Tuesday 28 May 2013

Mini-session Analysis 2nd Test, England vs New Zealand, Headingley 2013

Here is the final mini-session analysis for the second test between England and New Zealand at Headingley, Leeds, England

A mini-session is (normally) half a session, either between the start of the session and the drinks break or the drinks break and the end of the session. Occasionally a long session will have 3 mini-sessions where it will be broken up with 2 drinks breaks.

2-1aEngland 32/1 off 14New Zealand
2-1bEngland 35/2 off 12New Zealand
2-2aEngland 43/0 off 16England
2-2bEngland 68/1 off 16England
2-3aEngland 70/0 off 17England
2-3bEngland 89/3 off 19New Zealand
3-1aEngland 17/3 off 5New Zealand
3-1bNew Zealand 62/2 off 18England
3-2aNew Zealand 37/4 off 14England
3-2bNew Zealand 75/4 off 11.4New Zealand
3-3aEngland 55/0 off 14England
3-3bEngland 35/1 off 14New Zealand
3-3cEngland 26/0 off 13draw
4-1aEngland 67/0 off 15England
4-1bEngland 66/2 off 14England
4-2aEngland 38/2 off 6England
4-2bNew Zealand 68/3 off 22England
4-3aNew Zealand 72/0 off 20New Zealand
4-3bNew Zealand 18/3 off 12.4England
4-1bNew Zealand 61/2 off 10.5England
4-2aNew Zealand 1/2 off 11England

Final update, click here

England win the mini-session count 13 - 7

Stumps, Day 4: England lead the mini-session count 11-7

New Zealand's lack of spin, and lack of ability against spin has shown through in this test clearly. Paul Wiseman has been taken on as New Zealand's spin coach, and it's possibly the most important cricket role in the country at the moment.

Lots of questions have been asked about Cook's decision-making and how conservative he has been in this test. However I feel that (if he had taken the wider view of looking at the series more than the match) then his decision was sensible, if a little boring. He had New Zealand in a situations where they couldn't possibly win the match, and therefore the series was secured. I personally prefer test captains to treat each match as being worth winning, but I can understand why he decided to use the tactics that he did. - Mykuhl

Lunch, Day 4: England lead the mini-session count 12-7

After some phyrric counter-punching by Southee and Bracewell, New Zealand were saved their blushes by the rain. If it stays wet for the rest of the day, then New Zealand will get a very undeserved draw. - Mykuhl

End of match, Day 4: England win the match and the mini-session count 13-7

It took 11 overs, but England managed to clean up the tail eventually. The standard New Zealand tail end tactic of not taking any singles, so that the batsmen get comfortable with one bowler worked reasonably well, so Cook was forced to change the ends of the bowlers. The decision to change ends had immediate effect with Anderson picking up the 10th wicket for the second innings in succession. - Mykuhl


  1. How do you decide has won each mini session?

    1. There is a formula that combines runs scored, wickets taken, overs bowled and the nature of the wicket that was taken (ie wicket number 3 is worth more than wicket number 9).

      Occasionally I decide that the formula is not correct, especially when the match is setup in a way that means that players are aiming for different things than normal. For example I gave 4-1b to England despite New Zealand scoring 61 runs in less than 11 overs, and only losing two tail-enders. In the context of the match, England needed wickets, and runs were irrelevant. Two wickets in 10.5 overs represented a good hour for England.