New Zealand v England preview

After England won both pyjama series 2-1 and lost the only red ball warmup match, we are finally approaching the meat of the tour: the three match Test series which begins in Dunedin on the sixth of March (fifth of March for those in the UK). England will be strong favourites after a first win in India for 28 years and after New Zealand were badly beaten in both Tests in South Africa. But this is not a New Zealand side to be underestimated and they will have Tim Southee and Ross Taylor returning, both of whom were absent in South Africa.

England did not play Jonny Bairstow in the warmup which should end any possibility that he may still compete with Joe Root for the number six spot. As I’ve written before, this is very generous to Root and harsh on Bairstow. England did give Graham Onions an opportunity to press his case for either Stuart Broad’s or Graeme Swann’s spot as the fourth bowler, but he took only one wicket for 213 runs in the match. The effect of this is that unless Broad suffers a recurrence of his heel injury ahead of the fourth Test, England’s XI for the first Test at least is all but set in stone. I suspect it will take an injury or a very poor performance for there to be any changes for the other two matches as well.

New Zealand added Neil Wagner to their squad for the first Test after he impressed against England in the warmup. With Southee, Trent Boult and Doug Bracewell all available for the first Test I don’t see any way for Wagner to be one of the three main seamers, but New Zealand’s only spin option in the squad is Bruce Martin. Martin is uncapped and has a first class average over 35 and I don’t think it would be a terrible idea for New Zealand to play Wagner instead in conditions that will likely help the seamers. It’s a tough call and unfortunately for New Zealand a tough call because neither player has done much to demand selection. I suspect it will be a decision made once they have had a look at the pitch, but right now I’d lean toward Wagner.

Even with the return of Taylor to the New Zealand side, I am not expecting much from the New Zealand batsmen. They were pretty thoroughly demolished in South Africa and even having returned home I don’t think they will find life against Anderson and company much easier. I’d be surprised if we saw any more double figure scores, but I think they will really struggle to put England under pressure. A lot will depend on New Zealand’s new opening pair of (presumably) Hamish Rutherford and Peter Fulton. New Zealand’s middle order is fragile and exposing them to the new ball is a recipe for disaster. Even if the top two can’t put a lot of runs on the board, they need to consistently form long partnerships to make sure that the Kiwi middle order do not face the teeth of the English bowling. In other words, they need to do the job of an opening pair.

New Zealand’s real strength, however, and where they might really cause England problems is their bowling. Southee was in the form of his life before missing the South Africa series with injury, but on his return to the Plunket Shield he promptly took 9-149 in a match. Boult and Bracewell are also both quite dangerous, though they have probably not shown it as often as New Zealand would like. Especially in their home conditions England can expect them to be a handful. England’s batsmen are quite good and won’t be in terribly unfamiliar conditions, but I still expect they will have a few low scores.

The player to watch may be Nick Compton; he has not yet solidified his place and this will be a very different ask than opening in India was. England still have the option of opening with Root and Compton probably needs to prove his worth here to make sure that Andy Flower doesn’t start thinking along those lines. Root himself need to show that his efforts in Nagpur were no fluke, however. As mature as he has looked it is easy to forget that he only has one Test to his name, but he does. He could yet find himself under pressure as well.

England are favourites, but if they did not already know that this would not be a walkover then their defeat in the warmup will have made that point quite clear. I expect New Zealand will have a few good performances in the series and will put England under pressure at times. The problem the Kiwis have is that when they do perform well they really struggle to back those performances up and consistently perform to the standard of which they are capable. England are a good enough side that if New Zealand continue to be so hit-or-miss they will struggle most of the series. I expect them to do enough to avoid the whitewash and with the weather also an issue I think the series will finish 2-0 to England, though 2-1 is a possibility. New Zealand might be able to get a draw or more, but only if they perform consistently well and England consistently or frequently fail to play to their standard.

It still isn’t Trott’s fault

New Zealand won the opening ODI by three wickets last night after England batted first and failed to put up a big score after being in a good position. As usual a lot of the blame for this has fallen on Jonathan Trott who is considered to have scored his runs too slowly. The contention is that by scoring slowly he puts too much pressure on the lower order to score more quickly and get the total up and that this time it cost England.

Trott scored 68 off ninety deliveries though, hardly glacial and was in fact England’s top-scorer. He is in the side to lay a platform for the explosive hitters in the tail and he did exactly that. The problem was not Trott, but that the lower order got out instead of getting quick runs. There’s no reason to think they were under undue pressure after Trott’s innings; Jos Buttler, for instance, has a List A strike rate of 120. He is going to score quickly regardless of the situation and the same is largely true of Eoin Morgan. Their role in the side is to accelerate late in the innings; this should not be a surprising or pressure situation for them. In fact one would not expect them to score quickly for 25-30 overs as they would have to if they came in without a platform. They would either get out or have to slow down. But England’s current tactics mean that they do not need to; they can play freely and score quickly for about ten overs after Trott, Bell and Cook have done their job. The reason England lost is because Morgan et al failed, not because Trott batted too well.

This is borne out by looking at England’s results over the past year and a half. England brought in this tactic about the time that Cook became ODI captain and what the people who blame Trott for England’s losses tend to forget is that England have actually been very successful in ODIs since then. Since the start of England’s home summer in 2011, England have had results in 35 ODIs. In the 28 in which Trott has played, England have 18 wins, nine losses and a tie. In the other seven England have won only three and lost four. The tactic of letting Trott lay a platform has been demonstrated to be a success; it is not why England lost the most recent ODI.

Graham Thorpe new pyjama batting coach

England announced that they are increasing their dual-coaching set up by having Graham Gooch only coach the batting in Tests now as Graham Thorpe will be the ODI and T20 batting coach. I think that it is a good idea; Thorpe has been coaching the Lions and this makes sense. Batting in Tests is quite different to batting in pyjama matches and England’s sides do change between the formats so why should this not be true for the coaches as well? This also eases the workload on Gooch and I suspect before too long England will have a specialist pyjama bowling coach as well.

I don’t think Thorpe will have too much work to do with the ODI side; Gooch did quite a good job overall in his time, despite the results in India. England were very poor in most of that series, but if the suggestions that Gooch was effectively sacked because of that are true (and I’m not sure they are) then it is quite harsh. England’s batting was very good through most of 2012 and in fact their ability to consistently put up large (if not huge) totals and give their bowlers something with which to work was instrumental in their success in the format in last year. Thorpe mostly needs to keep them doing what they are doing and work toward preparing them for the next World Cup. He might have a bit more work to do with the T20 side, of course. England are so inconsistent in that format it is hard to know what needs to be done there.

He won’t have a lot of time to make any substantial changes before the series in New Zealand starts; the first T20 is in under a fortnight. Obviously England don’t have any meaningful ODIs on the horizon as those don’t really exist, but it will be interesting to see if England have a particularly different approach to the ODIs this summer against Australia this summer than last.

Final ODI selection

England finish their tour of India today/tomorrow with a dead rubber ODI. After winning the Test series in December the tour is unquestionably a success and down 1-3 in the ODI series there is really nothing for which to play in this last match. England can’t even really use it to prepare for the future; they don’t play another ODI in the subcontinent until November of 2014 when they go to Sri Lanka and there are no ODI tournaments in the subcontinent on the Future Tours Programme.

But that’s not to say that England have nothing to lose. Whilst they would no doubt like to win it is important that they not pick up any injuries. The Ashes are still some way off, but there are Tests in New Zealand beginning in just over a month and there is no need to risk someone missing out on those for the benefit of an ODI and especially a dead rubber.

England have done a good job of resting players for the series as a whole, but now with the series effectively over they should look at going a step further. Alastair Cook has played in every match except the T20s on the tour to India and he is due to lead the side against New Zealand just a few weeks after the end of this series. Although he is the captain, the last thing we need is for him to start feeling burnout and I’d like to see him rested. Steven Finn too ought to rest, especially after the injuries that kept him out of three of the Tests in India. Ian Bell can lead the side in Cook and Broad’s absence; he, Kevin Pietersen and Joe Root are the only two of the main Test side I would play. In Bell’s case, he is not in the T20 squad so will have a bit of a break before the ODIs start and unlike Cook has not had to deal with the day-to-day burden of captaincy. Pietersen will be rested for the pyjama portion of the New Zealand tour and whilst it would not be a terrible idea to rest him it isn’t necessary. Root also could be rested, but didn’t play in most of the matches on this tour so shouldn’t need to be.

It would leave a very weak side on the whole, but it doesn’t matter a jot if England lose the series 2-3 or 1-4. The Tests are won and what is important now are the Tests against New Zealand and Australia.

England squad for New Zealand announced

England released their 15-man squad for the tour of New Zealand today. It is, of course, different from the one I would have selected. But it’s still a strong one overall and England are clearly taking the Kiwis seriously, which is good. Failures in South Africa notwithstanding, they do pose a threat with their bowling and can pull off an upset.

The biggest aspect is that Tim Bresnan has been dropped in favour of Chris Woakes. Apparently Bresnan is going to have more work done on his elbow; it’s clearly not been right since he had surgery on it a year ago. I had him in my squad of 15, but if there is something that actually can be done for his elbow then I’m glad they are trying that instead. I’m not entirely sold on replacing him with Woakes though. Woakes is talented, but I think a bit too much is made of his all-rounder tag. I view him as a bowler who can bat; he tends to come in well down the order for Warwickshire and he has a first-class batting average under forty. It does make him a bit of a like-for-like replacement for Bresnan and he’s certainly a good bowler, but I don’t think he’s better than Stuart Meaker as a bowler and that is who I would have picked after Bresnan. I don’t think batting ability should come into it unless a player is so good with the bat that he could be picked on it alone. For Woakes this clearly isn’t the case so it should only be a matter of who is the better bowler and I think it’s Meaker.

Eoin Morgan and Samit Patel have both dropped out as expected, but it hasn’t opened the door for James Taylor as I would have liked. Taylor will be captaining the England Lions instead, but I think he can count himself horribly unlucky. He did little wrong against South Africa; he had one good innings and one bad innings before being run out by Matt Prior at Lord’s. But he was left out of the tour to India behind Morgan (inexplicably) and to accommodate the horses-for-courses selection of Samit Patel. Now that they are both out Taylor should be back in the frame, but instead he seems to have been all-but-forgot with Jonny Bairstow and Joe Root ahead of him.

The squad that is selected is a strong one overall and it doesn’t leave much doubt about the likely XI. Unless there is another injury before the series starts (and I’m not delighted with England risking Broad in the one day series ahead of the Tests) the only real battle should be for the number six spot and it looks like Root will go into it as the strong favourite. We’ll know for sure in just over a month.

Suggested England Test squad

Tomorrow England will announce their touring party for the three Tests in New Zealand in March. I don’t think there will be any great surprises, but I am keen to see how they decide to pick players on the first tour to more English conditions after the loss to South Africa last summer. As I mentioned a few days ago, Nick Compton ought to retain his spot in the playing XI and although Joe Root will certainly be on the plane I would play him either at six or not at all. It’s also already been confirmed that it will be a 15-man squad with Jonny Bairstow as reserve wicket-keeper.

It is the question of who to bat at six which I think will dominate the squad discussions and lone warmup, though now at least it is because England have many good options instead of none. But they still have both Root and Bairstow and neither have done anything to be dropped and really neither has James Taylor. England seemed to forget about him when naming the side to tour India and I’d like to see him recalled for the series in New Zealand. Samit Patel will presumably be missing out after his poor performance in India and Eoin Morgan should definitely be dropped as well, but with the squad size being cut overall I think Taylor may still miss out. I would have him on the plane though, as injury cover if nothing else. The selectors need to keep him in the picture though even if he does miss out; I thought he looked perfectly capable in the two Tests against South Africa that he played and I think that if England had gone to New Zealand before India he would be in the squad.

The bowling can’t be completely ignored though. There is still the nagging doubts about Stuart Broad’s fitness after his latest injury kept him out of the ODIs in India. He’ll be in the squad, of course, but England should have a plan in place in case he gets injured again. It’s tempting to want to add another bowler as cover (Stuart Meaker the likely candidate), but England do have four other fast bowlers who can expect to be on the plane which should be enough and possibly even more than enough. I would drop Panesar from the squad though as spin is unlikely to play a major role and Root and Kevin Pietersen should be all England need to support Swann. I would either just leave his spot empty (the squad is being cut by three players compared to the India one) or replace him with a batsman.

My squad in full would then be:
Cook*, Anderson, Bairstow, Bell, Bresnan, Broad, Compton, Finn, Onions, Pietersen, Prior, Root, Swann, Taylor, Trott

Compton should open in New Zealand

It’s a bit early to start really looking at the XI to play the first Test against New Zealand; the first Test is still over a month away and England are still playing the ODIs in India. But this week Michael Vaughan said that he thought Joe Root should open the batting in New Zealand with Jonny Bairstow coming back at number six. (I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that the former Yorkshire player is advocating two Yorkshire men…) As good as Root has looked and as much as I do think Bairstow deserves more chances, I think it would be a mistake to drop Nick Compton.

Compton looked the perfect Test opener in India; he batted cautiously and wore down the bowlers when he needed to early in the innings and when he had the chance to play more aggressively he showed that he could do that too. He only made the one fifty, but it’s hard to ask for much more from a debutant. Root also played very well in the one Test he played, but not only is that not enough to immediately stick him up the order I don’t think it is enough to even guarantee his place at number six. It was only one Test and I think both Bairstow and James Taylor should still be in the running for the position. Neither have really done anything to be dropped and especially I don’t think that Root’s innings against India were particularly more impressive than Bairstow’s innings at Lord’s against South Africa. (Which is not to take away from Root’s performance, of course.)

The only way Root should open the batting for now is if Compton either gets injured or has a run of failures against New Zealand. This could happen, of course, but Compton has some credit built up and even if he does have some failures he should be given at least a couple of Tests. I would start with Root at six in New Zealand as I don’t think the one warmup England are playing ahead of the Tests will really be enough to knock him off that spot, but I would definitely have Bairstow and Taylor both in the squad. England have three very good options at number six now (making for a pretty drastic change from just a year ago when they didn’t have any) and they shouldn’t chisel any one of them into stone. But at the same time there is no need to get rid of a solid looking opener just to make more room at number six.

Should be a fun weekend

Including tonight, there are three cricket matches, two rugby matches and a football match that I’m planning to follow closely this weekend. England’s women have their last two (dead rubber) T20 matches tonight and Sunday night, whilst the men play tomorrow morning looking to level the series. At the same time as the men’s match, however, there is rugby on as England play Wales at Twickenham and when that ends Bath will play away to Exeter in the Premiership. Finally, Sunday morning is the League Cup final with the Reds favourites to win a first bit of silverware for a while.

As far as predictions go, I’m still sticking with my original 4-1 prediction for the England women. They very nearly (and arguably ought to have) lost the third match, and whilst winning that will give them a mental edge for the last two it could be negated by the fact that they are now dead rubbers. T20 is an inherently unpredictable format and I still think the Kiwis will sneak a win this weekend. That said, I would not be surprised if England got the whitewash.

As far as the men go, the loss on the first T20 was, whilst not entirely unexpected, quite disappointing given that England probably should have won after the start to which we got off chasing. (It seems that we simply cannot chase 145 in the UAE.) Although the batting mostly let us down, we did drop a couple of catches, which may have cost us. The turning point was probably Bopara’s wicket, but I think KP’s was actually more important. He had picked up right where he left off in the ODIs and looked like he might have been able to knock off at least half of the target by himslef, but he was well caught on the boundary for 33. The catch also cost us six runs, as the ball was on course to clear the rope, the important of which should not be underestimated. (We only lost by eight runs.) For the next match I’m tipping Pakistan to win again, and not merely because the first two series were both whitewashes. England, despite being champions and world number one in this format, still don’t tend to look terribly convincing. I suspect a large part of England’s strong T20 record is actually down to luck, (the rest being very good bowling) though that’s to be expected in this format.

In the rugby, I did not see anything in the second round to persuade me that my initial assessment of Wales and England was incorrect. England will have home field advantage, but I think that is about it. Whilst we looked composed and competent for the last half an hour or so against Italy, there were still a lot of mistakes in that match as there were against Scotland. I expect Wales to punish those mistakes a lot more efficiently than Scotland or Italy did, as well as to make fewer themselves. If England can play very error-free rugby then they will have a chance with the crowd behind them, however I don’t think they will be quite up to the level required to beat a strong looking Wales, even at Twickenham.

Finally, the League Cup final on Sunday. Liverpool are strong favourites (2-5, according the Guardian), of course, playing 5th in the Championship Cardiff. That said, we have had problems forcing victories over lower placed side this year (though more at Anfield than anywhere else). Cardiff also have a very good record against us, and we saw Arsenal upset just last year. That said, I do think we will win, though it will probably be nervy for a considerable portion of the match. As good as Reina et al are, I expect we will ship probably one goal, but with Andy starting to find a bit of form up front and Suarez looking to make up for lost time I think we will score two or three to take home the trophy.

England win by 48 runs

The win makes it two in two for England’s women and this one was never in doubt. England’s top three of Edwards, Marsh and Taylor scored 33, 48 and 45 respectively and all at good rates to set up England’s total. The partnership of Edwards and Marsh was particularly impressive, as they went along at almost ten per over. Even after dismissing them in quick succession, the Kiwis never really found a way to contain the scoring. Taylor played another good innings whilst the batsmen farther down added nice cameos. New Zealand ended up using seven bowlers in the innings and all of them went for at least seven an over. I was hoping near the end of the innings that we could get up to 170, but the average completed first innings score in women’s T20 is only 126, so 166 was still more than handy.

New Zealand’s run chase was rather odd though. They started poorly, getting only two of the first over before Anya Shrubsole, heroine from the first match, delivered a wicket maiden. After four overs New Zealand found themselves 9-1 and already needing almost ten per over to win. That prompted the only period of the match in which they really looked like going for it. McGlashan in particular made a concerted effort to find the ropes and just about managed to keep the Kiwis in touch for a couple of overs. Once they powerplay ended though they went back to knocking the ball for singles. I can understand keeping wickets in hand for a late assault, but they waited far too late. They went over six overs after with only a solitary six (followed by a wicket) as the only boundary, after which they needed 12 per over to win. By the time they actually started an assault in the 15th over the rate required was over 13 and all they could do was slog. Seeing as they had to get a four off of almost everything they saw, it was not surprising that it didn’t come off and they lost four wickets in two overs. What was surprising was that after that they went back to hitting singles! Part of that was some very good containing bowling from England, of course, but when one’s side needs 17 per over to win there is no excuse for not trying to clear the infield. Only boundaries were going to be enough and they did not seem to be willing to take the risks to get them. They kept losing wickets anyway, however, and their final tally of 118 all out was fairly pathetic.

With England now 2-0 up and the Kiwis having looked pretty poor twice the series is there for the taking. New Zealand may be able to sneak a win, but I’m sticking with my original 4-1 prediction.

England win by six/nine wickets

Suddenly I’m writing the words ‘England win’ a lot. A couple of nights ago the women’s side won their first T20 by six wickets. It was rather closer than it ought to have been, Anya Shrubsole took 5-11 (all five bowled or lbw) in four overs as the Kiwis finished on 80-9. It was at this point that I made the in hindsight ill-advised comment ‘should be a straightforward chase’ on Twitter. Needless to say we got bogged down and after losing a few wickets were actually behind the rate for a time. For the Kiwis, Kate Broadmore at one point had figures of 2.2-2-0-1. Unlike Shrubsole, however, she couldn’t take more than that one wicket and Sarah Taylor hit a composed and unbeaten 31 off 34 to see England home with six wickets and 14 balls to spare. Never in doubt… The second match of the series is tonight/tomorrow morning and whilst New Zealand will take heart from their bowling display I’m tipping England to win again.

The far more surprising win was for the men’s side. If I had known before the tour that there would be 3-0 scorelines in both the Test and ODI series I would have assumed that we had won the Tests and been hammered in the ODIs. As it was, England turned in one of their most comprehensive ever ODI wins away from home. Only three times previously have England played top tier opposition away from home and chased down a target with more balls to spare than the 76 balls to spare that they had in this match. The most recent was against South Africa in November 2009 when England lost three wickets en route to 121 off 31.2 overs. England also won with 94 balls remaining at the MCG in January 1979, a 40-over ODI in which Geoffery Boycott scored an unbeaten 39 off 107 deliveries. England took just 28.2 overs to chase down the 102 they needed for victory and I’m sure the crowd went home thinking that they got their money’s worth. I think a case could be made that this was a more comprehensive victory than any of those, however. England looked today like they could easily have chased down another hundred runs. There were standout performances from Cook and Finn again, but KP was the real star. He looked today like the KP of old, a man bristling with intent and for once not likely to give his wicket away. Once he got into his stride the only thing that looked like it might stop him from reaching three figures was if England ran out of runs to chase. As it was, Cook’s dismissal meant that KP could get to an unbeaten 111, his joint highest ODI score.

This puts England in a very rare position for overseas ODI series. Excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, the last time England won an overseas ODI series by two or more matches was a 3-0 whitewash of New Zealand in 1992. If England can win the last match, it will be only the second time overseas and fifth time ever that England have won four or more matches in an ODI series.