England win Test and series

So England managed to take the five wickets they needed last night to ensure that they won the Napier Test and took the series 2-1. Well done to them, especially for fighting back after losing the first Test. Winning away from home is never easy either. But they made a meal of it last night as Tim Southee and Ross Taylor took New Zealand past 400. Heck, even Chris Martin made 5.

Some readers (Ann, say) may feel that this fully justifies Michael Vaughan's caution in batting on on the fourth day to get a lead of 550. We only won by 120 runs and so it was best to have the insurance in the bank. I'd suggest that it was having such a huge buffer that made England lose focus somewhat when they were bowling second time around. When they thought they were defending only 250 in the first inning, the bowling was sparky, aggressive and constantly probing. This time they had all the runs and time they needed, where was the urgency?

The large lead may also have encouraged the free-hitting from Southee in particular - 77 off 40 balls - at the end. The match was over, may as well have some post-lunch fun. It skewed the size of the win. If New Zealand were chasing 450, they would not have batted so carefree and England's tactics would have been tighter. Ann is right to say that it is Michael Vaughan's prerogative to declare when he wants, not some hack watching TV on the other side of the world. But I am worried that by pushing for a 550-run lead in the second innings, England betrayed their fear more than they showed their strength. If you don't feel confident about dictating the game to New Zealand when you are 500 runs ahead, you are in a state of weakness. Oh well, roll on the summer.

Comments

[Ann]

Then MV would have declared sooner. I really fail to see why this is such a big issue. Vaughan would have been silly to act in any other way than he did, as the atheist very nearly said ;-)
As you know full well, Patrick, what I said was that it was MV's prerogative and not that of DV. Nowhere did I mention hacks, at whatever longitude and latitude they may have been located.
OK, so having a large margin may make you slightly less than desperate. You seem to want England to be desperate at all times, and resent the team being in a position of overpowering dominance. It was a sign of strength, not of weakness, to declare when you jolly well felt like it: to be able to please yourself and know that you'll win anyhow.
Not that I have no criticisms: JA's shockingly inconsistent attitude is beginning to annoy me. Come on, Jimmy, use your head: when you have been hit for 4 identical consecutive boundaries earlier in the game, to let it happen again is a little careless. Don't telegraph your intentions. After the second boundary, how about verying the length or even the speed, even though your ability to hit the exact same spot at exactly the same speed 4 times in a row may be impressive per se ...

[Patrick Kidd]

Not 400, but 500 was certainly ample. The only reason England batted on on the fourth morning was surely to let Strauss get to 200. Once he went there wasn't much reason to delay. The important thing is that Broad hit out to ensure that the extra 50 runs were scored quickly, but what if the runs had been harder to come by?

[The Atheist]

I'm not sure what you are advocating here, Patrick. You think that people should declare once a 400 run margin has been achieved?

Given the amount of time left in the game, Vaughan would have been to act in any other way than he did. If your batters are on top, you have to force the opposition from the game.