live cricket scores

Sunday, 18 January 2015

De Villiers smashes 31-ball hundred in SA's 439

AB de Villiers ripped up the record books with the fastest century in ODIs, off just 31 balls, as South Africa smashed their own record at the Wanderers and racked up 439, four shy of the world record total of 443. De Villiers' was the third hundred in a towering South African total - the first time three had been scored in an ODI innings - which also saw Rilee Rossouw register his maiden hundred and Hashim Amla his 18th, in the highest opening stand South Africa have ever posted of 247.

De Villiers was only at the crease from the 39th over, when Amla had collected a cool 120 off 112 balls. Amla faced just 30 more deliveries and added 33 to his total, an indication of how de Villiers' dominated the last 10 overs and spared none of the West Indian bowlers as the third wicket stand added 192 from 67 deliveries.
He pounced on everything from slower balls to full tosses, and there were plenty of the latter and showed off his full range of strokes. There was the pull, the scoop, the lofted drive and the good old slog. Jason Holder, given the toughest of examinations as a young captain, was hardest hit as de Villiers plundered 45 runs off the nine balls he faced from him, including six of his sixes, as he raced past the previous hundred mark of 36 balls set by Corey Anderson on January 1 last year.
Like the rest of his attack, there was little Holder could do on a belter of a surface - the same one on which the T20 was played last week. Dwayne Smith ended with an economy rate of 17 as his fourth over cost 30. At least West Indies could take comfort that they chased down a record of their own in the T20. The 236 they scored was the highest successful chase in a T20 but if they are to have any hope of repeating that in the fifty-over format, they will need a start like the one South Africa had.
Rossouw and Amla were circumspect upfront, with the latter ushering his younger partner through the knock he really needed. A yo-yo start to his international career saw Rossouw collect as many ducks as he did starts and he could count them both on one hand. Five noughts would not have infused the man who may be tasked with opening at the World Cup should Quinton de Kock be unfit at the start with confidence but a century will change all that.
Rossouw's first run as an ODI opener came after he was hit on the stomach by Holder and did not stop until he chipped one straight to mid-off in the 39th over. By then, South Africa had already broken one record and took the opportunity to smash another.
De Villiers was promoted to No.3 to take advantage of the solid platform but launched from it in more spectacular fashion than anyone could have imagined.
It did not start that way for West Indies. Although neither Jerome Taylor nor Holder really threatened, they kept the openers to five runs an over in the first eight and were helped when Sulieman Benn pulled them slightly further back. The only chance came off Benn's bowling when he had Rossouw given out lbw but the batsman reviewed the decision immediately and replays showed a clear bottom-edge.
South Africa had 100 inside 20 overs but their circumspection only really lifted when Marlon Samuels was brought into the attack. He began with a short ball begging to be put away and Amla obliged with a pull backward of square. Twelve runs came off each of his first and third overs as South Africa took 41 off the five overs between 20 and 25 to suggest the acceleration had begun.
They took the Powerplay two overs later and were almost made to regret it. Benn was brought back to force a squeeze and Rossouw nearly run-out but nothing was going West Indies way even though they only gave away 29 runs in the five-over period. South Africa's opening stand was still unbroken and both batsmen were closing in on centuries. Rossouw's came first off 102 balls and Amla's three deliveries later, off 103.
More worryingly for West Indies, it was only the 35th over, South Africa already had 200 runs on the board and went on to more than double that.

No comments:

Post a Comment