THEY say that a week is a long time in politics. Those who were writing off the Australian team and in particular Mark Waugh and Shane Warne, prior to the first Test against South Africa, now are in the embarrassing situation of having to explain away just how they underestimated the strength of character of Australia's two stalwarts and overestimated the quality of the South Africans.
The Australian press has long hunted in a pack, when taking a line and Warne and, in particular, Mark Waugh, have been a favourite target for some years.
I would hate to think how often Mark Waugh has been written off as finished. And every time the press get on their favourite hobby horse, they are left with egg all over their face.
Mark Waugh has been a vital and integral part of Australian cricket for a decade and he is not going to give up his prized Test spot without a fight.
While brother Steve has received all the accolades for toughness, durability and reliability, Mark is often spoken of as being unreliable and soft. Make no mistake about it, Mark Waugh is a tough cookie and while his style may appeal lackadaisical and casual he has great inner toughness.
While he has a lower batting average than his twin, if he had as many unbeaten innings as Steve he would be averaging about the same.
But this is not the way of Mark, for he is a supreme entertainer and drawn out, unfinished innings are not his scene, unless of course that is what is required by his team.
The value of Mark Waugh is that he has the rare ability to win a match off his own bat. Doug Walters was 'another unpredictable, rare gem' according to his critics even though he averaged 48.26 in Test cricket, while the 'ever-consistent' Ian Chappell averaged 42.2. Such is the perception of cricket's experts.
Probably only the incomparable Sir Donald Bradman has won more matches off his own bat for the Australians. Just how tough the junior Waugh is can be judged by the fact that his next Test will be his 100th consecutive one for his country.
That takes more than just flair and a natural gift, for the workload of modern cricketers is tough and you should have something special to survive 100 Tests without withdrawing from even one through injury and maintain the form and the selectors' faith.
The critics were equally wrong in their assessment of Australia's chances and once again underestimated the talents of Shane Warne and the Australian bowlers.
Warne and Glenn McGrath, with a little help from the other bowlers, are the real match-winners in the Australian team and have been for some years.
Match in, match out they have been amazingly reliable and due to a combination of the weather and the surprisingly good form of the New Zealand batsmen they didn't get their usual return against our neighbours early in the season.
They may well have become a little complacent against the Kiwis whose recent form had been very poor.
Once the real stage was set they bowled superbly and overwhelmed the South Africans. I didn't find this a surprise, for I have been writing about the South Africans being too one-dimensional and this was clearly on display in Adelaide.
Speaking of one-dimension, just what was Nasser Hussain and England up to against India? They had a chance to win the second Test and then were in a commanding position to win the third, but opted to adopt negative, County tactics rather than seek to attack and pressure batsmen into error.
They opted, with their number one spinner Giles, a left-armer, to operate over the wicket and aim wide of the right hand batsman's pads into the rough.
As a result, only one or two deliveries were in play and batsmen kicked away the others. It was a disgraceful display and cost England a possible draw in the series.
These tactics had operated in County cricket to the detriment of the game for many years and were virtually outlawed by a law change last season.
As the law stands at present it says that balls pitching outside the leg are okay providing when they spin they will hit the stumps.
Wider balls or arm balls which are delivered wide of the pads should be no-balled.
As a result most of these negative tactics are dropping out of County cricket and bowlers are starting once again to learn how to attack the batsmen and put enough pressure to force them into error.
Unfortunately, this didn't happen in Bangalore and a world TV audience was forced to watch a disgraceful negative farce. Such tactics are a disgrace to Test cricket and an insult to the English bowlers.
I would encourage bowlers to go around the wicket and change their line to provide a different problem for the batsmen but only as a tactical change. This should not be overused as it was by England.
This not only applied to the spinner, but also to fast bowler Andrew Flintoff.
Initially, Flintoff bowled superbly with the new ball keeping it well up and on off stump.
Enter Sachin Tendulkar and immediately Flintoff was ordered to go around the wicket and bowl short.
Interesting tactics and one which was worth a go early, but not exclusively as they virtually were by Flintoff to Tendulkar.
Flintoff didn't look the same bowler from then on.
On the other hand, Matthew Hoggard was allowed to continue over the wicket and keep the ball up and allow it to swing. He had success and bowled well.
Very interesting and all rather strange.
Comments
SHARE