Fulton fires for Canterbury but falls short of ton

Last updated 13:14 21/02/2013

Relevant offers


Dan Hughes makes history as first Australian cricket concussion sub after blow to helmet Players can't complain about schedule if they go to Indian Premier League: Steve Waugh Black Caps v India: Good result but room to improve, says Mitchell Santner Tamim Iqbal leads Bangladesh recovery after Moeen Ali strikes for England Plunket Shield 2016-17: An XI of players who will be pressing test selection claims Hamish Marshall excited about final chapter of cricket career in Wellington Wellington seek strong start to Plunket Shield after impressive preseason Henry Nicholls 'disappointed' not to be in India with Black Caps but targets 'big runs' in Plunket Shield Indian media praise Kane Williamson and his Black Caps as series finally gets competitive Skipper hails 'special performance' from Trent Boult in series-levelling victory

Peter Fulton fell agonisingly short of his fourth Plunket Shield century of the season, but gave his test credentials another boost as Canterbury put on a solid batting performance.

The Canterbury skipper was dismissed for 98 in the morning session of their final four-day match of the season, against Auckland at Hagley Park today.

Fulton's contribution helped Canterbury through to 233-4 at lunch on day two and a lead of 60.

Tom Latham was 50no and first day bowling hero Shanan Stewart was unbeaten on 20 at lunch.

Despite missing a match, Fulton was the competition's leading run scorer before this game and now has 883 runs at an average of more than 55.

He's scored three centuries and seven half centuries.

He's been surpassed as the competition's top scorer by Otago's Aaron Redmond who was 126no at lunch in his side's match against Wellington.

But Fulton has well and truly put his hand up to bat at the top of the test order against England when the first of three tests begins on March 6 in Dunedin.

Ad Feedback

- Stuff

Special offers
Opinion poll

Should bouncers be banned from cricket?

Yes - they're too dangerous

Neutral - it is what it is

No - it's just bad luck when it goes wrong

Vote Result

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content