New Zealand v England, 2nd ODI, Napier

Another scalp beckons for New Zealand

The Preview by Alex Winter

February 18, 2013

Comments: 47 | Text size: A | A

Match facts

February 20, 2013
Start time 2pm (0100 GMT)

Mitchell McClenaghan struck early to remove Alastair Cook, New Zealand v England, 1st ODI, Hamilton, February 17, 2013
After 10 wickets at 19.70 in his first four ODIs, New Zealand will miss the injured Mitchell McClenaghan © Getty Images

Big Picture

It is hard to decide whether New Zealand are the most overestimated or underestimated team in world cricket. Without fail they are considered small fry for the more glamorous teams, yet a cautionary footnote is always offered. Such warnings cite their ability to pounce over any opposition looking a little off-colour. South Africa's weaker health was too timid in January and England also turned up a little pasty in the face as they lost the opening ODI in Hamilton.

Given that loss, England are again on the verge of a series defeat in New Zealand despite bringing probably their best ODI side since 1992 - the last time they won a series there. Consecutive series defeats will not be in the mind of Ashley Giles, who inherited the No. 1 ODI side in the world before Christmas.

The preparation of both camps would have made a difference in Hamilton. Almost half the England XI came into the match without a warm-up knock, following a few weeks recuperation after the India tour. They met a New Zealand side walking a little taller after their remarkable series win in South Africa. A match in, and Alastair Cook, Ian Bell, Jonathan Trott, James Anderson and Graeme Swann should be fully adjusted to life in the land of the long white cloud. Arguably New Zealand's best simply isn't as good as England's best, and Cook's men will be focused on not selling themselves short again.

New Zealand, for their part, have another grand opening to claim a notable scalp and consecutive ODI series wins will be some turnaround from the shambles of the Test series in South Africa.

Form guide

New Zealand WLWWL (Completed matches, most recent first)
England LWLLL

In the spotlight

Ross Taylor is one of the most talented batsman New Zealand have produced and he is yet to make a serious mark on his return to the side. A big performance could provoke a Nasser Hussain-style reaction that would not only send the clearest of messages to the New Zealand board but also ensure that Taylor becomes entrenched in the team's revival, having missed the landmark victory in South Africa.

He may be penned in for the Champions Trophy at No. 3 but Jonathan Trott will always have his doubters. Innings like his 68 in 90 balls in the first ODI don't do much for Trott's image and, despite his value as a base to play around, he needs to keep the runs ticking to quell the calls for flashier, younger players to replace him.

Team news

New Zealand's victory in Hamilton came with its casualties. Mitchell McClenaghan has been ruled out of the series and Martin Guptill will miss at least the second ODI. McClenaghan's replacement, Tim Southee, is coming off a fine all-round first-class performance and will be hungry to reclaim lost ground after being sidelined by injury for two months. Hamish Rutherford, who made his international debut in the first T20 against England, replaces Guptill.

New Zealand (probable) 1 Hamish Rutherford, 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 Tim Southee

England will probably stick with the same XI. James Harris could play to give Steven Finn a rest but with the series on the line, fielding a debutant is unlikely.

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 weather should be warm and sunny and McLean Park generally offers one of the best pitches to bat on in New Zealand. England will be looking for a similar score to their previous visit.

Stats and trivia

  • Mitchell McClenaghan has taken 10 wickets at 19.70 in the first four ODIs of his career, including 4 for 20 on debut in Paarl, suggesting he will be missed.
  • Remarkably, two of England's four matches at McLean Park have been ties. In 1997, England failed to overhaul 237and their last visit, in 2008, also finished with tied scores in a thriller that had 680 runs scored.
  • The last time New Zealand won back-to-back ODI series when Zimbabwe or Bangladesh were not involved was in 2008, when they beat England home and away.


"I'm only in my early 30s and when I was growing up I was told you play your best cricket in your early 30s, whereas since I've turned 30 all I get asked is when I'm going to retire."
New Zealand fast bowler Kyle Mills is being dished out a few bouncers

"It would have been nice to have stayed in till the end with the bat, and put some more runs on the board. With the ball, I didn't finish as well as I'd like to. But to pick up two wickets in the middle was pleasing."
Chris Woakes analyses his performance in the first ODI

Alex Winter is an editorial assistant at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Alex Winter

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by delboy on (February 20, 2013, 0:41 GMT)

Si Baker Sinjuns Grammarians need you

Posted by landl47 on (February 20, 2013, 0:26 GMT)

Hopefully England will have adjusted better to the conditions for this game and will have learned from their mistakes. I said before the last game that I fancied NZ to edge it; this time I think England will have too much for the kiwis.

Posted by Bishop on (February 19, 2013, 23:10 GMT)

@Matthew Jones. You are right to a point. NZ in the early naughties was a formidable ODI side in large part due to the fact they had the best lower order going around...Oram, Cairns, Macca & Vettori batting at 6-9 with players like Mills still to come. Heck, I remember when Franklin used to bat at 10. The problem with the current crop of bits and pieces men though is that neither their bowling or batting is quite good enough, and teams stocked with them feel like NZ are trying to make a decent bowler or batsman in the aggregate, instead of just selecting a decent bowler, and a decent batsman. Of course, if they bring something else to the table (like Southee's batting) that's great, but they should be selected on the basis of their primary skill first, for example Southee is a good enough bowler that he'd still be selected if he batted like Chris Martin and fielded like Phil Tufnell. You need to trust your batsmen to make the runs, and your bowlers to take wickets/keep the runs down.

Posted by Sombrehombre on (February 19, 2013, 21:43 GMT)

Hoping NZ goes for another bowler rather than Ellis, who is a mediocre international batsman and bowler at best and WILL get carted in Napier. Southee, Boult and Mills is a decent pace attack and the batting line up with Nathan McCullum at 8 is fairly long. NZ team suddenly looking fairly balanced!

England don't need to change anything, their team is classy and will be better second game up.

Posted by slasher on (February 19, 2013, 21:04 GMT)

Quite happy with the NZ team would have probably gone for Latham over Rutherford though as his clean hitting is a closer replacement for Guptill, and Latham needs to be bought along carefully. Yes Napier wont suit our bowlers but its the same for both sides and winner will be the team with more aggressive batsman rather than accumulators.

Posted by Klgn on (February 19, 2013, 20:53 GMT)

Team should understand....How to defend Low Scores? and How to Chase big Score...That is all about the Game of Cricket!!!

Posted by Klgn on (February 19, 2013, 20:52 GMT)

England needs to be mind full approach. Reading batman mind and bowlers should bowl. Bowlers are just throwing bowls as per bowler's strengths, that should not work in cricket. It's Mind Game!!! Learn from the Match Winners like the legend Graham Gooch, Sir Ian Botham, Nasser Hussain. Apply Spin Force bowling. England needs to come out of this horrific situation asap.

Posted by Crock55 on (February 19, 2013, 20:33 GMT)

As a mad kiwi sports fan this blackcaps team will take you on a rollercoaster ride. Brilliant one minute an embarassment the next. Until they get some consistency they can't be taken as a serious contenders.that is not winning every game but as least competeing and if you lose at least go down fighting

Posted by 5wombats on (February 19, 2013, 20:15 GMT)

@Cpt.Meanster (February 19, 2013, 19:12 GMT) interesting to see you haven't changed at all. Still lecturing other people about their team when your own isn't much chop; recent ODI series loses in Zimbabwe, England, Australia, the Asia Cup, and an ODI series defeat at home to Pakistan. Don't you think it's a bit rich of you to come on here passing judgement over other teams? "England are not a good ODI team" you say - maybe so - but still good enough to beat your team 3-0. And by the way England had the bowling attack for the conditions in the UAE too, but you probably never noticed that.

Posted by shillingsworth on (February 19, 2013, 19:45 GMT)

@Vilander - It's not that simple. England did well in ODIs earlier this year without KP and lost the recent series in India despite his return to the side. Yes, they are undoubtedly a stronger side with him but they haven't suddenly 'become vulnerable' just because he is missing this series.

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (February 19, 2013, 19:12 GMT)

The fact of the matter is, England complicate their ODI game. They simply do not keep it simple as their test match cricket. This is why England are not a good ODI team. You simply can't put your money on them. All this in spite of having decent players in the side. In NZ specially, the grounds are very small. A score of at least 280-300 should be par for most grounds. If England bat first, they need to be dynamic and rotate the strike as much as possible should the boundaries dry up. They also need to stop relying on no.6 and no.7 to score them the runs. Cause England have the bowling attack for the conditions in NZ. I will be fixed on this game to see what happens.

Posted by JG2704 on (February 19, 2013, 19:04 GMT)

@jackiethepen on (February 19, 2013, 9:33 GMT) - jmcilhinney did

@subbass on (February 19, 2013, 18:05 GMT) Sehwag is a ferocious batsman anywhere. I don't think it's that bad a comparison. India will still play cricket on non batting friendly wickets.

@yorkshire-86 on (February 19, 2013, 9:02 GMT) It's a tough one as we got to number 1 by accumulating in the early overs and then going hard in the latter overs. Having said that , the foundations of getting to number 1 were set up with the win in UAE where KP opened. Personally I'd like to see Hales and Wright (separately) given a go , just to see what they can do, To be fair we did try the pinch hitter role for a number of years without success but we should still be scoring more than 35 etc in the 1st lot of powerplay overs IMO. Think it was your post saying 230 is a defendable score in Eng when the bowlers are firing but right now that's not happening. Very true

Posted by   on (February 19, 2013, 19:01 GMT)

People who think New Zealand should be selecting specialists over all rounders I think are wrong. New Zealand have always been at their strongest with a couple of specialists and a team built up of mostly All Rounders. Even Tim Southee who is impressive with the ball can really bat well, and it is normally the tail for the black caps that wags.

Posted by   on (February 19, 2013, 18:56 GMT)

I think people are forgetting Tim Southee bowling was impressive in Sri Lanka; New Zealand have lost nothing in the bowling department.

Posted by Vilander on (February 19, 2013, 18:08 GMT)

the moment you remove KP out of the equation England become vulnerable anywhere..very interesting, but not taking anything away from NZ.

Posted by subbass on (February 19, 2013, 18:05 GMT)

Poor comparioson there Si Baker. Indian batters are bound to have a better SR they play on roads most the time. Whereas in England scores of 300 are rare. I do agree that they could do with a 'master blaster' in the top 3 but until recently England were ranked number 1 in ODI's, so they must be doing something right. Also, Cook's s/r/ is improving and since he came back into the side his sr is 80+ which is not tooo shabby at all, likewise Bell another who's s.r. is on the rise.

Besides, this series is far from over and I still expect an England win especially now McClenaghan is out. He has looked the best bowler on both sides really so he will be sorely missed.

Posted by jamalahmed on (February 19, 2013, 17:01 GMT)

go newzeland go and beat those english mans and prove how good a limited overs team you are

Posted by sweet2hrme on (February 19, 2013, 16:43 GMT)

I think england cannt win tomorrows game but New Zealand can only loose to make the series interesting!

Posted by yorkshire-86 on (February 19, 2013, 16:26 GMT)

We can't just hope for 120-3 after 30 and rely on the big hitters to come off. Most of the time they won't.

Posted by Apocalypse_EX on (February 19, 2013, 15:22 GMT)

This England team can be very exceptional at home conditions but as usual it is away that the team suffers(they have gotton better away but its still not enough). Beacause of this England are without a doubt favourites for this year's Champions Trophy but their stocks will be lower for the World Cup(where I think Sri Lanka will spring quite a surprise). Away from home(where the ball doesn't swing as much and fast scorers are needed) you cannot have Bell and Trott so close to each other at the top but they can't come later either as it will impact momentum. How they solve this problem will ddefinitely impact their performance in Australia & New-Zealand.

Posted by   on (February 19, 2013, 13:17 GMT)

The most pressing issue England need to address if they're to halt their recent slide into ODI mediocrity is their snail-like batting at the top of the order. Currently, Cook, Bell & Trott possess ODI strike rates of 78, 74 & 74 respectively. By way of comparison, India's regular top three - Sehwag, Gambhir & Kohli - have SRs of 104, 85 & 85. If we extrapolate these stats over a full 50 overs by adding all three SRs together to arrive at a sum of 300 balls, we find that England's total of 226 is significantly dwarfed by India's 274. This is why, especially when we bat first, we consistently seem to end up 30-40 runs short of par *except when* at least two of our top three perish within the first 30/35 overs, allowing time for our middle-order power hitters to play themselves in for an over or two before their final assault. The solution? Simple. The top three simply have to score ten more singles each per 100 balls - i.e. one more single per ten balls - by rotating the strike more.

Posted by Jaissy on (February 19, 2013, 13:12 GMT)

eng are missing kP,he is the one man army enough to destroy any team in the world.

Posted by Selassie-I on (February 19, 2013, 13:11 GMT)

@Posted by R_U_4_REAL_NICK on (February 19, 2013, 9:09 GMT)

I disagree, I think with 2 new balls now we want our test style batsmen in early on, let's just get to 30 overs with less than 3 wickets down, even if we only have 120 on the board. Then we want the Morgans and the buttlers to come in and capitalise.

Posted by Rewa402 on (February 19, 2013, 11:48 GMT)

Although I would like NZ to cleansweep the series, I am hoping England win this one so that the Eden Park match isn't a dead rubber. I think England can win but things will need to go for them tomorrow.

Posted by in_the_v on (February 19, 2013, 11:45 GMT)

The way the tour has progressed so far, I expect England to bounce back in this game, which will lead to another decider....... at Eden park, why are they even playing cricket there?? Obviously NZC is trying to squeeze out every penny they can from this tour, theres even a test match scheduled there. Hopfully Rosco can make more of an impact in this game & be in full flight by the time the test matches start.

Posted by RandyOZ on (February 19, 2013, 10:19 GMT)

Should be a clean sweep for NZ. Anyone who has seen this England team play knows how terrible they are.

Posted by zoot364 on (February 19, 2013, 9:57 GMT)

Well done Kiwis. Consistently underestimated by England and always up for fighting their way throught tight situations. England aren't going to win tournaments with this batting line up. They'll bump along as a decent side with a decent set of results but they don't have the capacity for the exceptional performance which is required more than once in a major tournament. Hales and Pietersen are needed near the top of the order.

Posted by jackiethepen on (February 19, 2013, 9:33 GMT)

No one seemed to question beforehand the lack of warm up game for the ODI side. Given that the t20s had three warm up games there does seem to be an unnecessary pre-eminence to the t20 side to get settled in. Other cricketers are supposed to just walk off the plane. No matter how good you are you need to adjust to conditions - jet lag, different temp. (it's freezing in England) and practice with time in the middle. It suggests a 'walk in the park' attitude by management but, after the Emirates, Team England promised their players 'proper preparation' for games. Didn't last long. Why on earth didn't the media grumble about it?

Posted by   on (February 19, 2013, 9:31 GMT)

Put Buttler up by one place. This will get England sone quick runs and quickly gains confidence. Morgan is out of touch, swap with Buttler is the only change. woakes needs more opportunities, his talents cannot go wasted.

Posted by R_U_4_REAL_NICK on (February 19, 2013, 9:09 GMT)

Moan as much as you like Trott doubters, but replacing Trott with guys like Pietersen who only fire in 25% of innings is not the way forward in my opinion. It's the order that needs shuffling I think - why have Cook, Trott and Bell all crushed together at the top? Separate them a bit for heaven's sake! Move Trott down to 4 and have Root or Morgan at 3.

Posted by yorkshire-86 on (February 19, 2013, 9:02 GMT)

England don't have enough firepower at the top of the order. There are two new balls now, and new balls go for runs easier.

Posted by   on (February 19, 2013, 8:58 GMT)

I thought Southee should have played in the first match ahead of McClenaghan. He is an effective performer with the ball & his fantastic 50 on the last tour (albeit in a losing cause) shows he is most definitely no mug with the bat. With Chris Martin gone (or unavailable) I'd have thought the Black Caps need all the experience they can call on.

Posted by kc69 on (February 19, 2013, 8:48 GMT)

Psychologically NZ is coming from a series win against SA and ENG is coming from a series loss against INDIA.This series looks more favourable for the kiwi's.

Posted by Manish Kumar on (February 19, 2013, 8:31 GMT)

@Deep6321 and class9ryan how can u say that Bj walting and Morgan will Score Tomorrow match

Coz There are Tylor,Maccullam Also

Posted by StevieS on (February 19, 2013, 8:24 GMT)

"Without fail they are considered small fry for the more glamorous teams"

I hope we are not talking about England here? England should be considered small fry when New Zealand play England in ODI's. Just look at statsguru : New Zealand v England 2004-2013 - played 19 - won 13 lost - 4 - tied -1 go back 20 years played 31 - won 19 - lost 9 - tied 2 - no result 1 . When was the last time England beat New Zealand in a cricket world cup game? was it the 70's or early 80's?

Posted by kiwicricketnut on (February 19, 2013, 8:20 GMT)

Not sure the ball swings in napier so southee and boult wont be so effective, southee has the variety to cope with no swing but im not so sure about boult, if it was auckland or hamilton i'd back boult but on a road in napier with no swing he could get pasted thats why we'll miss mcclenaghan. Maybe someone like milne on a pitch like that would be a better bet. One thing i love about games in napier is that the toss doesnt determine a result and its usually a run feast, looking foward to a cracker, i do love it when the poms tour

Posted by Bishop on (February 19, 2013, 7:58 GMT)

Why Boult for Ellis? I would have thought Ellis did enough last match to retain his spot. Though having said that, I think NZ should be selecting specialists rather than the "bits and pieces" men so I'd be happy for Boult to come back in. Personally, I think it is Elliot who should make way, and Franklin and N Mac shuffle up to 6 and 7 respectively - especially since Southee is no mug with the bat.

Posted by deep6321 on (February 19, 2013, 7:43 GMT)

I think Watling will score runs and Boult will be the bowling hero. It will be a good contest.but i favour NZ to win their 2nd consecutive ODI series.

Posted by gnanzcupid on (February 19, 2013, 7:40 GMT)

Nz is becoming too hot to handle for the poms. Unless the poms get the right combination they will struggle.

Posted by   on (February 19, 2013, 7:31 GMT)

England should be scared of Tim Southbee who got 4/16 off 12 overs and 168 off 130 in hs last game

Posted by SamRoy on (February 19, 2013, 6:39 GMT)

Problem with England is that they need a free-flowing batsman at No. 3 given that the openers treat bowling on merit rather than being adventurous themselves. If England wants to rectify that problem in, say Champions Trophy, they need Pietersen to come at 3 and drop Trott. It's a hard call as Trott is probably the best batsman in the side after Pietersen and Cook, but he is the one who has adapted the least. Trott doesn't rotate the strike enough and that does cause extra pressure on the team. As for NZ, Ryder needs to come back surely.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (February 19, 2013, 6:24 GMT)

Despite the first up loss, I think England have to be favourites for game 2. You'd think that, collectively, those England players who have been out for a while would do better with a game under their belts and, unfortunately for everyone, NZ will be missing a couple of key performers from a close game 1. I certainly won't be assuming an easy win though. My biggest frustration with England continues to be their single-mindedness with the ball when what they're doing obviously isn't working. They like to bowl short and it works for them on certain occasions but, on those that it doesn't, like last game when McCullum was peppering the leg side boundary, they seem unaware that their are alternatives. I can only assume that this is a plan created by the coaching staff so I don't see it changing any time soon but the apparent stubborn refusal to try anything else is bizarre. It's about time some journalist asked David Saker for an explanation.

Posted by Simoc on (February 19, 2013, 5:52 GMT)

Yes NZ is a Brendan McCallum team. If he gets a ton they may win. Sure Taylor and Guptill can be strong contributors but I'm picking England to take out NZ easily.

Posted by   on (February 19, 2013, 5:26 GMT)

Love Kyle Mills' response to that question. There's something about Cricketers and their media question comebacks. Unlike any other sport. Must be all that time out in the middle thinking up their next golden sledge.

Posted by class9ryan on (February 19, 2013, 5:12 GMT)

Hoping to see some runs from BJ Watling and Eoin Morgan in this match .... one is a opener while other a finisher .... But we will see all guns blazing from New Zealand

Posted by Tom_Griffin on (February 19, 2013, 4:44 GMT)

Tim Southee - 191 CM Mitchell McClenaghan - 189 CM

A small bit of research wouldn't go astray.

Posted by nzcricket174 on (February 19, 2013, 4:27 GMT)

I hope the game is similar to Napier '08. If so, we are in for a cracker.

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
Alex WinterClose
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