Selectorial decisions pay off
Statistically , but England are honest enough to know that this rated seven out of 10.
A win is a win, of course – and this was England’s first overseas victory for two years, and their first anywhere for eight Tests.
They will take a great deal of confidence with them to Napier where they should prove that they are the better of the two teams.
First, we should say well done to the selectors who made a big call by – their most experienced bowlers by a distance.
Bear in mind that this was only the second Test under the auspices of Geoff Miller’s new selection team, and they put their necks on the line. They got it right, with – and nip – to England’s attack.
There are areas for improvement. The fielding here, as discussed yesterday, was very shoddy.
There were some good catches among the missed chances – Alistair Cook took a smart one at third slip in the second over today to get rid of Daniel Vettori – and this will be worked on over the next four days.
The top order is still finding big scores elusive – Kevin Pietersen has made two hundreds and no fifties in his last 18 knocks and is starting to look rather frustrated.
There was nothing he could do about being run out while backing up here, but it does show that everyone goes through a spell in which they have to dig deep.
The biggest slap on the back goes to Ryan Sidebottom who has taken 16 wickets in these last two Tests. He never tires and is always nothing but utterly wholehearted in everything he does.
He is also becoming a seriously decent swing bowler who looks likely to take a wicket with every ball he bowls.
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌýPost your comment
Sidearse is a phenomenon. Where has he been these last years? One wonders......
Complain about this comment
I really thought that dropping Hoggard was harsh and unnecessary, because I had serious doubts about Anderson's ability to do any better. Thankfully I have been proved wrong.
Hoggard will be back. I think he is resilient and determined enough to work hard to get back into the side, and I think he will achieve that. I'm not so sure about Harmison though - I don't think he's strong enough psychologically. This could well be the beginning of the end of his international test match career.
You're absolutely right to highlight the parts of England's game which were not good enough - it would be easy to forget about them because of the bowling successes. In another scenario, those dropped catches could easily have lost England the test and the series, and yet again the top order hasn't performed. It seems like England can only ever get one half of their team working at any one time, frustratingly.
Thanks for the blog, the commentary and the podcasts, all of which are of an excellent standard and all of which I have been following with much interest.
Complain about this comment
Spot on Aggers, nothing more than a 7/10, might even rate a 6 for me, given the New Zealand attack. AMbrose's knock the highlight, shows that someone posting 100 in the first innings is crucial to winning games - it's been a while.
Worrying to see him drop a catch and miss a stumping however, yet another batsman that keeps, rather than a great keeper that bats which worked in this test but may not work every time (see Geraint Jones).
Complain about this comment
Well put as always. What England really need is a clinical edge - to put the boot in when the opponent is already down. This match should have been over on day four, and on a less friendly pitch we might have been run a bit closer. It's time to get mean.
Complain about this comment
Spot on as usual Aggers. Watched the test and quite enjoyed the performance; especially good to see the bowling selection paying off. Always things to work on, but I think now we must be favourites for the series.
Complain about this comment
Good summary, Aggers but I think 7 out of 10 is somewhat generous. If we won the test match inside 4 days, like we should have, then I would agree but I would give it a 5 out of 10.
The batting is still a major concern. Colly is the only one really grafting and putting a value on his wicket. Vaughan and Cook look nervous and edgy whenever they walk out and I'm not sure why Strauss is in the team. He looked woeful once again with poor foot movement and his bat coming down at all angles. KP has been remarkably subdued but I think this can be put down to the fact that nobody is scoring runs and he feels the need to batten down the hatches for long periods.
The bowling has seen a refreshing change with Anderson and Broad accepting the responsibility and, as you quite rightly state, Siders has been a revelation and deserves all the success that comes his way. He probes away at every batsman and his late swing has proved a real handful for the Kiwis. He is also a dogged late order batsman and a reliable and safe fielder.
In terms of the discards, Hoggard deserves to stick around and will come back into contention during the English summer but Harmison needs to be pensioned off to the meadows of Durham immediately.
Complain about this comment
7 or 6 out of ten is where England are right now as a team needing to rebuild.They are an average side with largely average players.We cant be no 1 or 2 in the world when we have no outstanding batsman or bowlers.Yes we have players who have the occasional outstanding performance, but none have the consistency required to challenge the top teams.Look at our batting-no-one is looking like a really big score-all get out for a nice 40-MPV is THE cameo expert.
Bowling is also lacking in depth and we need to get another spinner as I'm not sure Monty is developing into world class.
Lets give Ambrose a good chance-we need stability there at least for the bowlers.He needs to practice standing up!!!
Complain about this comment
Nice to see England back winning test matches again. Sidebottom was once again fantastic, the whole team should look up to him as he always gives 100 per cent. Catching was poor, Collingwood seems to put alot down in the slip, hopefully Flintoff will be back soon, meaning he moves into the slips.
The biggest plus was Ambrose. People say Prior made a good start but he has done better. He has got a 50 and 100 in his first four innings, away from home, Prior who also scored a 100 and a 50 in his first four, did this at home, against a dreadful WI side, furthermore England were already in the driving seat in them games. I am not taking anything away from Matt, he is a good batter and can score runs when it matters, i.e Sri Lanka, this winter.
Something funny for you all. When Jones and McCullum squared up in the 04 series, the media said it was a competition between two very good wicket keepers and Jones won, look where he is now, while McCullum who is arrogent in my view is making stupid money in India.
Complain about this comment
FINALLY......Some solace to England..
Complain about this comment
People seem to have forgotten England's brilliant fielding in NZ's first innings!
Still, their fielding perfomance in NZ's second innings really highlights a problem England have that we have seen time and time again - their inability to kill the game quickly by always lapsing into complacency and becoming sloppy.
This time they could afford it, but its a bloody awful habit and we have seen them lose several mataches when they were apparently in a winning position because of it.
On one other point, Strauss. I really don't understand the calls for Shah to replce him. Ok, he didn't bat great, but his performance was no worse than that of England's other top-order batsmen.
As for Shah, sorry, but I really think he is incredibly over-rated: he has the occasional good knock, but too often fails miserably. If you are going to replace Strauss (which would be a mistake given the other qualities he brings apart from his batting), let it be with a like-for-like, and not a very average middle-order batsman!
Complain about this comment
A strong England is very good for cricket so this is a welcome victory, not least because it was achieved with a margin to spare when one considers the shoddy fielding. I am left wondering why I have not seen Ryan Sidebottom before now and it makes one ask what other talent might be hidden in the the English county scene. For mine, Anderson has still a long way to go before he becomes an automatic selection. He is more a test than one day bowler but even in the test arena he needs to be much more consistent and less costly. Is there a mentality amongst the English batsmen that 40 or 50 is a satisfactory score? It isn't unless someone in the top order is going to get that elusive century around which a substantial team innings can be compiled. I wonder does anyone ever mention to Michael Vaughan that it is about time he produced, not just one good score, but a string of them? You could not pick him and Strauss on actual performances right now, especially when the others are not shining.
I will reserve judgement about the potential of this English side until after the third test. It wll be as much a trial of their mettle as of their skill. Right now the top nations - Australia, South Africa and India - would crush the England of that first test against the Kiwis.
Complain about this comment
Spot on Aggers. The real backbone of England's effort as been Sidebottom, who lets not forget, caused a collapse of the Kiwis in the 2nd Innings in Hamilton and had it not been for the dreadful England batting, could have been a matchwinner.
Sidebottom is so accurate and aggressive that it puts pressure on the opponents to score against the other bowlers, which is why when Anderson was accurate, he got the wickets.
Ryan S has become the new stalwart of England's bowling attack, and when Vaughn throws the ball to him, he knows that Sidebottom is going to cause the batsmen to have to play the ball, and then the wickets will come.
Tim Ambrose and Paul Collingwood's partnership turned around this Test series and England's fortunes, but Ambrose needs to work on his glovework and his concentration.
Paul Collingwood's innings were exemplary for graft.
Complain about this comment
The reason why we haven't seen Ryan Sidebottom is simple -- Duncan Fletcher.
Peter Moores has done something right for once. Letting the new blood come in to refresh the old. Mind you our good friend Sidey isn't a spring chicken himself, but like a good vintage he's gotten better with age, and can be a serious threat to any batsman.
But overall it is a good comeback win, but I have to echo the sentiments. When they have the opposition down and on their back, they need to strike that final decisive blow. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is painful, and demoralizing.
Complain about this comment
I hope (and JA will no doubt have a trenchant view on this) that the final Test provides some opportunities for the spinners. At the moment, Panesar is ineffective and expensive. A better bowler might not have got more wickets but I think would have proved less easy to get away.
Complain about this comment
A fresh injection of talent did wonders for our bowling and wicket-keeping efforts, it may be necessary to look at introducing aggressive, young batsmen of the ilk of Joe Denly and James Hildreth unless our batsmen start to dominate bowling attacks. Not scratch around, but dominate. The secret to the Ashes turnaround in 2005 was as much because our batsmen dominated the first day at Edgbaston, scoring over 400 and setting the agenda. With the exception of the currently fallible-looking Pieterson, we have five batsmen who graft and chip away, but do not have the confidence or ability to dominate relatively ordinary bowlers like Jacob Oram. The Australians would never have allowed that, just as they would never have allowed vettori and patel to settle into a groove in Hamilton. Vaughan needs to set an example here. I'm not sure that Strauss, Cook, Bell or Collingwood are able to change their games as Langer and Hayden did, but the England selectors need to heed the lessons learned from Tim Ambrose, Stuart Broad and Ryan Sidebottom and start reviewing the batsmen.
Complain about this comment
What about the umpiring? While the Poms celebrate they must remember how they were helped by the extremely poor umpiring on Day 4- how could The umpires deny an appeal against the light and then (after a wicket- Oram- had fallen immediately decide to go off- a defining moment in the test which was ruined by this major 'lapse' in concentration by umpires who should be (but obviously weren't)on top of their game.
Well done England, but you were helped by poor NZ batting in the 1st innings and mediocore umpiring.
Complain about this comment
I like the batting of Broad and Sidebottom as tail enders. Broad is better than that IMO...Dare I say Flintoff for Panesar to take the batting depth right down to number 9...we dont need Panesar on pitches like this. Bowl Freddie sparingly along with Collingwood as 4th bowler to the three definates of Anderson,sidebottom and Broad
Complain about this comment
Nice to see England win in the face of a good effort by NZ. I agree with Jonathan on giving the credit to the selectors (if it was their decision) and to Ryan Sidebottom in particular.
Hopefully the win will inspire some confidence in the England camp which will help their still obviously troubled batting line-up.
Complain about this comment
Duncan Fletcher didn't rate Sidebottom because he 'lacked pace'. Well, so did Glen McGrath and Richard Hadlee. What Sidebottom does have, however, is line, length and a bit of movement, virtues that will always get wickets. It's a simple game, really.
Complain about this comment
Not really too sure where the idea that England are likely to "prove that they are the better of the two teams" in Napier comes from. In my view they were beaten rather easily in the first test by a grossly misjudged NZ team, and have simply shown in this last test that they are their equal. It seems that throughout the lead-up to this tour, and during it, there has been a misplaced sense of superiority over the NZers, and a distinct lack of respect for a NZ team which has been much better than them in the ODIs and every bit their equal in the tests. It is precisely because of this arrogance that everyone is keen to see England lose in Napier.
Complain about this comment
Phil, he's been on the side.
Complain about this comment
well done England! phew!
i think all this victory really shows is that when Harmison plays England are NORMALLY a bowler short.
well done Michael Vaughn - though for what, i'm not exactly sure...
Complain about this comment
I still have grace reservations about England's batting. They show no confidence and even less flair.
Keep the same structure for the 3rd test but wholesale changes are needed. Vaughan is a passenger. Strauss has forgotten how to bat. Bell and KP. Maybe they can hang around.
Vaughan & Strauss out. Collingwood skipper. A bit of new blood for the summer or else SA will cane us.
Complain about this comment
I would like to comment on a couple of the previous posts...firstly, England are not 'winning test matches'; they have won one (singular) test match - the first away in two years, which is not a record to be proud of. Secondly, whether England can become a strong side is yet to be proven. Both the batting and bowling are well short of what it needs to challenge the current best teams in the world.
I personally incline to the view that as Ambrose is Australian he shouldn't be in the England side, but given that he is, if the great wicket-keeping debate tedium starts up again, it should be noted how close his first innings knock was to the winning margin.
Complain about this comment
Surely the message for England is to bury their prejudices. As you said, Aggers, the selectors got it right. But for years we did not, keeping Sidebottom out for seven years. Swann still deserves a chance in the final game. Panesar could benefit from missing out on the last game. His overall game has been in a slow steady decline lately and players sometimes need the cold bath of being dropped to return reinvigorated.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations to the winners. They were clearly the dominant side in the five day contest.
Complain about this comment
it's hard to read much into this win, this is the worst kiwi side in many years a side with no real quality in the top 6 batting.
The england side of 3 years ago would have won this series 3-0, india australia or south africa would be 2-0 up right now.
Complain about this comment
7/10 is fair enough to me. The biggest plus was Ambbrose who pulled England out of a hole. The difference between his start and Priors is that he did it when England were in trouble. His glove work is also a lot better than Prior's.
In the first two tests, all have the top 6 have got in but none have gone on and made it count. I'm hoping that Bell can make a significant score in the final test. Its a while since hes scored a test 100 for England.
The bowling was much better at Wellington. All three seamers bowled well and Broad should have come of the game with much better figures. Collingwood dropped two straight forward catches off him.
Our slip fielding is an area of concern with only Strauss looking the part. Our best fielder collingwood should go back to cover point.
Anyway as you usual your commentary has been brilliant Aggers. You're without doubt are the best cricket commentator.
Complain about this comment
One swallow doesn't make a summer, but a win is a win...
Did Broad really bowl any better than Hoggard would have? Figures of 3-118 are hardly great. Broad is undoutedly a better batsman, but he has to take wickets - something that Hoggard has done time and again, only to be harshly dismissed for one poor maych.
Complain about this comment
To all of you how query where Sidebottom has been before England he didn't play because he wasn't very good or consistent but fair play to him he worked on his bowling and has improved greatly so now he gets picked
Complain about this comment
Its about time we won a match but we hardly set the world on fire. After this game i went onto youtube and watch some of the footage from the 2005 ashes. Oh how we miss flintoff and Jones in particular.
I still think it was a very harsh decision to drop Hoggard. He always gives 100% and rarely lets us down.
Fair do's for getting rid of Harmison though, he NEVER looks like he really gives a monkeys about being on the field at all.
Complain about this comment
Good summary as always Aggers. Agree the batting is a concern and KP is definately not the same player coming to the crease with a low score on the board. Trescothick has been a massive loss he was class opener who really went at bowling attacks and put quick runs on the board setting a solid platform for those lower down the order to come in and attack. Will the new selection setup be looking at picking solely on current form from now on? If so surely Ramprakash deserves another go in the team. Any player who averages over 100 2 seasons running should surely be worth a place and just look what Sidebottom has done since returning after a long absense!
Complain about this comment
Mostly balanced comments on here as ever but some hilarious ones too. One post blaming the umpires (who had an excellent game), and bemoaning New Zealand's poor first innings batting as the reason England won. Rather than just look at the scorecard why not listen to reports/watch the match, Anderson was excellent in the first innings and NZ got more than it looked they would early on.
Also India/Australia/Boycott's Mum Select XI would be 2-0 up comments are pointless. How could anyone know this? Didn't India lose their last overseas series, oh yes I think they did.
Finally this is not a bad NZ side at all. To me they have a strong bowling unit, and a decent middle and lower order (Taylor, Fleming, McCullum, Vettori all class batsmen)....they've struggled with getting decent openers for years, but then again so do a lot of teams!
So, a good win and with room for improvement, lets be positive for once.
Complain about this comment
If I read "one swallow..." once more!!!! :-)
For me the best thing is that there has been minimal knee-jerk "drop Ambrose" reaction. He has kept wicket really brilliantly every day of the series bar one and that one day one can be generous and say that his exertions with the bat probably had a lot to do with his poor day. That said, two stumpings and a catch missed were a pretty shocking reality check for him. If this turns into a regular occurrence, then we should worry. One off day in the midst of many good ones is not a problem.
England controlled the match almost from start to finish (with the sole exception of a patch in the first afternoon). It's true that the side can and must play much better, but then we said that all through the South Africa series in 2004/05. Then there were dark mutterings about the invariable bad session or awful day and the fact that against Australia it would cost us dear. Now we are looking back at that series with rose-tinted spectacles as the apogee of English resolve and success (boy that was not how it looked at the time! The fans were savage about some of England's poor cricket in that series).
Job done here. How it was done is not so important as the fact that it was. Now, on to Napier and the second and rather larger job of winning the series. Winning this Test is meaningless if the series is lost in the end.
Complain about this comment
Great of them to drop the two bnowlers and put new blood in. Surely it is worth doing the same to Strauss? I know we won, and also he scored a few but why not pick someone young with potential (like they did with Cook?) rather than someone who is out of form and looks like their best might be behind them . . . . . Just to clarify i don't really think that player is Shah but we should look at finding another opener if Tresco isn;t going to come back to play.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations England. It's great to get a win and hopefully go on to do better in the next test.
However in the euphoria, it is easy to forget that the batting, barring Ambrose and Collingwood, was largely mediocre. A lot should be expected of Vaughan and he is not delivering. Strauss is another (although he is fundamentally a good test player), while KP is failing to live up to his own lofty standards.
I believe that it was more NZ losing than England winning. There are fundamental issues we need to address and we are still not doing it. Dropping Hoggard now looks like inspired selection, but I am not sure he too would not have succeeded on this seamer friendly pitch. Remember Vettori failed with the ball here. Panesar too needs to pull up his socks.
So a six out of ten is about right.
Complain about this comment
Interesting to see whinging about the umpiring. England had some extremely rough decisions against them in the 1st Test: should we be condescending and say "well done New Zealand, helped by some extremely poor umpiring?" I think not!!!! New Zealand won and deserved to. England won the second match and deserved to, even if the final margin was far closer than it should have been.
Complain about this comment
@30, Broad came in for Harmison. If you are going to compare, you should look at Hoggy vs Anderson.
The comparison is theoretical - but Hoggy had to bowl on a slow, flat wicket with little bowling in his legs. Anderson got to go off and get a warm up match and bowled on a pitch and in conditions that suited him. In my mind, Hoggard would have got similar figures to Anderson on a pitch like this.
The real test is the next test - Napier will likely be similar to Hamilton. I expect figures of 1-98 from Anderson. He's inconsistent and always has been, and has never seemed to have the heart to bowl on tough pitches, unlike Hoggard. Hoggard has had about 1 bad game for England and has been dropped. In my mind, there is no doubt he is the better bowler than Anderson, and I am sure he will be back when we play NZ in England.
Complain about this comment
Kudos to the selection panel on their brave decisions - the only way it could've turned out better for them would've been to give Harmy and Hoggard the Anderson treatment and make them available to play for a couple of Kiwi sides - they could even have held an IPL-style auction and made a few quid out of it too!
Obviously it's early doors, but hopefully the decision to play bowlers who have had genuine match practice made by selectors on tour with the side is a picture of things to come.
Now let's hope we can wrap up the series Napier and start an upward curve in the fortunes of the England team.
Complain about this comment
well a wins a win but worries include monty's shocking fielding.
strauss' total lack of form and the running between the wickets of bell and pietersen.
give those guys some pro plus or something and tell them to concentrate!
ambrose - i'm not convinced. his batting was very streaky and his keeping at times sub standard.
is he the best wicket keeper in the country?
i'd go for mustard or davies.
Complain about this comment
A win at long last. Sidebottom is an enthusiastic bowler as is Broad so keep them in. Agree with earlier comments on Vaughan maybe captain but really shows no venom these days as is being carried.Nice pad in Barbados and £300000 a year but not worth being captain.He is a weak character by nature all soft.Colly would be a great captain. Strauss is a has been with the bat but keeps a few catches always seems very on edge as does Vaughan when batting.Colly is a good aggresive batsman.Where has the word BATSMAN gone to as its now BATTERS.Might do for Aussies but Fletcher brought that word in and its stuck but he's gone now thank god but is wrong for England so all you commentators get back to the real word please.
Complain about this comment
Sometimes it doesnt matter how you win. England needed to win, they needed to show that they can dig in and bounce back and they've done that. This team is very much a work in progress and the likes of Broad and Ambrose have shown that they could become excellent players, they just need the experience and they will only get that by playing.
Well done England
Complain about this comment
New Zealand scored 311, isn't that a record 4th innings score for a Wellington test?
The wins great, but don't get too excited about a set of bowlers who let a pretty poor team score so heavily.
Complain about this comment
A fresh injection of talent did wonders for our bowling and wicket-keeping efforts, it may be necessary to look at introducing aggressive, young batsmen of the ilk of Joe Denly and James Hildreth unless our batsmen start to dominate bowling attacks. Not scratch around, but dominate. The secret to the Ashes turnaround in 2005 was as much because our batsmen dominated the first day at Edgbaston, scoring over 400 and setting the agenda. With the exception of the currently fallible-looking Pieterson, we have five batsmen who graft and chip away, but do not have the confidence or ability to dominate relatively ordinary bowlers like Jacob Oram. The Australians would never have allowed that, just as they would never have allowed Vettori and Patel to settle into a groove in Hamilton. Vaughan needs to set an example here. I'm not sure that Strauss, Cook, Bell or Collingwood are able to change their games as Langer and Hayden did, but the England selectors need to heed the lessons learned from Tim Ambrose, Stuart Broad and Ryan Sidebottom and look to providing impetus and a fresh approach to the batsmen.
Complain about this comment
Adam (#45):
If England had taken their chances (how many dropped catches and missed stumpings were there?) New Zealand would not have reached even 200.
Don't blame the bowlers. They did their job brilliantly.
Complain about this comment
To all those Monty-haters out there, he wasn't exactly well supported by the fielding, with a dropped catch and two missed stumpings. He will come good.
The worry for me is the batsmen - it's back to the old collapse days of the 90s too often.
Complain about this comment
What's with all the 'drop Panesar' nonsense?
Yes ok the previous tour to Sri Lanka he wasn't that good (then again we were expecting him to do as well as Murali, or at least the media were) and the first test against New Zealand he wasn't particlaurly brilliant by his own standards. However he did enjoy a personally successful tour with England Lions (on a side note, Rashid is, at most, his equal all round, bowling wise there is no contest).
In the first test he bowled better than Hoggard and Harmison and yes he was out-bowled by Vettori, but Vettori is the best finger spinner in the world.
Now let's look at this test, shall we? first innings he had nothing to do (1-0-2-0) but the second one he did what a spinner should be doing, keeping the run rate down. Compare his economy to all the other bowlers and only Collingwood betters him. Figures of 21.3-1-53-1 aren't bad, considering he came very close on other occasions. Yes his fielding wasn't very good (read here 'cack') but let's be honest compared to what it was, it's an improvement.
Statistically he outbowled Vettori. And bowling is his job. So what's the problem with him, guys?
Complain about this comment
Dropping our two worst bowlers won us the second Test, but NZ had a better second innings than England so no room for the attack of complacency which appears to have broken out.
Time for another bold decision - this time drop our two worst batsmen - step forward Pietersen with 48 and Vaughan with 45 over the two innings.
Complain about this comment
Siders is a natural. Anybody who saw a 7-8 over spell by him to Sachin Tendulkar at Trent Bridge last summer would have wondered where he was all the time? I think I have never seen someone trouble Sachin so much since, of course, our very own McGrath!!!
Complain about this comment
I agree with Ben about Monty. He's done a decent job in this match and has been Englands most consistent wicket taker over the last couple of years. Sidebottom and Monty have been the mainstays, if the others had their consistency we'd be winning more matches, simple as.
Complain about this comment
Well, a win at last, it's clear that despite the fine figures of Anderson in the 1st Innings that Sidebottom is the leader of the attack and our best pace bowler currently fit, if not our best bowler.
Same again in Napier please but with better fielding, Ambrose-great, Anderson-great, Sidebottom-fine 4th Innings haul and good pressure in 1st Innings (economy 2.13 really built up pressure).
But one point to all the people pointing out England's dropped catches, yes very true, but NZ also dropped Cook on 5 or something, and Bell and Collingwood in successive balls in the 2nd Innings so it could yet have been different had they fielded up to their previous standards.
Complain about this comment
Although I agree the selections look to have been successful on this occasion, many of us who disputed Anderson being picked over Hoggard (Broad over Harmison was 100% correct) may well still question it.
Anderson has flattered to deceive throughout his career, has had numerous chances (mostly in ODI's) and seems to produce one game out of ten for England. On previous form, we can now expect plenty of 5+ an over returns and people will again question why he is in the side.
Hoggard may well have taken 7 wickets in the match himself if picked given the conditions being right up his street - we will never know. And given his consistency for England over many years, I still feel his ommission was very harsh.
Complain about this comment
England needs a staggered evolution. Throwing out six players at once is no use - what you need is a competition for places so that if someone is seriously off the boil they can be replaced with someone who is in form.
You don't want to chop and change after one or two tests. Nor do you want to get in the mid-90s habit of replacing the bowlers every five minutes because the batsmen aren't performing.
Keep Strauss - for now. Reassess in the summer, putting him up against Shah and one of the new guns (Denly etc) for consideration.
People often think that throwing in x or y would be a good idea - they have to be ready, otherwise they'll sink for six years like Sidebottom did. Test match cricket is harder than county cricket so you have to have something extra about you that you can sustain at a higher level for five days. Cook clearly showed it and got in the side quickly, you need to keep that conveyor belt turning.
Complain about this comment
Honest assessment as ever. Agree wholeheartedly with the fiedling point. Monty, bless him, was dreadful in the field in this Test and far too many catches went down. on Day Four which isn't good enough.
A big call needs to be made with the top order. A belter of a pitch is expected at Napier, much like the ODI one there earlier this tour. Should we keep faith with a misfiring Strauss in the hope he rediscovers some form? Or should he make way with Cook partnering Vaughan. KP to 3, Bell 4, Shah 5, Colly 6? I'm swaying towards the latter.
Sidearse superb... again!
Complain about this comment
Paul Barrow:
Bresnan was tried and was not a success, albeit in the ODI side. Since then he has not done anything really eye-catching to get back into contention. Luke Wright the jury is still out on. He has hardly bowled so far in ODIs and his batting has been rather hit and miss (consistent, brief, violent innings down the order; consistent failure when he has opened or batted at 3) - not quite a solid recommendation that he will be a success at Test level.
Flintoff? We'll see. I am not confident that he'll be back. He will need a lot of bowling for Lancashire to show that, this time, he really is fixed and fit.
Rashid? He will undoubtedly tour next winter. Monty has had some disappointing results over the last year and a bit with the shining exception of the West Indies series. In this Test though his bowling looked to be getting back to what we had come to expect. Wouldn't it be a luxury to be able to play Rashid and Panesar in the same side????
In a way the criticism of Monty is actually a good thing. It means that he is not now just the promising tyro, but is expected to deliver consistently. Looking over his shoulder at Adil Rashid's progress should bring out the best in him.
Complain about this comment
Don't think we can exactly drop two batsmen as Alan suggests, as we only have one backup (Shah) in the squad! Unless you want to play Mustard as a batting specialist that is? And changing the captain for a deciding Test would be crazy even by our standards.
They all know they need a big score, Vaughan and KP included, to be secure for the return series in a couple of months' time. Don't know what's causing this century drought really, other than a collective loss of confidence, as they all have decent conversion rates over their careers apart from Bell and possibly Collingwood.
Complain about this comment
Most of the batters actually have decent test averages and have done it before. What they lack is mettle - they need to be more aggressive. I would look to the coaches. By the way, how often do England reach 70 for the first wicket then be 3 down before 100 is on the board?
Complain about this comment
Aggers
I raise 4 areas of slight concern for England that need working on or addressing.
1)Catching/ Fielding - well discussed already
2) Vaughan's batting - he needs a fluent half century, or scappy tonne, Strauss made more runs than Vaughan did.
3) England Batting - Ambrose got a well deserved tonne, but the top 6 are making 40's,60's but still not converting to centuries, good centuries or double centuries.
4)KP - a little down on batting form, averages and consistency for the last year.
Complain about this comment
It is becoming very difficult to please a section of English support.
The lads played very well from being not a lot for 5 at tea on day 1 (put into bat on a seaming pitch).
Once England were in control, they didnt look like losing and closed out the game with lots of time and comfort.
Yet all we hear is, dropped catch, missed stumping, dropped catch, didnt bat fast enough, not enough hundreds, dropped catch, missed stumping!
If your expectations are so high, dont be surprised if they dont deliver.
NZ are not the greatest team. They are certainly a match for us however. They are at home and they are galvanised by our arrogant attitude towards their ability.
Complain about this comment
5 or 6 out of ten I think. I still worry about the batting. The openers are just not what they were in the heyday of Vaughn and Treskothic. We haven't got that platform any more.
England lose marks for their performance in the field.
It is patronising to suggest that England are the better side. Both teams are pretty average, but NZ have some good players. They are carrying some players like How and Gillespie, but hopefully for them these boys can improve. They are a much smaller cricketing nation that England and they are on a par with us at the moment.
Complain about this comment
The sooner Rashid is fast-tracked into the side, the better.
But the real problem is the batting. What happened to the England team that used to make 400+ first knock as a matter of routine? That sets up match wins, as the bowlers can concentrate on knocking over the opposition and the opponents are under pressure.
The batsmen need a collective kicking. They're not performing as a unit and Ambrose showed them up. There's not enough grit in the top 6 at the moment - Colly aside. No hundreds in four innings for the top 6 tells a story.
Complain about this comment
For me Collingwood has been the main reason England have been able to perform. Consistent with the bat and has taken key wickets at crucial points. Well done to Collingwood, big thumbs up from me.
I don't understand why a form player like Ramps isn't considered. It seems madness (to my perhaps amateur eye), to have 'Dead Weight' batters achieve averages of 20 when you have Ramps in the county game who is more likely than anyone else to get us a couple of those century's everyone is saying we need! Am I the only one who wonders why the England selection process is not a little more dynamic?
Complain about this comment
Napier will be Fleming's last test... could he pull off something? New Zealand will play for everything, can and will England match?
Complain about this comment
Yes a good win for England, despite a few sloppy sessions in the field. They must now look to improve further if they are to take the final test. Plenty of nets for the bowlers to keep their rhythmn and lots of fielding practice. Careful consideration is needed on whether or not Shah should be brought in for either Strauss or Pietersen; I suspect they'll probably persist with Strauss, although is he only gets two more modest scores then he should be discarded again and told to play for Middlesex all summer.
Complain about this comment
Dear Friends,It was very good first day's batting on the first morning by England openers.New Zealand failed on the morning of fith day's play.All fourty wickets except for the last one fell for some good fast bowling of both sides.New Zealand took the New ball on the first morning.England took their second New ball on the final few minutes on the fourth day and went on to claim the vital Oram wicket.The match was still live until the last McCullam wicket.It was the two men behind the stumps who faught for the MAN of this match award.This time the New Englishman won.Good Luck for Good Cricket.G.Somasunderam
Complain about this comment
Hope KP is not becoming like Lara was towards the end of his career - a run of mediocre scores then the odd biggie to boost his average. He needs to be a reliable run-getter.
I think there is a case for working with Trescothick towards the home Ashes series next year.
Complain about this comment
Monty: He is not a naturally athletic fielder, but he is naturally 'up for it' and gives 120%.
As a disenchanted supporter, i greatly value a player with a big heart.... keeps me interested.
Sidebottom and Monty lead the way.
Complain about this comment
There are still those ridiculous comments of NZ being such a poor side. It's getting old, untrue and doesn't win England many new fans globally for sure.
For me I'd put the two teams even now. England won, but to be honest they should've won more convincingly. Suffice to say they need some serious fielding practice.
NZ bowled poorly in the 3rd session of the 1st day and put in a dreadful 1st innings batting effort. They didn't bat and bowl as well as England did. Simple as that. NZ continue to play positively for the most part though which I think is encouraging. They're still continuing the Fleming doctrine of going out to win even if the odds are bleak. I think this attitude will pay dividends in the years to come.
This leaves us with an interesting situation in Napier now. England will take some confidence from the recent win but they really don't look like "winners" yet. Despite losing, NZ should be able to see some obvious weaknesses in England's game. At the same time, NZ have a fair few weaknesses of their own to worry about too. A brittle top order with Matthew Bell and Matthew Sinclair looking out of depth or out of form, and some of the bowling lines need to be a lot tighter.
It's going to be anyone's game in Napier and I'm really looking forward to it.
Complain about this comment
Good comments Aggers and a lot of sensible, reasoned posts in response.
Interesting how we like to reflect on 2005. I'm so old, I sometimes dwell on the days when England's number 3 was Peter May. Now we have Strauss!!
Something has to be done about the batting - whether it's selections, strategy, technique or what. Clearly, a bowling attack performs better if the batsmen can be relied upon to post sizable totals.
I'm wondering if Pietersen's current performances are due to playing to instructions rather than his natural game, which worked so effectively before.
Finally, what exactly has the batting coach done for/to the England team?
Complain about this comment
The choice had to be made sooner or later. I'm pleased for the young bowlers. However the fielding was schoolboy and the batting need to improve. I think Strauss should be back opening and Vaughan 3rd. However I think it's important to retain perspective. 1 test victory is nothing, we need to build on this and not , like in the past, sit back and say everything is alright. There's still a lot of work to go.
Complain about this comment
Well done England and especially well done to the newer members ...welcome aboard. I'm really looking forward to the Third Test at Napier now. Apparently it should be a very flat batting track so the performance in all areas of the cricket will have to become more clinical if there is to be a result at all. Just one question and plaese forgive my prudishness but ...I know the Barmy Army are fun and all and the trumpeter is a novelty at times but wouldn't you be a bit erked if you spent all that money on a ticket and had to sit infront of the guy all day ????? I remember years ago going to watch England v Pakistan in a one day match at Lords seeing a lot of Pakistan fans having hooters confiscated by the stewards and to be honest I also remember quietly thinking "thank Gawd for that!". Does the trumpeter have a special lisense or something???
Complain about this comment
so the consensus is - ambrose is australian, but so what?
like i said no wonder the aussies laugh at us.
Complain about this comment
Typical mis-placed sense of superiority from Aggers. Boring and obvious comments once again. Teams extremely equal, and if it weren't for Ambrose's first innings, the result could have been different.
Complain about this comment
Still concerns after the euphoria about our new keeper batsman who had a shocker behind the sticks in the second innings and looked less than comfortable in his second knock. Phil Mustard is the better option especially with the gloves on.
Hoggard would probably have delivered a similar return to Jimmy Anderson on this pitch, and would not have been stupid enough to have got injured 'warming down' either.
Broady looked good, but again not sure that selection was ' inspired' the batsmen have been failing for a good length of time and this is more a worry especially when struggling against the New Zealand attack which is poor.
Lets hope that we can win the series although with 5 days rest I am sure teh Black Caps bowling attack wil perform better than they did here.
Bob the Monk has a fair point about Adil Rashid as a genuine all rounder, but the sooner Strauss is given the elbow the better
Complain about this comment
Time for English selectors to be more consistent. They should pick up players only if they have faith in him and give the player a good run. There is no point in picking a player for one match and dropping them for the next.
Sidebottom was given a single test match to prove himself way back in 2002. Then the selectors forgot about him till last year.
Any national cap should be earned and should not be handed out just like that.
Complain about this comment
The batting as usual looks fragile, relying on an unlooked for display by the wicket keeper to achieve a match winning total. Yet still the best batsman in England continues to sit at home waiting for the call that never comes. Why isn't Ramprakash out there?
Complain about this comment
A good win against an average side, no more, no less. On the face of it, scoring over 600 runs on that surface is about par, and taking 20 wickets for 500 ish again is no better than par. But nailing a victory is good news because all you can do is to comfortably beat average opposition and thats what we did, so well done.
I'd like to think that a hungry, ruthless England will turn up in Napier, but I have my doubts ... why ? Well the fact of the matter is that although New Zealand are mediocre, we are not much better, look at our recent record. Yes, you can look on paper and suggest that England have real potential, but how long have we been saying this. Do we have anyone that stacks up to the batting of say Ponting, Hayden,Kallis, Tendulkar, Yousef and the answer is no (Pieterson has threatened but hasn't got there). Then look at the bowling - Lee, Muli, Steyn, Nntini, ... Again, we have no "world class" exponents. What we do have is a bunch of no better than decent cricketers as yet because they have not delivered on the world stage (stats rarely tell lies).
So, where from here. Hopefully we can win in Napier & build some momentum for the summer. I think the batting requires a re-think with Vaughan and Strauss the most vunerable. On the bowling front, Hoggard will be back in contention but I have been impressed with the three that played (although I will reserve judgement with Broad & Anderson for now, but both do have wicket taking potential). Not convinced that Ambrose as a keeper is any better than Jones or Prior - expect this debate to re-surface.
Re. selection, a bold move that must be applauded - we needed freshness and thats what we got. Re. playing football in the warm down, the less said the better (stupiity comes to mind).
So, do England have the mental strength to go on and win ? Very little evidence presented over the last couple of years so we'll wait & see. I suspect we may be in for a draw given that the pitch is likely to favour the batsmen. If that's the case, I hop the England heirachy don't view it as a fine comeback, but more of an opportunity lost given our hopeless 1st test performance.
We should then look at the winter and last summer's performance and have the guts to make the changes that are necessary irrespective of last taest performance.
Complain about this comment
Several posters make the excellent point that there is no basis whatsoever for Jonathan's bizarre assertion that England are the better side, to be proved in Napier. Forgetting the 2020 nonsense, NZ thrashed England in the ODIs, and won the first test by a bigger margin than England did the second test. So how can you reach the conclusion that England are the better side? It's results that count, not arrogance. Results to date on this tour indicate that NZ is the better team...and I bet the Napier pitch won't be a seamer (no complaint about that, I would stress).
I hope that England win in Napier, but I don't think that this kind of complacency will help them to do so.
Complain about this comment
Comment from bumble prior to last nights play that he was told by one of the players that having Strauss in the slip cordon was an extra boost.
And I don't think you could call his chance a drop. Just about got fingers to it.
I still think he will play in Napier, and I hope he starts to find his form, because without Tresco and Flintoff, we have no decent slip fielders.
Complain about this comment
I have to agree that the win, though great in terms of morale for the team, is a little flattering. As has been mentioned, New Zealand are hardly world-beaters, and they did have the better of the latter half of the match.
We know that Vaughan, Strauss and Pietersen have the talent - they have dominated world-class attacks before -but their recent form is a worry, and points to some rather serious mindset worries. I think our players have become too enamoured of modern psychobabble - we hear phrases like 'comfort zone' and 'taking positives' with monotonous regularity. You're only as good as your last match, so they should just concentrate on putting in the work in practice: the only real psychology needed is complete and utter belief in your own ability - and that comes from complete mastery of the basics - which comes through tireless and relentless work.
Sidebottom is brilliant, but, like Glenn McGrath, his success comes from keeping it simple and doing the basics right - if they miss, you hit.
Anderson did well, but I'm not holding my breath just yet: he's had good matches before, but never been able to carry the momentum forward with him.
Complain about this comment
The Mark Ramprakhash situation has been worked over a lot. If he were 28 rather than 38 you might give him one last go. However, he averaged 26 over a long Test career (52 Tests) and his final run in the side offers a clue as to why his average was so modest. In his last 10 Tests he had 16 innings. In 14 of the 16 he got a start (the two failures were in his last 3 innings, I believe), yet he only passed 40 twice in all those innings and only averaged around 30. That was the situation for most of his career: he has a stunning series of good 20s and 30s, with very few failures, but hardly ever translated a good start even into a solid 50.
If you drop a player like Bell, Vaughan or Pietersen (averages all consistently 40+) for a player who averaged 30 during a good run, you will be rightly pilloried.
Same side for Napier. Jimmy Anderson must silence the doubters who think, rightly, that he has been too inconsistent. Monty Panesar needs another good Test with the ball to help his self-confidence. And, above all, the XI that won needs a chance to finish the job and gain some confidence. If we lose, then you might want to question other players, such as Michael Vaughan as Captain, but let’s at least give them the chance to finish this series with a win first.
Complain about this comment
I am worried at the fielding but to pick on Monty is a bit rich seeing as multiple wickets did not transpire due to inept catching (see Kevin pietersen as an example).
It is good to see a win but I am not counting on this being a new 'start' for England.
Complain about this comment
Whilst England won the match, it was not what I call a good win. At no time did we apply the strangle hold, and even at the end doubts were beginning to come in as to whether maybe the NZs might save the day.
Not one batting display (except Collingwoods) was good, and the score was made more by luck than judgement.
The bowling was very good, the fielding was crap.
This team are never going anywhere - we really must start looking elsewhere in the counties for likely candidates, to blood them in time for Australia, or suffer losing badly with the present setup.
Norman West
Complain about this comment
Decent performance. The batting line up just needs one change I feel to keep them on their toes.
Has anyone else considered bring Prior in as a batman?
Complain about this comment
Good win much the better team, however our fielding needs to be greatly improved. Have we the right persons in the slip area? Top 6 batters still not producing regular high scores 100+? To often they get in for 40 or 50 but then get out, they must go on to make big scores?
Our bowlers need to appeal with greater volume having in my view missed out on what appeared plum LBW shouts.
Broad is certainly one for the future, and where has Sidebottom been hiding for last few years, brilliant.
Finnally lay off the Football run down practice!!!!!
Complain about this comment
Just been reading through and noticed a comment that I too have often wondered about - Ramprakash has been EASILY the best batsman for the last two seasons - and I do mean BY A LONG WAY, why hasn't he been playing these last two years - has he 'retired' from international cricket or something ?? Back to this match I agree that all of our batsmen seem to get themselves in but then fail to go on to a substanstial score, surely this is due to poor concentration ? as it was in the field in NZ 2nd inns, we really need to work on this. I think we had a nice balance to the team other than that. On the subject of Harmie, he's been the best but I think the poor bloke has had his confidence shot to pieces and needs to return to Durham for a season of county games and see how he come out the other side.
Complain about this comment
I cannot believe some of the negativity around Ambrose's performance in some of these comments. His and Colly's stand on day 1 won this test match for England. He came to the crease with England staring down the barrel and he turned the test in England's favour
Yes he dropped a catch but he was standing up and it was such a big edge it would have gone to first slip.
Maybe he will, maybe he won't be the 'dream batter / keeper' that England demands but he should be judged after 12 months not 2 games. So far his kept well and scored a 50 in one game and won a test match in the other.
Strauss should alo remain in this side.He's got two OK scores in 4 innings and will come back to good form and if Shah couldn't get in ahead of Bopara he won't get in ahead of Strauss.
Winning any test match away should be applauded and congratulations to the selectors for stirring up the bowling which looks miles better, admittedly on a faster, bouncier pitch
Complain about this comment
Now there's a bit of confidence in the side let's not change it. Keep the team sheet as it is and let them build some momentum. Its the psychology that is more important than the players. If this England team start feeling like winners, they might start playing like winners. Then I'd say they do have what it takes to beat the likes of the Aussies and India.
I hope we have left the negative attitude behind that permeated the 1st test. Maybe even Vaughn will brighten up and play to win more often.
Complain about this comment
critic2
You mention some of today's greats (Ponting, Kallis, Tendulkar, Hayden, Yousuf). Let's add another one: Jayawardene. They are all indisputably the best of the their generation. They have also played, respectively, 116,94,116,146,79 & 93 tests. England's top 6, with whom you are comparing them? With the exception of Vaughan (75 tests) they have played between 26 (Cook) and 45 (Strauss), which makes them relative newcomers. Not absolute novices, I grant you, but reaching the stage where either their first flush is wearing off and they are having to adjust their game to the fact that bowlers have discovered how best to bowl at them (KP, Strauss and Cook, say) or they have established themselves in the team and are looking to 'kick on' to the next level (Bell and Colly, say). So, by way of comparison, how were the current greats faring at similar stages of their careers? Mostly pretty similar to our top six - Ponting's average at 45 tests was nearly identical to Colly's; Hayden went from mid-40s average to over 50 around this time, even Sachin , wonderkid that he was, took over 30 tests to reach 2000 runs.
I'm not using these stats to get at you in particular (although you were the one who mentioned the greats) and yes of course it's a concern that a) none of the batsmen in our side have made big match-changing scores recently and b) they are collectively capable of the most dismal collapses (the mark of the really good side is that at least one will succeed when all others fail, which happens from time to time). But my point is that, for all that we expect of them, and for all that we think they've been around for ages, this side is still pretty inexperienced. Patience, everyone, patience.
Looking forward to Napier, and to the continuation of the 6-match series back in England. If it ends a draw after home and away series, do away wins count double? Or is it decided on penalties? ;-)
Complain about this comment
Our Away test record over the last 2 years is pretty awful:
Played 10
Won 1
Drawn 2
Lost 7
So despite ther fact we didn't play that well, I'm still happy with the win. Stop with all the negativity: I hope we can go on and get a result in the next test, and take it from there.
Complain about this comment
Can someone give Ambrose a break, we have to support our keepers and get behind them, yes his batting is aggressive and streaky, but of the great English keepers of the past I certainly remember Alan Knott being streaky, Bob Taylor had a pretty low average although was a good keeper, Paul Downtown, Bruce French again both good keepers but didn't score enough runs, Jack Richards was a good batsman but not the greatest keeper. Sadly Adam Gilcrist has changed peoples opionions on keeper/batsmen, and the closest we came to him was Alec Stewart, we stood by him when Jack Russell was by far the better keeper, so maybe lets just support Ambrose and not let him drift back into county cricket like Reed, Jones, Mustard, Prior, Foster, lets not try and get an ex English keeper in every county team!
Complain about this comment
re post 55 - Bemused
how the....... do you know what I wrote - I haven't seen my post come up yet!
Bresnan scored a ton against India last July and I could not think of any other all-rounders who deserve a chance - that's why Flintoff was back in my side assuming his fitness, and Rashid goes straight in - let's find out if they can bat, in a new attacking frame of mind, as Ambrose showed in his ton - if you get enough luck - you may well win the test.
As for Luke Wright, he has shown glimpses of bottle and character that seem so much rarer today - I want to see him given a chance - tone down the violence but still bat aggressively.
Hey if Hayden can do it with the disadvantages that he faces (caveman mentality, bully, sledging addiction etc), then surely we have a couple of boys that can do it equally well.
Did you like my team of commentators? I was struggling for a wicket keeper, and had to drag in Andy Flower.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations to England for a much-needed win. I agree with aggers (and many other comments from others) re England's performance. I look forward to the Napier test and would like to see Michael Vaughan produce a captains' innings with a big century.
Well done Sidebottom and Anderson for some good, aggressive (in the nicest way) bowling, with excellent support from Stuart Broad.
I am a Durham fan, but does anyone agree that Collingwood should be bowled more often, a) to give a rest to the front-line attack and b) for variation?
Complain about this comment
The New Zealand team is currently in turmoil - small squad and players are leaving for the IPL.
With England - they have a squad ready to compete with the likes of Pakistan, Sri Lanka and West Indies.
However a bit like the premiere league - there is a seperate league at the top consisting of South Africa, India and Australia.
Complain about this comment
A much improved performance this time from England. Can they win the deciding test? Yes, as long as they don't have to bat last. God spare us another gutless collapse in the pursuit of victory.
Incidentally, judging by his comments after the game about how it was nice to win on St. Patrick's Day, Michael Vaughan obviously believes he's the captain of Ireland! The English really are a most confused race.
Complain about this comment
Anonymous: It looks like your post got censored. It was up. You had a good team of commentators. There's a fair few Tests in the Press Box.
I don't know what has happened to Tim Bresnan, but he seems to have dropped right off the radar. Luke Wright, I agree 100%. His persistant failures up the order and persistant success in the slog overs batting down the order suggest that he needs to rein in the violence a bit to suceed in Tests. What he most needs though is to be trusted with the ball! I think that he has only bowled in four of all his limited overs internationals to date and two of those were 20-20. If he can show that he can take wickets regularly at international level his stock would rise massively.
Right now though, it's time for a Tonker Taylor-like "same side, better batting (and fielding)".
Complain about this comment
I'm not entirely comfortable with the notion that Sidebottom was ignored purely because he wasn't nippy. However, if it is true, then that seems to display a complete lack of understanding with regards to moulding a balanced test team.
The comparisons with McGrath I think are justified. McGrath sometimes barely bowled at 80mph, and even at 77-78mph he was still menacing and potent. It is unarguable that line and length is paramount for test bowlers, unless they have some other exceptional quality. Harmison did have one, but his line and length are now so poor it masks any other qualities his bowling had.
Complain about this comment
Good as it is to win, this should not (like the rugby) paper over the cracks in the system - the management of this team, based on their last 9 months of play, is not working out ie shocking inconsistency of performance, strange decisions like bring strauss back when out of form and the inability to to get best out of key players like KP & Harmy. Who made the call to drop Harmy & Hoggard...probably miller? Its an old point but england are still living in ashes-2005 era. That team has gone and we need to move on, so as to establish some sensible management. First step is post-tour, thank MPV for his hard work and appoint a new captain.
Complain about this comment
good job that Ambrose made a ton as we'd be back discussing whether to go back to prior, jones or even jack russell behind the stumps...
Strauss has to go.
World class coaches are needed ASAP for all areas of the game.
It was an english wicket on a foreign field...napier could be like hamilton all over again!
Complain about this comment
Monty has done nothing wrong apart from let 8 runs through his legs. Did he miss stumpings and drop catches. Did he throw fours runs away when throwing to the keeper??
First test the seamers Hoggy and Harmy did not perform, in steps Monty on the first day on a non turning wicket. He was asked to look after and contain one end and he did just that.
2nd inning he got 3 for 50 again job done.
2nd test he didnt need to bowl due to a seamers paradise and in the 2nd innings he had 3 dropped catches and a missed stumping and got the prized scalp of there dangerous keeper.
I dont understand what you guys want from him????
Now lets look at KP's Strauss and Vaughen's contributions Batting and fielding shall we??
Complain about this comment
It still comes back to the same old problems that have haunted England for the last 15 years. A top five that fail to produce sufficent runs for the bowlers to be able to have a go at. The persistance of needing a "wicket keeper / batsman" to prop up the lower order. Surely the main priority should be a wicket keeper who can keep. The selectors seem to have been living in the "Ian Healy / Adam Gilchrist" zone for a long time. England have never had a good keeper who can bat since Jack Russell retired, who was a keeper first! Concentrate on getting a decent keeper. The bowling changes are good but there are still good players who lose form too easily, either that or for a period of time they exceed their level of competence.
Complain about this comment
It's really great to see Ryan Sidebottom continue to do so well. A talented, whole hearted cricketer - and a nice bloke to boot! The question is being asked - where has he been and why wasn't he picked before? The main one is that he was always too old and too much of a "county journeyman" for Duncan Fletcher, as he mentions in his autobioography. Siders has got his chance chiefly because of the different management regime. And let's not forget that he only got into the side originally (last year I mean) because Jon Lewis, who was England's regular standby seamer,injured his ankle. Things might be somewhat different if that hadn't happened. (And being a Glos man part of me wishes it hadn't and that JL ended up with a decent run but that's another story!) Keep it up Siders!!
Complain about this comment
"There was nothing he [Pietersen] could do about being run out while backing up..." Really? How about not backing up in the first place? It has always been at best a dodgy practice anyway and would be best dealt with far more often by a judicious Mankad.
Complain about this comment
i think hoggard should be back for broad and owais shah should get a chance
Complain about this comment
As much as I'm enjoying this win, consistency is a major problem with England.
If they win the next test I'll be a lot more excited.
Complain about this comment
Good comments from Rob at 9:43. I agree that we need to get some proper perspective.
English fans like to think that England is a better side than NZ, but they haven't proved it yet. Their judgment is largely based on the fact that NZ had a lot of senior players retire. Apart from that NZ's recent test record (ie. performance as a team) is as good or better than England's, I think (tried to check but couldn't find a convenient list anywhere). Also, NZ's junior players have self evidently stepped up - particularly Taylor, How and Vettori as captain.
There's also room for improvement in the NZ squad. In particular, Oram hasn't really got his batting right yet. If he and McCullum (or Taylor) get set in a partnership, then there will be a big score. Also, Sinclair (double century on test debut) has not yet hit best form. Bell might also do better but has not yet shown signs that he will ever do much more than take the shine off the ball.
If England go to Napier expecting to win, it will be normal service resumed for English fans.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations England, well done on levelling the series. Is all set up nicely now for the 3rd test.
Well done Ambrose on his first innings hundred which set the game up for England, nice to see attacking play and him playing his natural game.
A bit of arrogance unfortunately in the posts (and Aggers comments) that England should prove they are the better of the two teams in Napier. This series is far from over and the 3rd test could be a real cracker. I'm hoping Southee gets picked for NZ, he's a very good young talent with so much promise.
Unfortunately Bell and Sinclair are woefully out of form but we have nobody to replace them with :(
Sidebottom has been sensational for England with the ball, is great to see someone with such a big heart who just wants to bowl and bowl.
Here's hoping to a great finish to the series.
To a lot of the posters on here - please show a bit more respect to your opponents that are currently 1-1 in the test series with you and beat you comprehensively in the ODI series.
Complain about this comment
a win is a win, but there has to be much more improvement in all area,s of our game fielding and batting in particular (with an eye on the ashes next year).our bowling was descent on a helpful pitch.it's now time to drop harmison and give the other bowlers a consistant run in the team the same policy the selecter's seem give to the batsmen but not to bowlers who they drop and select at any mini crisis, i would also apply this to the wicket keeper spot,ambrose showed enough in this game to suggest that he has the potential to be a genuin test wicket keeper.let this win be the first small step on the road to reclaiming the ashes.
Complain about this comment
I've just read all the comments and they are very interesting with many different views which provides healthy debate!
Well done to our team; a win is a win. Yes, many of them are not performing like they have in the past but very, very few players have not had a "poor" patch during their careers and the constant criticism is not going to help!
The batsment are picked on their proven ability; a critic once asked Clive Lloyd on the morning of a test why Gordon Greenwich was still in the team when he hadn't had a good score for many innings. CL's reply was "form" is variable but "class" is permanent! So our top 6 are the best we have at the moment.
All the bowlers performed well this time and perhaps it was the "tour planners" at fault for not ensuring that all our guys had plenty of pre-test bowling.
Yes, Strauss needs more runs but his fielding "gives" him a 30-40 runs in the bank before he bats. As someone has said on this site, KP is batting more reservedly and I believe this is because he's coming-in with few runs on the board and he's having to "grind-out" more before he "hits the excellerator"!
I'm confident our boys will win the final test, supporting rather than criticising them will help.
Complain about this comment
With the current 2nd test defeat of NZ I think it is about time we took a long hard look at the rules of test cricket. Some changes have to be considered.
My suggestions are:
1. All runs that are scored in access of the required total in winning the first test of a series should be credited to the winning team and carried over to the following test. To illustrate this NZ would have gone into the second test 189 runs in credit and as England were only able to claw back 126 of those runs in the second test the series would have be decided in favour of NZ. Not only that but NZ would take a 63 run credit into the third test.
2. All bowlers are to keep their hair in a tidy and orderly manner e.g. Chris Martin NZ. For ever centimetre of growth beyond this stipulation the bowler has to reduce his run up by a metre.
3. When the opposition spectators outnumber the local spectators the opposition bowlers will be required to bowl one “free hit†ball in every over until such time the local support exceeds that of the opposition support.
4. If any fieldsman allows the ball to go through his legs for a boundary that fieldsman will spend the next six overs in the sin bin.
5. If any fieldsman drops a catch that is deemed “a sitter†that fieldsman will spend the next ten overs in the sin bin.
6. If any fieldsman throws the ball towards the wicket keeper when a tight run is not been taken and the throw results in four overthrows that fieldsman will spend an entire session in the sin bin.
7. If a batman chooses to bat a metre outside his crease the bowler has to show respect for this decision and deliver the ball from stumps rather than the popping crease.
8. Blatant lying has to be eliminated from the game. Terms such as “well bowled†(heard 12,457 times when only 3 were well bowled). Gasps of astonishment at an unplayable delivery only because the batsman couldn’t reach it.
9. Returning the ball to the bowler via the wicketkeeper should only to be tolerates when Jonathon Agnew is not commentating.
10. The unscrupulous tactic of fieldsmen deliberately dropping catches (in order to allow top order batsmen to score just enough so as to ensure they are selected for the next test) has to be outlawed.
Well done England from a balance Kiwi supporter.
Complain about this comment
Have to think this was a vital win, as apparently Napier pitch is a batsmans paradise so a draw looks like a possibility.
If it is a batsmas paradise lets at least hope some of our top order can play themselves into good form for the summer.
Complain about this comment
Good to see Sidebottom continuing his top form, the polar opposite of Harmison, who hasn't been overly bothered since the Ashes in 2005. His time has gone. Anderson needs to be much more consistent to be an England regular. To drop Hoggard after one (maybe two) poor games was unbelievably harsh, but he will be back. Strauss must surely be running out of time, too. A good team performance, but no more than that.
Complain about this comment
I still think most people are missing the point. The first game was not lost by our bowlers but our batters! We still have the same batters that did so badly in the first test. The fact that our bowlers have simply papered over the cracks in batting that will manifest themselves again. The sooner we stop stiking the head in our hands and sort it out the better for everyone. I gaurentee that were Tresco declared fit tomorrow every one of those guys would be wondering if they would be dropped!
Complain about this comment
Player reviews on second test
1.Cook- Becoming more aggressive- a hundred is round the corner. Good Job!!
2.Vaughan- Avg captaincy and poor batting. Time to say good bye!!!
3.Strauss- His average since Ashes05- 24.0 on foreign soil. Drop him for good!!!
4.Peitersen- His "I'm too good for England Cricket" attitude is troubling. Time for a reality check!!! England cricket is doing him a service, not the other way round. Doesn’t seem to belong in the team- and seems to affect his performance.
5.Bell- He seems to self-doubt under pressure. Mixed bag.
6.Collingwood- Hard work and results beyond his skill. Mr.110%
7.Ambrose- Displayed the Australian in him; his wicket keeping errors not serious to debate his abilities; assure him a decent run.
8.Broad- Showed attitude bowling short pitch to McCullum. Great promise!!! Has to take his batting seriously as well.
9.Sidebottom- True Yorkshire man. A Fighter!!!
10.Panesar- Good but the most over-hyped spinner ever. Worst fielder in current Int'l cricket; learn the basics of fielding. Basics, he’ll never be an athlete. Has good defense and can be trained to be night watchman. Overall, good enough to be the first choice spinner in Eng XI.
11.Anderson Great act in the Ist innings. He is a clear victim of England selection. They’ve toyed with his career, killing his confidence. He clearly falls apart when under attack from the batsmen- assure him a long run or drop him quickly- but stop kicking him around.
Complain about this comment
101: Ambrose is first and foremost a keeper. His batting has come on a lot in this last year and you mustn't forget that without his 100 England would probably have lost this game.
Complain about this comment
Player reviews on second test
1.Cook- Becoming more aggressive- a hundred is round the corner. Good Job!!
2.Vaughan- Avg captaincy and poor batting. Time to say good bye!!!
3.Strauss- His average since Ashes05- 24.0 on foreign soil. Drop him for good!!!
4.Peitersen- His "I'm too good for England Cricket" attitude is troubling. Time for a reality check!!! England cricket is doing him a service, not the other way round. Doesn’t seem to belong in the team- and seems to affect his performance.
5.Bell- He seems to self-doubt under pressure. Mixed bag.
6.Collingwood- Hard work and results beyond his skill. Mr.110%
7.Ambrose- Displayed the Australian in him; his wicket keeping errors not serious to debate his abilities; assure him a decent run.
8.Broad- Showed attitude bowling short pitch to McCullum. Great promise!!! Has to take his batting seriously as well.
9.Sidebottom- True Yorkshire man. A Fighter!!!
10.Panesar- Good but the most over-hyped spinner ever. Worst fielder in current Int'l cricket; learn the basics of fielding. Basics, he’ll never be an athlete. Has good defense and can be trained to be night watchman. Overall, good enough to be the first choice spinner in Eng XI.
11.Anderson Great act in the Ist innings. He is a clear victim of England selection. They’ve toyed with his career, killing his confidence. He clearly falls apart when under attack from the batsmen- assure him a long run or drop him quickly- but stop kicking him around.
Complain about this comment
Its great to see Siders in the team and performing miracles in this slow but improving side. Moores and the selectors are doing the tried and tested method in which they are giving chances to old and new blood. Broad gets better every day that passes whereas Sidebottom has set the standard, he's grabbing the whole side by the scruff of the neck and taking them places, its just upto others to follow suit. Its about time that Moores lets Harmison go, he's constantly injured and unfit, seems to out of his depth nowadays and so does alot more, Flintoff and Hoggard could be the same too. Nevermind hanging onto deadwood, give the young'uns a chance now and watch them flourish. We have a great bowling attack, now lets crack on with the batting!!!
Complain about this comment
best of wishes to marcus trescothick. all england fans love hin.
as a durham ccc member, i hope to see him score a century against us this summer!
with all the goodwill for him, i'm sure he will be fine.
your record is secure marcus. as an excellent and high achieving opening batsman for somerset and england. how many people can say that? you are a legend mate.
Complain about this comment
What of the Kiwi performance? Very poor by my reckoning.
Complain about this comment
Since I've left Blighty for Australia last year, I've forgotten how thoroughly depressing and negative most English people are when talking about their own team. Its as if English self-confidence is so low that they feel they must put the boot in before everyone else does.
In this case, a win is a win. First England start to win Tests. Then they start to expect to win Tests. They they start to expect to win Tests well.
Its about confidence and expectation of success.
Yes, England were sloppy in the field on day 4. Yes, Oram was unlucky to be out as the light faded. But England were resilient enough to put decent scores on the board in both innings and they turned NZ over in their first innings with some excellent fielding, which is why England coasted on day 4.
All good stuff that says that its possible to play to your strengths and win a Test match comfortably. There are lots of positive things to say about England that should be encouraged and applauded.
Complain about this comment
7/10 is overly generous,too many batsmen ( not batters) seem to think the work is done with 40 odd to their name and get sloppy.
Broad will improve, he has heart, more pace than given credit for and he is visibly learning. Sidebottom is the bedrock of the bowling now, while Panesar seems to be at odds with either himself or what is demanded of him.
Oh and a further mark should be docked for Michael Vaughan talking about celebrating St Patrick's Day. Are you captain of England or Ireland?
Complain about this comment
All this whinging that it was somehow unfair to New Zealand for one player to excel and that we should somehow discount his performance and say that really we lost, seems singularly British (although enthusiastically subscribed to by some Antipodeans too).
In fact, just like in the First Test the margin of victory was larger than Ross Taylor's score, in the Second Test the margin was larger than Tim Ambrose's score. Take out the best performance on either side and, nominally, the result would not have changed. In both cases you can say that one performance tipped the momentum of the match in favour of one side, but "might have beens" don't win Tests. Just as England were well-beaten in the First Test, New Zealand were well beaten in the second and the eventual margin of defeat flattered them somewhat (honestly, at 270-8 chasing 429 did anyone seriously believe that New Zealand were in with a chance, despite the posts saying "am I one only one who thinks that New Zealand are going to win this???)
Any side that can miss 8 chances and still dismiss the opposition for just over 300 chasing 429 really does have a stranglehold!
Right now both sides can take positives out of the series. The Third Test will tell us if one of the two was actually better overall. Right now though, on performances, it is finely balanced.
Complain about this comment
Decent performance. The batting line up just needs one change I feel to keep them on their toes.
Has anyone else considered bring Prior in as a batman?
Complain about this comment
"Era is over" -Vaughan
Yes i agree. How about start that with dropping him and give captaincy to someone else. why england is afraid of getting some new faces to test cricket. Vaughan is getting sloppy these days. I think it is time for change. Last two year one victory come on england can do better than that.
Complain about this comment
7 out of 10 is too generous Aggers, respect you as I do.
Imagine that performance against South Africa or any of the other top test nations - we would have been crushed.
Only three guys turned up to play their best in this test match - Anderson, Sidebottom and Ambrose. NZ played worse - and that was the key.
I'd give them 3 out of 10. They've got it all to do to get 8 players performing every session, every day, every match before we even begin to look like serious contenders for a higher place in teh rankings.
Complain about this comment
People say 'drop Vaughan'
Well, I say, don't!
Flintoff, Trescothick,Collingwood and Strauss have all had a go. That only leaves Bell and Pietersen, and neither of them is fancied in the role. Vaughan's record, overall, is still very good.
The future captain looks like being Cook, esp as he seems to have learnt how to catch in the slip/gully. He is the only batsman assured of his place now. Ok, Pietersen is the Gower of his generation and will only be dropped if he gets bored, and/or flies a bi-plane, but the others are all a bit flakey.
Owais Shah is the unluckiest man around. Watches Bopara fail in Sri Lanka then watches Strauss swan back in with no form whatsoever. Just what does Shah have to do?
Here's a thought. If we win this series, Flintoff doesn't get back in unless he can bowl properly. As a 5th bowler, his batting is not good enough any more. Collingwood is a better bet.
If he's properly fit, though, the best team would be this:
Cook
Strauss
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood (4th seamer)
Vaughan
Flintoff (bowling only short quick spells with the new ball)
Read
Sidebottom (opening bowler)
Panesar
Anderson (3rd Seamer)
9,10,11 can all bowl long spells and each bowler offers something different. Collingwood supports, Freddy is a short spell strike bowler and will never again be allowed to bowl himself into the ground, the big-hearted daft Preston lad.
12th man: Broad
13th man: Tremlett
Ambrose, Hoggy and Swann to tour
Harmi, you're out til you have well and truly proven yourself consistent and effective in county cricket. That is what the other bowlers have done.
Plunkett and Mahmood. Where on earth did they fit in?
Trescothick and Shah, the door remains open. Vaughan's knee and Bell's form are never guaranteed.
I'm really optimistic!
Complain about this comment
Aggers
Undoubtedly the selectors' decisions were vindicated. However, I can't help but think they've stumbled on the right combination by accident. James Anderson was Player of the Series against India, then was dropped after one poor test in Sri Lanka, only to return here with a big contribution. Is he going to be dropped again next time he has a bad test match? To those who say he can be expensive and inconsistent, I agree, but I'm sure he'd benefit from a run in the team. Contrast the treatment with Anderson with Panesar, who apparently's now undroppable. Seriously, when was the last test match that Monty bowled well, or even batted and fielded to an acceptable standard? Yet they stick by Monty - correctly, in my opinion - but seem quite happy to fire off Hoggard and Anderson the second they don't perform.
The inconsistencies in selection are staggering; some players can underperform for 5 months and they're in, others for 5 days and they're out. It shows in the results: show me a tsst team that is chopped and changed all the time, and I'll show you a losing side. England is a case in point. Fletcher recognised this, and kept the selection consistent even when there was a clamour for change. His fault was not being able to build a new team when he needed to. A similar approach is needed now. Identify your players and stick by them through thick and thin.
Certainly England are at a disadvantage because they lack any world-class players in the mould of Warne, Kallis, Ponting or Muralitharan. If you go back to the start of the Fletcher era, though, it was very similar. Flintoff, Trescothick, Vaughan and Harmison were raw, inexperienced players who no-one knew whether they would succeed or not. They all became top-quality, if not world-class, players for a while at least. I remember Trescothick and Harmison being slaughtered early in their careers, but they soon proved the doubters wrong. Of course we're disadvantaged that Flintoff, Trescothick and Simon Jones are out of action, but that is no excuse for an inconsistent selection: pick your side, stick with it, then you've got a nice selection issue when they return.
We've lost far too many tests recently, and we've hardly been impressive in winning here. The first issue is to get the selection right. The second is to remind the players of their responsibilities. No hundreds once again from the top 6, yet plenty of starts: this is not good enough at test level; far from praising someone for getting 44, he has let his team down by getting out when well set. The closest we have to two superstars, Monty and KP, have both been dreadful for too long - they need to be told to stop living on reputation and fight for the cause, because they're both letting us down.
Complain about this comment
Lots of comments about Ambrose being an Aussie, has everyone forgotten Andrew Symonds is a Pom!!
Complain about this comment
[126] I thought Freddie came from Lytham St Annes, not Preston. I'm prepared to stand corrected, though.
Tend to agree with the weight of comments on the batting: what troubles me even more is that no one seems to be able to identify up-and-coming replacements (as opposed to re-treads). Some good runs in May from the likes of Hildreth and Denly - always assuming their counties have first-class fixtures - would be more than welcome.
Complain about this comment
can i just say that all england fans are 100% behind marcus trescothick.
he has been a great player for england, and if in the future it is 'only' somerset he plays for....then i'm sure the somerset supporters will be delighted. as will i when he next appears at durham.
as someone who has suffered from depression myself, i know of the issues he is going through.
but he has tremendous support and care at somerset, and that's all he needs. he will be fine.
Complain about this comment
One suggestion to challenge the batsmen...
Strauss to open. Vaughan at 3 (or 4).
Upside:
- Rest for the captain after marshalling the fielding. He could be stronger and more likely to press for centuries
- challenge for Strauss to get him remotivated and back in gear
- Two left handers may cause extra problems for a Right Arm Over attack
Downside:
- Two left handers at the start (rather than a left/right pair)
I think opening is Vaughan's preference, but he isn't "going on" as we hope.
Complain about this comment
mohammed
look at the records of cook/strauss v cook/vaughan. The latter are a much more successful pair. If they're going to persist with Strauss, maybe Bell at 3, Strauss at 6? Protect AS from new ball and put pressure on Bell to perform the way he should, given his talent.
Still think Ramps should be in........but that's a stale argument.......
Complain about this comment
Selectorial is not a valid word in the dictionary that I've consulted.
Also, while I sympathise with Trescothick and Harmison about their families at home surely they need to think about their careers which allowed them to set up home in the first place. Also, their careers have a short life span compared to most peoples' which accentuates the problem. Unfortunately, especially in Trescothick's case, their International careers are over.
Complain about this comment
5 out of 10 we were lucky that Anderson was fit to bowl why they had to warm down playing football on the third day is beyond me.For most of the day nine of the team had been sitting on their backsides watching the other two bat.
Complain about this comment
I appreciate all the comments made about Anderson and Broad adding some zip and enthusiasm to Englands attack, but lets not forget, Hoggard was asked to bowl on the flatest deck i have ever seen in the first test and at Wellington Anderson and Broad get a wicket that swung, had pace and movement in the air and off the seam all 5 days, a bowlers dream.
The Wellington wicket kept all seam bowlers interested for the whole 5 days, Hamilton was like bowling in the street outside, absolutely no help to anyone, the collapse in our 2nd innings was more poor batting than great bowling.
Hoggard is unlucky, he has carried England's attack for 4 years and given his heart and soul to the cause, to discard him after one mediocre game on a falt deck is ridiculous, he deserved a better understanding of his talents than what was shown.
Complain about this comment
Isn't it strange that the two 'best' and most reliable players in English Test cricket (Collingwood and Sidebottom) are a/'late' arrivals and b/ two of the oldest in the team (Collingwood was 28 when he was first picked).
The problem is that most of the Test side has effectively been played out. Everybody knows their weaknesses and exploits them. As they are 'always' in the team they have no opportunity to develop a response.
Consequently Pietersen now looks decidedly average and increasingly one dimensional when batting. Monty, once a promising bowler, is now very ordinary. The latest on the road for England oblivion is of course young Broad. But under recent management, if they chose to get off the treadmill, they would never get on again.
Both Monty and KP really need to spend a year, possibly two with their counties to learn some new tricks (Monty especially needs to learn to deliver at least three different balls) and replace them with the best the counties have to offer whether they are 20 or 120 years old. If they are as good as people or KP believe, then they will be back on top of the County lists by the end of the season and they can be used again
Complain about this comment
No need to go gaga over Sidebottom and Anderson yet. Sidebottom hasnt really performed in unhelpful conditions. Anderson is a bit hit and miss. Wait until both get hammered by NZ in the third test. Napier is a flat deck.
Complain about this comment