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

Rutherford's stunning debut builds huge lead

102

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

  • landl47 on March 8, 2013, 13:27 GMT

    A slightly better day for England today (it couldn't possibly have been as bad as yesterday), but a great innings from Rutherofrd has NZ 235 ahead with two long days to go. Will McCullum declare immediately to give his bowlers the maximum possible time, knowing that NZ could knock off the runs if England takes a small lead, or will he opt for a T20 type bash for an hour to make it easier to bat only once? If he goes for the latter, he has the perfect batsman to bring it off- himself.

    Either way, it sets up an enthralling battle as England tries to save the game. Unless, of course, they bat as they did in the first innings, in which case the end will be quick and far from sweet.

  • on March 8, 2013, 8:11 GMT

    very impressed by Hamish Rutherford, what a knock on debut!....he looks so assured at the crease and not afraid to boss the bowling...One straight/on drive off Anderson early in the morning session was 'Haydenesque' in style and brutality!....Naturally, being English I was praying that every ball would be 'the ball' to knock his stumps flying, but sometimes, patriotism has to stand aside so one can applaud class at the crease :)

  • LillianThomson on March 8, 2013, 6:18 GMT

    Ken Rutherford was probably my ultimate sporting hero of the early 1990s. He was the larrikin who could bat like Kim Hughes, but who wasn't going to win any prizes for his diplomacy or concentration or abstinence from a flutter or a drink.

    His 1995 autobiography "A Hell of a Way to Make a Living" is a treasured possession for me, and makes endless references to young Hamish.

    Rutherford Senior was driven out of New Zealand cricket before he even hit 30, and early victim of the Fun Police who now deprive us of Jesse Ryder and Dan Vettori.

    So it brought tears to my eyes to see Hamish making his Dad proud these last couple of days. I'm still proud of Ken Rutherford, from his bravery as an out-of-his-depth teenager in the den of the unbeatable Windies in '85 to his '92 World Cup and his victory at Johannesburg in '94. Hamish is a welcome addition to NZ cricket.

  • leggar on March 8, 2013, 2:17 GMT

    Great to see Rutherford score a big hundred on debut, but once again it looks as if New Zealand are going to fail to put up a really big first innings score and take the opportunity to bat England out of the game. Frustrating to see a number of batsmen make starts and then gift their wicket. Few will complain about NZ taking over a 200 run lead on the first innings but it promised much more at lunch. When was the last time NZ posted a score in excess of 500?

  • Sinhaya on March 8, 2013, 1:22 GMT

    First of all congratulations to Hamish Rutherford! You are brilliant. I hope you build on this and can be a great batsman for NZ. I recall Mathew Sinclair back in 1999 when he scored a double ton on test debut but just could not impress much after that. So hope you wont be like Sinclair.

    For England, well Anderson is so reliable that no matter how expensive he is, he keeps getting the breaks.

    It is hard to imagine England batting failing in the 2nd innings looking at their overall batting performance in tests. But a lead of 200 for NZ could mean scoreboard pressure that will play the part behind NZ winning if at all.

  • on March 8, 2013, 0:36 GMT

    What a player Hamish Rutherford looks: solid in defence on both the front & back foot, & as capable of velveteen cover drives as he is of deft flicks off his legs or brutal aerial power shots over long-on. To cap it all, it seems he's also blessed with an unflappable temperament. As I write, he's just been dismissed for 171. If that wasn't the best debut Test innings I've ever seen, then it has to rank among the top three or four. Once Vettori & Jesse Ryder are back, New Zealand will have a formidable top seven & a world-class spinner to add to a hugely impressive seam attack. I'd love to see Ryder open with Rutherford, but I suspect that'll be deemed too high-risk a move for the Kiwi management to contemplate.

  • Greatest_Game on March 8, 2013, 0:22 GMT

    Amazing!! Just got home & took a look at the score. At lunch, Rutherford is on 167, exactly the same number that England put on the board! What a coincidence. Imagine the odds on that. The only major difference is it took England 330 balls, & Rutherford got there in 121 balls. What a dream debut he is having.

    Eng's nightmare however seems to be continuing. If Rutherford keeps going, and Taylor gets his eye in, this could end up looking like the SA vs Eng test at the Oval, where, after Smith had put up 131, SA with Amla on 311 and Kallis on 182. 637 for 2 is not a score Eng want to see again. Mind you Eng had put up a healthy 385 in their innings, & SA declared only 252 ahead. To match that lead NZ need to add another 95 runs. However, with the new ball about to be taken, Eng might be able to claw their way back into the game. If that does not work for them, & Taylor gets going at somewhere near Rutherford's strike rate, the pair would take NZ beyond 500 today. Exciting stuff.

  • 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

  • WonkyBail 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 :)

  • WonkyBail 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!

  • landl47 on March 8, 2013, 13:27 GMT

    A slightly better day for England today (it couldn't possibly have been as bad as yesterday), but a great innings from Rutherofrd has NZ 235 ahead with two long days to go. Will McCullum declare immediately to give his bowlers the maximum possible time, knowing that NZ could knock off the runs if England takes a small lead, or will he opt for a T20 type bash for an hour to make it easier to bat only once? If he goes for the latter, he has the perfect batsman to bring it off- himself.

    Either way, it sets up an enthralling battle as England tries to save the game. Unless, of course, they bat as they did in the first innings, in which case the end will be quick and far from sweet.

  • on March 8, 2013, 8:11 GMT

    very impressed by Hamish Rutherford, what a knock on debut!....he looks so assured at the crease and not afraid to boss the bowling...One straight/on drive off Anderson early in the morning session was 'Haydenesque' in style and brutality!....Naturally, being English I was praying that every ball would be 'the ball' to knock his stumps flying, but sometimes, patriotism has to stand aside so one can applaud class at the crease :)

  • LillianThomson on March 8, 2013, 6:18 GMT

    Ken Rutherford was probably my ultimate sporting hero of the early 1990s. He was the larrikin who could bat like Kim Hughes, but who wasn't going to win any prizes for his diplomacy or concentration or abstinence from a flutter or a drink.

    His 1995 autobiography "A Hell of a Way to Make a Living" is a treasured possession for me, and makes endless references to young Hamish.

    Rutherford Senior was driven out of New Zealand cricket before he even hit 30, and early victim of the Fun Police who now deprive us of Jesse Ryder and Dan Vettori.

    So it brought tears to my eyes to see Hamish making his Dad proud these last couple of days. I'm still proud of Ken Rutherford, from his bravery as an out-of-his-depth teenager in the den of the unbeatable Windies in '85 to his '92 World Cup and his victory at Johannesburg in '94. Hamish is a welcome addition to NZ cricket.

  • leggar on March 8, 2013, 2:17 GMT

    Great to see Rutherford score a big hundred on debut, but once again it looks as if New Zealand are going to fail to put up a really big first innings score and take the opportunity to bat England out of the game. Frustrating to see a number of batsmen make starts and then gift their wicket. Few will complain about NZ taking over a 200 run lead on the first innings but it promised much more at lunch. When was the last time NZ posted a score in excess of 500?

  • Sinhaya on March 8, 2013, 1:22 GMT

    First of all congratulations to Hamish Rutherford! You are brilliant. I hope you build on this and can be a great batsman for NZ. I recall Mathew Sinclair back in 1999 when he scored a double ton on test debut but just could not impress much after that. So hope you wont be like Sinclair.

    For England, well Anderson is so reliable that no matter how expensive he is, he keeps getting the breaks.

    It is hard to imagine England batting failing in the 2nd innings looking at their overall batting performance in tests. But a lead of 200 for NZ could mean scoreboard pressure that will play the part behind NZ winning if at all.

  • on March 8, 2013, 0:36 GMT

    What a player Hamish Rutherford looks: solid in defence on both the front & back foot, & as capable of velveteen cover drives as he is of deft flicks off his legs or brutal aerial power shots over long-on. To cap it all, it seems he's also blessed with an unflappable temperament. As I write, he's just been dismissed for 171. If that wasn't the best debut Test innings I've ever seen, then it has to rank among the top three or four. Once Vettori & Jesse Ryder are back, New Zealand will have a formidable top seven & a world-class spinner to add to a hugely impressive seam attack. I'd love to see Ryder open with Rutherford, but I suspect that'll be deemed too high-risk a move for the Kiwi management to contemplate.

  • Greatest_Game on March 8, 2013, 0:22 GMT

    Amazing!! Just got home & took a look at the score. At lunch, Rutherford is on 167, exactly the same number that England put on the board! What a coincidence. Imagine the odds on that. The only major difference is it took England 330 balls, & Rutherford got there in 121 balls. What a dream debut he is having.

    Eng's nightmare however seems to be continuing. If Rutherford keeps going, and Taylor gets his eye in, this could end up looking like the SA vs Eng test at the Oval, where, after Smith had put up 131, SA with Amla on 311 and Kallis on 182. 637 for 2 is not a score Eng want to see again. Mind you Eng had put up a healthy 385 in their innings, & SA declared only 252 ahead. To match that lead NZ need to add another 95 runs. However, with the new ball about to be taken, Eng might be able to claw their way back into the game. If that does not work for them, & Taylor gets going at somewhere near Rutherford's strike rate, the pair would take NZ beyond 500 today. Exciting stuff.

  • 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

  • WonkyBail 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 :)

  • WonkyBail 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!

  • JG2704 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

  • Lermy 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.

  • Rally_Windies on March 8, 2013, 19:14 GMT

    okkkkkk

    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 ......

  • NostroGustro 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).

  • wrenx 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!

  • bobmartin 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..

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

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

  • Englishmanabroad on March 8, 2013, 17:44 GMT

    I think that NZ need to declare soon. 2 days is a long time to bat, and even if England manage to take a lead, NZ should be able to knock off the necessary runs, (unless KP, Bell and Prior all go crazy and NZ find themselves facing 250 in two sessions.)

  • on March 8, 2013, 17:43 GMT

    Rutherford and Pujara- two names to remember when Test cricket reclaims it's pre-eminent spot in the cricket calendar in the coming years. Well played young man!

  • Englishmanabroad on March 8, 2013, 17:39 GMT

    While I congratulate the NZ team on their present position, I should like to remind them, (and all of the other England disparagers), "...one swallow does not a Summer make." ("The Proverbs of Erasmus." (I think))

  • on March 8, 2013, 17:00 GMT

    A limited fightback by England, but NZ are still well in command of the Test. Excellent innings by Rutherford, and, from an English point of view, I wish the NZ selectors had listened to the radio commentator, Bryan Waddle.

    He cheerfully admitted during the morning session that he wouldn't have included Rutherford in his team, as he thought he wasn't ready!

  • samincolumbia on March 8, 2013, 16:50 GMT

    England saved a thrashing by Mccullum this time (after Rutheford) by rain! The best fast bowler in the world, Finn (according to poms), yet to take a wicket on a seaming pitch. haha..Sets up an interesting Ashes with two average teams battling it out.

  • on March 8, 2013, 16:47 GMT

    Well played New Zealand! I think Jimmy Anderson's reaction when he got Ross Taylors wicket was silly - take a look at your bowling figures and your teams general performance..... then make that same noise again :)

  • cric_J on March 8, 2013, 16:09 GMT

    Congrats Hamish Rutherford.What a brilliant innings on debut.And that too against one of the top teams in test cricket.Way to go, man.As for England , I think Jimmy tried his best to pull things back and his figures do not do justice to his efforts.Especially with the second new ball he was pretty good.England really need to clean up the tail AND Mccullum and then bat really well to save the game.Or they may pray to the rain gods !

  • cloudmess on March 8, 2013, 15:11 GMT

    Well played NZ! - and not least Rutherford jnr. Perhaps England have become the new India. But this performance must raise some questions about England's players. Even if they have had the worst of the conditions so far, they should have had the gumption and skills to limit the lead. They will now be facing a huge deficit and possibly an innings defeat. Who could have predicted that? You could possibly find excuses for their dips in form in 2012 - poor pitches in the UAE, slightly unlucky having competed well in latter 2 tests v SA. But if they lose to NZ, then questions need to be asked. The batting seems sound enough, but perhaps the fast bowlers are not quite as versatile as we think - like typical English seamers, they always seem to need something in the pitch in order to be effective (even now Amla and Kallis might be still batting at the Oval had Graeme Smith not declared on them last July). Can you imagine Steyn & co allowing NZ to build such a formidable lead?

  • abhyudayj on March 8, 2013, 14:47 GMT

    Unexpected batting collapse for england ,aussies make the upcoming ashes very exciting as both team will depend on bowling unit

  • 2nd_Slip on March 8, 2013, 14:22 GMT

    Taking nothing away from the young man, good batting against a good attack but I am surprised that everyone has ignored the alarming vast difference in strength and quality between SA and the chasing pack in test cricket. Its very sad that the best team in the world wont get to play till end of year. After watching SA put away NZ without breaking a sweat I thought Eng would come close to doing that also, but tell you what ,they have been outplayed in all dipartments so far!! Shocking!!

  • Rick_T on March 8, 2013, 14:14 GMT

    leggar - Re: NZ's last score over 500, NZ were 495/7 decl last year in their win against ZIM and also 553/7 decl in their win against BAN in 2010. Against Top 8 countries, NZ scored 448/8 decl against IND in 2010 and 619/9 decl against IND in 2009.

    aavalentine - NZ's run rate has not been slow at all. Since the 1st wicket fell, NZ have scored 244 runs off 57 overs at a run-rate of 4.3. Since the 60th over, they have scored 221 runs off 48 overs at a run-rate of 4.6.

    Also, I disagree that the match is heading for a draw. There are six and a half sessions to go and the forecast, I believe, is for no rain. If NZ can get close to a lead of 300, say 45 minutes before the end of the first session tomorrow, it would mean scores would be level with roughly 2 sessions remaining on the last day. ENG would have to get at least 400 to draw the game. Less and NZ should win.

    Alternatively, if NZ are bowled out for a lead of no more than 250, ENG could still win, albeit unlikely.

  • on March 8, 2013, 13:38 GMT

    England have become a sub-continental team now :)

  • Jaffa79 on March 8, 2013, 13:30 GMT

    Well played NZ. I do think that England have not showed their opponents the respect they deserve and they are rightly getting thumped. I just hope they can bat long and save this one. Lessons to be learnt for sure! Many Aussies seem to gloat over this scoreline but I would like you guys to remember that in India your solution to getting thumped is to possibly bring in Steve Smith! That should answer any questions about depth or talent!

  • Selassie-I on March 8, 2013, 13:30 GMT

    Great from Hamish, a really good innings, amazing when you consider his age and that it's on debut.

    No sideways movement at all to speak of in this test for the England bowlers, really emphasises how bad a performance it was from the batsmen. They will need to redeem themselves in the 2nd innings and bat out for a draw.

  • ScottStevo on March 8, 2013, 12:37 GMT

    @ozziespirit, who wrote them off in 2011? I'm assuming you're talking about the ODI series we played? Nobody would have written them off considering the squad we (I say we, I know I support Oz, but who do you support?) sent over for that series. Since when has England been a better side on paper??? Only since Ponting and Hussey have retired, which wasn't years ago...

  • jb633 on March 8, 2013, 12:37 GMT

    As an Engish fan I must say that the innings of Rutherford was top draw. I love the way he stays so still at the crease and plays every ball right beneath his eyes. I know we are not close to South Africa at present but this NZ side looks far stronger than the one put out a few months back. I think if they could get Vettori and Ryder back then they are going to be a serious team again. For us I can't say I am suprised in the slightest. I hate sounding like the classic pessimistic Brit but as soon as the media talk of whitewashes I know we are going to fold like a pack of cards in the following game. I think there must be complacency because any crickett fan the world over would agree that we are a stronger outfit than NZ. In particular we really are poor starters of a series. Look back to the first few days of the last Ashes, day one of the UAE tour, 1st test in Sri Lanka/South Africa and the Indian series. We need to learn how to hit the ground running and stop playing catch up.

  • Nightwing32 on March 8, 2013, 12:33 GMT

    Great to see NZ not having a collapse. It is really good (From an Australian) to see them to well. I think what England and Australian supporters have to realize is that The Ashes aren't played in Dunedin or Mohail and all that. So I don't think England is going win the Ashes just like that and nor are Australia. It will be a tough series. I feel bad for NZ though, they are playing so well and I really hope the weather doesn't help England

  • on March 8, 2013, 12:33 GMT

    @ JG2704..I didn't make any comparisons...I merely stated that if you are going to, you should at least use something other than the first two days of a single test match e.g. two teams who have recently played the same opposition in the same country. On another matter, I see Michael Vaughan in his column today writes that " this England side hates any form of criticism." Then I have the simple answer... don't do anything that can deservedly attract it.

  • ozziespirit on March 8, 2013, 12:05 GMT

    @RednWhiteArmy: Have to say that New Zealand's batting is better than Australia's at the moment. English bowler like Anderson showed us a thing or too last couple Ashes, and Finn in the whitewash last year. Just wish Rutherford was Australian - we really need someone like him right now.

  • JG2704 on March 8, 2013, 12:03 GMT

    @leggar on (March 8, 2013, 2:17 GMT) - Have to agree with W666. NZ have pretty much already batted England out of the game and they needed to try and push the game forward

  • JG2704 on March 8, 2013, 12:03 GMT

    Have to applaud the NZ fans on these threads who seem very grounded and refrain from any derogatory remarks. Although , I'm sure there are many trolls to come - only 2 so far and both from regulars who aren't from NZ.

    @Meety on (March 8, 2013, 7:55 GMT) re "England CAN still win the match" - Sorry bud but that's way too far fetched. Absolutely zero chance of the W and you can rib me forevermore if I'm wrong

    @ozziespirit on (March 8, 2013, 9:40 GMT) Well put there. I also think the Aus performances in India will have little bearing on the Ashes

    Please publish this time. The trolls I refer to are obviously not the above 2 posters

  • aavalentine on March 8, 2013, 11:49 GMT

    Match heading for a draw unfortunately. Having lost a day, the NZ run-rate is far too slow given how strong a position they were in. I would have thought 300+ lead was on the cards.

    Sad to see England escape with a draw.

  • oval77 on March 8, 2013, 11:47 GMT

    Good work from the Black Caps, and England will be very frustrated at their own performance. We're going to have to bat very long and hard and I can see Martin being dangerous turning it in with a lot of runs to play with.

    I can understand why a lot of Ossies here will be very pleased - it increases the anticipation of the Ashes for them. Eng will have to step up. But with the Australian's current woeful performances in INdia after England made it look easy, this turnaround sets up an intriguingly balanced ashes battle.

    But all this talk of Aus and Eng, and of INdia's consistently awful Test skills, detracts from the main news - which is that NZ are looking like a decent prospect. It'll be great for cricket if they can rise up the rankings again.

  • on March 8, 2013, 11:26 GMT

    Poor performance by England. Good performance by NZ. Why do we (England) always struggle in first tests? Complacency? Stupidity? Or are we simply not good enough? I give up trying to figure them out. This team is so inconsistent that I really have to wonder whether we are worth our 2nd place ranking in tests.

    It's so frustrating. Do they care?

  • on March 8, 2013, 11:17 GMT

    Good show by the Blackcaps. Hope Hamish Rutherford goes on to become a good bat and with Kane Williamson heral a new chapter in New Zealand's cricket in Tests.

  • on March 8, 2013, 11:14 GMT

    How was this English side ever number 1? Overrated, over-hyped by their press. Its great to see their fall from grace!

  • on March 8, 2013, 11:14 GMT

    is he Ken Rutherford's son???

  • on March 8, 2013, 11:04 GMT

    NZ side again looks good after long long time..they can beat anybody anywhere...they did it in Aus, Sl...although only in ODI in SA.....Bring back Jesse Ryder..they can be world champions at world cup 2015...and be in top 4 in ICC test championship race...........

  • JG2704 on March 8, 2013, 10:44 GMT

    @ bobmartin on (March 8, 2013, 10:13 GMT) By the same token - Aus performances in India should have no bearing on what happens in the Ashes. I said this to someone the other day , that there will be little spin assistance in England so their bowling attack will not be found so much wanting as it has been in India. A few months is a long time in cricket. Last year - for instance - Eng were beaten convincingly by SA and then SA toured Aus and were totally outplayed in 2 of the 3 games and won the 3rd. So because Aus did better vs SA and Eng beat India in India , Aus would breeze the Indian series- right? Because team A beats team B and team C beats team A , it doesn't mean team C beats team B

  • Mitch1066 on March 8, 2013, 10:43 GMT

    Couple these comments I agree with. Firstly it'd say hamish has done himself proud. Secondly write England off at your own peril Australia did they lost india did they lost. There still chance for it end in draw. And even slight chance of England victory and I said slight not impossible but unlikely.

  • JG2704 on March 8, 2013, 10:37 GMT

    Brilliant from the NZ batsmen - esp Rutherford on debut. One of my fellow Eng fans questioned the depth of NZ's quality batsmen , so I guess this goes to show that just because these names are unfamiliar it doesn't mean they are not quality. As for the game , well we've been pasted in every dept. When we got NZ 6 down for 326 I expected to keep NZ's lead down to less than 200. Also feel that Swann would have been better on this pitch than Monty. While Monty prob has more variations , I think Swann is a better thinking bowler and has more nous with varying his pace etc. NZ should declare on their overnight score for sure and if Eng save the game then fair play to them. If they try to add more runs it could (if there's rain around) eat into valuable time which could cost them a result

  • Batesta on March 8, 2013, 10:27 GMT

    I think that Rutherford should have considered declaring after he passed Englands first innings scoreline.

    Isn't it amazing how one teams mine field is another team's One Day flat track........ or maybe somebody should get real and give credit to a good innings rather then just being a Troll.

  • bobmartin on March 8, 2013, 10:13 GMT

    A lot of comments seem to be using the first two days of this match as some sort of yardstick to compare England with Australia and the latters chance of winning back the Ashes... I would suggest to those people that they look at what's happening in India, where the Aussies are getting well and truly thumped by a team which England recently beat in a series. That might give you a better comparison of the relative strengths of the two teams than a couple of bad days in the first test of this series.

  • quittthewhinging on March 8, 2013, 9:54 GMT

    Well played NZ. Now go for the kill! (Saffer here).

  • on March 8, 2013, 9:50 GMT

    Superb innings by Rutherford against lacklustre bowling. Too much energy wasted on verbals which clearly had no impact and too little thought to bowling full length with a couple of gullys and a point waiting for miscues. Monty bowled far too fast - when air and a slower pace might have induced a false stroke... NZ in charge and deservedly slow - been a while since England have prayed for rain, but might be necessary...

  • ozziespirit on March 8, 2013, 9:40 GMT

    Anderson thrashed us last Ashes, and Finn too in their whitewash last year, so it's good to see them have an off game. Unlike some fellow posters here though, I remember what happened when we wrote them off in 2011, and it really came back to bite us. First game back playing after a break - who doesn't take a game to warm up? The Ashes look a certainty to stay in England's hands after this kick up the rear they've got here, England on paper are just too strong for Aus, and it's been that way for years.

  • on March 8, 2013, 9:38 GMT

    Well batted Kiwis - but shows you what a truly pathetic batting performance it was by England. Probably the rain will save us though. Cant see how we can bat that badly again, someone must get in on that pitch and make a big ton.

  • Thefakebook on March 8, 2013, 9:14 GMT

    Rutherford's stunning debut builds huge lead,I told you so Eng are not a better team than OZ,on condition that favor them they are getting bossed by a so called weak side NZ.No Vettori also that means they are even weaker the Kiwis.Well done Ashes looks really noncompetitive now.

  • on March 8, 2013, 9:10 GMT

    Well played Rutherford, quite the debut. I just hope that England can bat with all the resolution they lacked in the first innings.

  • SurlyCynic on March 8, 2013, 9:04 GMT

    I agree with the writer, the verbals from Finn were laughable. In fact, that goes for all the England bowlers. Broad's little tantrums are pathetic, and the 'send-offs' from Anderson weren't intimidating, just thuggish. Perhaps he's been attending some English football games!

  • R_U_4_REAL_NICK on March 8, 2013, 8:59 GMT

    Not looking too good for England at all. A certain BB McCullum still there, and the lead already 235. Rain dance anyone? Seriously, well batted NZ. Great decision to field first as well IMO.

  • Valavan on March 8, 2013, 8:49 GMT

    Congrats Hamish, that was a brilliant knock given the circumstances, England didnt bowl that badly but it was Hamish all the way. @gsingh, Ganguly's was a rearguard act, do you want to say 171 of 220 balls and 131 off 320 balls is of same calibre. I applaud ganguly's effort but dont hype so as if it is a thrashing. I know you back India, but India should get to 1 by themselves but not hanging on others defeats. you can make your cheap talks in Ind Vs Aus. cricinfo please publish

  • Harlequin. on March 8, 2013, 8:49 GMT

    The Kiwis have a lot of promise rising through their ranks. I imagine everyone can see the potential in the Southee-headed attack, but their batting line up may be formidable in a few years. Taylor and Ryder are still the right side of 30, we all know what they can do if they are managed properly, and with Williamson and Rutherford showing they have the mettle to score big against decent attacks there are 4 solid players which would give the likes of Baz and Guptill license to play T20-esque innings. Not a bad top 6 if you ask me, it just needs a decent coach to put it together!

  • Charlie101 on March 8, 2013, 8:45 GMT

    Well played NZ and Hamish Rutherford . Whilst all is not yet lost as I think rain is forecast we are going to have to bat for 1 /2 days to secure a draw and the smart money will be on NZ

  • Meety on March 8, 2013, 7:55 GMT

    @Winchester666 on (March 8, 2013, 5:32 GMT) - England CAN still win the match. It is fairly remote, but assuming NZ don't declare, (I am estimating 200 overs left - no more rain), NZ will probably add another 50 runs in 10 to 15 overs = lead of around 290. This would = about 80 overs of batting by England. A further 40 overs at 4 rpo = 160 run lead. So a brisk 3rd innings of 450 (KP could drive this), followed by an NZ collapse of sub 160 (plausible) & if this were to occur in UNDER 60 odd overs - Eng wins. If I was a betting man I would say NZ are about 60% chance of winning - 30% draw, & Eng 10% of winning. A lot can change in 200 overs (allowing for earlier start). I'm an Ozzy who always goes for NZ except against Oz & Bangladesh! (Flip a coin when NZ play WI & SL).

  • Soso_killer on March 8, 2013, 7:52 GMT

    Lol, its nice to see LillianThomson on a New Zealand forum for a change. It seems as if we've thought New Zealand some brutal cricket here in Africa, boy! have they learned. I hope people realises this talk of a two tier system is ridiculous. Come on Black Caps press home your advantage.

  • on March 8, 2013, 7:31 GMT

    @LillianThomson I know the name Ken Rutherford, he moved here to SA and was highly respected in SA domestic cricket. He captained our then Johannesburg based team and had an amazing impact. He became a legend of SA domestic cricket and has a full tribute dedicated to him in the SA cricket annual for the year 2000.

  • Front-Foot-Lunge on March 8, 2013, 7:30 GMT

    Well batted young man. Flat deck or not, you played a One-Day innings in a test and it paid off, what a talent.

  • Soso_killer on March 8, 2013, 7:22 GMT

    England have been dominated into submission here. Comprehensively outplayed in all facets of the game.

  • satishchandar on March 8, 2013, 6:53 GMT

    Great innings by Jr.Rutherford. Hats off really. This English attack is certainly one very good one with Anderson and Finn really big bowlers across the world in the format and Broad a decent seamer. Monty havent played a lot in unhelpful tracks and it just showed off a bit.

    The kind of composure the guy showed over the period of play was simply brilliant. NZ always produced some big starters who haven't been able to maintain the same tempo for a period of time which is the prime reason we don't see many batting legends from the place. Hamish need con concentrate more and produce substantial innings consistently. The likes of Sinclair, Guptill all had a great opening but not able to do it consistently. Really hope this guy can do justice to his big potential.

    While there was more time lost, I would still love to see Baz going in tomorrow morning and play T20 like innings. Not worrying about getting out - whic hwill give more overs to bowl. Smack a 50-80 quickie and declare.

  • on March 8, 2013, 6:50 GMT

    As an Oz observer this game is looking very amusing. C'mon Kiwi we want an innings defeat so I can LMAO!

  • LillianThomson on March 8, 2013, 6:46 GMT

    On the subject of Otago's batsmen past and present, it's interesting to compare the Test careers of Hamish Rutherford's Dad Ken and Glenn Turner, who has been treated with almost regal acclaim by the visiting English media, who remember him as a titan in county cricket.

    Hamish Rutherford's Dad entered Test cricket as a teenager in 1985 with an away series against an intimidating and unbeatable West Indies series, and famously was blown away, with 12 runs in 7 innings. Ken was as brave as he was flawed.

    Glenn Turner's Test record from the age of 29 was quite curious. He made a Boycottesque exit from international cricket, missing the West Indies foursome completely, never playing Jeff Thomson or Imran Khan and returning only for a single Test at 35 against a then-weak Sri Lanka.

    And then Glenn Turner sacked Rutherford as NZ skipper and dropped him as a player when he himself was only 29.

    Let's hope that Hamish has better luck than his Dad as he tries to build a career.

  • on March 8, 2013, 6:37 GMT

    No chance for England,unless it rains again

  • on March 8, 2013, 6:23 GMT

    can we play the ashes now?

  • shahbazhussain on March 8, 2013, 6:19 GMT

    amazing stuff to see... now i can comfortably sleep without having a thought that NZ cricket was fading. Now guys like Ruth can ensure Cricket is what NZ is known for.

  • aavalentine on March 8, 2013, 6:19 GMT

    Match heading for a draw unfortunately. Having lost a day, the NZ run-rate is far too slow given how strong a position they were in. I would have thought 300+ lead was on the cards.

    Sad to see England escape with a draw.

  • RednWhiteArmy on March 8, 2013, 6:13 GMT

    NZ are playing some good cricket at the moment and Rutherford looked impressive. I reckon the NZ batting is better than australia's at the moment. It was fantastic to hear the barmy army singing throughout the whole test so far, despite the scoreline. Just goes to show why England have the best supporters on earth.

  • crashed on March 8, 2013, 6:13 GMT

    @bravetigersmustwin number 1 currently is SA and SA whitewashed NZ in previous series 2-0 England is number 2 and SA won them also 2-0 when they took the number 1 spot from England last year - please get your rankings straight :p

  • jmcilhinney on March 8, 2013, 6:04 GMT

    The England bowlers didn't do too badly under the circumstances, but that just goes to show how poorly the batsmen performed. Good to see Broad creating chances and he probably bowled a bit better than his figures suggest as there were a number of boundaries, including a 6, off edges. They all count of course, but we've got to look for the positives. Their poor catching cost England dearly against SA last English summer and they've done themselves no favours here either. Rutherford put on 107 after he should have been caught by KP and he probably should have been caught by Broad 12 runs before that. He could even have been gone on 24 but for some less than attacking captaincy from Cook, but that's not going to change. Take off the 132 that Rutherford and Brownlie scored after they got lives off easy catches and England are only 102 behind and still an outside chance of winning even. Only themselves to blame, just like against SA.

  • shripadk on March 8, 2013, 5:58 GMT

    I hope Rutherford continues on his good start and capitalise on it. Too many good young talented kiwi's have come and perished into thin air due to various reasons after promising start to their career. I only caught highlights but there were some great strokes in that innings. Tomorrow being weekend, I might get to see this match live. Being a neutral, it is great to see matches like this.

  • Meety on March 8, 2013, 5:46 GMT

    Bit black & blue on the 2nd day, but thanks to the weather, the pressure will still be on NZ to make the remaining 2 days count. IMO - it won't be that easy to get the next 10 pommy wickets, hopefully no rain, so that England can fairly save the game or NZ are not denied a fair win. I say that under the belief that it would be close to a miracle for England to win from here. I assume NZ will declare, but there could be something in getting another 50 runs IF, they get them at 6rpo or better. THAT would almost certainly take a Pommy win off the table. == == == Anderson was by a mile, the best of the Pommy bowlers, I didn't see much of his send off of Taylor, (just a glimpse), but if it was as bad as I thought it was, he needs some sort of reprimand. == == == Root is finally confronting what a tough gig Test cricket can be. That catch he dropped was a sitter! Fascinated to see how he responds with the bat in the 2nd innings.

  • on March 8, 2013, 5:43 GMT

    Inspiration from what is happening in India & NZ. Those who were getting abused / ambushed / humiliated in recent years; now it seems to be the season to turn the tables! Today is Worlds Womens' Day. Sisters, and daughters, you may derive some strength and inspiration from these international cricketing events.

  • PrasPunter on March 8, 2013, 5:42 GMT

    @ bravetigersmustwin , the last time i checked a team lead by a certain Graeme Smith was No 1. And I check every morning. May be wishful thinking from your side ???

  • gsingh7 on March 8, 2013, 5:42 GMT

    after ganguly thrashed english bowlers in lords on his way to 131 on debut, i think this is the best debut i have seen. england bowlers were obliterated on both occsions. this shows english bowlers play a vital role in cricket history. nz will declare after 40 min tomorrow and go on to win the test with an innings and some to spare.

  • on March 8, 2013, 5:38 GMT

    The shark gets its cutting edge from its sharp finns. The English bowling shark Finn seems to have lost some of his sharp fins! Wonder why? Is it from his efforts NOT to knock down the non-strikers wickets, which he used to do with impunity; but will attract a 'no-ball' verdict, in the changed scheme of things?

  • Winchester666 on March 8, 2013, 5:32 GMT

    @Legger - You're kidding me right?

    If you're a long suffering NZ fan like me then surely you wouldn't take a score like this against the 2nd best team/bowling attack in the world for granted.

    Yeh I could understand how you would be disappointed about the starts but NZ are 402/7 while trying to advance their run rate, have 3 wickets in hand, 2 settled/capable batsman at the crease & have a lead of 235 (not 200). Even after they were 131/0 after the first day I couldn't have asked anything more out of them today.

    They may even declare overnight to give them a realistic shot at a win, I'd hardly put it out there as a batting failure when a team is thinking about declaring to win a match lol.

    @BhuJo - "England still has a chance to make over and draw/win this test match!!"

    Yeah I would agree that there's still a good chance that England can draw this match, but a win??? Are you serious? You're delusional if you think England can win from here.

  • Mitty2 on March 8, 2013, 5:28 GMT

    Funnily enough @bhujo, all though I agree with you entirely on england's complacency and lack of respect; excluding the Indian series, they haven't won a test series since before they got demolished by the saffers :)

  • CrICkeeet on March 8, 2013, 5:23 GMT

    OMG! If DAY 1 nt abandoned 4 rain den what happened..... its only day 2 then!!!! though its day 3 (4 rain) still eng hav 2 bat superb 2 save dis match in d second ings......

  • bravetigersmustwin on March 8, 2013, 5:23 GMT

    NZ is still a very good team in test cricket. They squared the series with SL in sub contitient and now roaring against the No 1 test team

  • heathrf1974 on March 8, 2013, 5:19 GMT

    Great performance by England. The weather is helping them too. The ball might move around a bit next morning.

  • Klgn on March 8, 2013, 5:08 GMT

    Seems, English players are taking too light,after winning few series!! Looks like they are not serious and enjoying their time in NZ!!

  • Archit_Shridhar on March 8, 2013, 4:59 GMT

    Robbed off of an exciting finish by McCullum... was looking in his original touch... quite a decent effort by English bowlers... but the day belonged to Rutherford Jr. ... well done and well deserved...However the match still stands at the mercy of the rain GODs. The scenes were not that great towards the end… the light and the rain… Kiwis should look forward for a finish tomorrow…

  • on March 8, 2013, 4:58 GMT

    Now this is more like the england I grew up with... Things are now better in the world.... :D

  • Great-shot444 on March 8, 2013, 4:58 GMT

    I m from Pakistan.my second favourite team is NZ . GO kiwis u can win this but it will be difficult to take wickets in the 2nd innings bcoz england are good enough team to learn from their mistakes .

  • shahbazhussain on March 8, 2013, 4:55 GMT

    amazing stuff to see... now i can comfortably sleep without having a thought that NZ cricket was fading. Now guys like Ruth can ensure Cricket is what NZ is known for.

  • Dirk_L on March 8, 2013, 4:18 GMT

    "He sneers at the batsman like a city gent offered an unacceptable wine list at a black-tie function." David, that is brilliant! P.G. Wodehouse himself would have considered it one of his better efforts!

  • on March 8, 2013, 3:52 GMT

    Well, I am, like most New Zealanders I suspect, quietly stunned. While there's no doubt Rutherford deserves every laud coming his way, from what little I've been able to watch it does seem a bit like England is losing rather than we are winning. The question for NZ to answer now is can they maintain sufficient pressure to stop England from recovering and playing the way we know they can? We have shown little skill at applying the killing blow in recent years; hopefully we can exhibit the necessary ruthlessness over the next two days.

  • Erebus26 on March 8, 2013, 3:14 GMT

    "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." Brilliant quote and just what I was thinking too (and I'm an England fan).

  • Klgn on March 8, 2013, 2:06 GMT

    Well done Rutherford on your Debut!! Now, England still has a chance to make over and draw/win this test match!! What a Bowler Jimmy Anderson!! Proud of you!! He is a one many ARMY and true force!!!Ground shots is required only for English batman, no lapses..common Eng!!!!

  • Tal_Botvinnik on March 8, 2013, 1:37 GMT

    Good for NZ Fans, At least they can be happy now and after years of misery and suffering

  • Mitty2 on March 8, 2013, 1:29 GMT

    Panesar isn't in the same category as swann. I said before it would be interesting to see how he performs on unhelpful conditions as the sole spinner. Historically, he's performed poorly on these pitches and as the sole spinner, and only performs on the helpful conditions in the UAE and the sub continent. With an overall test bowling average of 33, and an extremely high bowling average against australia, it would seem that tredwell is the next best for England for the present and future. But playing in the sub continent; panesar should be a horses for courses selection.

    Looking at the scoreline, it would seem that the pitch really favors the team bowling first and batting second, but this is not the case. The pitch has held up and has not changed, the pathetic batting performance was due to impatience, the inabilty to dig in and complacency. Against the English seamers for the NZ batsmen, it has been more than easy so I think swann wouldve made a large difference by being economical

  • balajik1968 on March 8, 2013, 1:17 GMT

    What a contrast to the start of Ken Rutherford's career! However Ken survived to make a decent career for NZ. Here's to hoping that the son does the same thing.

  • on March 8, 2013, 0:51 GMT

    No sympathy whatsoever for England. Among all the successes we've enjoyed in the last few years, we England fans have also been subjected to some pretty abject batting displays - Adelaide '06, Jamaica '09 & Abu Dhabi '12 spring immediately to mind - but this one has to be the worst of the lot. No fewer than seven of our batsmen were out to crude slogs that would've disgraced a village green beer match, while the other three were victims of decidedly half-hearted strokes.

    We may be the best of the pack chasing a truly outstanding South African side (who, I believe, will dominate world cricket with ruthless Teutonic efficiency up to the day Kallis & Smith decide to hang up their boots), but we're only the best by a whisker. Personally, I hope this Test signals the start of a golden age for Kiwi cricket, but they've flattered to deceive so many times before that it's highly doubtful that'll be the case.

  • Baxter_P on March 8, 2013, 0:06 GMT

    This must be an unexpected and unlikely position of power for NZ to be in, so I'd sure McCullum is thinking over how his team can win from here. I'm sure NZ won't collapse in the next session (and once Taylor settles and with McCullum and Watling to come, they should continue to score at a decent clip), so they could be 200+ ahead at tea, and all going well, 250 or so ahead this evening. If McCullum is able to declare 250+ ahead with 10 or so overs at Cook and especially Compton this evening, that would be the perfect scenario. I'd back NZ to knock over Compton, who has looked out of sorts in his 3 bats on tour, and finish today really exerting pressure on England.

  • boehj on March 7, 2013, 23:55 GMT

    First century on debut vs England since 1996!

  • boehj on March 7, 2013, 23:55 GMT

    First century on debut vs England since 1996!

  • Baxter_P on March 8, 2013, 0:06 GMT

    This must be an unexpected and unlikely position of power for NZ to be in, so I'd sure McCullum is thinking over how his team can win from here. I'm sure NZ won't collapse in the next session (and once Taylor settles and with McCullum and Watling to come, they should continue to score at a decent clip), so they could be 200+ ahead at tea, and all going well, 250 or so ahead this evening. If McCullum is able to declare 250+ ahead with 10 or so overs at Cook and especially Compton this evening, that would be the perfect scenario. I'd back NZ to knock over Compton, who has looked out of sorts in his 3 bats on tour, and finish today really exerting pressure on England.

  • on March 8, 2013, 0:51 GMT

    No sympathy whatsoever for England. Among all the successes we've enjoyed in the last few years, we England fans have also been subjected to some pretty abject batting displays - Adelaide '06, Jamaica '09 & Abu Dhabi '12 spring immediately to mind - but this one has to be the worst of the lot. No fewer than seven of our batsmen were out to crude slogs that would've disgraced a village green beer match, while the other three were victims of decidedly half-hearted strokes.

    We may be the best of the pack chasing a truly outstanding South African side (who, I believe, will dominate world cricket with ruthless Teutonic efficiency up to the day Kallis & Smith decide to hang up their boots), but we're only the best by a whisker. Personally, I hope this Test signals the start of a golden age for Kiwi cricket, but they've flattered to deceive so many times before that it's highly doubtful that'll be the case.

  • balajik1968 on March 8, 2013, 1:17 GMT

    What a contrast to the start of Ken Rutherford's career! However Ken survived to make a decent career for NZ. Here's to hoping that the son does the same thing.

  • Mitty2 on March 8, 2013, 1:29 GMT

    Panesar isn't in the same category as swann. I said before it would be interesting to see how he performs on unhelpful conditions as the sole spinner. Historically, he's performed poorly on these pitches and as the sole spinner, and only performs on the helpful conditions in the UAE and the sub continent. With an overall test bowling average of 33, and an extremely high bowling average against australia, it would seem that tredwell is the next best for England for the present and future. But playing in the sub continent; panesar should be a horses for courses selection.

    Looking at the scoreline, it would seem that the pitch really favors the team bowling first and batting second, but this is not the case. The pitch has held up and has not changed, the pathetic batting performance was due to impatience, the inabilty to dig in and complacency. Against the English seamers for the NZ batsmen, it has been more than easy so I think swann wouldve made a large difference by being economical

  • Tal_Botvinnik on March 8, 2013, 1:37 GMT

    Good for NZ Fans, At least they can be happy now and after years of misery and suffering

  • Klgn on March 8, 2013, 2:06 GMT

    Well done Rutherford on your Debut!! Now, England still has a chance to make over and draw/win this test match!! What a Bowler Jimmy Anderson!! Proud of you!! He is a one many ARMY and true force!!!Ground shots is required only for English batman, no lapses..common Eng!!!!

  • Erebus26 on March 8, 2013, 3:14 GMT

    "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." Brilliant quote and just what I was thinking too (and I'm an England fan).

  • on March 8, 2013, 3:52 GMT

    Well, I am, like most New Zealanders I suspect, quietly stunned. While there's no doubt Rutherford deserves every laud coming his way, from what little I've been able to watch it does seem a bit like England is losing rather than we are winning. The question for NZ to answer now is can they maintain sufficient pressure to stop England from recovering and playing the way we know they can? We have shown little skill at applying the killing blow in recent years; hopefully we can exhibit the necessary ruthlessness over the next two days.

  • Dirk_L on March 8, 2013, 4:18 GMT

    "He sneers at the batsman like a city gent offered an unacceptable wine list at a black-tie function." David, that is brilliant! P.G. Wodehouse himself would have considered it one of his better efforts!