England v Australia, NatWest Series, The Oval

Bopara enjoys all-round good day

ESPNcricinfo presents the plays of the day from the second ODI at The Oval

Andrew McGlashan at The Oval

July 1, 2012

Comments: 29 | Text size: A | A

Michael Clarke thought it had Eoin Morgan lbw, England v Australia, 2nd ODI, The Oval, July 1, 2012
There was more DRS controversy after Michael Clarke trapped Eoin Morgan lbw © Getty Images
Enlarge

Bowling change of the day
Ravi Bopara has not had much work yet this summer with the ball for England; an over against West Indies at The Oval and one against Australia at Lord's was the sum total before today. On this occasion, though, he was given a chance before Graeme Swann and the move paid off handsomely for both bowler and captain as he nipped one back at Michael Clarke to find the inside edge. Bopara will never be picked for his bowling, but it is an underused - and often underestimated - part of his game.

Giveaway of the day
Shane Watson had gone to a run-a-ball fifty but, perhaps in fear of wasting another start, he seized up just when Australia needed to find another gear. His next 30 deliveries brought 16 runs while the team added 24 between overs 20 and 30. Something had to give, and it did. Trying to break the shackles he aimed to launch Swann over deep midwicket but only got as far as Steven Finn who just about judged the catch as he took it by his ankles.

Aggro of the day
Swann could have had another wicket in a very similar way when George Bailey, who played a curious innings during which he laboured against Swann, followed the same route as Watson and tried to clear cow corner. This time it was Tim Bresnan in the position and it was a far harder catch than Finn's as he had to make considerable ground around the boundary to get under the chance. He managed to reach the ball but could not hold on much to Swann's anger. Swann has never been one to take dropped catches well - and has come close to over-stepping the mark on occasions - and chuntered all the way back to the deep at the end of his over.

Run-out of the day
One of the many impressive attributes of England's fast bowlers is how good they are in the field. The team does not carry anyone. Finn showed that being tall does not mean you cannot be agile when he completed the nifty run-out of David Hussey. The batsman had squeezed a yorker back towards Finn who parried the ball but scrambled after it from his follow through and then proceeded to flick the ball back onto the stumps with Hussey well short. However, it was a good job he had not clattered the stumps with his knee - as is becoming a habit - because then the stump would have needed to be uprooted to complete the dismissal.

Comeback of the day
Out went Pat Cummins (for the rest of this tour) and in came Mitchell Johnson. There were almost cheers from the English fans when the team was announced. To be fair to Johnson he has had some good days - mainly in coloured clothes - since he was serenaded with "He bowls to left, he bowls the right" during the last Ashes series, but the home support was not going to let that get in the way. His first spell gave them plenty of ammunition to restart the chants; 2-0-20-0 were the nasty figures at the end of it, including two no-balls the free-hits from which were cracked away by Ian Bell and Alastair Cook.

Failed imitation of the day
Bell is in such fine form that it did not come as much of a surprise when he danced down the pitch and drove Watson straight for six. What did come as a bit of a surprise was that Jonathan Trott, who had moved nicely to 17 off 21 balls, tried to emulate him. Trott has many wonderful attributes as a batsman, but lofted straight drives off the medium-pacers is not top of that list and his attempt ended with an ugly inside edge against Watson.

Review of the day
Two balls after removing the in-form Bell with his first delivery, Michael Clarke appeared to have given England more than just a minor jolt when he won an lbw decision against Eoin Morgan two deliveries later. Morgan, though, immediately asked for a review and, on close inspection, there was the faintest mark on the inside edge from Hot Spot. It was far from bright white and Aleem Dar, in the TV chair, took his time and also used the sound from the stump microphone before advising Richard Illingworth there was conclusive evidence to overturn the decision.

Andrew McGlashan is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Andrew McGlashan

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by xylo on (July 2, 2012, 22:01 GMT)

I believe Clarke is taking this tour very seriously as preparation for the Ashes. He is batting like it is a test match!

Posted by ladycricfan on (July 2, 2012, 16:32 GMT)

Morgan's review: the tiny spot where ball passed disappeared immediately. There was another spot appeared at the same time where there was no contact. There was a third spot appeared later. Snicko showed nothing.

Posted by JG2704 on (July 2, 2012, 16:13 GMT)

@satish619chandar on (July 02 2012, 12:30 PM GMT) - I'm pretty sure the right decision was made re Morgan even if it was not a howler. Morgan reviewed it straight away which (with only 1 review allowed he surely would not have done) although I can see where you're coming from. I suppose you could review it without hotspot purely by going to the 3rd umpire for a visible look inc close ups etc but I suppose it's tough losing a review as a batsman if you know you nicked it but only Hotspot shows it.

Posted by SDHM on (July 2, 2012, 12:33 GMT)

Soorajiyer - so you wouldn't mind if the ECB stumped up the money and paid for DRS in the England/India series later this year for the England players to use? If the BCCI doesn't want it, then don't let the players use it, but don't deny others the chance. As for the Sehwag nick in the World Cup, you have to remember that these are new, stronger hot spot cameras, meaning thinner nicks, like Sehwag's was, are now picked up. There was nothing else that mark on the bat could have been but the ball, but with the old Hotspot Morgan would have stayed out. The right decision was made. But it's one of those - the England fans will say justice was done, the Aussies will feel hard done by!

Posted by satish619chandar on (July 2, 2012, 12:30 GMT)

@aracer : We have seen the hotspot giving mark when it is not an edge or not detecting some obvious edges..So you can never be sure of tiny marks.. Hotspot does have flaws when it comes to tiny edges.. As they put in commentary, it is more a umpire decision mistake rather than the technology.. DRS is there to eliminate howlers(Like all of us prefer) and the decision is not a howler to be reversed.. It was almost similar to the Gayle decision.. though some had reservations on Gayle decision, it was how DRS should work.. In case of not so obvious referrals, better if the umpire sticks to the original decision.. It doesn't necessarily need to be an Indian supporter to comment on DRS flaws..

Posted by jmcilhinney on (July 2, 2012, 11:53 GMT)

@subbass on (July 01 2012, 21:33 PM GMT), this is a fine example of a lack of understanding of how DRS and its components work. HotSpot is simply an infrared camera. It detects electromagnetic radiation in the infrared spectrum. You and I know that as heat. They can make the camera more sensitive by making it able to detect smaller amounts of radiation, which they have done recently, but how exactly would they "fix" this issue you speak of? It's not like there's different types of heat and they can make the camera detect one type and not another. Heat is heat. What they show us is a visual representation of the difference in heat radiated by different areas. Darker is cooler and lighter is hotter. That's all there is to it. It's science, not magic.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (July 2, 2012, 11:45 GMT)

@tusharkardile on (July 02 2012, 10:18 AM GMT), Morgan's review is an excellent advertisement for DRS because it shows that HotSpot can detect very faint edges. The fact that Morgan reviewed immediate is merely a strong indication that he believed he had hit it. The only evidence that matters is the obvious hot spot on the bat at the exact time and place that the ball passed the bat. There is no plausible explanation for that spot other than that the ball hit the bat. Anyone who disagrees with that is either simply ignoring the evidence because they are anti-DRS or else doesn't possess a primary school level understanding of science.

Posted by Hammond on (July 2, 2012, 11:41 GMT)

@RandyOZ- so now it is the selectors fault? How about actually admitting that Australia put it's best available team on the park and were outplayed? Can you even bear the thought?

Posted by Yevghenny on (July 2, 2012, 11:23 GMT)

tusharkardile - there is a new hot spot camera to the one you are talking about. What is the point everyone shouting about hotspot needing to improve, then when it does pick up a spot everyone says "how do we know it's not just a random mark?" If everyone will notice, Morgan turns the bat so the face is towards the camera so you can't see the edge anymore, which is why it "disappears". I can guarantee if there was no DRS in this match, people would be saying "but there is a mark, why isn't there DRS in every match?"

Posted by AdrianVanDenStael on (July 2, 2012, 11:21 GMT)

@aracer: in fact not all those who have doubts about DRS are India supporters. I've heard the argument that what went wrong with the Morgan decision was not DRS itself but "the application", but I don't think that's a very helpful distinction, since one of the fundamental problems with DRS is the lack of clarity and consistency about how it is applied. During the last Ashes series I remember Ponting getting worked up about a not-out decision on a caught behind against Pietersen, ironically made on-field by Dar himself, where DRS revealed a hot-spot; ironically it was decided not to reverse the on-field decision. One thing which is memorable in that case is Brad Haddin being as certain that there was an edge in that case as Morgan was in this case, yet I don't remember people leaping to conclusions about that in the way they are now. Also what do we make of Bell not referring an lbw decision against him on Friday when hot spot suggested there was an edge? There are still many questions

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Andrew McGlashanClose
Andrew McGlashan Assistant Editor Andrew arrived at ESPNcricinfo via Manchester and Cape Town, after finding the assistant editor at a weak moment as he watched England's batting collapse in the Newlands Test. Andrew began his cricket writing as a freelance covering Lancashire during 2004 when they were relegated in the County Championship. In fact, they were top of the table when he began reporting on them but things went dramatically downhill. He likes to let people know that he is a supporter of county cricket, a fact his colleagues will testify to and bemoan in equal quantities.
Tour Results
England v Australia at Manchester - Jul 10, 2012
England won by 7 wickets (with 11 balls remaining) (D/L method)
England v Australia at Chester-le-Street - Jul 7, 2012
England won by 8 wickets (with 13 balls remaining)
England v Australia at Birmingham - Jul 4, 2012
Match abandoned without a ball bowled
England v Australia at The Oval - Jul 1, 2012
England won by 6 wickets (with 26 balls remaining)
England v Australia at Lord's - Jun 29, 2012
England won by 15 runs
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days