Canterbury exert dominance over Wellington

Last updated 12:57 21/11/2012
Firebirds
Photosport

THROUGH THE GATE: Jesse Ryder fails to cover his stumps and is knocked over by Andrew Ellis for just one on the first day of Wellington’s Plunket Shield match against Canterbury in Rangiora.

Relevant offers

Cricket

Jayawardene hits ton to help Sri Lanka recovery Kane Williamson banned over bowling action Batsman Craig Cachopa signs deal with Sussex New Zealand's top female cricketers to be paid Batsman Shaun Marsh to undergo elbow surgery Jos Buttler to make test debut against India Afghanistan keep Zimbabwe ODI series alive Jeetan Patel enjoying his county stint in England Why are England so poor? Ghosts, apparently Ishant Sharma inspires Indian second test win

An 118-run unbeaten knock by Dean Brownlie has ensured Canterbury have exerted their dominance over Wellington on the third-day of their Plunket Shield match today.

At lunch Canterbury were 216-4 in reply to Wellington's first innings total of 239.

At the end of play on the first day - Monday - Canterbury were 91-2 with Brownlie and Peter Fulton unbeaten on 53 and 32 respectively.

Play began at the earlier time of 10am today after not a ball was bowled on the second day because of rain.

Brownlee and Fulton were humming this morning before the latter was dismissed for 79 off 175 balls when caught by Luke Ronchi off the bowling of Jesse Ryder, leaving Canterbury 187-3.

Tom Latham's stint was much shorter.

He was soon back in the pavilion with just six runs to his account when Mark Gillespie coaxed him into nicking a catch to Josh Brodie.

Brad Cachopa had added three runs off 20 balls at lunch.

Short scoreboard:

First innings

Wellington 239 v Canterbury 216 (G Worker 0, P Fulton 79, S Stewart 3, D Brownlie 118 no, T Latham 6, B Cachopa no); M Gillespie 2-44, A McKay 1-28, J Ryder 1-22.)

Ad Feedback

- Stuff

Special offers
Opinion poll

Was a life ban from cricket a fair punishment for Lou Vincent?

Yes, he's admitted to match-fixing and deserves his punishment

It doesn't go far enough in my opinion

No, it's only going to deter whistle blowers in the future

It's too harsh. A two-year ban would have been fair

Vote Result

Related story: (See story)

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content