Which was pretty much how it panned out. I declared four overs after tea, at 7/527, rather than right on the tea break, just to limit the time England’s openers had to get ready and to keep them guessing.
I gave our bowlers a bit of a taste to see how they’d go. Ryan Harris was straying onto Cook’s pads a bit too often with the new ball, so I took him off after three overs to get Nathan Lyon into the game. He immediately had an effect – almost! His third ball got Cook’s edge. It deviated onto Hadds’ thigh and popped up in front of me. I could see it hanging there, but it was like everything went into slow motion. I couldn’t get forward quickly enough, and the ball ended up landing probably halfway between Hadds and me, without having gone high enough for either of us to get to it. The sequence of edge, thigh, and lobbing up was almost identical to what happened to Davey Warner earlier today – except for the result. Cricket’s a game of millimetres, that’s for sure.
‘Gazza’ Lyon was putting a lot of revs on the ball and gave Cook some more anxious moments. There was a cut shot that screwed off the edge and fell just short of Warner at backward point. Starcy got one through Cook’s defence and it fell close to his stumps, but not on them. This game can frustrate you sometimes. Watto had a chance at a run-out, but his throw missed. We really felt that the wicket was coming. Watto hit Cook in front, but the ball had pitched outside leg stump. I kept changing the bowlers in search of the man who was going to break through, and to keep the batsmen from settling. Cook seemed to be unwell, too: he kept asking me if he could take a drink.
Peter Siddle, so reliable, was the bowler who did the trick. He bowled a beautiful-length ball to Joe Root, who nicked it to Hadds. Just classic fast–medium bowling.
Even though there was still half an hour to go until stumps, they sent Tim Bresnan out as night watchman. This was quite surprising. Bresnan’s a good lower-order batsman, and had done the night watchman’s job at Lord’s, but this was quite a long time for him to survive.
It turned out that he wasn’t in for long. Sidds bowled him a shortish ball, which he tried to pull. There was a noise as it went through and we all went up when Hadds caught it. The umpire gave it out, and I suspected that it would be referred. If the tables had been turned – if the initial decision was not out – I would not have asked for a referral. I just felt there was a chance it had hit his body and not his bat. So I was quite pleasantly surprised when, after a brief chat with Cook, Bresnan walked off. No arguments from me! But the replays did show that he’d most likely missed it. It’s good to see that I’m not the only captain who gets these referrals wrong.
The night-watchman ploy had failed to come off. Trott, who looked in such good form in Nottingham and at Lord’s, came in and started nervously. He would have run Cook out if Davey Warner’s throw had been a few centimetres straighter. Then Trott got a healthy nick off Sidds, but it landed just short of me at second slip. So many ‘nearlys’!
But we were still pretty happy when we came off for the night. We lead by nearly 500 runs and England have lost two wickets. Tomorrow’s going to be hard. I can’t see it being a day when we take a lot of wickets with catches at second and third slip. We’ll have to bowl straight at the stumps and aim for LBWs and bowleds, with maybe some catches at short mid-wicket and short cover. When we produce chances, we must take them. Our bowlers are good enough to do that. As a team, we all have to be switched on, every ball.
The chances will come.
Saturday 3 August. Manchester.
I have mixed feelings about today. We did so many things well, and yet not quite as well as I’d hoped. The result is pretty good, to have got England seven wickets down with only 242 runs added in the day, but we didn’t capitalise on opportunities we had.
The weather had cooled noticeably, and I spent most of the day in my sleeveless sweater. A fairly brisk breeze blew across the ground from east to west, helping the bowlers with any swing they might get. But the pitch was still very flat and playing well, and there was a lot less moisture in the atmosphere than in the first two Test matches.
We started with Peter Siddle and Ryan Harris, who had been the pick of the seamers yesterday afternoon. I set two short mid-wickets to Jonathan Trott, in case he got his balance too far across the stumps and lifted the shot to leg. For Cook, it was again the plan to tempt him in that fourth- and fifth-stump channel with the fuller balls.
Sidds had Cook playing and missing with just such a ball, and Rhino was tempting him into reaching for some drives outside his comfort zone. It’s tense and fun at the same time, engaging in battle with good batsmen. When the rewards come, you’re overjoyed. Cook played and missed with his pull shot, but it was Trott we got first, a ball from Rhino bouncing a little more than expected. The catch came to me at second slip where I had to lean forward to make sure it carried. A second-slip catch wasn’t the central part of the plan, but there was still enough bounce to create a chance.
So, three down, seven to go. Kevin Pietersen came in and offered us a few opportunities early. He played and missed at several balls, and got off the mark with an inside edge past his leg stump. With good batsmen who start nervously, you always hope that you’ll get them in the first few overs, and for us it wasn’t to be. Pietersen survived that streaky period and I made a double change, bringing on Nathan Lyon and Mitchell Starc. Pietersen was still troubled, but got Starcy away with a couple of pull shots and gained some confidence from there.
Starcy has a knack for taking wickets, even if he’s not as consistent as the other seamers. He broke through to pick up Cook, when Hadds took an absolute screamer down the leg side. I didn’t feel that it was completely lucky to get the catch there. It’s not one that you necessarily bowl for, but many batsmen are vulnerable if they move across too far and play a leg glance too finely. Still, it requires great wicketkeeping to finish the job, and Hadds is having a fine game. Taking that catch will have done a lot for his confidence.
Bell joined Pietersen, and continued his good form. Pietersen was always liable to take a risk if we dried him up, and he charged Watto once, edging the ball again a few centimetres past his leg stump. Starcy went around the wicket to Bell, to try to cramp him up on the off side, and just before lunch he played and missed at one – or so I thought. Hadds went up in a very loud appeal, while Starcy and I and everyone else did nothing. I was having a laugh with Hadds – ‘Nice try, mate!’ – but later there was word that Hot Spot might have shown a little tickle, so, as the wicketkeeper’s always saying, maybe he does know best.
After lunch, Pietersen went after Nathan Lyon, lifting him for two sixes down the ground. He also gave chances though – again, he got a frustrating inside edge that could have gone into his stumps. And then he marched down the wicket at Watto, who was getting some reverse swing. The ball ducked back in and hit him on the pads. Watto went up, very confidently. When we talked to him, he said, ‘It’s got to be close.’ But he wasn’t super-insistent on referring. Hadds and I – and, for that matter, the umpire – believed Pietersen was so far down the wicket that the inswing would have taken the ball past leg stump.
So we didn’t refer it – neither Hadds nor I thought it was worth it. A minute or so later, Hadds said, ‘It was out.’
‘Who said that?’ I said.
He pointed up to the dressing room, where our analyst, Dene Hills, and Darren Lehmann were signalling with the finger that if we had referred it, Hawk-Eye would have shown that the ball was hitting middle and leg. I guess it was a mistake, but to be honest, if the same thing happened I would probably do the same thing. You just can’t refer with any confidence when a batsman is that far down the track.
Watto took the disappointment without complaint, picked himself up and bowled a very good spell of reverse swing to Pietersen, challenging every part of his technique. We did dry him up, which we always feel is the first step to breaking his concentration. Meanwhile, though, Bell was able to score freely in his strong areas between mid-off and backward point, so we cou
ldn’t slow down the overall run rate enough to tighten the screws on either batsman. And sometimes the half-chances just don’t go your way. There were quite a few of those in Pietersen’s innings, and in the period I’m talking about, he went for a big off-drive that he snicked through a gap between second slip and gully for four. It could so easily have been a catch.
It took a very special piece of bowling to end that partnership, and Ryan came up with a perfect-length ball to Bell. It pitched around middle and hit the off bail. Bell did nothing wrong with his defensive shot – the ball was just at that precise length where the batsman couldn’t confidently play forward or back. It took a terrific ball to straight-out beat a good batsman playing in the form of his life.
Pietersen, meanwhile, went on to make his century. We always thought we had a chance with him, though. After he got his hundred, Watto beat him outside the off stump with three balls in a row. It was so frustrating for all of us, and Watto’s patience was tested. He has done a fantastic job with the ball, allowing me to rest the front-line seamers while he’s tying down an end, but his figures haven’t rewarded his effort yet.
On the other hand, Starcy has the knack for taking wickets. He was the one who got Bairstow, then finally got Pietersen for 113, sneaking one through for LBW. Pietersen talked with Matt Prior for a while before asking for a referral, which suggested that he wasn’t too confident. There was some doubt over whether he’d nicked it, but the third umpire didn’t have enough evidence to overturn the decision of the onfield umpire, and Pietersen was on his way.
There was always the chance of a collapse, but we couldn’t quite pull it off. Overall the boys bowled well in patches, but I was disappointed that we didn’t step on the throttle when we had the opportunity. The wicket was tough to score on because we had the ball reverse-swinging, and I thought Sidds, Rhino and Watto were all outstanding. Starcy got the three wickets, but didn’t quite have the control he would have liked. Nathan Lyon bowled pretty well and I think he’ll come into his own in the second innings.
In the morning, the plan is simple. We want to bowl well and take the last three wickets as soon as possible. England are still 30-odd runs from avoiding the follow-on, but my inclination is to have another bat, so that our bowlers can rest and the pitch can have a bit more wear and tear. When we do bat, we have to show intent and score quickly.
At some point tomorrow, I imagine I’ll have to declare our second innings and set a target. It’s going to be tricky to work out exactly when, and that’s all going to depend on how well we bowl in the morning and then how fast we can score runs. There are forecasts of rain about, but there have been every day, and I can’t think too much about that. Basically, we have to risk losing to try to win this Test match. That might mean a declaration that comes sooner rather than later, but at 0–2 down we have no choice. Sometimes in cricket you have to take that risk. We hope the game gives us the opportunity to win it.
That’s all we ask for: the opportunity to see if we’re good enough.
Sunday 4 August. Manchester.
I’ve had to sit for a while in my hotel room tonight, just calming myself down. The frustration really bubbled up today, and I had to keep telling myself that a captain mustn’t lose control on the field. Privately, I can think my own thoughts. But as a leader, I have to set an example. The boys are really pulling together as a team, and keeping my composure is part of the leadership role I have to play. But that’s not to say it’s easy.
It’s been one of those games where we got on top early, have remained on top, but have had to face a number of big and small obstacles. We’re so desperate to win and stay in the fight for the Ashes that the battle against those obstacles is also a battle against our desperation. We want this thing so much.
England managed to stall us for an hour and a half this morning, their tail putting on 30 or 40 runs more than I was happy with. Prior, Broad and Swann also took up precious time by keeping us out in the field until half an hour before lunch. But still, we had plenty of time to set up a declaration and a fourth-innings push for victory.
While we were in the field, I asked David Warner to open the batting with Chris Rogers. I wanted all the boys to play aggressively, and nobody has the capacity to do that better than Davey. Also, I wanted the three left-handers – Davey, Chris and Usman – in early and on their way before Swann came on. Obviously, the best outcome would have been for Chris and David to be still batting when Swann began bowling, but as the series has taken shape, we’ve concluded that it’s particularly hard for left-handers to come in against the older ball and on the more worn pitch when Swann is turning the ball away from them. That meant Watto dropping down the order to number four, followed by myself and then Smithy. I also told Watto this while we were in the field, and he supported my reasoning.
Overall, I couldn’t have been more pleased with the attitude and team spirit shown by the batting group. They all put team first, self second.
The English bowlers sent down a large proportion of short balls at Davey. I don’t know if this was to probe a suspected weakness, or just to ginger him up and test him out after all the controversy. At any rate, he got into his stride very quickly and looked impressive. He missed one bouncer from Broad, and England referred it to the DRS when the umpire turned their appeal down. There was nothing to say he’d hit it, and he went on. The English took some time about getting back to business. Time meant as much to them as it did to us.
Chris kept the scoreboard ticking over, before nicking Broad to slip. Usman also showed an unselfish, positive attitude. The pitch was starting to misbehave more often. Usman was beaten by one ball from Swann which bounced over the edge of his bat, over Prior, and even over Jonathan Trott at slip – and it hadn’t even landed in the footmarks. There’s definitely going to be something for Nathan Lyon to bowl into.
Davey eventually holed out to Joe Root at deep mid-wicket, but again, he was doing the right thing by the team. Then Watto and Usman pushed things along until Usman was bowled around his legs by Swann. I felt very relaxed when I went out – this was about as different a scenario as possible from two days ago. Watto looked in good touch. Then Bresnan bounced him, and Watto unfortunately steered it over the slips cordon to Kevin Pietersen, who was waiting at third man for the catch.
Smithy was in fine fettle again, picking up where he left off in the first innings. He was in a more attacking frame of mind, hitting two beautiful straight sixes, one off Bresnan and another off Swann. Speaking of Swann, a bizarre thing happened when he was bowling to me. He attempted what appeared to be a leg-spinner, but it came out of his hand like the famous balls John Howard bowled in Pakistan when he was prime minister. It landed halfway down the track and in my surprise, all I could do was follow it around on the leg side and paddle it away for a single. I guess David Warner sometimes bats right-handed, so Graeme Swann’s allowed to try leg-spin.
The whole mood of batting was different from the first innings. After fighting for every run the other day, Smithy and I were now trying to hit the accelerator. Unfortunately, after nudging one fine of third man, Smithy, who’s a very fast runner, turned and came back for a second without my hearing or seeing him. By the time I looked up, at the keeper’s end after a comfortable single, Smithy was almost next to me. He turned and ran back, but didn’t make it in time. It was the first run-out of the series for either side, which I guess is a measure of how grimly contested the Test matches have been. Both teams have been professional and careful with our running between wickets.
All along, I had to think about how long to go on batting. Ten minutes before tea, some light drizzle came down and the umpires took us off for an early break. This affected my thinking on a declaration. The early break meant that the last session would be something like 38 overs in length. We just felt that our bowlers, who had slogged away for 140 overs in ten hours of cricket to get England out, and had now only been resting for 30 overs, needed more of a break before they could make the most
of the new ball. A 38-over session is a long one, and we thought that declaring at tea would also take the sting out of them for tomorrow. We want to make a really strong push for victory, but we need the bowlers to have the freshness and energy to do so.
For those reasons, our plan at tea was to bat for another 50 minutes before declaring and having some 20–25 overs to bowl tonight. Then the ball will still be relatively new when we restart tomorrow. The runs weren’t so important. I am happy to give England a target they might think about chasing. So after tea, I just planned to bat for those 50 minutes.
The relations between the teams have been as competitive as you would expect in an Ashes series. But I don’t think they’ve been poor, given the pressure everyone’s under. England were doing all they could to slow the game down again, but nothing so extreme that they could get sanctioned for an over-rate violation. It’s a matter of pushing the law to the limits, and Australian teams have done the same. Similarly, at one point I was pushing for a second run off Anderson, and when I turned to go, he had moved across the wicket into my path. I’m sure he didn’t mean it, but he was right there and I went into him with my shoulder. It was an accident and some words were exchanged, but the senior players have been by and large keeping a lid on things. He looked like he was hurt, but I don’t think he was.
Hadds got out playing a big shot for the team – more unselfish cricket – and Mitchell Starc and I were pushing the scoring along. The light was fading, but the floodlights were on and we were having no problem seeing the ball, even from the faster bowlers. Some of the England players were saying to the umpires that they were losing sight of the ball from the outfield, but this didn’t concern me. The playing conditions say that the umpires can stop the game if safety is at risk. As batsmen, Starcy and I were feeling no risk at all. The outfielders aren’t really relevant to that argument.
The Ashes Diary Page 12