NZ still well in T1 after combative D2

Well, my prediction about England getting on top of NZ didn't exactly come about, not only because Matt Prior, lbw first ball, didn't lift the scoring rate, but with runs on the board and Jimmy Anderson looking dangerous (as well as getting his 300th Test wicket), I'd say that the home team have a slight advantage, but one which may well fluctuate in the next couple of sessions or beyond.

I didn't watch much of T1D2 though did catch up on the Foxtel highlights, From what I saw it was clear that the highlights of the day were (1) a continuation of NZ's tight bowling, with Tim Southee coming to the fore, (2) great swing bowling from Jimmy Andersson and ( 3) a refreshingly aggressive innings by Ross Taylor.

At present the match is in the balance, though IMO that balance is titled in England's favour, because NZ, notwithstanding their batting strength ( read Brendan McCullum and Kane Williamson) are still in first innings arrears and have to bat last against a tight England attack.

Time to resume my position on the couch.

New Zealand 4/153 (49.4 ov, Taylor 66/72b/13x4, Williamson 44*/137b/5x4, Anderson 15-7-32-3) trail England 232 (112.2 ov, Bairstow 41/107b/4x4, Root 40/114b/4x4,  Trott 39, Cook 32, Bell 31, Southee  28.2-8-58-4, Wagner 3/70, Boult 2/48) by 79 runs with 4 1st inns wkts in hand: T1/2 D2/5 at Lord's.

Scorecard

Back from break to see NZ hold England in check in day of 1950s style Test cricket

I've taken a break from cricket following, not only because there's been no IPL coverage apart from sketchy highlights of matches and a bit more on the emerging scandal (or series of scandals) there.


But last night I settled onto the couch and watched the first two sessions of England v NZ T1 at Lord's, which turned out to be (1) a good day for the Black Caps and (2) a throwback to the 1950s.

England (Alistair Cook) won the toss, opted to bat, and struggled against some steady NZ bowling, a lush outfield and perhaps their own defensive mindset.

4/160 from 80overs isn't the kind of batting to lure crowds through turnstiles (and perhaps to the TV screen). Yet young Trent Boult 17-7-29-2 and old(er ) Bruce Martin 24-11-37-1 had reason to be pleased, even though Martin's missed c&b from Jonathan Trott before he'd scored was a big blot on an otherwise clean NZ fielding sheet.

Slow batting, slow outfield, rain forecast: are these the ingredients of a draw?

I predicted (to myself) that on home turf England would reverse their modest achievements in the recent Antipodean series. But after T1D1 a 2-0 result looks less likely. For what it's worth I reckon England are better placed than 4/160 suggests. If Matt Prior can hit out and the rain keep away England may yet win. On the other hand if the Black Caps can persist and play four or so more days like the first (a big ask IMO) who knows what might happen?

England 4/180 (80ov) v New Zealand; T1/2 D1/5 at Lord's

The Ashes 2013 : Australia's Ashes squad: a team for the here and now

The Ashes 2013 : Australia's Ashes squad: a team for the here and now | Cricket Features | Australia in England - The Ashes | ESPN Cricinfo

Generally I agree with these sentiments: strong quick bowling (subject to fitness) thin batting, several unknown quantities.

Australia lose as ray of sunshine turns to dark cloud: T4D3

India 272 & 4/158 (31.2 ov, Pujara 82*) def Australia 262 & 164 by 6 wkts: T4/4 D3/5 at Delhi. India win series 4-0 and regains Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

Well done India!

Cheteshwar Pujara's 82*/92b saw India home after their bowlers had bowled the visitors .out for a feeble second innings 164.

Enough for now. More later.

India take narrow lead in teeth of Australian fight back: T4D2

India 8/266 (66.1 ov, Vijay 57, Pujara 52, Jadeja 43, Lyon 5/94) lead Australia 262 (112.1 ov, Siddle 51, Smith 46, Hughes 45, Ashwin 5/57) by 4 runs with 2 1st inns wkts in hand: T4/4 D2/5 at Delhi.

A tightly contested day's Test cricket on a wearing pitch.

Murali Vijay 57/123b (8x4) and Cheteshwar Pujara 52/76b (5x4) kickstarted India's reply to Australia's Peter Siddle 51/136b (4x4) boosted 262 with a 108 run opening partnership in 25.1 overs.

Once Nathan Lyon was introduced, a tad belatedly, into the attack his improved accuracy coupled with the assistance he derived from the pitch put the brakes on India. Sachin Tendulkar benefited from an umpire's lbw howler to make 32/53b while Ravi Jadeja hit out for 43/49b to take India close to a first innings lead, which they duly achieved, leaving the Test up for grabs.

The result will depend on how the respective attacks perform from here. Nathan Lyon's 22.1-3-94-5 showed that he's learned from the onslaughts on him earlier in the series, though Ravi Ashwin ( 34-18-57-5 in Australia's innings) and his colleagues will deploy their considerable talents to contest Australia's hopes of salvaging a win from this Border- Gavaskar trophy losing series.

Revamped Australia's frailties exposed once more by India's attack: T4D1

Australia 8/231 (98 ov, Siddle 47*, Smith 46, Hughes 45, Cowan 38, Ashwin 4/40, Jadeja 2/34, Sharma 2/35) v India: T4 D1 at Delhi.

The more things change ...Australia made five changes, bringing back three of the four miscreants suspended from selection (though not substitute duties) for T3, and appointing one of them, Shane Watson, captain in lieu of the injured Michael Clarke. (IMO the best replacement would have been Brad Haddin, though I can see when he wasn't chosen).

Australia recovered well from the early loss of David Warner to be 2/94 at lunch, but then the now customary middle order collapse set in as the Indian bowlers - Ravi Ashwin 30-17-40-4 outstanding - worked through the innings until some late resistance from Steve Smith 46/145 b (2x6, 3x4), Peter Siddle 47*/125b( 4x4) and James Pattinson took the team from the precipice of disaster (and embarrassment) at 7/136 to a better, if by no means dominant 8/231 at stumps on a day in which 98 overs were delivered.

The pitch has played a few (but not many) tricks, which has perplexed the commentators, some of whom feel that 280 or so may be a competitive total (or maybe they're just trying to make what seems to me to be a one sided game look less so).

Disclosure: I began to lose faith in Australia when at 115 prodigal son Watson played a prodigal stroke and was stumped for 17 running down the wicket to Ravi Jadeja. After Glenn Maxwell's T20 hoick I gave up and switched the TV off.

India win Test & series comfortably despite periods of Australian fightback: T3 D5

India 499 & 4/136 (33.3 ov, Kohli 34) def Australia 408 & 223 (89.2 ov, Hughes 69, Starc 35, Haddin 30, Kumar 3/31, Jadeja 3/35) by 6 wkts: T3/4 D5/5 at Mohali. India lead series 3-0 and thereby regain Border- Gavaskar trophy.

The Test kept me alert until the end, not because Australia ever looked like winning but because their collective resistance kept the possibility of a draw alive for so long. Not that this would have done anything for the series but there were a few positives to emerge from the wreckage, eg (in no partcular order) Mitchell Starc's allround accomplishments; the batting of Ed Cowan,Steve Smith and, at last,Phillip Hughes; and Peter Siddle's wholehearted bowling.

Enough for now. Congratulations to India, and some gratuitous advice for Australia: regroup and build on the strengths which emerged or reemerged during this match. This may make for some interesting discussion at the selection table (or form filling). My 5 cents' worth: is there a place in the T5 ueleven for Shane Watson?