´óÏó´«Ã½

´óÏó´«Ã½ BLOGS - Test Match Special
« Previous | Main | Next »

Sidebottom gives England hope

Jonathan Agnew | 07:26 UK time, Saturday, 8 March 2008

An astonishing final session saw New Zealand .

At tea they were coasting on 55 for 1 - their lead already an imposing 177 with Stephen Fleming looking in superb touch.

But a succession of excellent catches - two of them absolutely brilliant - turned the game on its head as Ryan Sidebottom, in front of his parents, took England's first hat-trick for four years.

Matthew Hoggard's spectacular running catch at deep midwicket started the slide - it was the sort of diving, high effort you see in Australian Rules Football - and Andrew Strauss manoeuvred himself skilfully to give Monty Panesar his first wicket.

But the most outstanding of all was Cook's reflex catch in the gully to dismiss Matthew Sinclair and give Sidebottom his second hat-trick opportunity of the innings.

Jacob Oram was hit plumb in front next ball, and Sidebottom celebrated wildly as New Zealand had lost four wickets in nine balls.

as2_getty438.jpg

The fact remains that chasing more than 270 will not be easy. Daniel Vettori is the best finger spinner in the world, and Jeetan Patel is a decent off-spinner.

They will have men around the bat, and England's batsmen will be under tremendous pressure. Vettori, one of the not out batsmen, will be keen to extend New Zealand's innings for as long as possible - or he might go for the option of attempting to hit 30 runs, or so, in order to stretch the target.

That will certainly be his method if he loses Patel because the last man, Chris Martin, is one straight ball material.

But England have a chance - and that's something they certainly did not have at the start of the day. Sidebottom and Panesar carried the attack, once again.

Hoggard was a little more like his old self - but still not all there - while Steve Harmison came on second change and bowled just four overs for 24.

New Zealand have dominated the match almost entirely - I believe they missed a trick by not opening the second innings with Brendon McCullum - and if England manage to win, it will be one of the greatest reversals of all time.

If you want my prediction from here ... I still reckon that a draw is favourite with an England win second.

°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌýPost your comment

  • 1.
  • At 08:36 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • ocr wrote:

does this put England in more of a pickle having to bat out the whole final day?

  • 2.
  • At 08:41 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Fred Quimby wrote:

My word, how exciting for England to have the scent of a draw in their nostrils!

  • 3.
  • At 08:47 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • n bakewell wrote:

Well done Siddebottom!!!!

Lets not let them off the hook tommorow morning!!!

The batsmen need to think we can win this one. Then the run rate might go up.

Sorry to say, hate jumping on bandwagons, but that might just be last we see of Harmison in an England shirt.

  • 4.
  • At 09:33 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • BrucieB wrote:

funny old game, ain't it? which just goes to show: you should never (ref previous blog) trot out the excuses, Aggers, before the last ball's bowled.

the Kiwis key mistake IMHO was to send McCullum out to try to fire some quick runs before NZ were fully safe. yes, maybe opening with him would have worked, but sending him out early when they did was not good captaincy. cause anything can happen ... and (sparked by his wicket) it did. whereas if he'd been there now i'd still back NZ to win.

  • 5.
  • At 09:34 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Pete Dhadda wrote:

Wow -what a day! Just goes to show how unpredictable Test cricket can be. I thought Sidebottow was fantastic, Panesar a great supporting act and some fantastic fielding by Cook especially has set this Test match up nicely -can go either way from here.

  • 6.
  • At 09:42 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • brian day wrote:

england need to clear up the last 2 wickets quick and be left with a figure less than 300 to chase, i would say england would be favs...above that i would say a draw.

  • 7.
  • At 09:43 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Jackie Litherland wrote:

Test Cricket is such a mental game. I think England have really out-thought NZ so far. They didn't expect England to occupy the crease in their first innings. NZ still had the one-day mind set. And were well set up after England's indifferent bowling.
England put the pressure back on NZ because wickets were slow to come by. Everyone thinks of runs, but in this Test hours were just as important, if not more so.
England's strategy was superb. Whatever happens you don't have a collapse and throw the game away in the first innings. From that position you can always try for a win if the opportunity arises.
I would love England to win this game not only because it would be so good for us, but so good for real Test cricket. Bring back the merits of occupation of the crease. We didn't do it in Sri Lanka and didn't play to the conditions. Boycott asked England not to give their wickets away.
He has his answer. Well done England so far. A draw might be a fair and likely result but England deserve it on points for strategy alone.

  • 8.
  • At 09:50 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Big AL Murray wrote:

Is this turnabout really that much of a surprise to everybody ?!? We were always in with a chance of getting close today and knocking over a couple of kiwis to take that smug look off their faces.

I posted on this blog yesterday that we were in with a shout if we batted close and got 3 wickets by close - everyone else in the media and on the blog seemed to be focused on the usual negative rubbish.

You could actually get England at 85-1 last night on the internet, I just had to tuck into plenty of that !! Its a shame that England should of at least got to 450 if the run rate was just a fraction better. The extra wickets and Kiwi collapse have helped though. The draw is now odds on at 1-2 with kiwis 4-1 and England 8-1. I have laid off all my 85's for a great profit, thanks very much England! If the kiwis put on any more than 30 then its a draw or kiwi win, any less than 300 and England will be in with a chance but I still think they will play safe and end up settling for the draw. No doubt all the boring England knockers will be out in force when either of the above scenarios play out. Well done England !

  • 9.
  • At 09:51 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Joe wrote:

Moores and the management wont even entertain going for 300 odd on the last day on that pitch. Its not in their mentality. The top 3 will bat out 30 odd overs for 70 odd and that will be that

On a side note, Vaughan brings Colly on before Harmison and then gives him 4 overs which were, again, awful. Clearly Vaughan has lost all confidence in him and I personally think thats the end for him. Broad to come in for 2nd Test

  • 10.
  • At 09:54 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Jez Thomas wrote:

What an amazing turnaround! Really pleased for Sidey as he deserves a bit of good fortune with catches after Prior dropped all those chances in Sri Lanka! Interesting that Harmison only bowled 4 overs - think Vaughan has lost all confidence in him. In his interview with Nasser Hussain before the start of play Harmison reckoned he had learnt a lot from how the Kiwi bowlers bowled on the track and felt he would be bowling for his place in the team in the 2nd innings. Four wicketless overs for twentyfour when all hell was breaking loose surely means he can't contribute enough if England are going to win this series. Still think it will be a draw. 300 in a day on that track is asking too much.

  • 11.
  • At 10:04 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • nzhammer wrote:

what an afternoon of cricket, completely turned on its head by sidebottom and top draw catches, c'mon england, we can win this when it seemed we were there for the taking.

  • 12.
  • At 10:04 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • kabind wrote:

I am happy with the sidebottom infornt of this parents and hatrick well done; but i really thinks this match is well paced for a result.Kevin will be the factor between losing and winning for english side . If he delivers as we custom with him then english team will register one of the upset in test cricket.

  • 13.
  • At 10:04 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Daniel Fernandes wrote:

Just hope there is no batting collapse by England as whenever they need to score quick runs they tend to have huge collapses. This is what worries me the most.

  • 14.
  • At 10:05 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Kieran wrote:

Referring to Aggers column a few days back.......its no surprise Sidebottom and Panesar took all the wickets and bowled the best of all bowlers. They have been playing the most cricket and bowling! I.e. Sidebottom ODI's and Panesar for England A/Lions in India. Great and pleased for the whole team, very good effort. Bring on the win!

  • 15.
  • At 10:15 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Adam Dennehey wrote:

Really pleased for Sidebottom, i was abit worried about him coming back in2 the team after such a long lay-off from tests vs the Windies in the summer but he's been gr8 for the team, UNLIKE Steve Harmison - whose interview wiv Nasser on Sky last night was brilliant (i dont agree wiv him but his thoughts were intresting) Sidders has the mental and phsyical attitude 4 international cricket and is someone who can help us lead the attack in2 the 2009 Ashes (how funny that comes up every time we play Cricket.

Good to see Monty bowl with flight and guile, and what about Cook's catches, the first of which of Fleming was a very underated catch and im astonished Agggers u didn't mention that in detail. Hoggy's and Strauss's catches weren't bad either and a good final day (for once in test cricket) awaits. Im not celebrating yet though, England are not resounded for gr8 final day batting. Remember the first test in Pakistan in 2005 when we needed 140-160 to win and we blew it with 9 wkts lost on the last day.

NZ with Vettori and Patel (2 gr8 spinners) as well as a good bowling line up in Mills, Oram and Martin (whose been impressive since coming back into their team in mid 2004) are no mugs and they could still win NZ the game. ENGLAND must strike quickly in the morning, remove Vettori - INNINGS Over.

And they'll have to bat positivley but cautiosley, there's no need to go for every ball but they cant afford to play TOO defensivley when in a good position...a good final day awaits!

  • 16.
  • At 10:25 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • paul hewitson wrote:

Disagree with Aggers. I hope for a quick morning dismissal which will diminish chances of a draw. On a wicket that offers more to Kiwi spinners, England will go for the sub 300 target.

  • 17.
  • At 10:26 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • William Benson wrote:

If there is a God, we will never see Harmless in an England shirt again.

He is a complete and utter waste of space.

Congratulations to Sidebottom. A great effort, helped by some outstanding catches. Well done.

  • 18.
  • At 10:36 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • drewmagoo wrote:

Great stuff from Sidebottom, however, there is no way I could see England chasing 300 on the final day to win a test. A valiant effort until lunch followed by a catastrophic collapse has been the way of things of late; their first innings performance did little to convince me otherwise.

  • 19.
  • At 10:37 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Faustino wrote:

First innings, a depleted NZ 470 off 138 overs, England 348 off 173, then a rollicking start to NZ's second innings. It's shown live here in Brisbane, but as a long-suffering Newcastle supporter (EPL's shown here too), I couldn't bear to watch the cricket as well as the lads! Too much pain!

So imagine my amazement when I checked the close-of=play score. Yes, we might snatch a win. But that's hardly a sign of a decent team in the wider scheme of things.

  • 20.
  • At 10:42 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • g wrote:

WOW! the catching practice is working! WOW!
vaughn needs a score in the second innings but he really hasn't looked like getting it. i fancy kp to get a few more, especially if he can get onto vettori.

  • 21.
  • At 10:47 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Rohan Shah wrote:

An England win? Don't make me laugh.

A New Zealand win is still the most likely option - remember they have the two best spinners in the game (yes, Patel is way ahead of Panesar; hell, so is Hiren Varaiya for that matter).

Even if New Zealand don't add anything to their second innings score, they ought to win.

  • 22.
  • At 10:56 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • mark wrote:

im not entirely sure that this was a strategy thought of by the england management. im fairly certain they werent banking on sidebottom getting a hat-trick, although he definitely deserved it as he's clearly englands best bowler. the situation has gone englands way now, but if england had played to win from the beginning then the match could well have been englands already. the kiwi's still have vettori at the crease so the game is far from over. as its been said above, there really is no place for harmison anymore - 4 overs from englands 'strike' bowler says it all. let us not forget the first innings where england were not brilliant and the kiwi's dutifully, and skillfully, punished them. however england can win but a draw has got to seem more likely. typically thats what england will play for rather than 'risk' a win.

  • 23.
  • At 11:07 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Simon Bartholomew wrote:

Having sat through 3 days of pretty dull cricket here in Hamilton I was jumping up and down on the grassy bank like a lunatic this afternoon. That said I am now wondering on relection whether the impressive bowling display has in some way increased the chances of England losing! New Zealand may have been reluctant to declare with a lead of only 280 or so and would perhaps have batted too long to give them the time to dismiss England - their hand may now be forced if they lose their final 2 wickets relatively cheaply.
Needless to say I will be back at Seddon Park tomorrow to see how it unfolds with all 3 outcomes now possible (probably a draw though let's be honest!).

  • 24.
  • At 11:08 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Mat wrote:

You guys think its tough being a supporter of the english cricket team. Try staying a devoted fan of the 'snatch a loss at any cost kiwis'. It drives you mad. We have to play on decks like this just to take it past 3 days. Wait til we play on a pitch with a bit of life in it, you won't even get 5 days of cricket to enjoy, you'll have it signed, sealed, and delivered inside 3. England will take this one late in the day tomorrow then the series will be a formality.

  • 25.
  • At 11:14 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Newcastle Tony wrote:

Sorry, but I reckon a defeat for England is the likeliest outcome.
There's no way we'll chase the runs, even if NZ declared overnight. We are too cautious, and its the first match of the series. Too much to lose.
The best outcome for us will be if the NZ tail hand around for more than half-an-hour in the morning.
If we have all day to bat, I think Vetorri and Patel will be too good for a defensive-minded England on a fifth-day wicket.
And we've got a long tail, remember.

  • 26.
  • At 11:15 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Michael Berman wrote:

If the result of this match is that Harmison is permanently discarded from the team, then it will have served its purpose.

  • 27.
  • At 11:22 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • mark smith wrote:

Harmison's interview with Naz was a great piece of television, but I found the pundits were too easy on him. It's all very well wanting to spend more time with family, but looking after your family consists to a large extent in doing your job well, whatever your profession. Unfortunately for Steve Harmison he has a job that, if he is to do it well and keep his family in the style he wishes, takes him away from them for several months a year. Unless Mrs Harmison is a successful investment banker or something then those are the roughs that go with the smooths, so while appreciating the man's family values, we and he must accept that the balance will not always be there, or only over the longer term. He can always choose to do another job or not play for England, and I'm sorry if that sounds tough. If his poor form continues then this decision will be made for him anyway...

  • 28.
  • At 11:25 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • nige weir wrote:

I dont see why we are favourites here. There is only 1 day left and they still have 2 wickets remaining. Its clearly a bowlers wicket so why on earth are we going to score nearly 300 in a day?

  • 29.
  • At 11:29 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Andy wrote:

Jonathan,
I don't fully agree with your match result prediction. Yes I reckon the draw is favourite as my first choice prediction, but my second place prediction is a New Zealand win. I think New Zealand are more likely to win than England because of two things. A) The pitch is Deteriorating fast, and B) England have traditionally been known to collapse in the batting more often in this sort of situation than get the win or even the draw.

  • 30.
  • At 11:29 AM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Mark Kidger wrote:

Last night I was posting before lunch that the match had a sniff if Adelaide '06 about it. It's less likely to provide a shock win that some would say was undeserved for the side that batted first and posted a big score, but there is real life in this game still.

Multiple scenarios are still possible:

New Zealand could go for quick runs reckoning that 280-290 is enough and then bowl out England quickly. A couple of quick England wickets and there could be panic.

New Zealand could go negative and decide that it is not worth risking a defeat in a match that they have controlled for so long. If they were to go 1-0 down in the series after controlling the match for 3.5 days the criticism would be tremendous.

England could knock over the last two wickets quickly and set out to see what happens. If they are within 100 at tea they could make a serious effort to win.

Finally, the match could just die quietly because the last two wickets hang on and the batsmen can't force the pace either for the NZ tail, or for the England top order.

Michael Vaughan must have the imagination to know that a win for his underdone side would be almost miraculous. I'd love to see him have a serious go at it. If we aren't willing to chase 280 off 80-85 overs something is seriously wrong.

  • 31.
  • At 12:01 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • ramz wrote:

Rohan Shah

i'm a passionate england fan and trust me when i say that Patel has nothing on Panesar. Harbhajan Singh, Kumble, Murali are better than vettori and Patel.

England probably won't win, but then again the kiwis won't either. Sidebottom was awesome today. far better than any New Zealand seam bowler in the match.

  • 32.
  • At 12:07 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Trev wrote:

What a nights cricket, the laborious toil of the England batsmen, replaced by the relative ease of run scoring by Fleming, then a incredibly consistent line & length spell from sideshow which produced the fantastic fielding display from Hoggard & Cook, this is a fantastic test match, and played in the right spirit with Vettori shaking sideshow's hand at stumps.

There is one dark cloud, Harmison has admitted on live tv, that he places his family commitments before his England place, while that is an honorable stance, and the lefty's will applaud him, he is there doing his job, which he is extremely well paid for, and his heart isnt even close to being in it, send the lad home, get Broad or Anderson in, they have match fitness, and the desire, and wearing the 3 lions means much more to them, we dont need another seamer plodding in at 75/80 mph.

The draw is favourite, but it still can go either way, good luck to both teams, and thanks for the throwback to the good old days.

  • 33.
  • At 12:18 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • david hibbott wrote:

Both sides are regular losers, which means a draw is as good as a win, neither will try to win it, which is a shame.

  • 34.
  • At 12:19 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Ian wrote:

The Harmison interview on Sky has surely put paid to his England career. He is not committed 100% to the cause. The criticism of this though should lay with management for picking him. If Brett Lee arrived late for a tour what would happen to him? Drop him now and give Broad a chance.

  • 35.
  • At 12:28 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Durham Lad wrote:

Let's be realistic, England will probably struggle to make a draw. However, I'm already looking forward to the Summer and Durham's chances in Division One. What a season in prospect with Harmison and Mustard in the team - all we need now is for Colly to be discarded, which must be soon (despite top scoring again) according to all his armchair critics.

  • 36.
  • At 12:32 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Ray wrote:

Sidebottom and Panesar have but the gloss on an otherwise poor performance. With almost every batsman getting starts of 20+ and none going on to make 100 the problems that plagued us in Sri-lanka look certain to continue. On Possibly the flattest pitch in the world someone should have got a ton. Were Tresco mentally up for it he'd be back in the team like a shot! As would Flintoff! And I can't help thinking that Had Prior or Nixon played they'd have hit the 100 too. In short today did nothing more than paper over the cracks of a poor batting display and some poor bowling on day 2.

  • 37.
  • At 12:32 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Jeff wrote:

Given recent experience "one swallow does not make a summer" - don't get me wrong, I'm really pleased England have had a good day and well done to Sidey, but the most likely result is a draw or another England batting collapse. I hope they can prove me wrong with some positive batting with KP taking the Kiwi attack appart - or better still he isn't required to bat!

As for Harmison - where did it all go wrong? Why can't he even bowl a few overs of good line & length? It seems he is all about confidence and its very fragile. He needs to get a positive frame of mind and get himself worked up and believe that he could be the world's no.1 again. Otherwise he's a has been. Think back to the first morning at Lords in 2005 - remember that not today! It a sad situation but he's got to be dropped and give Broad or the unlucky Anderson another go.

  • 38.
  • At 12:36 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Andy Lea wrote:

Harmison's comments underpinned what I had thought for a while - his heart isn't in the job.

Combined with the fact his bowling his been awful for some time, his career in an England shirt must be over after this series.

Its interesting to hear his apologists have gone quiet. I seem to recall a 'bemused' poster on here wondering why on earth we were questioning a bowler whose average ranks now with such illustrious company of the likes of Allan Mullaly?

The answer is simple.

He ain't good enough, and despite his admirable concern for his family, is unable to acknowledge the harsh life of a sportsman.

Face it had Harmy been an Aussie, he would have vanished a LONG tme ago.

  • 39.
  • At 12:42 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • William Armitage wrote:

How long can England play with only 3 bowlers? Steve Harmison has been carried by the other guys for long enough now and must seriousley think about his international future. To say he was not fully prepared for this match is a complete joke and for me should have stayed home with his family which sounds like to me is where his mind is. Stuart Broad must be absolutley steaming mad after watching the Harmison interveiw and should be beating Moores door down and demand an explantion to why he was not picked above home sick Harmison.

  • 40.
  • At 01:04 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Michael Nee wrote:

Time to drop harmy, he's been off form for over 18 months and his economy rate is getting really bad now.

Get Stuart Broad In.

Well done to Sidebottom, he deserved that hat-trick

  • 41.
  • At 01:06 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Roshan Shrestha wrote:

Today we all yet again witnessed how uncertain is this game of cricket.Newzealand were coasting for a huge lead on day four but this man Ryan sidebottom once again proved his credibilty with the swinging ball.However, we mustnot forget the exceptional fielding from the English side at the time when How and fleming looking to be in a great touch.i think it was a great test match to watch but I predict a draw between these two sides.

  • 42.
  • At 01:06 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Andrian Harsono wrote:

Holy cow, Sidey! You sure can bowl. I am tempted to write that England should now really go out there and score runs quickly, but knowing England as they are, they are more likely to do something really stupid and collapse and end up spending the last session trying to bat for a draw... and fail. Keep a level head boys, and believe in yourselves.

In the meantime, I agree with many others. I'm sick and tired of waiting for Harmison to fire up. I really feel that this is the last time we will see him play for England. Goodbye Harmy, your contributions will not be forgotten.

  • 43.
  • At 01:20 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • girish wrote:

this is going to be one of the better test matches played by England on foriegn soil.
I am glad they are showing some fight after poor and slow batting in 1st innings.
But Agnew mentioning that this is may be one of the greatest reversals of ALL TIME made me smile a bit nervously.Typical exaggeration of matters when we dont need any pressure at all.
If over turning 130 run lead is the greatest comeback of all time then john has not heard a place called calcutta.

  • 44.
  • At 01:42 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • nige weir wrote:

This is what I call cricket. 20twenty will never produce this kind of intrigue. This is almost like a chess match now. There are so many possibilities. Can we get the last 2 wickets and have a real go at that already difficult total? If not then this game will die a slow and painful death. If yes then can the England batsmen score the runs we need on this difficult wicket?
I LOVE TEST MATCH CRICKET. People were calling this the most boring match in years, and yet, right now it could not be more fascinating. I wander if the tide has turned towards England or will there be another twist?

  • 45.
  • At 02:13 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • John Watts wrote:

Before the NZ wickets started to fall, I was wondering if NZ would dare to declare 300 ahead.

A target of 300 or less sets up a potentially very interesting final day with all 3 (or 4!) results possible. England definitely need to get those 2 wickets quickly, and if they do, they must bat positively and try to get NZ on the back foot.

  • 46.
  • At 02:40 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Norman West wrote:

If it were Australia in this position, they would win.

Regrettably out lot do not have the balls to contemplate this.

  • 47.
  • At 02:53 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • robbie wrote:

Perhaps England should open with Petersen and Collingwood

  • 48.
  • At 02:58 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Jon Muir wrote:

Great turnaround for England! Sidebottom bowled beautifully, with great help from Panesar! If we knock off the last two wickets early on tonight, then we stand a chance of snatching the win. We need to bat positively, but sensibly. We can't force the run rate on such a slow pitch, as New Zealand's collapse has shown.

Tonight even if we do manage to take the early wickets, we'll be batting against quite considerable odds. It will be the fifth day, so even on this flat, slow pitch, it should still offer a bit for the spinners. Vettori's on fire - the best left arm spinner in the world, and Patel's a very able spinner who gets quite a bit of turn. Also as we've seen from Sidebottom, the ball can reverse swing quite alot.

If we lose early wickets in our second innings, we need to shut up shop to secure the draw. But if we bat positively and sensibly you never know! This match, which for the fist 3 days seemed an extremely tedious one, could go down in the record books as an historical turnaround!

Regardless of the 1st Test's result, we need to make sure of one thing; get Harmison out of the 1st 11. We all know he can never return to his amazing form earlier in his career. For his sake and England's bowling attack; leave him out of the next test! Bring Broad in to replace him, he might not be a great wicket taker, but he'll offer a far greater line and length, thus conceding far less runs. He'll also strengthen a typically very weak tail-end.

2nd Test 11:

Cook
Vaughan
Strauss
Pietersen
Bell
Collingwood
Ambrose
Broad
Sidebottom
Hoggard
Panesar

  • 49.
  • At 03:00 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Mark Kidger wrote:

Trev, ultimately it was shown that there was method in the England madness. New Zealand allowed themselves to get frustrated and ignore the basics trying to force the pace. Right now England have a victory chance that you would never have imagined at the start yesterday, or when the innings folded after lunch.

As for Anderson, have you been checking his progress? After some superb performances against the West Indies and India last summer, he has had three extremely expensive and innocuous spells in ODIs since. If Steve Harmison gets the chop, Stuart Broad is a far better bet. Anderson blows hot and cold and, recently, there has been far more cold than hot.

  • 50.
  • At 03:11 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • David McConnon wrote:

I thought that I would swim against the tide and offer a positive view about Harmison.............but I can't!

The man is a fraud; I didn't see the interview but I have a sense from previous comments. He seems to have no spirit, no drive, no self-respect and sadly, no love for the game. What on earth were the selectors thinking by picking him?

Sidebottom, on the other hand is terrific - I can see a future bowling coach. As good a day as it was, I don't think England will go for the win - too many tremulous individuals and negative recent history. Would love to see it though.

  • 51.
  • At 03:56 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • John Watts wrote:

When New Zealand had only lost one wicket, I was wondering if they would be daring enough to declare 300 ahead or continue and bat England out of the match. Then wickets fell very quickly, and we now have a very interesting last day to look forward to.

All 4 results are possible. England definitely have a chance, but given the pitch and their previous run rate, even 270 will not be easy. Assuming they have less than 300 to chase, I hope they will approach it positively, but intelligently. NZ definitely have a good chance, too. Curiously, their best chance of winning may be for England to think they have a chance to win.

  • 52.
  • At 04:16 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Peter Baker wrote:

England to chase down around 300 in less than a day....you ARE joking !! hope I'm proved wrong but have seen one too many over enthusiastic match predictions to get excited about this one...well done sidey at least there is a chance.

  • 53.
  • At 04:29 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • James wrote:

i wonder how long in to day five new zealand would have batted had they not lost 7 wickets in the final session. great performance from england but i'm sure a sidebottom hat-trick was not in the game plan.

it will be interesting to see how long england play attacking cricket for on day five.

i hope its not all day...

  • 54.
  • At 04:33 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Steve Veasey wrote:

England won't go after any target,sad to say. Even if they are asked to get 290 off say 75 overs Vaughan, Cook and Strauss will first of all try to make sure the draw is in hand. England might have a look at scoring 100 off 20 if they are only 2 or 3 wickets down,otherwise its going to be batten down the hatches and breathe a sigh of relief that we got away with one.

  • 55.
  • At 05:33 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Matthew Verrall wrote:

It turning out to be a good test match. Remember that a test match is played over five days, a good sesion can change the motem of the game.
Good on Sidebottom for getting his hatrick. Backed up by some good bowling from Panser and some excellant fielding from Hoggard and cook.

It is no surpise that Sidebottom and Panser have been our best 2 bowlers as they have come into the test match more match fit that Hoggard or Harmison, sidebottom the one dayers and panser the lions tour.

Which our goes to prove that our bowlers need to be fit and have cricket under thier belt. If

Is this the last time we will see Harmison in an England shirt?

I hope so, let Broad or Anderson who are more fit after playing in the one dayers.

  • 56.
  • At 05:54 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • AJAY wrote:

Good if England win but for a team that took 173 overs to score 300 plus it is a long road. If they try to hit they will lose wickets,if they plod then draw is a possibility.

  • 57.
  • At 06:23 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Michael wrote:

Come on England!!!

England should chase no matter what score New Zealand get, make them suffer like the auzzies did last year. Plus i took 25-1 last night for england wo win.

  • 58.
  • At 06:37 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • apek wrote:

England can't win can they? I don't mean this match - I mean against their critics. Repeatedly lambasted for an inability to 'bat time' and a habit of throwing away their wickets, they bat for 170+ overs for the first time in a gazillion years (4 in fact) and everyone slates them for batting too slowly! Now it's perfectly true that it was not the most adventurous approach, but a) NZ bowled well, b) they crucially took time out of the game, meaning that NZ had to force the game on the fourth afternoon, which is why England have a chance to win now. Alternative scenarios based on recent form would have involved England scoring maybe 300 - 350 (or possibly less) much quicker and throwing their wickets away because they had to play 'positively'. This would have enabled NZ to build a match-winning lead much more easily.
Here's toady's killer stat: England have batted 150 overs or more 16 times in the last 10 years: of these they have won 4, drawn 10, and lost 2: Adelaide 06 (Warne) and the Oval (Muralitharan). So the logic goes: once having conceded 470 (obviously preferable not to do this in the first place) we need to bat time - it will then take an exceptional bowling performance (or appalling batting collapse) for us to lose the game........
No it wasn't especially exciting to watch, and it may have stemmed from a negative rather than a positive approach, but I'll take it over abject defeat any day - of course we may yet see that on what promises to be a very interesting last day.

  • 59.
  • At 07:55 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Mat wrote:

England should have a go at the total no matter what they have to chase. If they go 3 down, then pull the pin and shut up shop, but a sidey hat-trick should not be achieved in vein. The last test hat-trick achieved on kiwi soil was in 1930, make it count.

  • 60.
  • At 08:14 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Dr. Cajetan Coelho wrote:

Ryan Sidebottom and Monty have done a great job for England.

  • 61.
  • At 08:40 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • George Roker wrote:

How can it be classed as a "reversal"
It has looked like a draw from day 1 and still will be!

  • 62.
  • At 08:45 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • brian day wrote:

u took 25-1!!!! i bet u didnt put much on it. its a interesting position, looking at the maths it could go all ways... i would slightly favour nz...but ironically the best chance for nz would be to say get bowled out pretty quickly and give england a carrot to go for.its not beyond reason that it ends as a tie, there is no price quoted on this possibility.but it does show that proper test cricket is as good as the 20..20 stuff.

  • 63.
  • At 11:01 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • The Guvnor wrote:

aggers, there are times when you dont half write a lot of rubbish.

how have england got any hope of chasing over 3 an over on the 5th day when they managed 2 an over on days 2 and 3. You are aware that test match pitches generally get harder to bat on, and that harmison isnt going to change sides and bowl at englands batsmen.

Sidebottom's efforts were laudable, but lets be honest, he was gifted his wickets as NZ chased quck runs and only one of his victms was a genuine dismissal.

England have been hopeless in this test match, a complete shambles with the sole saving grace of cook's catching. Its time the team and management stopped kidding themselves and the media.

  • 64.
  • At 11:42 PM on 08 Mar 2008,
  • Wiggum wrote:

England's only chance of a win is in an Aggers blog. If England were NZ in this match they'd be praised for positive play and NZ criticised for being negative. This weakened NZ side are still better than England, if only Bond was still with us.

  • 65.
  • At 12:09 AM on 09 Mar 2008,
  • Hengist wrote:

LUNCH: ENGLAND 36-4

Says it all really. Well played New Zealand. Now go on and seize the victory you deserve.

There are 4 million people in New Zealand. Cricket is very much a minority sport after rugby union (and seems particularly unpopular among the Maori and pacific islander population). NZ is a wet and cold country, limiting both practice and match opportunities. They just lost 3 seasoned internationals to the Indian 2020 circus.

And yet they can still thrash us out of sight! Hats off. Credit where its due. Well played.

  • 66.
  • At 02:55 AM on 09 Mar 2008,
  • Bob wrote:

England have been well and truly thrashed. What a woeful performance, with NZ completely dominating 4 of 5 days. (Well, If you read media reports in England, they'll say that they dominated day one!!)

This is the true picture of English cricket. Aggers commented that NZ is a team "ripe for the picking" before the test began. And with a second string attack (as Aggers had put it, coz a couple of their good players are out in India playing T20), NZ took the fight right to Englahd.

And so what is the excuse Mr.Aggers? The weather? The pitches? Lack of conditioning? Harmison's boots? Hoggard's breakfast? T20 cricket (the most ridiculous one)? Please get real and stop passing these silly reasons around. Check the ICC test and one-day rankings and that is exactly where England needs to be, if not lower. ZIM, BAN and to some extent WI may be the be only teams that England can hold their own against. They are really poor in all versions of the game.

They may still regroup and come back strongly in the next match. But it is a good lesson to all of you in the media to write a report after you see the match, and not hope against hope right before day one. I havent yet had the chance to hear what Vaughn has to say, but I can assure you that it will make some funny reading.

  • 67.
  • At 02:58 AM on 09 Mar 2008,
  • Eric wrote:

Well, I'm pouring a cool refreshing pint of victory. Ahhh, that is sweeeet. Thank-you England, an enthralling game of cricket! The series will be decided on which team can put together a second innings of substance.

If you stop expecting so much from your team (us Kiwis learnt this lesson a long time ago!) then you can enjoy the game whichever way it goes.

I look forward to a dogged fightback from the Brits in game two!

  • 68.
  • At 03:03 AM on 09 Mar 2008,
  • Dean B wrote:

So a NZ win was third most likely result Aggers? We love having you in New Zealand and love your commentaries but I hope you aren't betting the house on your predictions! :-)

  • 69.
  • At 03:24 AM on 09 Mar 2008,
  • Vijay Bhadri wrote:

My new kungfu chop is I tell everyone I am "Solutions Architect" actually trying to copy an ace cheat and former colleague how does that sound.

Thanks,
Vijay Bhadri... NC

i was very impressed by Sidebottoms preformance! Pitty it wasnt enough to get the whole test

  • 71.
  • At 08:07 AM on 09 Mar 2008,
  • Mark wrote:

Oh Jackie (comment 7), what a blinkered world you must live in...England out thought NZ for about 3 balls (during Sidebottoms hat trick.).otherwise NZ out batted, out balled and outclassed their opponents.

  • 72.
  • At 08:07 AM on 09 Mar 2008,
  • Matt Slater wrote:

Good morning England! You got thumped. Thanks for assuming that the NZers were an easy-beat, underestimating their endurance, and then batting awfully after such a fine bowling performance.

Already there is talk of firing a few people, Strauss and Harmison(??), will that really make a difference?

On a more positive note, Sidebottom is an immensely determined and inspirational player.

This post is closed to new comments.

´óÏó´«Ã½ iD

´óÏó´«Ã½ navigation

´óÏó´«Ã½ © 2014 The ´óÏó´«Ã½ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.