Matt Renshaw has scored his first ODI century, while Nathan Ellis took five wickets to guide Australia to a 59-run win over hosts Zimbabwe in the first clash of their three-match series.
Renshaw put on 72 runs with Alex Carey for the fifth wicket and 75 with Ollie Peake for the sixth wicket, leaving Zimbabwe with a needed run rate of 5.90.
2 sentences from our version of the report,
chosen to cover it. Nothing here is written; every line is in the article below.
How
Summarized version
Matt Renshaw has scored his first ODI century. Renshaw made 109.
Headline check
One of the two things this headline claims did not turn up in the report.
“Aussies” is named in the headline. We could not find it in the report.
Figures, names and quoted words in the headline, looked for in the report itself — not in the summary above. Names are matched as they are spelled, so a report that says “New South Wales” where the headline says “NSW” is queried here when it should not be. How this is checked
The article, shortened and in plain language
Matt Renshaw has scored his first ODI century, while Nathan Ellis took five wickets to guide Australia to a 59-run win over hosts Zimbabwe in the first clash of their three-match series.
Australia chose to bat first, and the surprise decision from captain Mitchell Marsh was vindicated as the tourists scored 8-294 from their 50 overs, setting Zimbabwe an imposing target at Harare Sports Club.
Renshaw put on 72 runs with Alex Carey for the fifth wicket and 75 with Ollie Peake for the sixth wicket, leaving Zimbabwe with a needed run rate of 5.90.
The 20-year-old left-arm quick Newman Nyamhuri finished with 5-62, only the second Zimbabwe bowler to take five wickets in an ODI against Australia.
Shortened to 1 minute
of reading, this version reads 10.9 on the Niral Score.
You are reading our version, not theirs.
This is ABC News (Sport)'s report shortened to its most important sentences, in plainer words, with
verdicts and loaded words taken out. Plain description stays, and so do adjectives
that carry a fact, such as "former" or "federal". The reporting, the facts and the quotations
are theirs — quotations are never edited — and the indicators beside it measure
this version. Hover or tap Adjectives to see every one left in the text.
How this outlet filed it, and how we rewrote it
No other newsroom we read has filed on this event, so there is nothing to compare it with yet.
Readers can ask a question about this story here.
Questions and answers are for subscribers.
Sign in
to read them.
Comments are read before they appear where anything in them needs a person to look.
Nothing posted here is ever deleted; a comment taken down keeps its text and the reason,
so the decision can be looked at again. How this works