BJ Watling aids quick victory for Northern

Last updated 21:35 09/02/2013

Relevant offers

Cricket

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 England gloveman Matt Prior to take a break Ish Sodhi could have cricket fans in a spin Cricket World Cup boss sees capital tourism spinoffs Afghanistan century not enough in one-dayer

Black Caps test wicketkeeper BJ Watling oversaw Northern Districts' quick win over Canterbury in their Plunket Shield match at Christchurch's Hagley Oval today.

With wickets tumbling over the first two days leaving the Knights just 47 runs to win yesterday, Watling and James Marshall kept their cool to claim a six-wicket win.

They knocked off the required runs in steady fashion with Watling finishing unbeaten on 75 and Marshall on 36.

It was a much-needed win by the Knights to keep them in touch with runaway leaders Central Districts and the Otago Volts.

Runs weren't a problem on day three at the Basin Reserve where Auckland were fighting back against Wellington.

Having conceded an 80-run first innings lead, the Aces batting lineup responded strongly yesterday, getting through to 233-5 in their second innings.

Opener Michael Barry got through to 77 before he was run out.

The Aces were teetering at 37-3 but skipper Gareth Hopkins responded with a patient unbeaten 92.

His runs came off 177 balls in almost four hours and he got good support from Colin de Grandhomme who scored 36 before being trapped lbw by Mark Gillespie.

Gillespie was in fine form, taking 4-51 from his 19 overs.

A result looks certain with Auckland 150 runs ahead with five wickets left.

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