South Africa v Zimbabwe, 1st ODI, Bloemfontein October 15, 2010

Ingram and Amla tons set up 64-run win

The Bulletin by Liam Brickhill in Bloemfontein
31

South Africa 351 for 6 (Amla 110, Ingram 124, Masakadza 4-86) beat Zimbabwe 287 for 6 (Taylor 145*, Theron 3-62, Botha 2-41) by 64 runs
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details

Three batsmen passed 100 as the runs flowed in the first one-day international in Bloemfontein, but where Hashim Amla and Colin Ingram's twin tons powered South Africa to a lofty 351 for 6, Brendan Taylor was given scant support in his fighting 145 not out and the hosts duly wrapped up a 64-run win. Similarly, South Africa's bowlers shared the spoils but Zimbabwe's attack was rather more uneven, Shingi Masakadza being the only one to pick up any wickets but giving away 86 runs in the process, while the visitors' spinners were more economical but unable to break through.

South Africa had been eager to stamp their authority on this series after their flawed performances in the Twenty20s - both of which they, nonetheless, won - and Amla launched their innings with an array of attacking strokes, easily outscoring Graeme Smith. Ingram joined Amla in the eighth over and their 136-run stand - easily the highest of the innings - lifted the total well out of Zimbabwe's reach.

During the course of their partnership Amla registered the first South African ODI century at this ground at this ground since Andrew Hudson's match-winning 108 against India in 1992-93. But Ingram's knock, while not nearly as graceful, was arguably the more special as he became the first South African to register a century on ODI debut, and was finally dismissed in the 48th over after sending the total in the stratosphere in the midst of a brutal 76-run stand with David Miller, another of South Africa's young guns.

When these two sides met in Bloemfontein a week ago it was the brutality of Smith and Loots Bosman's hitting that demolished Zimbabwe's pace attack, but today it was the serene grace of Amla's bat that undid the seam bowlers. Smith's dismissal did nothing to stem his attacking instincts, and Amla's supple wrists took him to a 32-ball half-century, including ten fours, in the 11th over. Ingram initially let him take the lead in attack, but after a short rain delay he celebrated the resumption with a firm punch straight down the ground and was soon matching Amla shot for shot.

Amla reached the landmark with a paddle to the final leg boundary in the 29th over, but just as murmurings of a potential attempt on Sachin Tendulkar's record-breaking double-hundred began his first lapse in concentration cost him his wicket, a shy from Utseya catching him short of his ground in the 32nd over.

With that Ingram took centre stage, barely missing a beat when AB de Villiers was run out by a direct hit from Cremer at midwicket, bludgeoning a full-toss from Masakadza to deep midwicket for his first six in the very next over. An anonymous innings from Albie Morkel was ended after just four balls, but Ingram was then joined by and the boundaries continued to flow.

After a nervous few balls stranded on 99, Ingram went to his hundred with a single off Mpofu, having accelerated after a slow start to reach the mark from 110 balls. He might have been caught at wide long-on shortly afterwards, but Sean Williams spilled the regulation chance and in the next over a lighthing-quick 50-run stand was brought up with two monstrous sixes off Miller's bat and two canny singles.

Ingram added a second six off Masakadza, but then attempted an adventurous paddle to fine leg only to have his leg stump flattened. Masakadza squeezed a yorker through Miller's defences one ball after the batsman had brought up a 30-ball half-century to pick up his fourth wicket, but those scalps cost 86 runs and with the rest of the attack unable to break through, Zimbabwe were left with an almost impossible task.

They might have got close had Taylor been given more support after Rusty Theron removed Hamilton Masakadza to pick up his first wicket in ODIs and break a spirited opening stand of 70 in just over 12 overs.

Taylor launched the chase with a flowing drive through cover off Parnell, and was harsh on any width offered with the new ball. An uncomplicated batsman, he has gradually cut out any unnecessary movements from his technique, keeping his backlift low and staying perfectly still at the crease until the right ball to hit comes his way.

While most of his runs came through the off side, Masakadza proved more authoritative when hitting to leg, cracking a couple of thunderous pulls before he stepped down the wicket and swatted Theron to Johan Botha, who held a juggled catch inches from the turf at deep cover.

That strike proved decisive, as the South African attack steadily chipped away at a vulnerable middle order. Nos. 3 to 7 were all dismissed for between 10 and 13 - Grant Flower's international comeback proving distinctly low-key - and by the time the big-hitting Elton Chigumbura arrived at the crease the fight had all but gone from Zimbabwe's chase.

Taylor, however, continued unbowed and went to his third international hundred in the calendar year with a steered single past point. With that the Powerplay was taken, and though the result was already a foregone conclusion Taylor opened up in style, lacing five more boundaries and reaching an unbeaten 145. His effort, though, was bereft of any significant support and Zimbabwe will need a much more solid team effort if they are to challenge South Africa in the remaining two matches.

Liam Brickhill is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Namara on October 17, 2010, 12:50 GMT

    Liam your headline is misleading the worlsd instead of giving a balanced reporting you opt for the opposite what would your Headline read in the match pitting NZ & Bangladesh.Please Liam be balanced when reporting Zimbabwe gave SA a toried time in a competitive match whic was won not easily as you thought.

  • kingstonian78 on October 16, 2010, 17:09 GMT

    Liam, i think "crushing defeat" is a bit of an over statement. Don't you think? Well played Zim ...hopefulyly when the media stops being so biased we can get the credit the team, management and selectors deserve. Come on Zimbabwe!!!!!

  • on October 16, 2010, 13:53 GMT

    Les us not forget this was a very flat track and 300 was a par score so Zim still have work to come up to standard.Flower skills can only be a bonus for Zim and it is great to see them going forward as an international team at last.This along with Banlglas great series win can only be good for world cricket

  • on October 16, 2010, 13:42 GMT

    Certainly not a crushing defeat. I have always disliked the way Cricinfo reports on Zimbabwe Cricket even when they win games. We won some very competitive games against India and Sri Lanka in Harare ealries this year but as always, Cricinfo played the wins down either choosing to report in a single paragraph or saying the teams Zimbabwe played were not full strength. Such arrogance and contempt!! The reporter must give a balanced account of the match and give credit where it is due. I certainly would turn to other opinions if Cricinfo chooses backward and imperialistic. I, however, think that Zimbabwe needs to assemble the team for the 2nd ODI as follows: 1 V Sibanda 2 Hamilton Masakadza (c), 3 Brendan Taylor, 4 Chamu Chibhabha, 5 Sean Williams, 6 Tatenda Taibu (wk), 7 P Utseya 8 G Lamb(or C Coventry), 9 R Price(or E Chigumbura), 10 Ed Rainsford 11 Tinashe Panyangara. Anyone???

  • A_J.. on October 16, 2010, 13:33 GMT

    "CRUSHING DEFEAT"??????????

    no my frnd; 't should b titled s "DISSAPPOINTING WIN 4 HOSTS"; 'coz Taylor hd proved d8 Zimbabwe holds d capacity 2 water-up d body's of "MIGHTY" Cricketing Giants..........................

    bt, a big congrats 4 d Debutant Ingram, hu played so nicely 2 his way of starting his career vid a ton>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

  • on October 16, 2010, 10:55 GMT

    Crushing Defeat? As soon as I saw it, I thought Zimbabwe would have lost by atleast 200 runs. Misleading title indeed.

  • on October 16, 2010, 9:40 GMT

    Im just wondering what Grant Flower has to offer Brendan Taylor as the batting coach. Flower (Grant that is) will only bring the young man down. Continue with your low bat lift young man and discover things for yourself. There is misplaced exitement that these old players are returning to pass on their experience but, these players during their day where hardly world class, Heath Streak as the only exception. Just look at how Elton Chigumbura is now playing. He has lost the fire and I think he should just accept that being captain is too much as an allrounder. Lastly, To even begin to compare Hashim to Sachin is just suicide. No one can ever wield the bat like the little master.

  • swikar22 on October 16, 2010, 9:23 GMT

    what is the use of having ODIs? Why not just have 20-20 and Test cricket.To make 20-20 more strategic and fair game for bowlers the number of batsmen could be reduced to 6 or 7 instead of 10.This would make it a more even contest between batsmen and bowlers.

  • ZCFOutkast on October 16, 2010, 9:05 GMT

    Liam your headline is harsh! Great effort Zim. There's no doubt that we have a lot of young depth with the potential to improve which will make our domestic cricket competitive but LET'S NOT FOOL OURSELVES WE NEED OUR COUNTY PLAYERS!!! Mpofu, rainsford&masakadza are expensive and so is kyle jarvis but with his pace he's a better bet. Ervine, de grandhomme&ireland to complete the seam attack. We won't go anywhere without Price! Chigumbura has to be dropped, in any case he can't compete with these allrounders plus chibhabha is not just a slogger he can genuinely bat. Lamb and Utseya are both economical and take little wickets but Lamb can add some useful runs plus maturity. 1hamilton masakadza, 2brendan taylor, 3sean ervine(c), 4sean williams, 5chamu chibhabha, 6tatenda taibu(vc), 7colin de grandhomme, 8greg lamb, 9anthony ireland, 10kyle jarvis, 11raymond price. This team would have won by a mile against SA yesterday!!! Anyone??

  • BonyongoDestroyer on October 16, 2010, 8:27 GMT

    I agree with other posters that "crushing defeat" is not an appropriate description. In my humble opinion the 64 run margin can almost entirely be accounted for in some fairly brainless bowling by Zimbabwe's seamers - eg. leg-side deliveries with fine leg up etc. Credit to the SA batsmen for putting these bad deliveries away, I suppose. SA and Zim batted about the same, SA just got more 4 balls to dispatch.

    oh for a seamer with the discipline and consistency of Brian Strang, Pom Mbangwa or Guy Whittal....I guess it will take time, the curent crop are all early 20s.

  • Namara on October 17, 2010, 12:50 GMT

    Liam your headline is misleading the worlsd instead of giving a balanced reporting you opt for the opposite what would your Headline read in the match pitting NZ & Bangladesh.Please Liam be balanced when reporting Zimbabwe gave SA a toried time in a competitive match whic was won not easily as you thought.

  • kingstonian78 on October 16, 2010, 17:09 GMT

    Liam, i think "crushing defeat" is a bit of an over statement. Don't you think? Well played Zim ...hopefulyly when the media stops being so biased we can get the credit the team, management and selectors deserve. Come on Zimbabwe!!!!!

  • on October 16, 2010, 13:53 GMT

    Les us not forget this was a very flat track and 300 was a par score so Zim still have work to come up to standard.Flower skills can only be a bonus for Zim and it is great to see them going forward as an international team at last.This along with Banlglas great series win can only be good for world cricket

  • on October 16, 2010, 13:42 GMT

    Certainly not a crushing defeat. I have always disliked the way Cricinfo reports on Zimbabwe Cricket even when they win games. We won some very competitive games against India and Sri Lanka in Harare ealries this year but as always, Cricinfo played the wins down either choosing to report in a single paragraph or saying the teams Zimbabwe played were not full strength. Such arrogance and contempt!! The reporter must give a balanced account of the match and give credit where it is due. I certainly would turn to other opinions if Cricinfo chooses backward and imperialistic. I, however, think that Zimbabwe needs to assemble the team for the 2nd ODI as follows: 1 V Sibanda 2 Hamilton Masakadza (c), 3 Brendan Taylor, 4 Chamu Chibhabha, 5 Sean Williams, 6 Tatenda Taibu (wk), 7 P Utseya 8 G Lamb(or C Coventry), 9 R Price(or E Chigumbura), 10 Ed Rainsford 11 Tinashe Panyangara. Anyone???

  • A_J.. on October 16, 2010, 13:33 GMT

    "CRUSHING DEFEAT"??????????

    no my frnd; 't should b titled s "DISSAPPOINTING WIN 4 HOSTS"; 'coz Taylor hd proved d8 Zimbabwe holds d capacity 2 water-up d body's of "MIGHTY" Cricketing Giants..........................

    bt, a big congrats 4 d Debutant Ingram, hu played so nicely 2 his way of starting his career vid a ton>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

  • on October 16, 2010, 10:55 GMT

    Crushing Defeat? As soon as I saw it, I thought Zimbabwe would have lost by atleast 200 runs. Misleading title indeed.

  • on October 16, 2010, 9:40 GMT

    Im just wondering what Grant Flower has to offer Brendan Taylor as the batting coach. Flower (Grant that is) will only bring the young man down. Continue with your low bat lift young man and discover things for yourself. There is misplaced exitement that these old players are returning to pass on their experience but, these players during their day where hardly world class, Heath Streak as the only exception. Just look at how Elton Chigumbura is now playing. He has lost the fire and I think he should just accept that being captain is too much as an allrounder. Lastly, To even begin to compare Hashim to Sachin is just suicide. No one can ever wield the bat like the little master.

  • swikar22 on October 16, 2010, 9:23 GMT

    what is the use of having ODIs? Why not just have 20-20 and Test cricket.To make 20-20 more strategic and fair game for bowlers the number of batsmen could be reduced to 6 or 7 instead of 10.This would make it a more even contest between batsmen and bowlers.

  • ZCFOutkast on October 16, 2010, 9:05 GMT

    Liam your headline is harsh! Great effort Zim. There's no doubt that we have a lot of young depth with the potential to improve which will make our domestic cricket competitive but LET'S NOT FOOL OURSELVES WE NEED OUR COUNTY PLAYERS!!! Mpofu, rainsford&masakadza are expensive and so is kyle jarvis but with his pace he's a better bet. Ervine, de grandhomme&ireland to complete the seam attack. We won't go anywhere without Price! Chigumbura has to be dropped, in any case he can't compete with these allrounders plus chibhabha is not just a slogger he can genuinely bat. Lamb and Utseya are both economical and take little wickets but Lamb can add some useful runs plus maturity. 1hamilton masakadza, 2brendan taylor, 3sean ervine(c), 4sean williams, 5chamu chibhabha, 6tatenda taibu(vc), 7colin de grandhomme, 8greg lamb, 9anthony ireland, 10kyle jarvis, 11raymond price. This team would have won by a mile against SA yesterday!!! Anyone??

  • BonyongoDestroyer on October 16, 2010, 8:27 GMT

    I agree with other posters that "crushing defeat" is not an appropriate description. In my humble opinion the 64 run margin can almost entirely be accounted for in some fairly brainless bowling by Zimbabwe's seamers - eg. leg-side deliveries with fine leg up etc. Credit to the SA batsmen for putting these bad deliveries away, I suppose. SA and Zim batted about the same, SA just got more 4 balls to dispatch.

    oh for a seamer with the discipline and consistency of Brian Strang, Pom Mbangwa or Guy Whittal....I guess it will take time, the curent crop are all early 20s.

  • on October 16, 2010, 8:19 GMT

    The Cricinfo headline seems inappropriate here. : Ingram and Amla crush Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe scored 287 which is a great total while chasing 351. If they can get their bowling right, they can pull off a win here. Just like they did against India, this side has the potential to go a long way and reclaim its lost glory.

  • on October 16, 2010, 7:20 GMT

    A great knock by Taylor, Sean Williams struggled out there & failed to rotate the strike. The Parnell delivery that got Chibaba was the turning point as Chibaba was just about to launch. Grant Flower bow out in dignity, you looked a "Helpless Cause" To revive the Zim fortunes, hand back the captaincy to Taibu and let Elton try and get back hiis all rounder status, he is poor with both bat & ball. Lets have another spinner like Tymcen Marauma in place of Mpofu? Cremer was pathetic and should be kept for"Test Matches" Alistair Campbell get serious in the next squad selection

  • on October 16, 2010, 7:19 GMT

    I'm just wondering how CAN THIS BE CRUSHING DEFEAT...

    Zimbabwe has put a respectable total here ....

    Great work by them..so some respect... btw I"m not from zimbabwe... Thanks,,,,

  • 3BBAY on October 16, 2010, 7:16 GMT

    Think ESPN or cricinfo are doing Zimbabwe an injustice by their headline ' amla and ingram CRUSH Zim ' bearing in mind the top score of the match was 145 by a Zimbabwean batsman and it is No 11 vs. No 3 with Zimbawe scoring 287 ....would be a little different if they won by 10 overs or bowled them out for less than 200....hats off to Zimbawe and Brendan Tayor...well played...Think Cricinfo should boosting Zimbabwe's efforts...

  • Kudzie1 on October 16, 2010, 6:45 GMT

    it was certainly not a crushing win by any means. Zimbabwean pace bowling was again a big let down. What would be worrying for the Proteas however is how they would let Zim post a relatively competitive score of 287 and also how they failed to bowl them out. if our bowling attack wasnt ordinary, it might have been a different reading altogether

  • talentquest on October 16, 2010, 6:13 GMT

    Sachin is simply great. Hashim is an apprentice yet. What is his record against Australia??? Forget ZImbabwe. Hmmmm! Let me think. Oh sorry, it barely exists. He has a long way to go mate. Those who post such comments about Sachin do not know cricket. One that can make Australians' blood boil time and time again is ONLY SACHIN TENDULKAR !!

  • Runster1 on October 16, 2010, 6:08 GMT

    lol SA fans think amla is better than the little master just because he got a 100 against ZIM!!!! If only Glenn pigeon was still playing...then SA fans wud think that theron is good cos he bowled out pigeon.

  • tikna on October 16, 2010, 6:02 GMT

    Vaidyar its not suprising that there were murmurs of Amla breaking Sachin`s 200 record considering that he brought up his century in just the 29th - 30th over. I guess there will be such talks everytime a batsman will cross a century in that much time now that the 200 barrier has been broken once

  • on October 16, 2010, 5:59 GMT

    i agree with omar haq,there was nothing crushing about this defeat.liam,it wouldn't hurt once in a while to double check whether ur wording is appropriate to e situation.nonetheless,well played to both teams.particularly zimbabwe.i didnt think ey'd get to 287.if im not correct its their highest total in the calender year.

  • on October 16, 2010, 3:33 GMT

    Whatever! Sachin sucks! Amla rocks!

  • on October 16, 2010, 1:54 GMT

    There does seem to be a problem with that list. The list we have been linked to is indeed when a batsman has opened - and remained not out at the point of the innings where no more batsmen were able to come out and bat - this includes 10 wickets to fall or injured players not batting.

    However what Tendulkar and in this match, Taylor did, was opening the batting - and remaining not out at the conclusion of 50 overs.

    Quite different but in a way the same.

  • on October 16, 2010, 0:30 GMT

    I think you guys are all MISSING THE POINT!!! Taylor hit 145no!!! Fantastic innings Brendan.... Should of been man of the match... Zimbabwe are on the road to recovery.

  • english_oaf on October 15, 2010, 23:55 GMT

    Vinay - if that is the case, then Taylor did not carry his bat either, as only 6 wickets had been taken.

  • on October 15, 2010, 23:28 GMT

    How is this a "crushing defeat"? Zimbabwe score 287 which is pretty respectable and Taylow was not out on 145. Hardly an apt headline for this match.

  • vaidyar on October 15, 2010, 23:21 GMT

    "Amla reached the landmark with a paddle to the final leg boundary in the 29th over, but just as murmurings of a potential attempt on Sachin Tendulkar's record-breaking double-hundred began his first lapse in concentration cost him his wicket, a shy from Utseya catching him short of his ground in the 32nd over." Seriously? As soon as he got to 100?

  • on October 15, 2010, 22:59 GMT

    I think in order to 'carry your bat,' all 10 wickets must be taken and the opener remains not out, this was not the case in Sachin's 200*

  • on October 15, 2010, 22:55 GMT

    The list of players to carry their bat is incomplete. Missing Gary Kirsten 188* against UAE in 1996. Can't think of any other?

  • english_oaf on October 15, 2010, 22:14 GMT

    I think the stat about carrying the bat is completely wrong I'm afraid - just from doing a quick statsguru search, there seem to be many, many more batsmen who have carried their bat through an innings (we're talking hundreds!). Unless I've made a massive mistake, which is quite possible...

  • sachinmagod on October 15, 2010, 22:14 GMT

    Yes and Sachin did it it on 2 other occasions apart from the historic 200*

    here they are:

    http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/256607.html

    http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64631.html

  • cmc_gang on October 15, 2010, 22:03 GMT

    Sachin also carried his bat through his innings of 186 against NZ in Hyderabad in 1999. So technically he did that 2 times and he is the 5th person to do it.

  • rphanikanth on October 15, 2010, 21:24 GMT

    The statistic about Brendan Taylor being the ninth batsman to carry his bat through a completed one-day innings is not true. He is the 10th batsman, not 9th. Sachin Tendulkar was the 9th to carry his bat through in his innings of 200 n.o.

    Refer to this scoreboard for details: http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/441828.html

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • rphanikanth on October 15, 2010, 21:24 GMT

    The statistic about Brendan Taylor being the ninth batsman to carry his bat through a completed one-day innings is not true. He is the 10th batsman, not 9th. Sachin Tendulkar was the 9th to carry his bat through in his innings of 200 n.o.

    Refer to this scoreboard for details: http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/441828.html

  • cmc_gang on October 15, 2010, 22:03 GMT

    Sachin also carried his bat through his innings of 186 against NZ in Hyderabad in 1999. So technically he did that 2 times and he is the 5th person to do it.

  • sachinmagod on October 15, 2010, 22:14 GMT

    Yes and Sachin did it it on 2 other occasions apart from the historic 200*

    here they are:

    http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/256607.html

    http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64631.html

  • english_oaf on October 15, 2010, 22:14 GMT

    I think the stat about carrying the bat is completely wrong I'm afraid - just from doing a quick statsguru search, there seem to be many, many more batsmen who have carried their bat through an innings (we're talking hundreds!). Unless I've made a massive mistake, which is quite possible...

  • on October 15, 2010, 22:55 GMT

    The list of players to carry their bat is incomplete. Missing Gary Kirsten 188* against UAE in 1996. Can't think of any other?

  • on October 15, 2010, 22:59 GMT

    I think in order to 'carry your bat,' all 10 wickets must be taken and the opener remains not out, this was not the case in Sachin's 200*

  • vaidyar on October 15, 2010, 23:21 GMT

    "Amla reached the landmark with a paddle to the final leg boundary in the 29th over, but just as murmurings of a potential attempt on Sachin Tendulkar's record-breaking double-hundred began his first lapse in concentration cost him his wicket, a shy from Utseya catching him short of his ground in the 32nd over." Seriously? As soon as he got to 100?

  • on October 15, 2010, 23:28 GMT

    How is this a "crushing defeat"? Zimbabwe score 287 which is pretty respectable and Taylow was not out on 145. Hardly an apt headline for this match.

  • english_oaf on October 15, 2010, 23:55 GMT

    Vinay - if that is the case, then Taylor did not carry his bat either, as only 6 wickets had been taken.

  • on October 16, 2010, 0:30 GMT

    I think you guys are all MISSING THE POINT!!! Taylor hit 145no!!! Fantastic innings Brendan.... Should of been man of the match... Zimbabwe are on the road to recovery.