Trent Boult – Bulletproof Truth

Is it a hood ornament? Is it a flamingo? It’s a non-striker …

“Maybe some people will use it, maybe they won’t.” – Glenn Phillips on his unorthodox non-striker’s stance.

Telford Vice / Sydney

THE non-striker’s end could do with some positive publicity, and it got it towards the conclusion of New Zealand’s innings in their men’s T20 World Cup match against Sri Lanka at the SCG on Saturday. While the focus was on the other end of the pitch, Glenn Phillips had the bright idea to set himself up as a sprinter rather than a batter.

He faced forward with his left foot behind the crease. His right foot was a metre or so up the pitch. Both his knees were cocked and ready to go. His upper body leaned into the stance, his chest parallel to the pitch. His bat was on the ground lengthwise and nowhere near the crease. He held it in his right hand, in a hammer grip, where the handle met the splice. His left hand and arm were extended at an upward angle in the air behind him. He looked not unlike a hood ornament on a vintage car.

But Phillips had a plan. He was under starter’s orders, awaiting not the crack of a pistol but the blur of the bowler rushing past. “If I had had my bat behind the crease, I thought it would be slower to turn and accelerate,” he told a press conference after the match, in which he scored a 64-ball 104 to engineer New Zealand’s 65-run win. “So I had my foot inside the crease, and I was going from there. The [conventional] extension of the bat inside the crease gives you another foot or two, but I’ve got little arms so my speed is probably going to get me further than my reach.”

Phillips has speed to burn, as he showed in running the 40 runs he scored that didn’t come in fours and sixes. And in a stand of 84 off 64 with Daryl Mitchell that started after New Zealand had been reduced to 15/3 in the fourth over. Phillips said the pair had used aggressive running between the wickets as a way to counter the dominance Sri Lanka enjoyed when the partnership started.

On the possibility of his unorthodox approach at the non-striker’s end gaining traction, Phillips said: “Maybe some people will use it, maybe they won’t.” Cricket’s army of analysts are probably already measuring whether what might be called the Phillips flamingo makes for faster running than the regular method of keeping the toe of the bat behind the crease while holding it near the end of the handle.

Mitchell, it seems, won’t follow Phillips’ lead. “I’m not as fast as Glenn,” he said. “I couldn’t get out of the blocks as fast as he does, so I probably wouldn’t do it that way. GP, he’s his own man. We love all the weird and wonderful things that he does. We’re all happy for him to keep doing them as long as he does things like [score centuries].”

Trent Boult concurred, and offered critique: “If anyone was going to do it it was him. It wouldn’t have been pre-planned; that just happened. He actually had the bat in the wrong hand, according to our trainer.”

Right on both counts, as Phillips explained: “It was a spur of the moment thing, but I actually had my three-point stance wrong — it’s supposed to be the other arm and the other leg. The position was to be able to see the bowler and take off as quickly as possible.”

And to avoid being run out in the fashion that has grabbed headlines in recent weeks. When Deepti Sharma had had enough of Charlie Dean backing up too far at the non-striker’s end in an ODI at Lord’s last month, she rightfully interrupted her delivery stride to remove the bails and dismiss Dean. When Mitchell Starc spotted Jos Buttler doing the same as Dean while Starc was bowling during a T20I in Canberra earlier this month, he issued Buttler with a warning that was picked up by the stump microphones: “I’m not Deepti but I can do it. Doesn’t mean you can leave your crease early.”

England’s players aren’t alone in stealing ground. The regrettable practice is widespread. At best it is reckless of the non-striker not to know where they are in relation to the crease. At worst it is cheating. Either way, the advantage gained is unfair and should be punished — and the bowler is best placed to do so.

The argument that the non-striker should first be warned is ridiculous. Bowlers don’t tell batters what kind of delivery they’re about to receive, just as batters don’t inform bowlers about what stroke they’re about to play. Why should bowlers alert non-strikers to the legitimate mode of dismissal they’re entitled to effect?

“You trying not to be out of the crease,” Phillips said. “There’s been a lot going around about Mankads and leaving the crease. At the end of the day it’s my responsibility to make sure that I’m in the crease and leave at the right time. If the bowler is doing his job then he has the right to take the bails off.”

Phillips isn’t the only player with sharp ideas in this area of the game. Earlier this month, in an interview with the Melbourne Age, Starc floated the notion of a technological solution to the scourge: “While it is hard to do at all levels, why not take it out of the hands of interpretation and make it black and white? There are cameras for front foot no-balls, a camera there all the time [at higher levels of cricket] and someone watching the line.

“Every time the batter leaves the crease before the [bowler’s] front foot lands, dock them a run. Then there’s no stigma. It takes away the decision to have to run someone out or think about it.”

Simple and effective. Just like imagining yourself as a hood ornament or a flamingo to gain an advantage fairly.

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.

East London’s own stars in the grand manner at the SCG

“I’m always trying to come up with different ways to make a bowler think.” — Glenn Phillips

Telford Vice / Sydney Cricket Ground

GLENN Phillips’ hometown is a small, squat city that harbours neither airs nor graces. Plonked onto the coast and just about forgotten, its economy is depressed, its streets littered, its future gloomy, its creativity receding like a middle-aged hairline.

We don’t mean Auckland, where Phillips grew up. We mean East London, between Gqeberha and Durban on South Africa’s east coast, where he was born and which his family left for New Zealand when he was five.

That might account for the way Phillips bats, especially the grand manner he brought to the SCG on Saturday. His run-a-ball 104 for New Zealand in their T20 World Cup match against Sri Lanka was a cascade of power and innovation, whether he was muscling the bowling through the on side, slap-hitting it softball style past point, running between the wickets as if he had stolen something, or coiling himself into a modified sprinter’s starting stance at the non-striker’s end. And all that on a pitch that offered bowlers movement, grip and variable bounce. It seems you can take East London out of the kid along with taking the kid out of East London.

When Finn Allen and Devon Conway were undone and bowled by the skill and intelligence of Maheesh Theekshana and Dhananjaya de Silva, and a flatfooted Kane Williamson was caught behind off Kasun Rajitha, New Zealand had scored 15 runs in four overs. That they reached 167/7 was due in large part to the stand of 84 off 64 Phillips shared with Daryl Mitchell, to the Kiwis hammering 65 in the last five overs of the innings, and to the Lankans dropping Phillips when he was 12 and 48, when the stand was worth 14 and 65.

Mitchell’s 22 was not quite a quarter of the runs realised in the key partnership. Even so, his effort was his team’s next best score. Phillips told a press conference Mitchell’s contribution shouldn’t be measured in those limited terms: “We didn’t even talk targets. With Daryl it’s very much about intent and being positive. It wasn’t necessarily about hitting fours and sixes because the pitch may not have required that. It was the intent; the running between the wickets. We wanted to show that we had presence, especially with Sri Lanka on top at that stage.

“The way Daryl’s mind works, he doesn’t think anything’s out of reach. He believes he’s born for situations that require tough decisions and tough processes. To have him out there with me in the middle is pretty hard to describe. The momentum and the presence he brings can switch things so quickly.”

Mitchell reciprocated: “It was challenging at the start but it was nice to be able to build a partnership with GP. For him to do what he did was pretty special. You could see by the way both teams batted that the pitch was variable in bounce. The cool thing about playing international cricket is that you’ve got to keep adapting to different situations. He’s got a lot of talent but to do it on a surface like that, I haven’t seen too many better T20 knocks.”

What did Phillips value more, power or innovation? “I’m going to have to say power hitting, but I’m always trying to come up with different ways to make a bowler think. Whether it’s stepping across [the crease] or giving myself a ridiculous amount of room. There’s also a lot of mind games involved, and understanding that once the ball is released power is what I do possess. Some guys would say innovation and are a lot better at it than I am. I try to mix the two together but power is definitely the side that I have to turn to the most.”

Phillips and Mitchell apart, the New Zealanders never came to terms with the conditions and the Lankans’ canny bowling. So they wouldn’t have been confident that they had enough on the board to keep their ambitious opponents in hand. But that question never had to be answered once Tim Southee and Trent Boult had cleared away Sri Lanka’s top four inside four overs with only eight runs scored.

Bhanuka Rajapaksa gave most of the crowd of 15,121 sprinkled around the 48,000-capacity ground something to cheer by clubbing a 22-ball 34. He put on 34 off 23 with Dasun Shanaka, who clipped and crafted 35 off 32. Not that anyone present thought the Lankans would get close after their horror start — including it seems the Lankans, who succumbed to a slew of lofted strokes that fell flaccidly into fielders’ hands.

Sri Lanka were dismissed for 102 with four balls left in the match. Only eight times in their 171 T20Is have they been bowled out for fewer runs. When Southee sent down a legside wide to Rajitha in the 19th to bring up the hundred, the crowd whooped emptily and applauded. Southee also clapped. Boult returned to complete a haul of 4/13, his best performance in his 52 T20Is. What did it mean to him that he was reeling in milestones at the age of 33?

“I don’t know what my career-best was before that, so that’s probably a bit naughty,” Boult said. Only to be contradicted by Mitchell standing next to him: “That’s a lie.” Boult protested: “I don’t know! Who was it against? Hey, I’m still learning.”

For Phillips, Boult was to be admired: “He brings a phenomenal amount of energy. He brings so much skill and temperament. He seems to know what the batter’s going to do before he’s bowled the ball. He’s got so many deliveries under his belt that, when they all come together and things go right, things like 4/13 happen.”

The result took New Zealand to the top of the Group A standings and left Sri Lanka, who have lost twice in three matches, above only Afghanistan. But as the tournament’s only fixture on a weekend night, the match wasn’t much of a contest and not nearly as watchable as some of the other clashes in recent days. The big-hitting, hard-running, ever-thinking Phillips did more than his bit to entertain, but overall the game was about as exciting as a Saturday night in East London.

When last had Phillips been there? “I’ve never had the chance to go back. I thought I was going to go on a tour there but it hasn’t happened yet. I’m really looking forward to the opportunity to go there.” The bubble was there to be burst, but that would have been cruel.

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.

Five days that shook the world

“I remember the look on your face when I said I’ll bat first.” – Dean Elgar to Mark Richardson.

Telford Vice | Cape Town

SOUTH Africa’s cricket revolution has been televised. But, considering victory was secured at 4.42am on Tuesday, and broadcast only on an expensive subscription service, not many of the team’s compatriots would have shared the moment. That’s a pity. Coming in the wake of the disaster into which the team had shambled mere days previously, it was something to behold.

Fittingly, the win was sealed by a player who — by several allegedly knowledgeable estimates — shouldn’t have been in the XI. Pick a spinner? At Hagley Oval? Why on earth would you do that, mate? Yet there Keshav Maharaj was, ending the match nine balls after tea on the last day by trapping Matt Henry in front to claim his third wicket of the innings. Maharaj bowled the most overs by a South African in the game, had their best economy rate in the first innings, and took four wickets.

Not the worst for someone who should have been confined to the dressing room. At least, in the first innings: by the time we reached New Zealand’s second dig the same television commentators — Stephen Fleming, Brendon McCullum and Mark Richardson and their combined 250 Test caps among them — who had scoffed at Maharaj’s inclusion were wondering out loud why he hadn’t shared the new ball.

Maybe Maharaj wouldn’t have been as effective had South Africa fielded first, but there was no chance of that happening. There were sniggers of derisive disbelief in the paid pundit gallery after Dean Elgar won the toss. You’re batting first, mate? At Hagley Oval? Really? Tom Latham, too, couldn’t hide a smirk as he confirmed that he would have opted to field: “The way we were able to execute in the conditions early on [in the] last game was really good.”

Elgar hadn’t forgotten the slights by the time of his post-match conversation with Richardson: “I remember the look on your face when I said I’ll bat first. It’s nice to see you with a better smile on your face this time around.”

Had the Kiwis, on and off the field, been so intoxicated by their triumph in the first Test, which was also in Christchurch, that they hadn’t noticed they weren’t going to play the second game on the same pitch? That was last week, mate. Wake up and see the stumps pitched somewhere else. “This wicket was a lot drier and had a lot less grass, and when you walked on it your spikes sunk in,” Kagiso Rabada told an online press conference on Tuesday. “That told you that it’s going to be a little bit slow. As the match moves forward the footmarks are created for ‘Kesh’ to exploit. That was the thinking, and in the end it was the right decision.”

There’s a lesson there about making sure you wear spikes, not trainers, when you’re trying to divine how a pitch might behave. It also helps to open your eyes. “Visually the pitch looked a lot different to the one in the first Test,” Elgar said in media files released by CSA. “There was a lot less green grass and a lot more brown grass. So it looked like a bat first wicket.”

So much for the logic of Elgar’s decision. At least as big a factor in how it came to be made is rooted in who he is: “Because of what happened in the first Test, the easy, soft decision would have been to bowl first. My nature, my character as a leader is not to take the easy way out. It’s to run towards the pressure that you’re facing.”

It took guts to do what Elgar did. His team had been hammered by an innings and 276 runs in seven sessions in the first Test, until Friday South Africa’s only match in the format at this venue. Elgar headed a batting line-up that had failed miserably. Could they fix things? There was only one way to find out, and South Africa’s captain knew that. It’s called taking responsibility.

Never in the other 10 Tests played at Hagley Oval had the captain who won the toss not inserted the opposition. Elgar now owns that first, along with, of course, being the only skipper to guide his team to success there after choosing to bat first. South Africa’s win, by 198 runs, was just New Zealand’s second loss at this ground, where they became the only other team to be bowled out in the fourth innings after Sri Lanka in December 2018.

South Africa went into the match having been dismissed for fewer than 300 in eight of their previous 10 innings, most recently for 95 and 111 in the first Test. To go from those abject lows to totals of 364 and 354/9 — their first declaration in 44 completed innings stretching back to April 2018 — said plenty. But not as much as the fact that, in this match, South Africa reached more than 350 in each innings, regardless of who did what at the toss, for the first time since November 1996. That’s not a statistic. It’s a monument. In the ensuing almost 26 years between that ’96 match, at Eden Gardens, and the second Christchurch game, South Africa played 247 Tests. In all of their 450 Tests, they have made 350 or more in each innings just five times.

Consider, too, that New Zealand are the inaugural World Test Champions (WTC), albeit that they have now lost three of their last five Tests. And that South Africa made the long trip to face them in their own conditions after fighting back fiercely to beat the other finalists, India, in an intensely competitive home series in December and January. And that, while the Kiwis were without Ross Taylor, Kane Williamson and Trent Boult, South Africa were missing Keegan Petersen and Lungi Ngidi and are still adjusting to life after Quinton de Kock. And that Mark Boucher has done his job superbly despite CSA having told him, in no uncertain formal terms, that they are trying to fire him. And that, should Elgar lead his team to another win over Bangladesh in South Africa in March and April, they could become WTC contenders.

Can you see why what happened at Hagley Oval this time around could be called a revolution, mate? As in five days that shook the world?

It was won as much by the experience and dazzling talent of Rabada as by newer names Sarel Erwee and Kyle Verreynne fulfilling their promise. Rabada’s sniping bowling earned him 10 wickets in the series, and his 41 strikes in the past 12 months have made him the world’s leading wicket-taker in that period. His career-best 34-ball 47 in the second innings had as much to do with South Africa’s victory as anything else. Erwee shared a century stand with Elgar in the first innings to set the tone, and went on to score a fine, flinty 108, his first century in his third innings. Verreynne, who would never have thought he would get his hands into the wicketkeeper’s gloves as early as December, when De Kock made a shock retirement, hung tough for an undefeated 136 in the second innings — a performance of impressive maturity that steadied a shaky innings, regained the advantage for South Africa, and represents more than half the total of 248 runs he has made in his nine innings.

Has Rabada, now 52 Tests into a stellar career in which he has claimed 243 wickets at 22.41, been in better form? “It’s very seldom that you feel at your best,” he said. “Every time you go out and play you just want to implement your basics as well as possible, and try to adapt to conditions as well as possible. You’re always facing a different challenge and it’s all about adapting to it. But also trusting your strengths and trying to do all you can to get to your best. But it’s very seldom that that happens. You just have to try and create your own luck through hard work and tactical thinking, and getting yourself in a good mental space. I think you’ve almost got to let the rest just happen.”

Erwee and Verreynne weren’t around, so it was up to Elgar to heap the praise. “His story is a lot deeper than just playing cricket,” he said about Erwee. “He understands the concept of hard work. He’s a favourite in our change room; I think it’s because he doesn’t shut up! It’s never about him. It’s always about what he can do for the side.” And here he is on Verreynne: “He’s had to fill big shoes. It’s great to see his natural ability come out and kick in. He’s been around for some time now, but he’s pretty inexperienced at Test cricket. Maybe a lot of scrutiny has been put on his plate too early in his career, which is unfair.”

The South Africans are now in the throes of a 32-hour trip home, which had they not squared the series in such stirring fashion would no doubt have seemed even longer. As difficult as it is to overstate what they have achieved at Hagley Oval over the past five days, they will be returning on a wing and a particular prayer: that their revolution, unlike all the others, will not be betrayed.

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.

Hagley says hello. Again …

South Africa’s bowlers can be trusted to bounce back, but where their runs might come from is anyone’s guess.

Telford Vice | Cape Town

NEW Zealand will need no prompting to try and repeat the feat they completed at Hagley Oval on Saturday. South Africa won’t be short of motivation to avoid that fate when the teams meet again at the same venue on Friday. Throw in the likely nuclear conditions and it’s difficult to see how the second Test won’t live up to the emphatic events of the first game of the series.

In a mismatch that lasted just seven sessions, New Zealand won by an innings and 276 runs. So anything except victory for the visitors this time will give the Kiwis their first series win over South Africa — the only side, of those they have played against, they have never beaten in a rubber. Not that the home side will be satisfied with a draw: another win and they will become the No. 1 ranked team in the world for the third time since January 2021.

Last week, the absence of Ross Taylor, Kane Williamson and Trent Boult from New Zealand’s XI — the first time they had been without all three of those stellar stalwarts since January 2008, or 117 Tests previously — was seen as a significant disadvantage against opponents who, in December, had rallied from 0-1 down to beat then top-ranked team India. The Kiwis’ trio of titans will be missing again this week, but that is now all but irrelevant.

Matt Henry’s 7/23 in the first innings and 9/55 in the match — both career bests for him — and Henry Nicholls’ 105, Tom Blundell’s 96 and Henry’s 58 not out more than made up for the loss of the biggest names of this generation of New Zealand’s players. South Africa’s response to the challenge was woeful in all departments. They were dismissed for 95 and 111, three of their five bowlers conceded more than 100 runs each with none claiming more than three wickets, and they dropped seven catches.

It’s conceivable that South Africa’s bowlers had an off day or two, and can be trusted to bounce back. But where their runs might come from in a line-up that crashed to 4/3 inside five overs in the second innings is anyone’s guess. Beyond picking the uncapped Ryan Rickelton at the expense of Aiden Markram, there isn’t much the South Africans can do to inject new blood into their batting order.

How the visitors will find their way back from so far deep in the woods is thus difficult to fathom. They tend to talk a tough game about fighting back, but only once before in their previous 37 two-Test series have they managed to level a rubber after losing the first match. And they’re up against a New Zealand team who have lost only one of the 10 Tests they have played at Hagley Oval, where they’ve won the last three by an innings.

Normally there wouldn’t be this much looking back when we’re trying to understand what might happen in an imminent match. But that’s unavoidable in the aftermath of a game that was utterly and entirely one-sided, and especially as the teams will return to the scene of that non-contest.

In essence, it’s up to South Africa to perform exponentially better in every aspect mere days after they have suffered the second-heaviest defeat in their history. And it’s up to New Zealand to keep doing what they have been doing for too long for last week’s triumph to be considered a fluke.

If it seems the Kiwis’ task in that equation is eminently more achievable than the visitors’, that’s because it is. It’s never a good idea to write South Africa off, and that’s not what this is about. But even their least critically thinking supporters will concede that a series win for New Zealand is far more realistic than the South Africans levelling matters. A draw? In the still churning wake of last week, even that will take some doing.

When: Friday, 11am Local Time

Where: Hagley Oval, Christchurch

What to expect: More sunshine this week, and throughout the match, according to the forecast, should translate into more benign batting conditions. But the seamers will still have more help than at many other grounds.

Team news

New Zealand: Who would have thought Trent Boult’s continued unavailability — fatherhood for the first Test, this time because he hasn’t been bowling enough — could be cast as a good thing. But it is because it means Matt Henry, who matched Richard Hadlee’s 7/23 as the best performance by a New Zealander at home last week, is sure of keeping his place in an XI that will surely be unchanged.

Possible XI: Tom Latham (capt), Will Young, Devon Conway, Henry Nicholls, Daryl Mitchell, Tom Blundell, Colin de Grandhomme, Kyle Jamieson, Tim Southee, Neil Wagner, Matt Henry

South Africa: Aiden Markram, who hasn’t reached 50 in his last 10 innings, in which he averages 9.70, should be dropped. Ryan Rickelton, who has scored three centuries and a 90 in his five first-class innings this season, should make his debut.

Possible XI: Dean Elgar (capt), Sarel Erwee, Rassie van der Dussen, Ryan Rickelton, Temba Bavuma, Zubayr Hamza, Kyle Verreynne, Marco Jansen, Kagiso Rabada, Glenton Stuurman, Duanne Olivier

What they said:

“We always talk about how do we take 20 wickets, and whether some guy takes 15 of them it does not really matter a huge amount. It is about us trying to take 20 wickets and trying to find the best way of doing that.” – Kyle Jamieson, who took match figures of 3/43 in the first Test, no doubt hopes for more success this time regardless of that philosophy.

“We know our back is against the wall, and the only way we can get through that is to fight and throw that first punch. As South Africans, that’s what we thrive on. We are going to have to do that. It’s not ideal that we started slow but I think you will see a different energy in this Test.” – fighting talk from Sarel Erwee.

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.

First Test about those who aren’t there

Fast bowlers have claimed 91.37% of the wickets at Hagley Oval, not least because they have bowled 88% of the overs.

Telford Vice | Cape Town

PREVIEWS aren’t supposed to be about players who have no chance of featuring in the match, but this is an exceptional instance. New Zealand will be without Ross Taylor, Kane Williamson and Trent Boult for the first Test at Hagley Oval on Thursday. South Africa will be missing Keegan Petersen. That’s about as exceptional a list of absentees as could be found.

Taylor has retired, Williamson’s longstanding elbow problem has kept him out, Boult is becoming a father, and Petersen fell foul of Covid-19 regulations. While the circumstances of their not being there are routine, the impact of their non-appearance promises to be significant.

Not since January 2008 have New Zealand named a Test XI that hasn’t included at least one of Taylor, Williamson or Boult. That’s more than 14 years and 117 Tests ago. They have been major figures in their team’s march to the World Test Championship.

Petersen is only five Tests into his career, but in the home series against India in December and January — when he was the leading scorer with 276 runs in six innings — he proved himself the answer to South Africa’s search for a No. 3, which hadn’t been resolved since Hashim Amla’s last Test in February 2019. Theunis de Bruyn scored 52 runs in four innings in the pivotal position in 2019, and Zubayr Hamza made 140 in eight innings in 2019 and 2020. Then Rassie van der Dussen scored 309 in eight innings for a decent average of 38.62 at first drop, but he was shifted to No. 4 in the wake of the Test retirement of Faf du Plessis in February.

None of which will matter when Ton Latham and Dean Elgar exchange team sheets in the middle of what amounts to a cricket ground — not at all a stadium — set in the midst of a lush garden in downtown Christchurch.

Hagley Oval is a proper place blessed with a proper pitch on which to play proper cricket. That New Zealand haven’t bothered picking a spinner in five of the nine Tests here — and not for the last three — doesn’t mean slow poisoners aren’t proper cricketers. But Mitchell Santner didn’t get a bowl in either innings against Bangladesh at Hagley Oval in January 2017, and against Sri Lanka in December 2018 Ajaz Patel had to wait until the second innings to turn his arm over. He was granted 12 out of a total of 106.2 overs and went wicketless. In their current squad of 15, the closest the Kiwis have ventured to selecting a specialist spinner is Rachin Ravindra, a batter who dabbles in slow left-arm.

It isn’t difficult to see why, especially as both matches in the series will be played in Christchurch. Of the 278 wickets that have been taken by bowlers at this ground, only 24 have fallen to spinners. The quicks have claimed 91.37%, not least because, among those who have struck here, they have bowled 88% of the overs.

Even so, don’t be surprised if South Africa don’t take the entirely fast and furious approach. In the 37 Tests they have played, home and away, since their last match in the format in New Zealand — in Hamilton in March 2017 — they have gone in without at least one spinner just three times: twice at the Wanderers and once at Newlands, and on each occasion against Asian opponents. Then again, South Africa have never played a Test at Hagley Oval.

All of which suggests that this ground favours, in batting terms, careful accumulators rather than flash and dash merchants. That argument is supported by the fact that Latham, Williamson and Henry Nicholls are the most successful batters here. Of the three only Williamson’s strike rate is above 50, and only just at 51.41.

But there’s a spanner in those works, and his name is Brendon McCullum. In Hagley Oval’s inaugural Test, in December 2014 involving Sri Lanka, McCullum hammered 195 off 134 balls; a strike rate of 145.52. Seventy-two of his runs screamed to the boundary on the bounce and another 66 soared over it. A fluke, perhaps. Especially as Suranga Lakmal was the most threatening member of the Lankan attack.

So how do we explain McCullum’s 79-ball 145 against Australia at the same ground just more than two years later? This time he hit 84 in fours and 36 in sixes, and his strike rate of 183.54 remains the second-highest in Test history for innings that have begat a century.

The highest was produced in an effort of 110 not out off 58 balls: a strike rate of 189.65. It was registered at Antigua’s Recreation Ground, where the outfield is not much bigger than a traffic roundabout. And it came from the bat of a player regarded as cricket’s greatest showman, Viv Richards.

Nobody in the modern game is Richards, and none of those who will line up in Christchurch on Thursday are of McCullum’s bristling bent. But previews aren’t supposed to be about players who aren’t around.

When: Thursday, 11.00am Local Time.

Where: Hagley Oval, Christchurch.

What to expect: A pitch that, even though it’s often green, doesn’t always live up to its reputation as a seamer’s paradise. That was the case in the most recent Test played here, in January, which yielded three centuries — including Tom Latham’s 252.

Team news:

New Zealand: Gary Stead confirmed the top five as it is below and all but said Matt Henry would replace Trent Boult. Also, it seems the home side will pick an all-seam attack. That leaves a spot for an allrounder, who could be Colin de Grandhomme.

Possible XI: Tom Latham (capt), Will Young, Devon Conway, Henry Nicholls, Daryl Mitchell, Colin de Grandhomme, Tom Blundell, Kyle Jamieson, Tim Southee, Neil Wagner, Matt Henry.

South Africa: Dean Elgar has said, twice, that Sarel Erwee is likely to crack the nod to fill the vacancy left by Keegan Petersen. Despite the prevailing conditions, expect Keshav Maharaj to retain his place.

Possible XI: Dean Elgar (capt), Aiden Markram, Sarel Erwee, Rassie van der Dussen, Temba Bavuma, Kyle Verreynne, Marco Jansen, Keshav Maharaj, Kagiso Rabada, Lungi Ngidi, Duanne Olivier.

What they said:

“We’re under no illusions about what’s in front of us, in terms of the battle it’s going to be. We have a record that we would like to change against South Africa. We’ve never beaten them in a series.” — Gary Stead faces up to the history between the teams.

“The wickets look very green and very grassy, but the surface underneath is quite hard so it makes it quite consistent in terms of bounce and pace.” — Rassie van der Dussen talks turf.

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.

No Taylor, Williamson, Boult. No worries?

South Africa would be well advised not to expect a lesser examination in the absence of the supernova stars.

Telford Vice | Cape Town

TWO New Zealanders walk into a bar. One sits down at a table near the door, and says to the other, “Get us a beer, will ya?” The other replies, “Mate, your legs aren’t painted on.” Translation: what makes you so special that you don’t have to walk to the counter to order your own drinks?

Kiwis seem to be born with an innate sense of equality. We’re all the same, mate. No-one is better than anyone else, and we’ll bloody-well make sure they know it. No-one is spared. Martin Crowe, for instance, was a victim of “tall poppy syndrome”, which demanded that prominent figures be taken down a peg or two. That happened because, along with his specialness as a cricketer, Crowe was unusually and unapologetically unorthodox in his way of being part of the wider world. Can’t have that, mate. The corrective action involved slurring Crowe with the term used by New Zealanders who don’t live in the country’s biggest city to denigrate those who do: “Jafa”. It stands for “just another fucking Aucklander”.

Happily, this unhealthy tendency has diminished. New Zealanders seem to have come round to the idea that while stars shouldn’t be polished beyond their deserved lustre, they should be allowed to shine their natural brightest without being cynically tarnished. Recalcitrants will be tested during the Test series against South Africa in Christchurch, which starts on Thursday. Because Ross Taylor, Kane Williamson and Trent Boult, the supernova stars of this generation of New Zealand’s players, will not be in the XI. Taylor has retired, Williamson is nursing a chronic elbow injury, and Boult is about to become a father and will miss the first of the two matches.

Since Taylor, the senior among those three, made his debut in November 2007, he and Williamson have scored more than a quarter of their team’s total runs. Williamson’s 7,272 and Taylor’s 7,046 allow them to tower over the third name on the list, Brendon McCullum, who made almost three-quarters of his career aggregate of 6,453 once Taylor’s career had begun. Taylor and Williamson are, in that order, New Zealand’s all-time highest run-scorers. New Zealand haven’t played a Test without both of them since January 2008. That’s 117 Tests ago, of which Taylor has featured in 110 and Williamson in 86.

No New Zealander has taken more wickets than Boult’s 301 — more than a fifth of the Kiwis’ total during his career — since he made his debut in December 2011. Boult is behind Richard Hadlee, Daniel Vettori and Tim Southee on New Zealand’s all-time list of wicket-takers, but he has bowled between 11,963 and 2,137 fewer deliveries than them. Remarkably for a fast bowler, Boult has missed only 11 of the 86 Tests New Zealand have played since he earned his first cap.

New Zealand have won 44 and lost 41 of Taylor’s Tests. Those figures become 37 and 28 for Williamson and 38 and 23 for Boult. But it’s as part of a united force that the three players’ worth is most apparent: the Kiwis have won 35 and lost 17 of the 64 matches in which their XI has been studded with Taylor, Williamson and Boult. That’s a winning percentage of 54.69. Before the Taylor-Williamson-Boult era, New Zealand won just 18.76% of their Tests. In before and after terms, they are 36.02% more successful when the trio have been in action compared to previously. Pertinently, they featured in seven of the nine victories New Zealand earned in the 16 matches they have played in the World Test Championship (WCT). With weird symmetry, Taylor and Williamson are both sixth on the list of run-scorers worldwide measured from their debuts, and Boult is sixth among the wicket-takers.

Whichever way you spin the numbers, the three Kiwis are giants of the modern game. But New Zealand are hardly pushovers when those players don’t make their presence felt more strongly than their teammates. That much was made plain during the inaugural WCT final in Southampton in June last year. Boult was tight but not especially successful in taking 2/47 in India’s first innings of 217, in which Kyle Jamieson claimed 5/31. Williamson and Taylor made 49 and 11 in their side’s reply of 249, which was led by Devon Conway’s 54. Boult took 3/39 in the second innings, but Southee banked 4/48. Even so, Williamson and Taylor did show their class in chasing down the target of 139 with an unbroken stand of 96. Williamson made 52 not out and Taylor was unbeaten on 47.

So the South Africans would be well advised not to expect a lesser examination on Thursday. By the sound of bowling coach Charl Langeveldt’s rumination on Hagley Oval’s famously green and grassy pitch, the visitors are indeed wise to the subtleties of the challenge ahead of them: “It can be misleading. That’s how New Zealand wickets are. It looks green, and probably with the new ball it will swing and seam. But it gets easier once the ball gets old. We spoke long and hard about it when we got here. The discussion was about getting used to the overcast conditions, too. When the sun is out, it’s easier [to bat] — the ball doesn’t swing and nip, the colour of the grass changes. But we will focus on bowling fuller. We need to make them play with the new ball. It’s all about being adaptable.”

Even the fact that Tom Latham has presided over only three wins in his six Tests as Williamson’s understudy as captain shouldn’t be taken as an obvious chink in the home side’s armour. In January, six days after Latham had scored one and 14 in Bangladesh’s shock eight-wicket win in Mount Maunganui, he led his team to victory by an innings at Hagley Oval, his home ground. Latham made 252, his sixth century and second double hundred in his last 39 Test innings. Clearly, his legs aren’t painted on.

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.

Cricket has seen its greatest game. Now what?

Stokes has lost his bat along with, apparently, his senses. He’s on his knees, his hands held up in what looks like surrender, eyes wide, wild and white with bewilderment. Don’t shoot.

TMG Print

TELFORD VICE in London

IT was the ricochet that did it, that tipped Sunday’s men’s World Cup final over the edge of reason and into Tarantino territory.

Until then, this had been a cricket match. A tight, tense cricket match with a lot on the line but a cricket match nonetheless. No more, no less.

Three balls left in the game. Nine to get. Two wickets in hand. Trent Boult hares towards Ben Stokes.

A full toss starts on the line of the left-hander’s off stump and veers towards middle. Stokes smears it, meatily, like a punch to the gut, towards midwicket. Martin Guptill is on the case — charges in, gathers the ball with surgical slickness, uncoils into a throw aimed at the stumps Stokes is hoofing towards to complete a second run.

Stokes knows it’s going to be close. He dives. The ball is whistling towards a direct hit. If it somehow doesn’t find its target, Tom Latham is poised over the wicket, primed to do the needful.

But the ball never arrives. Instead it collides with Stokes’ outstretched bat as he crashes to earth. And away it scoots at an angle of about 160 degrees compared to where Guptill unlocked and unloaded.

Colin de Grandhomme is after the ball, but he is running like a man under water chasing a stone skipping on the surface. It takes the ball six seconds from the point of its contact with Stokes’ bat to the moment it bumps, apologetically, into the boundary cushion at third. It feels like six hours. De Grandhomme arrives a moment later, spent with effort and sick with the realisation of what this means.

Stokes has lost his bat along with, apparently, his senses. He’s on his knees, his hands held up in what looks like surrender, eyes wide, wild and white with bewilderment. Don’t shoot.

Kumar Dharmasena and Marais Erasmus confer, and Dharmasena turns his back on the pitch to signal the scorers. He holds up all five fingers of his right hand and the thumb of his left: six runs added. Three needed off two balls.

Nevermind the rest. The fogginess in what cricket calls its laws about whether the run being completed should count if overthrows result, the two runouts off the last two balls — both without the batters having faced a ball, a first in a World Cup innings — to tie the scores, the super overs that failed to untie the scores, the boundary count that finally made England the champions — and was surely the revenge of some sport-hating ultra-nerd of a bean counter who sits stooped, openmouthed, sticky-eyed, unshowered for days, over a screen, captured by the numbers flitting this way and that, who wouldn’t know humanity if it opened a vein and bled all over him.

None of that is as weird as the ricochet. It’s the kind of miracle performed by accident at a pool table in a bar at 4am by the most hopeless player, who is drunk enough to forget how hopeless he is. Except that Stokes, like everybody else involved, is stone cold sober.

Perched high above all that, the 237 accredited journalists don’t know whether the pressbox is imploding or exploding. But they do know, when the fireworks finally rent the evening sky, that none of them has seen anything like this, much less reported on it. How do you write the final scoreline? England won by what? New Zealand lost by what?

Hours later one of the reporters, a former international player, rises from a laptop still steaming with the last of the thousands of words he has written this sacred and profane day. He offers a few more words, gently, quietly, with something like apprehension in his tired eyes, into the still sparking air.

“Jesus.

“Dunno.

“Super overs.

“Boundary counts.

“Sponge boundaries.

“LED stumps.

“Dunno.

“Christ.”

He is trying to reconcile the game he used to play and thought he would know forever with what he has seen, and he is failing. There is poignance here that must be protected and cherished. The gods bless and keep this man.

Remember when the 1999 World Cup final at Edgbaston was the greatest one-day international yet played (yes, my beloved wounded fellow South Africans, it really was)? Remember when the 438 game took that title on a crash-boom-bang crazy day at the Wanderers seven years later? Remember the suit-ruined, tear-stained 2015 World Cup semi-final at Eden Park?

Forget that. All of it. And all the other contenders. ODI cricket as we thought we knew it no longer exists.

All that does exist is a question too terrifying to answer, but which was asked by every beat of every racing heart in Sunday’s golden afterglow.

Where does this damn fool game go now that its greatest match has been played?

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.

England Goliath against Kiwi David

England and New Zealand have the resources to turn themselves into better versions of themselves. South Africa, comparatively, do not.

Sunday Times

TELFORD VICE in London

ENGLAND have drunk deeply of the Kool-Aid of how good people have said they are on their march to Sunday’s men’s World Cup final at Lord’s.

New Zealand, whose coach, Gary Stead, once washed the windows of the august Pavilion, seem almost embarrassed to share a field with these legends of their own lore.

Eoin Morgan’s Irish accent got in the way, but his Churchillian intent shone through after his team’s emphatic eight-wicket semi-final win at Edgbaston on Thursday: “Sunday’s not a day to shy away from; it’s a day to look forward to, much like today.

“We have created the opportunity to play in a World Cup final. It will be a matter of the same again trying to produce everything that we can performance-wise, but enjoy the day.”

Contrast that with what Kane Williamson said about handling the pressure of hanging onto the steepler offered by Ravindra Jadeja, who seemed to be smashing India to victory in the other semi, at Old Trafford on Wednesday: “Someone goes ‘catch it’ and it’s above me so it must be mine.”

It’s a neat script for one of sport’s most compelling screenplays: David versus Goliath.

Better yet, there are lessons in the protagonists’ contrasting approaches for South Africa, whose performance at the tournament was far below their capabilities.

Having believed for so long that they were among world cricket’s big boys, they weren’t ready for the bleak truth that they aren’t — even after trying to tell themselves exactly that.

Not so England, who did not reach a semi-final for six tournaments after losing the 1992 final to Pakistan. Group stage exits in half of them tells, unarguably, a tale of decline.

But this time England have some of the most booming bats in the game. Jonny Bairstow and Jason Roy average 69.47, more than any other opening pair in one-day history. Joe Root has scored two centuries, Morgan and Jos Buttler a ton each.

This marks the sixth time in a dozen World Cups that New Zealand have forged to or past the semi-finals. They are the little country that can. Almost. They went one step further four years ago, but were swiped aside by Australia in the final.

Unlike South Africa, New Zealand know who they are and what they can do. They bring an attack that rasps with the pace of Lockie Ferguson and the swing of Trent Boult, and the key on Sunday will be how the batters in blue square up to the bowlers in black.

England and New Zealand have the resources to turn themselves into better versions of themselves. South Africa, comparatively, do not.

But it comes down to more than money. It’s also about belief, and South Africa are all out of the stuff. For now.

New Zealand prevail in contest for the ages to reach World Cup final

India’s captain, a Goliath of the game, was downed by a sliver of the ball as small as David’s pebble. He fumed off the field like Daddles the duck himself.

TMG Digital + Print

TELFORD VICE at Old Trafford

THE winners wore black, the losers were blue, and the men’s World Cup is alive and kicking all the way into its last few days.

In one of the most rivetting one-day internationals yet played, New Zealand beat India by 18 runs in their interrupted semi-final at Old Trafford on Wednesday.

The other team in Sunday’s showdown at Lord’s will be decided at Edgbaston, where England and Australia will play the other semi on Thursday and, if needs be, Friday.

New Zealand added 28 runs off the 23 balls they faced on Wednesday to complete an innings that rain on Tuesday halted at 211/5. They totalled 239/8, and dismissed India for 221 in 49.3 overs.

The day’s drama started when Ravindra Jadeja, in the space of two deliveries, undid New Zealand’s chances of setting a bigger target.

The first of those balls, the 11th of the day, was bowled by Jasprit Bumrah and smeared to midwicket by Ross Taylor — who turned for two but couldn’t beat Jadeja’s precise pick-up-and-throw for a direct hit on the only stump he could see.

Then Tom Latham tried to heave Bhuvneshwar Kumar over the midwicket fence — where Jadeja held a superbly judged catch.

Taylor was gone for 74, grafted hard off 90 balls, and Latham for 10, and five balls later Matt Henry was also caught in the deep.

And if you thought that was crazy, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

India crashed to 5/3 in the first 19 deliveries of their reply — Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli and KL Rahul, their bristling top three, all among the top 15 runscorers at the tournament, gone for a single each; the first time that has happened in all 4 190 ODIs yet played.

Sharma edged the fourth ball he faced, a pearler of an out-swinger from Matt Henry, and was caught behind.

Not for 56 innings in the format has he had a shorter innings; a stream of success that started in August 2017.

Since then, and before Tuesday, he had scored 16 centuries — among them a double ton and two efforts of more than 150 — averaged 67.12 and lugged a strike rate of 96.61.

Most pertinently, he had reeled off centuries in his previous three innings at this World Cup, against England, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, to go with those he scored earlier in the tournament against South Africa and Pakistan.

But as he trooped off on Wednesday he looked as dazed and confused as a clueless No. 11.

Seven balls later Trent Boult bent an inswinger into Kohli’s pads and Richard Illingworth raised the finger of fate. Kohli referred the decision and the review showed the ball only just clipping the bails.

India’s captain, a Goliath of the game, had been downed by a sliver of the ball as small as David’s pebble. He fumed off the field like Daddles the duck himself, shaking his head as he went.

Three deliveries after that Henry had his second after Rahul was caught in two minds about playing or leaving an out-swinger — and classily caught by a diving wicketkeeper Latham.

Not a lot seemed to happen for the next 40 balls, 33 of them dots, except that 19 runs were scored.

Then Dinesh Karthik half fended, half bunted Henry from outside off stump to the left of gully. Cue Jimmy Neesham to swoop and claim, one-handed, perhaps the catch of the tournament and reduce India to 24/4.

Rishabh Pant and Hardik Pandya pretended they weren’t two of the most destructive hitters in the game in the cause of restoring order, which they did in a stand of 47 off 76 balls.

It ended when Pant could fake it no longer and heaved left-arm spinner Mitchell Santner to long on. Santner did for Pandya in similar fashion, and also for Pant’s score of 32.

Between those dismissals you could feel the hope rising from the crowd, significantly smaller than Tuesday’s but still predominantly India heavy, as Dhoni crossed the boundary and made his way once more unto the breach.

Did 2011’s captain fantastic, now an ageing uncle, still have what it took?

The question wasn’t quite answered because Jadeja returned to the fray to do his damnedest to win it for India with a breathtaking innings of guts and gumption.

The 116 he shared with Dhoni was a World Cup record for the seventh wicket, and when it ended — by way of skied drive to mid-off in Boult’s last over — India’s serious hopes ended, also.

Jadeja hammered his 77 off 59 balls with four fours and as many sixes, a wonder that no-one who saw it will forget.

Neither will Dhoni’s brutish cut for six off Lockie Ferguson to narrow the equation to 25 needed off 11 balls fade in the memory.

Two balls later he was run out trying to take two by Martin Guptill’s outrageous direct hit from deep backward square leg.

The last run Dhoni completed took him to 50, but he didn’t raise his bat as he sauntered off.

Classy to the end, uncle.