Nicely done lads. England levelled the T20 series in New Zealand this morning with a brilliant performance that must have left the Kiwis feeling shellshocked.
When I turned on the TV and saw that we’d set the hosts 242 to win my eyes almost popped out of their head. It was the 11th highest score by a major international side in history. And it was England’s highest score by some distance – beating the 230 we scored against South Africa in Mumbai during the last World T20 tournament in India.
There were individual records too. Eoin Morgan’s half century (he went on to score 91 off 41 balls) was the fastest ever by an England player. But the real star of the show was Dawid Malan, whose 103 off 51 balls was England’s fastest ever T20 century. That’s some achievement for a so called fringe player.
I was absolutely delighted for Malan. We discussed the other day what a fine white ball players he is. His T20I average and strike rate are now better than Virat Kohli’s! However, he probably needed a match-defining score to cement his place in the team. And now he’s done that.
Malan is great to watch. He’s not quite David Gower (I often think he’s a bit like Ed Joyce aesthetically) but he’s still destructive in a stylish and languid manner. His runs are rarely ‘thrashy’; they’re mostly beautifully timed rather than brutal. England simply must find room for him in their World T20 squad.
The problem for Dawid is that competition is fierce. There’s still Jason Roy, Jos Buttler, Ben Stokes, and dare I say it Alex Hales, to come back into the mix. Who on earth should England leave out? It depends whether the selectors go for reputation or production. If they choose the latter then Dawid should be a dead cert.
Malan has now made 6 scores in excess of 50 in just nine T20I innings. It’s hard to know what else he can do. However, if England can go on to win this series, as they’re now favourites to do in the cricket betting, then it will become harder to change a winning team too much. The fact that Malan can open the batting as well as slot in at 4 makes him both a valuable and versatile squad player.
The other player who caught the eye today was Tom Banton. This time he made an entertaining 31 off 20 balls. He’s a very special talent indeed. I can’t quite pick who he reminds me of. David Lloyd said after the game that he’s a tad reminiscent of Kevin Pietersen. I can see what he means but the parallels aren’t exact. Banton has the same world class hand-eye coordination but he’s more orthodox than Pietersen on the drive.
England also bowled well today – although I doubt anyone seriously thought that New Zealand would chase down England’s huge score. Monroe and Guptill got them off to a decent start, with the Curran brothers taking some punishment for the first time on tour, but the crowd’s hopes of a home win proved ephemeral.
Our star with the ball proved to be Matt Parkinson. There’s so much to love about this Lancashire lad. He gives the ball some air, shows courage, and isn’t afraid to bowl slowly even when he’s going for runs. That takes guts and a sound temperament.
Parky’s short-lived duel with Colin Grandhomme was compelling. The ‘big man’ launched him for a massive six but the leggie held his nerve. He kept tossing it up and Grandhomme’s eyes ultimately proved bigger than his belly. Banton took a sound catch in the deep.
It was clear that the Kiwis had decided to target Parkinson but it proved their undoing. The youngster claimed four valuable wickets and extinguished any remaining hopes New Zealand might have had. I particularly enjoyed his dismissal of Southee, who slogged a few down the order. Parkinson got him lbw with a nice slider – evidence that he’s got all the tricks.
The series is now set up beautifully for the decider in Aukland. The only potential problem is the weather. The forecast suggests heavy showers with the possibility of thunder.
If I was a mainstream cricket writer I’d now add “but if the storm clouds do stay away then New Zealand ought to worry about thunder in the shape of Dawid Malan”. But I’m not so I won’t.
James Morgan
PS Yesterday’s article was published quite late in the day so you might have missed it. Here’s a link to The Hundred PR Paradox. This one took longer than usual to write and research so please do give it a read if you have time.
Written in collaboration with cricket-betting.in
Subscribe to receive new article notifications via email
A splendid performance by England – I listened to the whole of it on the radio. What makes that enormous total even more remarkable is that just 18 runs came from the first four overs, and Banton’s bright effort nothwithstanding, it was only once Malan and Morgan got going that a huge total was seriously on the cards. Finally, Parkinson’s bowling effort was even better than the figures suggest – two chances went begging off him as well, so it could easily have been a six wicket haul – and also Sodhi, New Zedaland’s rather more experienced leggie, got absolutely monstered, Malan taking 28 off one over (and he was probably glad it was only 28 in the end given that the first five balls went for 26). My thoughts about this match form the first part of this blog post: aspi.blog/2019/11/08/nz-v-england-t20-series-goes-to-decider/
If the final match is rained off and the series is tied, which side is currently winning on boundary count-backs? Thanks.
Nice one Smylers. We’d win that one again.
As I said of the final, as long as both teams are made aware at the start and accept it there can be no sour grapes, however artificial the decision. I am all for getting a winner and stopping drawn white ball series, after all the whole concept of this format is becoming increasingly artificial anyway.
There’s actually no boundary count back in this series. In the event of a tie, the winner will be decided by the combined height of the players’ wives.
I misread that as “weight”.
Now that could have caused all sorts of disagreements
Does that include wags, as some players aren’t married. Now that would be unfair and what about the pregnant ones, do you count baby weight. You haven’t thought this through have you.
242 was a challenging 50 over target not that long ago.
Seems to be forgotten that Malan was one of England’s few relatively bright spots in the last ashes series in Australia.
It still was a challenging total in the World Cup final. It all depends on the pitches.
Once again it’s experience that defines a white ball match. You can’t read much into our bowling as the Kiwi batsmen had to take inordinate risks, so there was little pressure.
Was wondering when Morgan would show his World Cup 17 six innings was no passing phase. He appears to have discovered a second wind as a batsman, where he can make his mark as a hitter as well as an accumulator.
Would be interested to know your views on Bairstow’s call up to the test squad as cover for the injured Denly. Hardly like for like. Will we ever learn, even with a new man in charge, though he is a bowler. Bairstow was dropped to go away and work at his game. What has he done since to justify a recall? Also what message does this send to others about the cliquiness of the present test set up?
I tend to agree Marc. It’s not really a like for like replacement but then again the selectors might feel they don’t need a Denly replica. With Burns, Sibley, and Crawley all in the squad it’s doubtful that Jonny will need to bat in the top 3 if called upon. However, if he is then Ed Smith will point to the century he made at No.3 in Sri Lanka. I don’t think we should read too much into that innings though. SL is quite a unique tour and there was no seam bowling to speak of. Jonny is not a Test 3 in my opinion – especially considering the way he’s played recently with his tendency to get bowled through the gate.
Maybe the ECB is so hard up after all their Hundred induced cashflow problems that they’ve simply chosen Bairstow because he’s already out there. I guess it saves an additional airfare ;-)
The thing that worries me is what message it sends to Bairstow. What incentive is there for him to work at his game and regain the sort of technique he had when he first appeared in the test side if he knows he’s still that close to a recall. He’s certainly never been a no3 at test level and with his present technical problems he’s no higher than a keeper at 7, who’s only required for cameos.
It’s the old chestnut of what’s the point of the county circuit if not to groom test prospects. There’ll be a few players thinking what’s the point if there’s no recognition. Seems like jobs for the boys to me.
Strauss popped up in the media a few days ago and said:
“We certainly haven’t seen the end of Andy Flower yet. I would not be at all surprised if we saw him in a high-profile coaching role again. Maybe not with the ECB, but in the English game somewhere”.
All will no doubt become apparent…