By Tom Wald
July 17th 2009 @ 4:58am
Australia strike back late as Strauss shines
England's Andrew Strauss, 2nd left, drives a ball from Australia's Nathan Hauritz, obscured at right behind umpire, during the first day of the second Ashes Test cricket match at Lord's cricket ground, London, Thursday July 16, 2009. Hauritz dislocated the middle finger of his right hand, as he missed a difficult chance to take the wicket on England's Andrew Strauss. AP Photo/Tom Hevezi
Australia recovered from a disastrous start to contain the damage done by England on the opening day of the second Ashes Test at Lord’s.
England captain Andrew Strauss (161no) batted all day in his methodical manner on his home ground as his side reached 6-364 at stumps.
However, his middle order let him down as England lost 6-137 following the brilliant opening stand of 196 between himself and Alastair Cook (95).
Having been undefeated at the home of cricket for 75 years, the first three hours of play were horrible for Australia with Mitchell Johnson’s (2-107) radar malfunctioning and Nathan Hauritz injuring his finger.
The opening stand eclipsed the former national record at Lord’s of 182 by the legendary pair of Jack Hobbs and Herb Sutcliffe.
But making it all much worse for Australia was Hauritz injuring his finger trying to catch a fiercely hit drive from Strauss on 52 back to the bowler.
The off-spinner immediately grimaced in pain and left the field.
He had X-rays on the digit that confirmed there was no break and he returned to the field halfway through the final session.
There were great expectations placed on Johnson’s shoulders before this series but he was all over the shop early on before fighting his way back into the match with two wickets.
His pace and ability to produce wicket-taking balls from nowhere made up for inaccuracy in the drawn opener in Cardiff as he still collected five wickets despite struggling to maintain a consistent line and length.
But on the game’s finest stage, he was humiliated in the opening session.
Strauss climbed all over him by striking four boundaries in the space of six Johnson balls after the left-hander won another important toss.
Of the last seven Tests at Lord’s, six of them have been draws and it looks like another good track for batting.
After England cruised to 0-126 at lunch, Australia tightened up with Ben Hilfenhaus (2-77) catching Strauss’s edge on 48 off a no-ball with Haddin making hash of the catch.
The gloveman struggled and even the reliable Ponting misfielded to the cheers of the crowd.
Johnson, with England on the verge of a 200-run opening stand, then started to make up for his embarrassing start by trapping Cook in front to become the fourth Australian left-armer to capture 100 Test wickets.
Hilfenhaus was rewarded for his efforts by removing Ravi Bopara (18) and Kevin Pietersen (32) played his usual eventful hand before being caught behind off Peter Siddle’s (1-66) bowling.
Paul Collingwood (14), the defiant man on the final day in Cardiff, made a meal out of a Michael Clarke (1-12) ball that he miscued to Siddle at mid-on.
Australia continued to chip away as they managed to get the old ball to reverse swing and Johnson produced an excellent inswinging delivery that rattled Matt Prior’s (15) off stump.
Departing hero Andrew Flintoff (4) enjoyed a warm ovation but didn’t long as Hilfenhaus had him edging to slips.
AAP tdw/gjw
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(10)
spiro said | July 17th 2009 @ 6:54am | Report comment
To think that Andrew Strauss was not a dominant player when he played in Sydney grade cricket. He has matured as a batsman. He doesn’t exhibit many mannerisms or nervous ticks. He waits for the ball to come on to him. He has a limited range of strokes but plays them well. He has good concentration and has made himself into a strong Test player, with a liking for Lords where he now averages around 60.
Once again the Test is in the balance. If Australia can finish off the fail reasonably cheaply, a big if, then they can bat their way to a big score and a chance (again) to try and bowl for victory.
But England now have runs on the board which is always useful in a 5-day Test match.
I thought Ricky Ponting did a good job rotating his bowlers in the first two hours of play and virtually forcing Mitchell Johnson to get some form back by bowling him a lot, even though he was going for 5 an over.
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2009 @ 8:34am | Report comment
We’re the ones batting in the blue helmets, aren’t we?!?!
While I wouldn’t necessarily have said this at 0/195, or even at 2/255 at Tea, I think England could only claim to be marginally in front at stumps on Day 1. 6/364 sounds impressive, but less so when you consider they lost 6/137 in there, and against an almost one-man attack.
I’d reckon Ponting had several heart attacks when Hauritz went off, and equally, he must be thankful for his fellow Taswegian, because none of the mainland quicks looked that impressive. Siddle looked pedestrian, again, and I don’t how you can describe Johnson at the moment. Johnson, from my count, bowled two good balls last night, and otherwise impersonated a monkey for the rest of the day – he had a menacing look, but mainly flung poo…
At least Hauritz was able to get back on, but he’d still have a bit of a wait before he can bowl again.
Hilfenhaus was clearly the best of the bowlers, and got good shape most of the day. He got Bopara with the old outswinger-outswinger-outswinger-off cutter trick made into an art form by Terry Alderman. Strauss looked otherwise unconcerned, except perhaps for some curious batting at the other end by his middle order. He’ll be relatively fresh too, having done most of his scoring from boundaries.
Australia’s fielding was poor in the first two sessions especially, and Brad Haddin led the way in this illustrious honour. I think I heard them say he’d conceded 11 byes by lunch, and a lot of his laziness or fumbles were of the sort I’d expect to see in third grade.
This all said, Australia would still be thinking they can roll England this morning, and will be able to start afresh with a ball only 5 overs old. If they can get Strauss and Broad, the rest will follow, and Hughes and Katich could be in the runs by lunch…
Justin said | July 17th 2009 @ 8:47am | Report comment
OK for the Aussies its pretty clear they can win this. An ordinary bowling and fielding performace that Cook and Strauss cashed in on. The rest of the batting lineup showed they dont have the temperament or technique at this level at the moment.
So objective one is to knock off the tail quickly. I think if they can get them out under 450 then we are in a decent position. Could start to mirror Cardiff. Objective 2 is to get through Flintoff’s initial spell. He will come hard, fast and short but get through that and he will be pedestrian from then on. Who else will get the wickets is the big question for England. This is a better batting strip than Wales. There may be some time lost tomorrow but I think most of it can be made up in the following 3 days.
I think AUS will bat and bat and look to put ENG under the kosh. Surely the bowlers cannot bowl those inconsistent lines and lengths again in the 2nd dig. Maybe they were a bit jaded after the effort in Cardiff (clutching a bit I know)?
Think it will be another terrific match of Test cricket, bring it on…
Jameswm said | July 17th 2009 @ 9:05am | Report comment
I certainly didn’t go to bed with high hopes, with England 0 for 100 and something. I can’t believe, waking up, that we’re still in it.
from what I saw, if we can actually bowl reasonably well, we’ll do OK. Johnson has always had stages where he goes for a few runs. Remember, his best bowling was in South Africa, in what were effectively the 4th, 5th and 6th tests of a 6 match series. He’s still underdone, but what I can’t work out is how obvious the remedy seems to be to the rest of us, yet he hasn’t worked it out. The ball that got Prior was a cracker.
If we bowl them out for under 400, we’re right on top. To do that, we need to get Strauss in the first half hour though.
The wicket was dead and the outfield short and very fast. Hughes could be interesting to watch if he stays in for more than an hour!
Otherwise I agree with what Julian said – we need to bowl well and restrict them early, then get through Flintoff’s first spell. Also, watch Jimmy Anderson witht he new ball (he swings it both ways), but he does tend to swing it (esp his induckers) from the hand, rather than late.
Benjamin Conkey said | July 17th 2009 @ 9:37am | Report comment
Most of that day had an eerily similar feel to the first day of the 2nd Test in Edgbaston four years ago.
On that day England was actually bowled out for 407 (in 79 overs) – their highest score in a day since World War II.
I thought after the first session that England would be heading for something similar. So many boundaries hit.
Once again, though we must wait to see how Australia bats to determine how good the pitch is, but judging by how the Aussies got some swing during the day..this could be all about what happens through the air for the rest of the match.
Well, Ricky Ponting will hoping so anyway..especially if Hauritz can’t bowl..
Worlds Biggest said | July 17th 2009 @ 11:01am | Report comment
A few observations. The Aussies will be stoked Harmison is not playing. Peter Siddle is surely playing for his Ashes Tour in this game. With Binga and the out of favour Clark to come back into the fold he has to take wickets in this game to have any chance of keeping his spot. The Aussies did well to even up proceedings. Troy Cooley are you in England with the team ??.
Punter rarely wins a toss.
Gaff said | July 17th 2009 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
Classic line Brett – “Johnson impersonated a money for the rest of the day – he had a menacing look, but mainly flung poo…”
pretty much sums up how he bowled.
Are we now regretting bringing just one spinner over? and who are we going to send over if Hauritz isn’t able to play?
Jameswm said | July 17th 2009 @ 2:38pm | Report comment
Gaff – it has to be Krejza. In two matches for Australia A against pakistan A, he’s scored a hundred and taken a 5-for and a 3-for. he is in form and playing, and was unlucky to be dropped in the first place. He’s the obvious candidate.
Will we need a spinner in the 3rd test? Johnson still has to be there and Hilfy has earned his place, but Siddle, Clark and Lee will be fighting for one or two spots. I don’t see the problem with mixing things up.
Ironically, Lee seems to be better witht eh old ball and suited to a wicket that will rough the ball up. Clark seems the perfect person to have been bowling at Lords though.
Can anyone tell me if Prior got out with the old or new ball?” I think it was the old one, which is odd because it seemed genuine – not reverse – swing that got him. Why would you swing a ball after 60 overs but not 5?
Brett McKay said | July 17th 2009 @ 3:24pm | Report comment
Thanks Gaff, that seemed the best way to describe him….
Jameswm, Prior definitely, but I think Flintoff as well fell to the old ball. The Aussies didn’t take the new ball until 4 or 5 overs before stumps..
Agree about Krejza too, though I doubt they’ll decide anything before finding out if Hauritz can bowl again in this Test.
Lewie said | July 17th 2009 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
Prior and Flintoff definitely were out to the ‘old’ ball.