New Zealand 182 All Out.

Anderson expensive but still getting wicket - The England bowlers have done well restriction New Zealand to 182.

The England barring has reverted to type - terrible.

Bopara top scoring with 27 tells it's own story.

Ambrose 0 showing that Mustard should be picked for one dayers.

Good late fightback by New Zealand in their innings with Elliot 56 and Mills 47.

England 77-6 need a miracle innings from both Collingwood and Swann.

__________________
Ern

England fighting back at 112 -6 after 31 overs.

Collingwood at least showing some grit.

__________________
Ern

All over now. Congrats to NZ for a great fighting performance.

Englands batting has let them down again, infact it was a disgrace today. Most of the batsman threw their wickets away on what was a pretty flat track - all the talk before the game was that a par score was 280-300.

The balance of the team is wrong. Wright isn't good enough to bat or bowl. Colly, Bopara and Bell should bowl ahead of him.

I'd bring Mustard back to open and keep wicket then a specialist bat or bowler can come in to replace Ambrose - in an ideal world I'd have Flintoff in (for Ambrose) but I dont know if I'd want him playing ODI's if it would shorten his test career.

__________________
Mark.

I don't know why Mustard was replaced in the first place, my problem with Flintoff is that I would like to seem him play Test cricket only, with an eye on 2009.

England batted poor with just Collingwood and Swann making a real fight of the match, but having said that new Zealand were the better side.

Goes to prove they were robbed with the half hour lost in the last match.

__________________
Ern

Neither do I. You would have though that with a colleague as captain that may help your cause a bit. This only seems to be the case if you are Sussex or ex Sussex.

Ditto. He's still our best bowler and we will miss him and Harmison against any decent opposition.

__________________
Mark.

wow england won?? i saw the new zealand innings and thought it should be an easy victory for the english....really the kiwis need to be congratulated for their victory. this opens up the series!

Good to see some other Kiwis stepped up to the plate for a game or 2.

Elliot has had a couple of cracking ODIs to start his career, albeit his innings was very slow it was just what was needed in the circumstances. Mills gave him great support, as well as lashing some 6s late on.

2 key wickets in his 1st 3 overs incluing that of KP cheaply, and backed up by the promigin Southee who took 4 wickets, including 1 magic over to get 2 edges before coming back late on to remove Colly and effectively give them 1 hand on the win. Good to see Vettori sticked by him after his 1st 3 overs went for 23, next 2 he took 3-2.

Agree with the points made below, Ambrose not the best ODI keeper in this country, and Luke Wright won't ever make it as an opener, nor will he consistently with the ball. The need a Tres like player with the bat, and some good tight bowlers at the end of the day, as well as wicket takers.

Hell, with Jimmy Anderson spraying it around every other game he plays, you need some guys who can stick to a plan and get wickets the old fashioned way

Heard an interesting point from Nick Kight after the game....they think Jimmy was bowling deliberately at the opposite end to which his natural swing would be assisted, due to the fact he didn't want the white ball to get out of control (espec with McCullum there). Anyone believe this would be a possibility? If not, why did he? Considering the other 2 seamers were hit the pitch types who could bowl at the other end, and if that is a correct assumption then is it good to have arguably your most experienced ODI bowler by a long shot bowling with no confidence in his own ability?

__________________
Hoggy Hoggy Hoggy...OI OI OI!!!

No I don't think Anderson lacks confidence to the extent that he would deliberately bowl at the end that did not suit his best asset. Could have been a team plan, but I doubt that.

I think in ODI's Anderson has taken wickets but suffered since he had to bowl at the promoted McCullum, unlike the hit the deck bowlers Anderson bowls fast and full - and McCullum will throw the bat at this type of bowling with the effect that he will get runs, or get out.
This is why I consistently say Anderson is better suited to Test cricket than ODI's. The fact that he takes wickets is the reason he keeps getting selected.

I think the England bowlers did OK, credit has to be given to Elliot and Mills. New Zealand deserved their win.

__________________
Ern

I agree. He is always wanting swing. I think he only found difficulty in two overs in the last Test where Sidebottom was also having problems. In a first over the bowler needs to see what the ball is doing so there is a likelihood it will go down leg if there isn't swing. There are more chances of getting wickets with swing when batsmen are tentative but with McCullum's attacking mode the ball will be going anywhere and he will be lucky.

Bowling plans are also something to take into account but they are made before the bowler has bowled on the wicket and he needs to be able to change his plans. Also Collingwood needs to stop changing the fields after every ball and have patience for the over.

With regard to the ends I think that they wanted Broad to bowl at McCulllum and Anderson at How, as Anderson kept getting him out in Tests. What has happened is the batsmen taking quick singles and Broad has ended up bowling at How and he has been getting him in these ODIs where in the Tests where Broad has been second change with How gone and was able to have some control over McCullum.