Australia [cliche deleted] v Pakistan T2 D4

Australia 127 & 381 (125.3 ov, M Hussey 134*, S Watson 97, Danish Kaneria 5/151) beat Pakistan 333 & 139 (38.0 ov, N Hauritz 5/53) by 36 runs: T2 D3 at Sydney.


I was wrong again. As were most other commentators. Australia's determination trumped Pakistan's intermittent flair and underlying lack of self-belief.

There were two distinct phases of the day's play. In the first Mike Hussey and Peter Siddle moved sensibly, taking advantage of some defensive field placings and another missed catch at the wicket, from 8/286, effectively 8/80, past 318, when Hussey brought up his century in 195b (14x4), then a further 20 wicketless overs to 8/373 ( Hussey 127*, Siddle 37*) at lunch.

Pakistan's fortunes revived after the interval as Siddle fell for a determined 38/117b (2x4) and Bollinger followed soon after leaving Hussey unbeaten on 134/284b (16x4).

The second phase was Pakistan's attempt to make 176 for victory. For a time it was edge of the seat stuff as the openers put on 34 before Doug Bollinger dismissed Imran Farhat. Salman Butt and Faisal Iqbal took the total to 51 before Mitchell Johnson had them both caught behind, Iqbal straightforwardly, Butt brilliantly by Brad Haddin whose keeping generally showed up the shortcomings of his opposite number.

Mohammad Yousuf and Umar Gul, Pakistan's best pair, came together and took the score to 3/77, including taking 12 off a Nathan Hauritz over, at tea. Anybody's game.

Ricky Ponting opted to continue with Hauritz after the interval. The captain's judgment, so much of which had been questioned throughout the match, was vinidcated when Yousuf belted a return catch to the bowler. Two balls later Misbah-ul-Haq fell.

At 5/77 it looked to be game over, though the brothers Akmal hung around for a while, Umar shepherding his older sibling through a 26 and Mohammad Sami through a 30 run partnership

The Australian bowlers persisted taking advantage of the brittle Pakistan lower order (the pitch was still playing well). Bollinger 2/32 from 12, Johnson 3/27 from 10, and Hauritz 5/53 from 12 overs (his second ever Test and first class 5 wickets in an innings haul in successive Tests) were too good.

Mike Hussey deservedly won the Player of the Match Award. He admitted that he was lucky to be missed three times behind the stumps but te fact remains that he rode his luck extremely well. He is definitely not yet finished as a Test batsman.

It's difficult to explain why Pakistan fell apart on D4 (and late on D3). For a perspective from their side see Osman Samiuddin on Cricinfo .

Scorecard

Two wickets in first over seal Pakistan's fate: T1 D5

Australia 5/454 d & 8/225 d beat Pakistan 258 and 251 (72ov, Mohammad Yousuf 61, N Hauritz 5/101) bt 170 runs: T1 D5 at MCG.

Pakistan were never in the hunt after losing Umar Gul and Misbah-Ul-Haq to successive Mitchell Johnson balls in the first over of the morning. Captain Mohammad Younus tried to put a less bad face on impending defeat with 61/140b (7x4), but nobody stayed with him long enough to resist Johnson, Doug Bollinger and Nathan Hauritz, whose subtle variations earned him his best Test figures of 5/101.

The Australian attack is good at working its way through an batting lineup of variable quality like Pakistan's. While far from perfect, the Australian fielding was appreciably better than the sub- Test quality butterfingered Pakistan fielding (exemplified by the dropping of Shane Watson on 99).

Can Pakistan improve enough to beat Australia? Despite their deserved reputation for inconsistency it's difficult to see this happening. If Danish Kaneria comes into the side for Sydney the bowling should be stronger (especially if, repeat if, the fielding lifts. The batting on paper looks good but needs to be able to post totals much great than 250. As for Australia, Ricky Ponting hasn't had a big innings for some time....

Scorecard

Pakistan batting falters in face of solid Australian total: T1 D2

Pakistan 4/109 (49 ov) trails Australia 5/454dec (128 ov, S Katich 98, S Watson 53, M Hussey 82, N Hauritz 75, R Ponting 57) by 345 runs with 6 first innings wicket in hand: T1 D2 at MCG.

A very one sided and not especially memorable day's play.

There wasn't even an Australian century to celebrate despite Bill Lawry's prediction that Mike Hussey, 82 at the time, would score one. Alas Lawry's claim was the kiss of death for Hussey, who was lbw (confirmed on review by UDRS) without adding to his score. He faced 113b, hit 10 4s and looked in good touch (so the reasons for Lawry's prediction weren't too far fetched).

Nathan Hauritz batted on without ever looking as polished or as entrenched as Hussey or Michael Clarke, who joined him at the crease (and who probably regretted not coming in last night to take advantage of the shortcomings of the Pakistan attack) . When Hauritz was lbw for 75/152b (1x6, 8x4), his highest Test score, Ricky Ponting declared.

The Pakistan batting was of modest quality, except for Salman Butt who looked fairly comfortable until he fell lbw to Shane Watson for 45/113b (1x4). The Australian bowling was tight, conceding just over 2 runs an over, which augurs well for a home win, though probably not for exciting cricket.

Scorecard

Bowlers' turn

Australia 7/520 dec @ 8/137 (47ov) lead West Indies 312 (81 ov, C Gayle 102, T Dowlin 55, D Bollinger 5/70) by 345 runs with 2 second inns wkts in hand: T3 D3 at Perth.

On the first two days 9 wickets fell for 634 runs. Day 3 was bowlers' day for both teams as 16 went down for 235 (WI losing 8/98, Aust 8/137).

The West Indies batting collapse was reminiscent of the First Test so didn't come entirely out of the blue. The pitch played a few tricks, and will probably get worse, but the batting after Chris Gayle's dismissal lacked the technique and apparently (Brendan Nash excepted) the determination to tough it out. Which made their revival with the ball, pitch assistance notwithstanding, all the more surprising. All the bowlers performed with the livewire Dwayne Bravo 3/34 from 15 overs outstanding and Sulieman Benn 2/26 from 9 .

What about Australia? Doug Bollinger deserved his 5 wickets, while Nathan Hauritz persisted well. he didn't extract as much spin as did Benn but his accuracy and variation were better. Of the batting the less said the better, though I will say how troubled Ricky Ponting looked when he came to the crease at no9 with the total 125. His elbow injury must be serious for him to hold himself back so far: it was the heart rather than the head which influenced this decision, just as it was the head which made him decide against enforcing the follow on.

Good as it was to see the Windies revival I think that when several factors, including the condition of the pitch and the inconsistency of their batting, are weighed up Australia should be able to win from here. Of course if there was another blinder from Gayle...or solid knocks from a few others...


Scorecard