way. Dernbach and the old out-of-form Broad may pick up wickets, but economy rates of 9+ in T20's aint going to win many games me thinks.

I have seen England's bowlers go through full short-form series without bowling a single yorker! Don't get it at all. Giles is it? Are you watching/reading mate?

Posted by   on (February 7, 2013, 19:33 GMT)

I cant beleive all the negative comments on here about this! Its 20/20 man! Who really cares.....NZ have always been an able side in the shorter form and can beat anyone on their day. Agreed it is not ideal but the tests are the main event and with a few tweaks the short form boys will be fine,not world beaters but fine. Ive learnt that you never underestimate NZ at home, solid and nuggety bunch who enjoy upsetting the applecart.McCullum and taylor are fine players and they have a decent pace attack if not scary in any way. They will certainly provide me with more nervous moments than the quite frankly awful Aussies.This next 12 months will be a bad time to be an Australian cricket fan! Randy Oz - I look forward to seeing your posts after you lose the ashes AGAIN! If M.Clarke gets injured we could see carnage!

Posted by JG2704 on (February 7, 2013, 18:09 GMT)

@CricketingStargazer on (February 7, 2013, 10:30 GMT) Eng played a full time spinner and a part time spinner and I would include t least 2 spinning options in every game. The pace bowlers took the wickets but by and large I reckon that if you looked at the pace vs spin stats for shorter formats the spin bowlers tend to be more economical. Even in these conditions our spinners had a better economy rate. The economy rate of the pacers was 8.83 and of the spinners was 8 - if 20 overs were bowled with those economy rate the scores would be 176 with 8.83 and 160 with 8. I would also say that - despite our top order not doing so well in these games - our bowling is of greater concern. We still posted 170 and you would back that to be a winning total in most T20 games I reckon. A couple of years ago you'd have backed our bowlers to defend such a total 90% of the time - not so sure now Anyone for Dernbach and Root for Jonny - another genuine bowling option

Posted by JG2704 on (February 7, 2013, 18:08 GMT)

@Trickstar on (February 6, 2013, 19:01 GMT) Not sure I agree totally with you re bowlers lengths. Alf Thomas was interviewed and he said the key was to mix everything up , inc slowies,Yorkers,back of a length,good length,bouncers ... . Maybe some of our bowlers bowl too much back of a length stuff where the batsmen knows what's coming and can set himself. Think it also depends on the pitch , the batsman , conditions etc

Re Finn/Tredwell - to me it's a worry if they go for runs because by and large they have been the rocks in the side

Posted by CricketingStargazer on (February 7, 2013, 10:30 GMT)

@jmc No, no one is making up reasons. I would just like to ask though, if this is the full XI, why are we playing two spinners on the lush green turf of New Zealand??? I would be amazed and a little perturbed if this is the balance of attack that we go with for the series (not withstanding that Samit Patel was our most economical bowler). As you say, the side was not good enough, but that is no excuse to press the panic button. Areas of concern? The top order has had two poor starts in the two matches. They need to do better. That may well lead to changes on Saturday. The middle order has twice had to dig them out. Steve Finn, our main aggresor, was expensive and his rhythm was not right. That though is what warm-up matches are for. People need realistic practice and, with it. you fix things and the better the opposition play, the better the practice. I'm not planning to start running around shouting "Don't panic! Don't panic!"

Posted by jmcilhinney on (February 7, 2013, 9:48 GMT)

@CricketingStargazer on (February 7, 2013, 9:09 GMT), while I agree that RandyUK is full of it, let's not start making up reasons for the loss. The England team was pretty much a full strength side based on the players in the squad. Personally, I'd like to see Woakes in for Dernbach but the selectors are as likely to persevere with Dernbach for the whole T20 series. Dernbach's figures in the first warmup were better than Woakes' so there's no real evidence that he would have got off better here and he wouldn't have batted. We might also see Root in for Patel but Root may also not have batted and is unlikely to have bowled better than Patel. The simple fact is that England didn't play well enough to win. That certainly doesn't mean that they won't win the series though, as we saw in India how much ordinary performances in warmups mean. T20 is volatile so losses can never be truly unanticipated but England should probably be favourites, although NZ are well in the hunt in this format.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Tour Results
New Zealand v England at Auckland - Mar 22-26, 2013
Match drawn
New Zealand v England at Wellington - Mar 14-18, 2013
Match drawn
New Zealand v England at Dunedin - Mar 6-10, 2013
Match drawn
NZ XI v England XI at Queenstown - Feb 27-Mar 2, 2013
NZ XI won by 3 wickets
New Zealand v England at Auckland - Feb 23, 2013
England won by 5 wickets (with 75 balls remaining)
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days
Sponsored Links

Why not you? Read and learn how!