New Zealand v England, 1st Test, Dunedin, 3rd day March 8, 2013

Rutherford's stunning debut builds huge lead


New Zealand 402 for 7 (Rutherford 171, Fulton 55, Anderson 4-108) lead England 167 (Trott 45, Wagner 4-42, Martin 4-43) by 235 runs
Live scorecard and ball-by-ball details

Hamish Rutherford completed one of the most audacious batting debuts in Test history as New Zealand took a firm grip of the first Test in Dunedin. Rutherford's 171, the seventh highest maiden Test innings, left England trailing by 235 at the end of a third day of an opening Test that has shaken their sense of well-being to the core.

Rutherford achieved a century on Test debut on his home ground and showed an uncomplicated appetite for mayhem as he made England pay for their hapless batting performance on the previous day. His freewheeling innings - 217 balls, 22 fours and three sixes - came to an end against the first delivery with the second new ball when he played too early at James Anderson and spooned him tamely to square leg.

Against the first new ball, though, he ruled supreme. Rutherford, like his father before him, does not look the type to fret unduly about his cricket. He thrashed 90 in an extended, 35-over morning session, at one point despatching Monty Panesar's left-arm spin for two sixes in an over to sail past 150. As England watched the ball disappear into gloomy skies, they must have wished they would darken some more over the wooded hills beyond and spare them further misery. They gradually did, a dank afternoon clipping the final session to only five overs.

Only Mathew Sinclair's double hundred on debut - 214 against West Indies in Wellington to wave goodbye to the old century - has exceeded Rutherford among New Zealand debutants. He chased anything wide with abandon and it was the way he severed the cover region against England's quick bowlers which stuck most in the memory.

He was 77 not out overnight and he soon thrashed five more boundaries to reach his hundred, the ninth New Zealand batsman to do so on debut. He was congratulated at the non-striker's end by Kane Williamson, who was the last New Zealand batsman to achieve the feat. Rutherford felt at home and emboldened in a genial country atmosphere; Williamson did it in Ahmedabad, which especially for a young batsman on Test debut must have felt a harsher environment.

England came out for the third morning with a new plan, bowling shorter and straighter, targeting the body with aggression. They have bowled strikingly shorter than New Zealand. They also cranked up the verbals. Taking Steven Finn's verbals seriously is difficult for anybody who has sat through his anodyne media conferences. He sneers at the batsman like a city gent offered an unacceptable wine list at a black-tie function. Anderson is more waspish and, befitting his long experience, these days offers his most Anglo-Saxon assessments behind his hand so he cannot be lip synched.

Anderson imagined that he might have held a return catch when Rutherford was on 109, but it would have been miraculous if he had intercepted a ball which whistled past him to the boundary. He booted the next ball back to the wicketkeeper in frustration.

Neither New Zealand opener was perturbed by the rise in noise levels. Fulton was earthy - as stubborn and unresponsive as the treacly brown pitch on which England's quick bowlers flogged themselves to distraction; Rutherford looked more easy going, forever eager to flay the ball through the covers or, markedly in this innings, as both Finn and Anderson could testify, drive resoundingly through mid-on.

Fulton's half-century on his Test comeback was a gritty affair, but his part in an opening stand of 158 was not about to steal attention away from Rutherford, who had all the best lines and who delivered them with gusto. Fulton responded to the applause for his fifty only briefly, like a man who did not want to be bothered. He got out on 55, from 169 balls, driven onto the back foot off Anderson and edging to the wicketkeeper.

Panesar's left-arm spin was unable to provide the control that England needed, Rutherford sailed past 150 as he despatched him twice over long-off. Panesar struck back, bowling Williamson as the batsman tried to fashion a cut against a quicker delivery that was too straight for the shot, but he conceded nearly four an over, as did Finn, who learned to rue Dunedin pitches in a spell with Otago last year and found them just as unsympathetic on his return.

Anderson rallied England with the second new ball, having Ross Taylor caught at second slip as he tried to cut and then, in his next over, bowling Dean Brownlie, whose preference for the back foot cost him dearly as he played a fullish delivery onto his stumps. Anderson should have picked up Brownlie third ball only for Joe Root to drop an inviting opportunity to his left at third slip. England's slip cordon, with Andrew Strauss retired and, in this match, Graeme Swann injured, is not what it was. When Anderson bowls, neither does he have the advantage of his own athleticism as a close fielder.

BJ Watling's misjudgement, bowled first ball as he left a delivery from Stuart Broad, gave England a third wicket in four overs, but a counterattack by Brendon McCullum and Tim Southee - who put Broad over the ropes twice before he swung and missed one - reasserted New Zealand's authority in an afternoon session in which they gambolled along at five an over. They are in an enormously powerful position but they will look at the skies in the morning in trepidation.

David Hopps is the UK editor of ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Dummy4 on March 9, 2013, 10:02 GMT

    Soso_killer: you are embarrassing the rest of the saffer's on this forum with your arrogant comments. Things change in cricket very fast. It won't always be like this

  • Rob on March 8, 2013, 22:34 GMT

    Now all the Bangladesh fans crying out for New Zealand to lose their test status following their routing v the No.1 team away, look as silly and pathetic as they are (when did they put in a performance like this, in a TEST, against a side ranked in the top 3? Not a ODI following a hammering in the test series). I like New Zealand as most England fans seem to and as long as they don't have the audacity to beat England, I am delighted with their showing. Good fans too, no crowing and talking big and being generally odious. England did beat the All Blacks last time out mind you :)

  • Rob on March 8, 2013, 22:26 GMT

    Knock the deficit off today then hit a swift 250 and declare by lunch tommorow, no problem now they have got their eye in!

  • John on March 8, 2013, 21:38 GMT

    @Bob Young on (March 8, 2013, 12:33 GMT) My initial post was responding To a Mr Bob Martin , so I'm a little confused now

  • Kevin on March 8, 2013, 19:43 GMT

    Rutherford bats a bit like Nathan Astle and Jesse Ryder. Not technically perfect perhaps, but prepared and able to hit the ball hard from the word go. I hope NZ can force a result, because I feel sure England will bounce back and be just as hard to beat as ever in the next two tests. Nice to have some luck go NZ way for a change, and when that happens you have to take maximum advantage of it. Let's hope England can bat well second time though and keep the game interesting. I'm sure they will.

  • Ali on March 8, 2013, 19:14 GMT


    i always said NZ are always 2-3 players short of a full 11 ----

    looks like they can finally get a 1-6 in the batting with +40 averages a keeper with a +30, and a bowling attack that can bowl out the opposition ...

    my,my, my --

    Australia, England, India watch out ----

    NZ might sneak into the #1 contender spot ......

  • Angus on March 8, 2013, 19:10 GMT

    @ Dark_Harlequin - totally agree. As a kiwi, these are exciting times. Made all the more exciting by the period of absolute chaos before Xmas, and the test losses we've gone through recently.

    If we can get the head office sorted out and get some good leadership, this test team with fully fit players should easily sit in the top 4 and compete anywhere against any other test team (except SA).

  • I on March 8, 2013, 18:55 GMT

    Last year, rain in New Zealand saved England from losing their number one ranking after just one series when South Africa are denied by the weather. This year, it's the rain that's saving England from a mauling. Say what you want, New Zealand is something of a lucky place for the England test team!

  • Bob on March 8, 2013, 18:51 GMT

    Re-Rutherford... Aren't we all getting just a little carried away... Of course it was a good innings... at a stretch you might even call it excellent... but that's all it was... one innings. He's not yet a Lara or a Tendulkar or a Cook...or any number of other test batsmen who've scored big runs consistently. I'll reserve my judgement as to how good he is until I've seen him do that..

  • Nikhil on March 8, 2013, 18:18 GMT

    WOW! Well done NZ! And congrats to Rutherford! Good luck to them for the next two days.