New Zealand v England, 1st ODI, Hamilton February 16, 2013

New faces, same close contest


Match facts

February 17, 2013
Start time 2pm (0100 GMT)

Big Picture

From the frenetic, electro-pop noodling of T20, the series settles into a more traditional rhythm ahead of the hoped-for operatic sweep of the Tests - an ideal way to build up through the formats during a tour. The ODIs will provide us with a burst of prog rock, as maligned as it is apparently outdated but still capable of moving the faithful. And, given 50-overs cricket is traditionally New Zealand's strongest suit, a decent contest could provoke some contented toe-tapping and beard-stroking among onlookers.

England do not have a great ODI record in New Zealand, having only twice won bilateral series there, the last in 1992. They will also have to deal with one of the side effects of modern format juggling, as almost half the side, including the top three, will come in cold, having not played a match on tour. In the cases of Jonathan Trott, James Anderson and Graeme Swann, their last competitive outing came in the Nagpur Test in mid-December. England may have come up with a method to coax their corps through the international calendar but, as Australia have recently discovered, constant tinkering can be just as damaging as losing players to injury.

The New Zealand side will also have a slightly different make-up to the T20s, though the likes of BJ Watling, Kane Williamson and Kyle Mills have been able to play domestic cricket since returning from South Africa. Ross Taylor missed New Zealand's surprise ODI series win on that tour but his return, provided he can find some form, should strengthen an already capable outfit. There is a good blend of youth and experience in the squad and, despite England's lofty ODI ranking (second to India on decimal points), Brendon McCullum will be hoping his side can land a few more blows before the Tests.

With Ashley Giles still wearing out the creases in his new England gilet, having taken over as limited-overs coach last month, there will be plenty of lessons to learn in conditions that will be more reflective of those at home, where the final edition of the Champions Trophy will be held later this year. A 3-2 defeat in India was no disgrace but a few quandaries - such as the wicketkeeping position and candidates for No. 7 - remain. For McCullum and Mike Hesson, another new team, the priority is simple: win.

Form guide

(Most recent first, completed matches)
New Zealand LWWLL
England WLLLW

In the spotlight

Kane Williamson is one of New Zealand's most promising batsmen but he struggled to cope with the demands of playing in all three formats in 2012. Dropped from the T20 team for the South Africa tour, he returned to limited-overs international cricket batting at No. 3 in the Kimberley ODI and made his highest score of 145 not out in a series-clinching win. New Zealand have several dashers and diligent allrounders but Williamson adds class to the batting line-up.

He has rapidly developed into England's T20 explosives expert, but Jos Buttler is still learning on the job as wicketkeeper, a position that Alastair Cook confirmed he will hang on to for the ODIs despite the presence of Jonny Bairstow in the squad. Buttler has only played three ODIs and has a maximum of six to cement his place as keeper for the Champions Trophy. The prospect of giving him an extra 30 overs in which to wreak destruction with the bat is also tantalising.

Team news

Taylor will come back into the side at No. 4 and he could find himself spending plenty of time in the middle with McCullum, who has moved to No. 5 to balance the demands of captaincy and wicketkeeping. New Zealand face a straight choice between playing one of the two other allrounders in the squad, Colin Munro and Andrew Ellis, or Trent Boult.

New Zealand (probable) 1 Martin Guptill, 2 BJ Watling, 3 Kane Williamson, 4 Ross Taylor, 5 Brendon McCullum (capt & wk), 6 Grant Elliott, 7 James Franklin, 8 Nathan McCullum, 9 Kyle Mills, 10 Trent Boult, 11 Mitchell McClenaghan

They may not be comparable in terms of style but England will welcome back the reliable presence of Trott in place of the rested Kevin Pietersen. The conditions could be ripe for Chris Woakes to showcase his all-round skills at No. 7, while Anderson, Stuart Broad and Swann should slot back in after missing the India series. Steven Finn, meanwhile, could debut a new, shortened run-up to try and combat his habit of knocking the stumps in his delivery stride.

England (probable) 1 Alastair Cook (capt), 2 Ian Bell, 3 Jonathan Trott, 4 Joe Root, 5 Eoin Morgan, 6 Jos Buttler (wk), 7 Chris Woakes, 8 Stuart Broad, 9 Graeme Swann, 10 James Anderson, 11 Steven Finn

Pitch and conditions

The teams head back up to Hamilton, venue for the second T20, where New Zealand's pitch-it-up swing trumped England's hit-the-deck aggression. The sunny weather is expected to continue and, considering the effect of the ball under lights earlier in the week, the team winning the toss may fancy having first crack at the short boundaries.

Stats and trivia

  • On their only previous ODI appearance at Seddon Park, in 2008, England were thrashed by ten wickets in a rain-shortened game, as Brendon McCullum and Jesse Ryder knocked off the target of 165 in 18.1 overs.
  • That was New Zealand's last win in Hamilton - they've lost to India, Australia and Pakistan since then. Overall their record there is won 10, lost four, with one no-result.
  • Ian Bell became the seventh English player to score 4000 ODI runs during the final match against India last month. Graeme Swann needs two more wickets to reach 100.


"We've just come off a series win in South Africa. Ross Taylor has been added to that mix. He gives us strength and quality in middle order. And our bowling unit has some experience and some good aggressive youth as well."
New Zealand coach Mike Hesson says New Zealand has what it takes to more than challenge England in the one-dayers

"Belly and I played a couple of weeks ago, so the other guys are probably a little bit underdone ... But they're world-class players who've played here before. So it shouldn't be too much of a problem."
England captain Alastair Cook on the returning Trott, Anderson and Swann

"I like playing ODI cricket. There's a 50-over World Cup in 2015, which we're working towards. I think it's a good game, and as we saw in India, in the series we've just played, you can have some really exciting finishes and exciting games of cricket. Long may it continue, hopefully."
England quick Steven Finn voices his support of the one-day international format

Alan Gardner is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • John on February 17, 2013, 3:03 GMT

    @Min2000 on (February 16, 2013, 1:14 GMT) I think no one really cared about the 1st and 3rd T20 but plenty of neutrals seemed to care about the 2nd game

  • John on February 17, 2013, 3:02 GMT

    @CricketingStargazer - I find it hard to see how an organisation like ICC would find a system where away points = more etc is too complicated but I'll take your word for it. In an ideal world all teams would be playing each other consecutively. I do find the comms funny criticising that team A has played easier sides or has played more games etc because when a team plays so called easier series it stands to take less points per series win and the points are worked out from dividing the points by the matches played so you are not penalised for not playing so many matches. SA were (before becoming number 1) said by many on here to be deserving number 1s because of the series they play away. Those people shied away from further debate when I pointed out that SA had played significantly more matches at home comp to away. That being said SA are probably as good away from home so playing at home isn't such a big advantage

  • David on February 17, 2013, 0:25 GMT

    Why is Watling not keeping if he is in the side? I also despair with so many "bits and pieces" players like Franklin and Elliot in the squad. I know players who can bat and bowl can be a real asset, and both these I mention have not done badly of late, but I would much rather see specialists who can really take the game to the opposition, not guys who will (hopefully) 'get by'. Cricketers should be selected on their primary ability first - if they bat or bowl a bit as well, that's a bonus, but bowlers who can't bat, and batsmen who can't bowl are much preferable to allrounders who aren't really good enough at either discipline.

  • Martin on February 16, 2013, 23:48 GMT

    I would like to see Rutherford retained for this series, given his performances in the T20 games. NZ may be missing a trick here

  • Jackie on February 16, 2013, 23:08 GMT

    You can be too cute and so is your summary of ODIs as prog rock. Speak for yourself maybe? If England can get up and running this should be a good Series because NZ have just defeated SA in SA. But England cricketers must be a bit miffed to have no practice game to prepare them, especially Jimmy, Swann and Trott. The England squad will still be adapting to conditions and of course jet lag. No warm up match yet three for the t20s. Who organised this Tour? No time for Ashley to even look at his players before they are out in the middle!!

  • Martin on February 16, 2013, 22:38 GMT

    I like England for this series. We have the bowlers. Ok they lack a bit of match fitness - but I think the unit - with Anderson, Swann, Finn, Broad will have too much for the Kiwis on this occasion. Also, in the t20's the Kiwis showed that they are a bit prone to getting out to the short pitched stuff - so they'll get some of that in the ODI's too. The batting.... I don't like Trott in this format, said so here before, for me he a Test match batsman. If Buttler and Root actually do play then that will be interesting to watch.

    We won the ODI series in South Africa (2-1) and we won the ODI series V Pakistan in the UAE (4-0), the conditions in these places are very different one from the other. Finn in particular was very impressive on the flat tracks of the UAE. For me there is nothing to suggest that we should not go on to win this away series in New Zealand. Mind you - this is England and they are notoriously inconsistent in this format!

  • Mark on February 16, 2013, 21:21 GMT

    @JG They claim that it would be too complicated to give more credit for away series. I think that giving the away side a 10-15% points bonus and the home side a 10-15% points penalisation would be perfectly feasible and quite fair. Win an away series in India, or Australia, or England is not easy and should be rewarded. Sides should get less credit for winning at home. Instead of a 1-0 home win being enough to gain points, sides will have to push for 2-0, whereas a side that draws 1-1 away will get as much credit as for a 1-0 home win.

  • John on February 16, 2013, 21:07 GMT

    @Parth Patel on (February 16, 2013, 5:13 GMT) Like it was not possible to win the T20 series without KP in the side?

    @TripleCenturian on (February 16, 2013, 8:27 GMT) Agree 100% - for none of the 3 to have been tried in recent times seems sad

    @AKS286 on (February 16, 2013, 10:42 GMT) England won't rest their ODI captain

    @CS - I did all the home vs away series with someone else and I think over the last 4 years we had played 3 more tests at home (comp to away) or something like that which would have changed as this was before our tours of India and now. Do ICC definitely not cater for where a series is played? It would seem strange as surely they would recognize that it's a much tougher ask for a sise like Eng or Aus to win in the SC than at home and vice versa? Agree with the tournament structure T20 , ODI then tests

  • Mark on February 16, 2013, 19:24 GMT

    It's odd to think that people say that this is the Black Caps' best format but, at the same time, they are ranked #8 and that a 2-1 England win will be, as @jmc points out, a rankings disaster for England. If there were one change that I would make in the rankings, it would be to weight away series more than home series. It would also end suggestions that England only do well in the rankings by loading their fixture list with home series, which is demonstrably false anyway! In practice though, changing the weighting for home and away series is actually not so easy to do, although one way is simply to give, for example, 15% more points to the away side and 15% fewer to the home side for a given result on the points formula.