Middlesex v Durham, Lord's, 4th day

Finn haul halts Durham

Jon Culley at Lord's

April 22, 2012

Comments: 7 | Text size: A | A

Middlesex 188 (Onions 6-45) and 179 (Onions 4-28) drew with Durham 238 and 82 for 6 (Finn 4-43)
Scorecard


Steven Finn ended Tillakaratne Dilshan's long innings, England v Sri Lanka, 2nd Test, Lord's, June 5, 2011
Steven Finn's haul was a timely reminder to the England selectors © Getty Images
Enlarge
Related Links

Four wickets from Steven Finn gave Middlesex a glimpse of an unlikely victory on the final evening but after more than half a match of rain interruptions the outcome was the one that was always the easiest to predict.

An original target of 130 to win from 45 overs favoured a Durham win but heavy rain in mid-afternoon left them with a much more testing 122 off 16. While they might have backed themselves to score that in Twenty20 conditions, against Finn and Tim Murtagh coming off a full run to a cordon of slips and gullies, it was a different proposition.

In the event, Middlesex came closest to pulling off a result after Finn, having rubbed off a little rustiness in the first innings, had worked up a good pace and claimed four for 43, Durham finishing six down.

It meant the 23-year-old could walk away from Lord's with a spring in his step despite the challenge thrown down by Graham Onions, whose ten wickets in the contest gave notice that he is pushing strongly for a recall to the England Test side.

"I got better as the game went on. I had not bowled since the last Test in Sri Lanka so there a few cobwebs to blow away and I felt I bowled pretty well today," Finn said.

"It is great to have that competition, too. Graham was the best bowler in the match by a long way, he bowled beautifully.

"He and I are in a similar position, on the fringes of the Test team. We are all fighting for the same spots but no one grudges anyone else doing well and I have huge respect for Graham, he is an awesome bowler."

In the final, shortened contest, Middlesex fancied themselves to steal a win, Finn said, given the conditions and the dilemma Durham faced over whether to chase the runs or content themselves with a draw.

Yet they had been saved in effect by the ninth-wicket partnership between Tim Murtagh and John Simpson that held up Durham in an afternoon that had started with Onions, bristling with confidence after twice accounting for the beleaguered Andrew Strauss, taking two wickets in three balls.

Dismissing Chris Rogers, who had looked to be Middlesex's last hope of salvaging something, and then Gareth Berg, the Durham pace bowler appeared to have the home side by the throat at 91 for eight, with a lead of only 50.

It came after a morning in which most of Middlesex's batting had been scarcely more convincing than their returning England captain, whose second-ball dismissal for a duck on Friday was followed by a 25-ball six on Saturday, having been dropped on nought before Onions bowled him for a second time.

"That sort of thing can happen," Finn said, sympathising with his teammate. "People are allowed to bowl good balls and he got the same one twice. But that's cricket and he'll move on to the next game when hopefully he'll get runs."

Onions, driven by his desire for a Test recall two years and three months after injury interrupted his international career, finished with 10 wickets in a match for the first time. But after he had taken a breather after three more overs in the afternoon session, Durham's supporting bowlers really let an opportunity slip away.

With Tim Murtagh swinging bravely and John Simpson, the wicketkeeper, batting cannily in support, the nature of the cricket changed. The edges stopped coming and in 15 overs another 82 were added to the Middlesex total before Murtagh's luck ran out on 45 against what was, in the event, a poor legside ball from Mitch Claydon.

Simpson soon fell too, attempting to lift leg-spinner Scott Borthwick over mid-wicket, but the target for Durham had swelled to 130 when it might easily have been 60.

After Will Smith had fallen to Murtagh in the fifth over of the Durham chase, Paul Collingwood was beaten for pace as Finn began to work up a head of steam and, after Ben Stokes and Michael di Venuto had fallen to catches at the wicket in their attempts to force the pace, it soon became a matter of merely deciding when to shut up shop for the batting side.

Phil Mustard had a go but once Dale Benkenstein and Ian Blackwell had also departed there was no option but to block. It might have been different had Borthwick not been reprieved by a no-ball when he nicked Finn to Strauss at first slip, but then Onions these days is no mug with the bat either.

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by CricketingStargazer on (April 24, 2012, 6:44 GMT)

To be fair, there was never the remotest chance of a result here and there should not have been. Middlesex should have never got themselves into the mess that they got themselves into; after all, Durham's first innings only started just before lunch on Day 3 and it took some horrible Middlesex bowling and then batting to allow them, first to score quickly and then to threaten to skittle Middlesex and make a result possible. However, with rain coming, Simpson and Murtagh's stand killed the match. With Middlesex able to put 9 men on the boundary, if necessary, scoring at 9 an over was never likely and once Durham abandoned the chase, Middlesex were never going to take the last 4 wickets. Onions looked a much better bet here than he had in the UAE, where he was understandably rusty, but Lords in April is not Mumbai in November: while he is in the mix, he needs to perform well on unfriendlier pitches later in the season too.

Posted by AdrianVanDenStael on (April 23, 2012, 13:25 GMT)

Well, DrT, maybe you're right about the southern bias, or maybe Finn rather than Onions features so much in this story simply because the headline writers had run out of Onion-related puns after the inevitable headline about Onions making Strauss weep the other day. Anyhow, thanks to cricinfo for correcting and including Finn in the match summary.

Posted by JulianDawson on (April 23, 2012, 12:00 GMT)

Oh dear, some chips on shoulders here. Finn's performance in the second innings definitely turned the game into another potential sensational Middlesex victory. Got to say that Middlesex have shown great character this season in pulling back matches from awkward positions. Well done boys.

Posted by DrTchock on (April 23, 2012, 10:28 GMT)

Much the same as the protocol for the southern bias, once again, in reporting county games, I shouldn't wonder?! The headline, photo and caption all swoon over Finn. Not until you get to paragraph 4 do you get to read about the bloke whose performance dominated the match! Onions got 10 in the match, including most of the 'big' wickets, and bowled when the game was in normal state. Finn got 4 second innings wickets, when Durham were engaged in what had become a T20 thrash, and he gets all the plaudits! One can only presume this is because he plays for Middlesex?!

Finn is a very good bowler and has a long international career ahead of him. However, had Onions not got injured, Finn would probably have hardly played at all for England by now! Finn himself puts his own performance into perspective, next to Onions' in this match.

How can any headline, following a game totally dominated from start to finish by Durham, with Onions bagging a 10-for, be about anyone other than Graham?!

Posted by northumbriannomad on (April 23, 2012, 9:21 GMT)

Aye, well, that's cricket. But Durham must be disappointed with the start to the season. Once again early momentum fails to materialize.

Posted by AdrianVanDenStael on (April 22, 2012, 20:59 GMT)

Can anyone explain the protocol regarding the match summary here? 'Middlesex 188 (G Onions 6-45) and 179 (G Onions 4-28) drew with Durham 238 and 82 for 6'. Yet as the match report makes clear, Finn took four wickets in the second innings as well; so why is that not mentioned in parentheses like Onions's second-innings haul?

Posted by myboyharry on (April 22, 2012, 20:56 GMT)

Onions was the pick of the bowlers in this game and if it wasnt for the fact that Durham were going for a win I doubt that Finn would have got many of his wickets in the second innings. It makes it far easier for the bowler when the batsmen start to take a few chances as Durham had to do. Durham would have won quite easily had the rain not interrupted play today.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
ESPNcricinfo staffClose
County Results
Hampshire v Warwickshire at Lord's - Sep 15, 2012
Hampshire won (lost fewer wickets)
Derbyshire v Hampshire at Derby - Sep 11-14, 2012
Derbyshire won by 6 wickets
Essex v Yorkshire at Chelmsford - Sep 11-14, 2012
Yorkshire won by 239 runs
Lancashire v Surrey at Liverpool - Sep 11-14, 2012
Match drawn
Leics v Gloucs at Leicester - Sep 11-14, 2012
Leics won by 2 wickets
Notts v Warwickshire at Nottingham - Sep 11-14, 2012
Match drawn
All recent results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days