Ashes 09: A joyous draw, long live Test cricket
|
One wicket. One wicket is all Australia needed. 69 balls at James Anderson and Monty Panesar, and Australia can’t win the game. While it is tempting to take a machine gun into a crowded building after a game like that, first you have to marvel at two — just better than completely useless — batsmen holding up an end to save a game for their country. Monty and Jimmy aren’t walking wickets, they are ordinary tailenders polished by the professional game. But 69 balls was longer than any of the first five wicket partnerships. And they looked like going out a lot less than their top order teammates. You may want to punch them right now, but you have to respect them. Australia may have made it easier for them at times (Marcus North?), but they still had to stick it out knowing one mistake meant Australia got the dream start. Australia was never the favourite to win this Test. Cardiff is designed for spin, and Australia was taking in their club spinner against two international class spinners. Yet, once you look past Jimmy Anderson’s fist pump after saving the game, you realise that Nathan Hauritz took more wickets in the game than England did. Yes, that Nathan Hauritz. The one Australia picked from grade cricket. Yes, really. Both teams batted for two and a half days. One team took five wickets, and one took 19. Jimmy Anderson might have been overcome with emotion, but it wasn’t from the joy of a hard fought game, it was at the fact they somehow they managed not to lose. Australia was one wicket away from an innings victory on the pitch that was set up for the hosts. This isn’t a demoralising draw, this is a joyous one. Once Ricky Ponting stops calling the English cheats he will realise that Australia dominated England in this Test. Four batsmen made hundreds, and Michael Clarke should have. Mitchell Johnson was not even required. The bowling wasn’t as smooth, but the last two bowlers picked took 11 wickets between them. Mitchell Johnson couldn’t hit the pitch at times, and Peter Siddle was more interested in trying to squeeze imaginary life out of the middle of the pitch than get wickets. But even with their two main bowlers struggling on an ordinary wicket, the Australians almost bowled England out twice. That has got to be what Australia takes out of this match. They might not have won it, but England weren’t even in the match for the last four days, they had resorted to cardboard cut outs on the fourth day. Ricky is too angry for positives right now. Being one of the great moralists of our time, he feels it is his right to set England straight on what is in the spirit of the game. Peter Siddle can stand mid pitch and swear at his opponent but England can’t time waste in the last hour. Once he has sorted that out, hopefully he can get Mitchell Johnson’s mind right, and go one wicket better at Lord’s. They say Australia grow an extra leg at Lord’s, if that is true, England will need to find some serious form quickly. You have to love Test cricket, five days of play, a draw, and people over here couldn’t be more excited. Love live Test cricket, and long live the exciting draw. |
|
|
|
13 Comments
Exciting draw? This was mind-numbingly boring cricket from England.
Waiting for rain, batting to survive ..hardly nail biting stuff.
The English commentators give Larger and larger pauses of complete silence followed by over after over of English batsmen becoming cannon fodder.
Pathetic.
I agree thoroughly with the summary here of the game. Some of my mates want to drop Hauritz because he couldn’t close out the test in the 5th day. The pitch was awful, Australia took 19 wickets, only batted once, and scored as many runs as England.
We’ll have them for breakfast at Lords.
I think what’s certain is that this series will be a junkyard scrap.
Little love lost between the two teams.
I think that makes it compulsive vewing.
Ponting should be angry, damn angry. A draw is as good as a loss in this case. The Aussies might have out gunned the Poms in most areas, but if you can’t bowl that rabble out twice in one match, then it says a little something about your bowling stocks.
Re: Hauritz… it was a spinners paradise. If he hadn’t of bowled well on that dust bowl then the selectors should have been taken out back and been dispensed with for including such a useless bowler.
Maaate, lay off the alcopops.
Rowan, how on earth was it a spinner’s paradise? How many wickets did the English spinners take? 1! Buggered if I know how that makes it a paradise. Sure, it looked like it was spinning, but while spinning, it slowed off the surface and sat up, which takes the sting out of all but the perfect delivery.
Don’t give the English spinners too much credit, just because they barely got a wicket doesn’t mean anything. They were about as likely to get a wicket as Kevin Rudd is to get a friend.
Utegate?
I agree it was a spinner’s wicket but the spinners coulndn’t make the most of it. Hauritz had to bowl well — he did. Credit to him.
I doubt he will bowl like that again this series but happy to be proved wrong.
I was watching last night, thinking: “Imagine what Warne wouuld have done on this pitch?”
Yeah, I had the same thought re: Warne. He made it look so easy, when clearly, it is not.
I love test cricket but is Ponting the best batsman and worst captain since Bradman? Once again a declaration is influenced by personal milestones and again the result is not what Australia aimed for. Time to remember he captains a representative team and not a bunch of mates perhaps?
Heathdon, you speak the truth. It was surreal to say the list to listen to Atherton in the commentary box suggest the fielding change and lo and behold by the next over of that particular bowler Ponting had miraculously had exactly the same thought.
It was a cracker of a test, although the ground was the shape of a basbull pitch and probably only suitable for 20/20 nonsense which is really just baseball with a wicket.
I wasn’t bored by the last days play - I was hoping that the Aussies won, and would’ve been pleased for the Poms if they didn’t resort to being poor sports - taking up time bringing out new gloves, and the phsyio? Even the batsman was embarrassed. I was really pissed off at that. We outplayed them via the obvious - 16 wickets as opposed to 6?They organized the pitch for their game - fair enough - but don’t bloody cheat or play in a grotty way! I hope they lose the next 4 matches. I’ve lost respect for them. Who decided to adopt such grotty tactics? Disgusted!
How closely was Jarrod watching? England did not take five wickets in the match, they took six. Hauritz did not take more than them, he took the same number. OK, it’s not much to be proud of, but it’s still a fairly basic fact.