Who would've thought it possible, as the England tail wagged to enormous affect in the first hour of play, that it would be possible for reports to declare, Australia hold the advantage at the end of Day 2?
Certainly not me! I copped a little bit of criticism on Twitter for lamenting how the game had slipped from Australia's reach as the English tail swatted, edged, reversed swept and also classically cover drove, 99 runs in 16 overs to post a 400+ total.
When Hughes opened with intent and fended off any nonsense about short pitched rubbish with a Hughes-branded 30 odd in quick time, the tone was set for an Australian response.
Now on this "Hughes is suspect to the short ball" garbage, honestly, do you think a short aggressive opening batsman hasn't faced a few bumpers in his time. If that was all it took to get rid of him, do you think he'd have made it this far? And by the way, South Africa have 3 or 4 decent quicks of their own remember and let's think back to how that turned out.
When a guy like Freddie Flintoff bowls 4 straight thunderbolts at your neck, pretty much any batsman anywhere is going to look a little uncomfortable. And seriously, the Pommie press will try to make something of the fact that a shortish ball had Hughes caught behind the wicket again, but seriously, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that consistent, fast pitched, short of length bowling, right in that "corridor of uncertainty" to an aggressive batsman will bring about his downfall now and again. Seriously, isn't that pretty much what you would teach any young fast bowler to bowl, to anyone??
Unfortunately for Hughes, he was out cheaply a couple of times in a warm up match on a slightly lively wicket so now he's going to have to face a whole bunch of short stuff, from bowlers perhaps a little more wound up than usual because they think they're in with a chance, for a few more Tests, before they realise he's just scored another three hundreds and they better think of something else. The same is probably in store for Bopara - are the Poms saying the same about him? One thinks they soon will be.
Anyway, I thought his 30 odd, was a great statement, (as much as a score of 30 can be) especially as most of it came just before lunch when England thought they would get a wicket or two and should roles have been reversed, probably would've seen a score of 0 for 8 going into the break.
Then Ricky Ponting strode to the crease. Now when Ricky starts an innings, we're all a tad nervous. A push here, a prod there, but suffice to say, if he hasn't been caught in the gully or the slips before he gets a chance to play that glorious pull shot that hits the mid-wicket fence just as the bowler gets into his follow through, we all know things will be okay. Last night it came when his score was on around about 15. I went off to bed comfortable in the fact it wasn't going to be a cake walk for England.
Waking up a few hours later, I joked to myself, that "a perfect start to the day would be to hear we hadn't lost a wicket. That would mean hundreds to Kattich and Ponting." Yeh right - on this pitch, where those that should know better assured us we wouldn't see a century this match. Well guess again "experts" - two of the best!
Anyway, having said all that let's not get carried away. You still don't lose a match on a pitch that will take plenty of turn, when you bat first, make 400+ and have two spinners in your side....do you? Many probably thought you don't lose
making 550 and declaring in the first innings either?
Next up for the Aussies is to turn this total into a 400+ score of their own - while it "should" happen it hasn't yet. Then, this only means they're a step closer to a draw. Even if they make 450, taking us to late on Day 3, England could post a run chase of 200+ and in the fourth innings that could be very tricky. Then again, it could rain, or late on Day 3 England could lose 3 wickets in the last half hour, or....now this is why we love Test cricket right!
