FIRST INNINGS
England 102-10
Prior 37*
Siddle 5-21 and Clark 3-18
The fact that 8/10 Englishmen were caught behind the wicket tells the story. Although Siddle cashed in, the respect should go to Clark who showed great control and got rid of an obdurate Cook when he was set. The game plan was simple; bowl full and let the conditions do the rest. You would have thought that a similar game plan would be employed by the English bowlers.
SECOND INNINGS
Australia 445-10
North 110
Clarke 93
Ponting 78
Broad 6-91
In seasons to come, teams will look at this game and say 'bowl full like Aus not short like the Poms'. The other bowling figures of note are "Anderson 0-89 (off 18 overs)" who should have found this ground paradise but refused to bowl full. I give credit to Broad for persevering but the half-trackers delivered to Ponting and Clarke by most of the attack got what they deserved
THIRD INNINGS
England 263-10
Swann 62
Broad 61
Johnson 5-69 and Hilfenhaus 4-60
At 5-78 at the end of Day Two there was no real hope for England and Johnson used the exercise to build form for The Oval.
Here's some points to ponder:
- Why was Harmison picked for a pitch where a full length was required?
- If he was there for aggression then why did the other bowlers, Onions and Anderson in particular, not bowl full?
- How has Collingwood remained in this team? It takes little time to deduce his weakness to leg-cutters/out-swingers it's amazing that only Stuart Clark has a hold over him
- Most of all, are England choking?
OVERALL:
Despite my respect for Shane Warne's cricket ability, his commentating needs work - especially when it comes to bias! I'm not talking about his bias towards spin bowlers but his apparent dislike of Billy Bowden who fell victim to some of the most insistent umpire-bashing I have heard in a commentary box. I know Australians don't like him but commentary deserves better; leave your prejudice at the door Shane.
The match lasted just two and a half days (shorter than those victories in 2001) but at least now things move to The Oval at 1-1
No comments:
Post a Comment