Tim Southee – Bulletproof Truth

Why are bowlers not often Test captains?

“The ‘brain style’ of being able to hold many possibilities in the head, and pick an immediate response, requires strategic and mental complexity. This ‘brain style’, which batsmen need, is similar to what captains require.” – Paddy Upton

Telford Vice / Cape Town

IF you have ambitions to captain a men’s Test team, don’t do a Tim Southee. As in bat in the lower order. The surest route is to take guard at No. 5, where almost half of all captains have batted. Other solid captaincy career moves are, in descending order of success, opening and batting at Nos. 4, 6, 7 and 3.

But of the 354 men who have led Test teams only 15 — 4.24% — have done so batting at No. 11, as Southee did for New Zealand against South Africa in Mount Maunganui last month. As many as 174 of the 354 — 49.15% — have batted at No. 5 as captain. You are almost a dozen times more likely to be handed the leadership as a No. 5 compared to when you bat last.

It’s not a perfect science because players don’t bat in the same place in the order every time. The balance of the team, strengths and weaknesses in different areas of an XI, match situations, the make-up of the opposition and the prevailing conditions get in the way of a neat explanation for who bats where, when, and regardless of whether they are the captain.

Southee, for instance, has had 14 innings as New Zealand’s captain — all from No. 8 downward but just one at No. 11. Famously, Graeme Smith ignored a broken hand to take guard at No. 11 at the SCG in January 2009. Michael Clarke had 110 innings at No. 5, but just 42 in the position as captain. Or only two more than his appearances at No. 4 when he was in charge of Australia’s Test team.

Of those 15 No. 11 captains, a dozen batted there from one to three times despite most of them playing exponentially more Tests. Only two, Courtney Walsh and Jack Blackham — Australia’s original Test wicketkeeper — had 10 or more innings as the last man in.

But the overall trend survives scrutiny: Nos. 1 to 4 have provided 39.64% of captains, Nos. 5 to 7 42.24% and Nos. 8 to 11 18.12%. Why are the lower reaches of the order starved of leadership opportunities? Do most bowlers and wicketkeepers have too much to think about and do to be lumped with captaincy? Conversely, do batters’ relatively lighter workloads make them better candidates?

Does a solid, steady batter inspire more confidence about their ability to think and act in tough situations than some tearaway quick? Is the preponderance of batting captains a nod to the chronic conservatism baked into a game that used to centre on grand amateurs paying professionals to bowl to them?

Paddy Upton, one of modern cricket’s most innovative thinkers, told Cricbuzz other factors might be at play: “Probably one of the primary ones is because of the mental requirement or skill for batsmen versus bowlers. A batsman is a responder in that they need to have a number of options in their mind in terms of attack and defence, and need to make a split-second decision once the ball leaves the bowler’s hand. Batsmen are generally responding to something the bowler initiates, for instance where the ball will land.

“They are asked to have a fast response to several options, with significant consequences for a correct versus incorrect response. Namely, losing their wicket. There is a lot more strategic thinking and a wider range of responses and decision-making involved, compared to bowlers.

“By contrast a bowler is an initiator in that they decide where the ball is going to go, and they have limited requirements to respond to external stimuli. Pretty much the only one would be a batsman moving in the split-second before the ball is released. It’s only really in that case that the bowler needs to have alternative strategies, and be able to respond immediately.

“The ‘brain style’ of being able to hold many possibilities in the head simultaneously, and then pick an immediate and consequential response, requires strategic and mental complexity. This ‘brain style’, which batsmen need, is similar to what captains require.”

There are, of course, exceptions; captains like Kapil Dev, Imran Khan, Wasim Akram, Shaun Pollock, Jason Holder, Heath Streak and Jason Holder. Maybe they don’t stick out as anomalies because they arrived on the scene as fast bowlers and left as allrounders.

But there’s also Bob Willis, Waqar Younis and Walsh, captains, fast bowlers and poor batters all. Thus few would be able to stifle a chuckle at this line from Walsh: “I like to lead from the front. If I tell a youngster to do something and I’m not doing it, then that’s not right.”

That’s rich coming from someone who survived for an hour or more just five times in his 185 Test innings, who never faced more than 72 balls in any of them, was dismissed in the single figures 103 times — 43 of them ducks — and suffered 11 first-ballers. Whatever Walsh told the youngsters when he captained West Indies, it wasn’t how to bat. But that doesn’t matter if you take 519 wickets at 24.44.

Or 698 at 26.51, as James Anderson has done. Still, England’s evergreen fast bowler was disappointed not to have been in the captaincy conversation when Joe Root replaced Alistair Cook in April 2017. “It would have been nice to have been considered for it but whether I would have taken it or not, I am not sure,” Anderson said at the time. “I would have seriously thought about it. But if I was on the outside looking in I would have thought, ‘Is this actually where the team needs to go? With a 34-year-old as captain?’”

What about younger bowlers? Why don’t they crack the nod to captain more often? “Bowlers do tend to get injured, I suppose,” Anderson said. “That might be why Stuart Broad didn’t get asked this time. There are more injury risks but I am all for bowlers being captain.

“Most of the fast bowling captains I have played with or against have been pretty successful. Glen Chapple here at Lancashire won the championship [in 2011, for the first time in 77 years] – so I don’t know why more fast bowlers aren’t given the opportunity.”

Maybe, in Anderson’s case, because his Test batting average is 9.02. But that’s better than Walsh’s 7.54. Thing is, the Windies won or drew 15 of his 22 Tests as their captain, which they played from April 1994 to December 1997 — at the start of their long and ongoing decline.

During his tenure as leader Walsh batted at No. 9 three times and 10 times at No. 10. At No. 11? Fourteen times. He spent almost two-thirds of his batting career, as captain and not, coming in last.

Would it matter to him that he is among 4.24% of Test captains? Perhaps, but probably in a good way.

Cricbuzz

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Kane king as South Africa limp back to SA20-land

“He doesn’t leave his bubble. He just stays there, he just focuses on the next ball. He really respects the game.” – Neil Brand on Kane Williamson

Telford Vice / Cape Town

AT least it was Kane Williamson who administered the last rites. If you have to lose a Test and be lumped with an unwanted record that you have avoided for almost 92 years, rather the nicest man in cricket delivers the killer blows than some smug aggressor.

Williamson’s undefeated 133 at Seddon Park on Friday, his third century in four innings and his seventh in a dozen trips to the crease, clinched what New Zealand had never achieved from their first meeting with these opponents in February and March 1932 — victory in a men’s Test series against South Africa.

Having been outplayed and thumped, by 281 runs, in the first Test in Mount Maunganui, the South Africans — significantly weakened by SA20 contractual commitments — proved more competitive in Hamilton. With Dane Piedt taking 5/89 in the first innings, which earned South Africa a lead of 31, and David Bedingham scoring 110 in the second dig, hopes rose of a fairytale win. But a crash of 6/33 after tea on Thursday, starring Will O’Rourke, whose match figures of 9/93 are the best by a New Zealand debutant, trimmed the target to 267. Williamson and Will Young took New Zealand home by seven wickets in the last hour of Friday’s play with an unbroken stand of 152.

“We were in a really good position [on Thursday] afternoon to put the Black Caps under real pressure,” Shukri Conrad said. “At tea time we were 217 ahead for four, and we could have batted out the day and part of today. But we felt we posted something that could be competitive. But when the No. 1-ranked batter in the world plays the way he does, I don’t think we can be too disappointed about the outcome of the match.”

Williamson batted for more than six hours and faced 260 balls for his 32nd Test century, the first of them scored on debut in Ahmedabad in November 2010. His latest feat was a patient march to a victory that became more inexorable with each passing, flawless minute that Williamson occupied the crease. In the series he scored more than 100 runs than anyone else and faced five deliveries short of double the number dealt with by Bedingham, South Africa’s leading batter in the rubber.

“You just watch and marvel at the way he goes about his business,” Conrad said. “If there are any learnings for our young bucks and our more experienced guys to take away it’s how he wanted to be there right at the end and almost pull out the stumps and say thank you very much. He’s a glutton for batting. It was an absolute masterclass. I sit here in the hope that our players watched and saw how to best go about it.”

Neil Brand saw Williamson’s innings up close: “He doesn’t leave his bubble. He just stays there, he just focuses on the next ball. He really respects the game, from what I have seen. He never throws his wicket away and he is always hungry to bat. A lot of us can learn from that.”

What could Tim Southee do but heap praise on the man from whom he inherited the captaincy in December 2022: “He is a special talent. It wasn’t an easy pitch to bat on and he just found a way. We knew if someone could stick with him and he showed us his brilliance, it was going to make things easier. He was tested with spin and pace and a challenging pitch, but we’ve seen over the years he has come out on top. After the 12 months he has had with injuries and setbacks and rehabs and coming back, it’s just phenomenal to see him be able to do what he does.

“He gets into his batting bubble and I guess it’s his happy place. We joke that he doesn’t like spending time with us, that he’d rather spend it out in the middle. But it’s just pure hunger for batting — his pure love for batting, not only in the middle but the time he spends in the nets.

“He is always looking to improve his game. It’s no fluke that he is as good as he is because he trains as hard as anyone I have ever seen. He hits more balls than anyone I have ever seen, and he just gets into that zone and is a guy you want in your team. For over 10 years he has been an incredible member of the side and one of our greats. And there’s still more to come.”

The South Africans were left to pick up the pieces of what might have been had they shown more application when they batted on Thursday, but they knew the superior team won. “The only time you are allowed to lose is when the opposition are better than you, and they certainly were better than us,” Conrad said. As a consolation, Brand had the certainty that “you know it’s possible to play at this level”.

He should count himself lucky he isn’t part of South Africa’s women’s team, who are staring at a defeat of biblical proportions after two days of a one-off Test at the Waca. They were shot out for 76 in 6.2 overs more than a session with Darcie Brown taking 5/21, then toiled for 125.2 overs before Australia declared at 575/9. Annabel Sutherland’s 210 was the fourth double century scored in the 148 women’s Tests played. By stumps on Friday, South Africa had lost their top order and were still 432 behind. The fact that Australia are playing their ninth Test in 10 years and South Africa only their second goes some way to illustrating the disparity between the teams, but that won’t make the visitors feel better about their impending thrashing.

South Africa’s teams will make long journeys home to a cricketminded public who will look at them with a mixture of pity, dissatisfaction and concern. Even allowing for the extenuating circumstances, how could they have performed so poorly? What will these results do to their collective psyche? Why should they take an interest in all that when they could suspend their disbelief and pour their passion into something as frivolous and inconsequential as T20 tournaments?

Like the SA20. It’s a fair bet South Africans have forgotten what happened in the final at Newlands on Saturday, much less in the rest of this year’s tournament. And that’s the point: it’s cricket for cricket’s — and money’s — sake. There is no overarching seriousness to get in the way of the fun, and there are no memories — good or bad — to linger into the succeeding days and weeks. Everyone goes home happy. Who won? Who cares? Even so, T20 shines with an incandescent brightness when the international game ebbs as low as it does in South Africa. And especially when a tournament shows provable progress, as the SA20 has done.

Of the 34 matches just 12 were decided by 10 or fewer runs or with no more than six balls to spare. But that was three more games than last year, and close finishes are not a genuine measure of the quality of the cricket played — two weak teams could contest the tightest match as readily as two strong sides.

Four centuries were scored in this year’s SA20 compared to three in 2023. No players made aggregates of 400 or more last year. This year there were four. This season’s leading runscorer was Ryan Rickelton with 530 in 10 innings. Last summer no-one could catch Jos Buttler’s 391 in 11.

Heinrich Klaasen’s 37 sixes in 2024 was almost double Will Jacks’ league-leading 19 in the first edition. Three players reached 50 off 19 balls in 2023. Klaasen got there in 16 this year. Jacks’ 41-ball century in 2024 beat Klaasen’s effort off 43 deliveries a year ago.

Last year’s highest score was Faf du Plessis’ 113. This year Kyle Verreynne made 116 not out. The biggest stand in 2023 was 157 shared by Reeza Hendricks and Du Plessis. Rassie van der Dussen and Rickelton piled up a partnership of 200 in 2024.

There were a dozen hauls of four wickets or more this year. Last year? Eight. Three of 2024’s best bowling figures were five-fours. We saw one in 2023.

Not all of the metrics point upward. Twenty has been the magic number for most wickets by a bowler in both editions. Anrich Nortjé’s 142 dot balls last year bettered Daniel Worrall’s 124 this year.

But there is no doubt the tournament is flexing its muscles as it grows. If it continues on that trajectory how long might it be before the SA20, with all its fizz regardless of who does what and none of the funk that falls when South Africa lose, replaces the international game as this country’s cricket of choice?

Australia won the Waca Test by an innings and 284 runs on Saturday.

Cricbuzz

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Kiwis eye history in Hamilton

“We want to come away from here with something.” – Neil Brand

Telford Vice / Cape Town

THE last time South Africa played a men’s Test in Hamilton, in March 2017, they were saved by rain that prevented any play on the fifth day. This time — the second Test starts on Tuesday — the New Zealanders look likely to get the job done inside four days.

In 2017 the visitors would have resumed on 80/5 needing another 95 runs to make New Zealand bat again. The chances were thus high of New Zealand wiping out the series lead South Africa had taken at the Basin Reserve, which followed a draw in Dunedin. With that the South Africans were able to celebrate their 12th victory in 18 away Test series, only one of them lost — the November 2015 rubber in India, which was tainted by poor pitches.

Almost seven years on much has changed. South Africa have won just one and lost six of their eight series on the road. The New Zealanders have quietly added to their excellence, which they confirmed by beating India in the inaugural World Test Championship final in Southampton in June 2021.

It’s tempting to look at cricket in New Zealand and wonder why the game in South Africa isn’t on as sound a footing. Isn’t the cricket industry in the countries about the same size? Doesn’t the game there and here share, broadly, the same culture? Yes, in both cases. But that’s a limited, simplistic analysis.

More relevant is the fact that as a developed country — as opposed to a developing country like South Africa — New Zealand doesn’t struggle for skills and expertise in all areas. It also doesn’t have to overcome the levels of corruption that can seem to be hardwired into South African society. Nor is it burdened with layers of distrust along racial, cultural and religious lines to the same degree as in South Africa.

New Zealand’s wider economy is significantly more stable and orientated towards growth than South Africa’s, and that the currency is far stronger. That’s why NZC doesn’t need a glitzy T20 extravaganza to ward off financial ruin. And why CSA do, and must make the SA20 their top priority. Hence the sorry state of the visitors’ Test squad, what with their best players locked into T20 mode until Saturday.

It isn’t fair on anyone involved, not least league commissioner Graeme Smith and the rest of the team who run the SA20, which is after all a rescue mission. But since when has capitalism — and cricket at this level is all about capitalism — been fair? The customers are being given what a lot of them want, and to blazes with the few who don’t want it. Until what they want pays the bills like T20 does, they are going to have to like it or lump it.

Still, it’s difficult not to feel sorry for Neil Brand and his team as they bid to avoid becoming the first South Africa team to lose a Test series to New Zealand. The original of the 17 rubbers was played in February and March 1932, when South Africa won the first match by an innings and both of the other two by eight wickets. Of the 48 Tests the teams have contested, South Africa have lost only six, the most recent of them by 281 runs in Mount Maunganui last week.

Another in Hamilton and New Zealand will banish the ghosts of March 2017, along with almost 92 years of failure. Aside from Test newbies Afghanistan and Ireland, who New Zealand have yet to play against, South Africa are the only side they haven’t beaten in a series. History is in the air.

When: February 13 to 17, 2024; 11am Local Time (Midnight SAST, 3.30am IST)

Where: Seddon Park, Hamilton

What to expect: Decent weather for the duration of the match. Totals of 500 have been reached at this ground five times in its 27 Tests — New Zealand put up 715/6 against Bangladesh in February 2019. Teams have been bowled out for fewer than 100 four times, but not since December 2002. Kane Williamson’s five centuries here — 53 have been scored in all — is as many as he has made at the Basin Reserve, where he has had seven fewer innings. Only three of the 28 five-wicket hauls at Seddon Park have been taken by spinners.

Team news:

New Zealand:

Towering fast bowler Will O’Rourke, who has played three ODIs, looks set for a debut. Mitchell Santner could make way for him. Will Young has been named to replace Daryll Mitchell, who has a foot injury.

Possible XI: Tom Latham, Devon Conway, Kane Williamson, Rachin Ravindra, Will Young, Tom Blundell, Glenn Phillips, Kyle Jamieson, Matt Henry, Will O’Rourke, Tim Southee (capt)

South Africa:

Shukri Conrad suggested strongly after the first Test that the XI would change. Exactly how isn’t easy to see. Perhaps Dane Piedt for Ruan de Swardt?

Possible XI: Edward Moore, Neil Brand (capt), Raynard van Tonder, Zubayr Hamza, David Bedingham, Keegan Petersen, Clyde Fortuin, Dane Piedt, Duanne Olivier, Tshepo Moreki, Dane Paterson

What they said:

“In New Zealand it can look like it’s going to do a lot, and then we’ve seen the side batting first get into a pretty good position. It’s about playing what’s in front of you.” — Tim Southee offers advice about what to do at the toss.

“We want to come away from here with something. We are desperate to put in a good performance this week and hopefully we can get ourselves into the game.” — Neil Brand still has the audacity of hope.

Cricbuzz

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Hairy times at Hagley Oval

“They’re fierce competitors, just like South Africans. We’re there to win. So are they. They’re a world class cricket team and they’re going to come out with all guns blazing. So are we.” – Dean Elgar

Telford Vice | Cape Town

DEAN Elgar may want to swing past the curator’s shed on his way to the middle for the toss before the first of two Tests at Hagley Oval starts next Thursday. Not to find out what the pitch might do, but to borrow a lawnmower.

When Elgar appeared at an online press conference hours before he and his squad left for New Zealand last Wednesday, he was recognisable as South Africa’s captain. Eight days on at another presser, this one beamed from his hotel room in Christchurch, he looked like someone else. The bottom half of his face had become a bonsai baobab.

Even in New Zealand, where extravagant public displays of male facial hair are as common as chewing gum is not on the streets of Singapore, Elgar and his beard would stick out. If only he was allowed to stick out.

Except for training and scheduled gym visits, the South Africans are confined to their rooms as per strict Covid-19 quarantine regulations. That could explain Elgar’s hurrying hirsuteness: “It’s a combination of boredom and maybe frustration. And maybe I’m a bit lazy to shave it off. But I’ll see how long I go with it.”

The squad’s 10 days of quarantine end on Monday, negative tests permitting. After they make good their escape, and unlike cricket teams in other countries, including South Africa, they won’t be restricted to a bio-bubble. Maybe then Elgar and his wondrous whiskers will take to Colombo Street, Christchurch’s main drag.

His burgeoning beard has certainly been noticed within the touring party, and at least one member has suggested it should go before the first Test starts. By then, and judging by its galloping growth, it could be somewhere past Elgar’s elbows and as wide as his shoulders. Hence the possible need to borrow a lawnmower from the Hagley Oval curator.

Certainly, Elgar will hope there is less grass on New Zealand’s fastest, bounciest pitch than there is currently hair on his chin. That’s as an opening batter. As the leader of a team primed with quality quicks, he won’t want too much of it shaved off. Grass, that is. But he is also mindful of a Kiwi attack that harbours three of the top 10 ranked bowlers in the world: Kyle Jamieson, Tim Southee and Neil Wagner. South Africa’s only top-tenner is Kagiso Rabada. As the No. 2 fast bowler in the game — Pat Cummins is No. 1 — he is higher on the list than any of the New Zealanders. Tom Latham is the only player on either side in the top 10 batting rankings, which would seem to tilt the balance in the bowlers’ favour.

Despite his team having blunted India’s much vaunted pace pack to win a Test series in South Africa in December and January, Elgar knew his batters were in for a stern challenge: “I say this with a lot of respect, but the New Zealand attack are a little down on pace compared to the Indian attack. In saying that, they execute their skills perfectly in their conditions.”

The home side should have a significantly better idea of those conditions than the visitors. South Africa had two 2015 World Cup warm-up matches at Hagley Oval, but their only official game there was an ODI in February 2017. None of the XI in that match are in the current squad.

South Africa last played a Test in New Zealand in Hamilton in March 2017. Elgar, Temba Bavuma and Rabada are the survivors from that XI. The South Africans have played 37 Tests — 13 away in England, Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan and West Indies — since their last encounter with New Zealand in the format. New Zealand have played 31, 13 of which have been in Australia, England, India, Sri Lanka and the United Arab Emirates.

The sides last met at Edgbaston during the 2019 World Cup. Since then South Africa have played 72 games in all formats in eight different countries and regions. New Zealand have played 75 in seven.

“It’s disappointing we don’t get to play against New Zealand a lot, because I’ve loved the series I’ve been part of,” Elgar, who has played in three rubbers against the Kiwis, said. “They’re fierce competitors, just like South Africans. We’re there to win. So are they. They’re a world class cricket team and they’re going to come out with all guns blazing. So are we.”

New Zealand have never prevailed in a Test series between the teams. Three have been drawn and South Africa have won the other 12. But the home side are the inaugural world champions and will start as favourites even though they are without captain and batting kingpin Kane Williamson, who is out with an elbow injury. South Africa’s batting has also taken a hit, with No. 3 Keegan Petersen removed because of Covid.

Almost half of South Africa’s squad of 17 have put their names in the hat for the IPL mega auction in Bangalore this weekend. So, whatever happens in all the bidding and buying, Rabada, Aiden Markram, Marco Jansen, Lungi Ngidi, Keshav Maharaj, Ryan Rickelton, Rassie van der Dussen and Zubayr Hamza will all have their attention returned to the task at hand by next Thursday.

Elgar, who has played only 81 T20s in a career focused on the red-ball game, was happy not to be among the anxious eight: “I’m definitely not in that auction because I can’t stand another year of disappointment and not getting the satisfaction of retiring in a few years’ time because of a million-dollar contract. I’m a lot more optimistic than that.”

But he understood the importance of the moment for those looking to land a big deal: “Some guys might have the auction go their way, and I’ll be the first guy to congratulate them because I’ll know the beers are on them. It’s an opportunity for someone to have their life changed because they’ve played extremely good cricket throughout their international careers. If a player does pick up a big deal we’re going to still pull him into line because he’s got to play for us. Playing Test cricket for your country is the ultimate.”

Perhaps. But not for much longer. And nevermind the beers: could one of those freshly minted millionaires buy Elgar a barbershop shave?

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…

Success! You're on the list.

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

Stokes wins closest ever World Cup final for England

Good luck to the keepers of cricket’s annals, who will struggle to smuggle this scoreline neatly into their records.

TMG Digital + Print

TELFORD VICE at Lord’s

BEN Stokes played a charmed innings to mastermind England’s triumph in the most closely fought final in men’s World Cup history.

England, who played in their fourth final, claimed the trophy for the first time by beating New Zealand, who had reached in the decider for the second consecutive time.

But it needed a super over to separate the sides after the match was tied — New Zealand totalled 241/8 and England were dismissed for 241.

Even that wasn’t enough to decide the issue: both teams scored 15 runs in the super over, so the equation was further distilled to which side had hit the most boundaries.

All told, super over and everything, New Zealand hit 14 fours and three sixes.

England? Twenty-four fours and two sixes.

Arise, World Cup champions. And good luck to the keepers of the annals, who will struggle to smuggle that scoreline neatly into their records.

New Zealand have batted first only three other times in their 11 games in the tournament, and twice in those matches they have made smaller totals than Sunday’s 241/8. They won one of those games and lost the other.

Their most dependable batters, Kane Williamson and Ross Taylor, who between them had scored both of the centuries and five of the 11 half-centuries the Kiwis have made during the World Cup going into the final, were dismissed for 30 and 15.

It was left to opener Henry Nicholls, playing only his third match of a tournament in which his 28 against India in the semi-final at Old Trafford, to provide stability with his 77-ball 55.

Williamson helped Nicholls add 74 for the second wicket, the only half-century stand of the innings, and No. 5 Tom Latham’s 47 was New Zealand’s next best effort.

Chris Woakes and Jofra Archer used the new ball effectively for England, and Woakes took 3/37.

Liam Plunkett claimed 3/42, taking all of his wickets with cross-seam deliveries.

Of England’s six bowlers, only Stokes, who went wicketless for 20 off three overs, conceded five or more runs a ball.

New Zealand defended a lower total as recently as Wednesday, when they made 239/8 in their semi-final against India at Old Trafford and won by 18 runs.

But they reduced the Indians to 5/3 in the first 19 balls of the innings — the like of which they couldn’t repeat on Sunday.

Instead Jonny Bairstow stood firm through stands of 28 with Jason Roy and 31 with Joe Root.

Roy was fortunate to survive, by the slimmest of “umpire’s call” margins, which was handed down after South Africa’s Marius Erasmus decided the Englishman was not out, when the New Zealanders reviewed Trent Boult’s shout for lbw off the first ball of the innings.

Then Colin de Grandhomme dropped a return catch Bairstow offered in the 11th, when he was 18 and England were 39/1.

Root gave De Grandhomme some solace six overs later when he flashed at a wide delivery and was caught behind.

Bairstow went for 36 three overs after that, dragging Lockie Ferguson onto his stumps.

And when Ferguson roared in from the cover boundary to catch, centimetres from the turf, Jimmy Neesham’s first ball of the match — which had been hammered there by Eoin Morgan — England were 86/4 and reduced to their last pair of proper batters.

But they were Stokes and Jos Buttler, and they clipped 110 runs off 133 balls in a largely controlled partnership that endured into the 45th over and took England to within 46 runs of victory.

It ended when Buttler hammered Ferguson to deep cover, where substitute Tim Southee held a fine sliding catch. Buttler’s 60 came off 60 balls and included six fours.

That started a slide of six wickets for 45 runs, but Stokes survived for an undefeated 84 off 98 balls with five fours and two sixes.

England were 220/7 with Stokes 63 not out and in the 49th over when he smashed Neesham to the midwicket boundary — where Boult fell over the boundary and turned a catch into a six.

England needed 15 off the 50th over, and Stokes lofted Boult for six over midwicket.

That narrowed the equation to nine off three — clearly in the Kiwis’ favour.

Stokes smacked Boult to midwicket along the ground, and Martin Guptill’s throw hit Stokes as he dived to make his ground.

From there, it scooted over the boundary to earn six runs off one delivery.

That meant England needed three runs off two balls, but only two were added as Adil Rashid and Mark Wood were run out in the process.

That tied the scores, prompting the super over.

Stokes and Buttler returned to club 15 runs off Boult, each of them hitting a four.

Neesham and Guptill came out to face Archer, and Neesham lifted a massive six over midwicket off the second ball.

Two were required off the last ball, but Guptill was run out by Roy’s throw to wicketkeeper Buttler scrambling back for the second.

That tied the scores again, but for only as long as it took to tally up the boundaries.