David Warner has showed evidence in this second Ashes Test that he is emerging from a slump, in an ominous sign for England.
Granted, the Australian opener twice gifted his wicket to Moeen Ali here at Lord’s, with his first innings dismissal showing maddening impatience.
SECOND ASHES TEST – FULL SCORECARD
But en route to tallying 121 runs for the match, he’s looked more assured and fluent than he has for more than six months.
Warner started the last Australian summer in scintillating touch, cracking tons in both innings at Adelaide.
At that point, he had claims to be the most valuable batsman in Test cricket, having reaped 1029 runs at an average of 94, including 6 tons from his previous 11 innings.
More:
>> REPORT: Aussies level Ashes series with 405-run win
>> David Warner emerges from his slump
>> Liebke ratings – Second Ashes Test
He had overcome the final hurdle on his route to becoming an elite Test batsmen – success in foreign conditions.
Warner had cowed the ferocious South African pace attack in their own backyard before flourishing against Pakistan’s spinners on dry wickets in the UAE.
Between that Adelaide Test and this one at Lord’s he lost his way. He had tempered his aggression and with that had lost both confidence and effectiveness, averaging just 29 in that period across six Tests.
In the series opener at Cardiff he looked horribly out of touch as he continually groped at deliveries outside off, his balance betraying him.
When he’s seeing them well, arguably Warner’s greatest strength is that he intimidates bowlers.
He is so quick to clatter full deliveries and so vicious on anything short of a length that opponents know a margin for error does not exist.
At Cardiff, Warner looked a weak imitation of his cavalier, commanding self. Perhaps an attempt to rediscover his machismo was the catalyst for his embarrassing dismissal in the first innings here.
Cruising on 38 from 42 balls, and having already cracked Moeen Ali for two boundaries in the over, Warner tried to blast the English spinner one more time from the final delivery.
He charged at Moeen, who dragged his delivery a bit shorter, only for Warner to still try to hit the ball out of the stadium, instead lobbing it up for a catch.
After looking so in control at the crease, he had frittered away a start. The second innings presented a perfect scenario of Warner to continue to rediscover his rhythm.
With Australia owning a gigantic first innings lead he had license to go after the English bowlers. While it wasn’t quite vintage Warner, he hit the ball sweetly, gathering 12 boundaries amid a knock of 83 from 116 balls.
Watching on from the sidelines, the Australian coaches and skipper Michael Clarke must have been delighted by what they saw. An in-form Warner makes Australia a much better and much more explosive side.
No other opener in world cricket can change the state of a match as swiftly and comprehensively as he can.
In the new ball period, the bowling side often rules the roost and the batsmen are left to battle for survival.
Eventually, as the batsmen get accustomed to the pace and bounce of the pitch and begin to predict the ball’s trajectory with greater ease, they become comfortable and start to place the fielding side under pressure.
But in that initial 10-15 overs when the bowlers are fresh and the ball is swinging, the fielding side have often built momentum already. If not achieved through wickets then this also can be done by shackling the batsmen and leaving them scratching for runs.
Batsmen who can withstand this period of tension and then go on to forge influential innings are highly prized.
Those who can flip the whole situation on its head are the most valuable players in the game. There have been few in Test history – batsmen who, in just the first few overs of an innings, can make the opposition feel as though they are under siege.
Warner doesn’t just score mountains of runs, he alters the tone of a match, sometimes in a matter of minutes.
When he flays an attack in the first half hour of a Test it deflates the opposition and makes batting far easier for both his partner and those still to come.
Australia will be hoping he can do just that over the coming three Tests, offering the tourists an enormous advantage in the process.
Pumping Dougie
Guest
Gold Nudge
Pumping Dougie
Guest
I doubt Mitch Johnson would have been put off by anything the Cardiff crowd said - who can understand a Welshman??!
Darren
Guest
Agreed. He still has incredible spells where he is a world beater but his low days are not such a drop off. Like anyone he will some conditions that suit him better than others. He has shown he can contribute on any surface.
Joel
Roar Rookie
Anderson has a decent record and has had a long career.. mostly based on England not really having any better options. When the ball swings he looks dangerous at least most of the time, when it doesn't swing he's a toothless tiger.
Joel
Roar Rookie
Scoreboard pressure is a ridiculous excuse, because England created the scoreboard pressure by bowling poorly and batting even worse. On a side note, the ball that got Moeen Ali in the second innings will be sending chills down a few of the England team's spines. Hell of a ball to get a on a so-called feather bed.
colinp
Guest
perhaps not relevant to the article, just putting my opinion out there, i like rogers he is a cc legend, i sincerely hope he retires because whether he's having so called unrelated dizzy spells, getting hit in the head all the time won't help
colinp
Guest
absolutely agree
Quitwhinging
Guest
Anderson 25 Ashes matches : 80 wickets at an average of 38.23 and strike rate of 69.3 Johnson 16 Ashes matches : 80 wickets at an average 24.77 and strike rate of 41.2. Who's overrated? Definitely not Johnson.
JoM
Roar Rookie
He has been awful in the last 3 innings to be honest.
JoM
Roar Rookie
Sure they can, Jimmy Anderson is one.
BargeArse
Guest
To be fair, virtually every commentator was qualifying their 'road' comments with a "wait till the other side bats on it" get out clause...
Jameswm
Guest
That's it? Scoreboard pressure alone?
Jameswm
Guest
Root at 4? Bit early isn't it?
Jameswm
Guest
Or what's not between his ears.
Spooky
Guest
I think England's tactics on the 1st day were woyfull. Bowling outside off stump all day. Waiting for someone to make a mistake instead of looking for wickets. 1 wicket after 1 days cricket -game over. The Aussies could bowl aggressively not having to worry about giving away runs. Well done Mitch marsh 3 quality wickets at crucial times. Clarke used his bowlers really well. Clarke should probably go back to 5 see if that brings back his touch.
Bearfax
Guest
No way would I drop Voges. You forget he scored a century in his first test innings only a few tests ago. Sure he isnt scoring big recently but he's over 30 in four of his seven innings and is average 56. Marsh is averaging 36. No way would I drop Voges for Marsh.
Rob JM
Guest
When was the last time watto scored a hundred in a critical situation to win us a match? Voges did it 6 weeks ago. I would give him one more test before going with S Marsh.
Rob JM
Guest
Since Johnson came back into the side for the england series he has taken two wickets or more in 80% of the innings he has bowled in! That is hardly inconsistent!
Dangertroy
Guest
I'd hasten to read too much into Warners innings here - he is a master if the 3rd innings, got a big lead, put them out of the game quickfire ton. He did look like he was having a good time of it, pretty easy to do when your 400 ahead. He looked good I. The second half of his first innings, until he tried to hit Moeen out of the attack. I don't think he has looked dreadful of late. He had a super patch prior to the home summer and he still scored 3 centuries against India. He had a pretty good IPL too apparently. Look, I love watching Warner make runs and wouldn't change him for anything. But he will have days where he gets out to a rash shot. He's an opening batsman, playing when the ball is doing the most, so he will get out early sometimes.
Chancho
Roar Rookie
Hi Colin, not sure how valid your 'young side' comment is when you consider 5 of the England line up were at the corresponding Lord's test in 2013 against Australia's 3 (Cook, Root, Bell, Anderson & Broad, vs. Rogers, Clark & Smith) surely the match experience in a somewhat unchanged side mitigates that? Also, your comments about the mental state of Johnson and the health of Rogers I sort of understand but I don't get the point in context to the article... I'm not sure if you're having a go or what? And it's not like England don't have concerns in this area... don't forget Broad confessed to having nightmares about being hit