Australia v England, 1st Test, Brisbane, 3rd day November 27, 2010

Hussey and Haddin put Australia in command

62

England 260 and 0 for 19 (Strauss 11*, Cook 6*) trail Australia 481 (Hussey 195, Haddin 136, Finn 6-125) by 202 runs
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details

Michael Hussey and Brad Haddin wrote themselves a place in the history books with a monumental 307-run partnership as Australia took a firm grip on the opening Test in Brisbane. The mammoth stand was a record for any wicket at the Gabba and steered the home side towards a formidable lead of 221 as Hussey hit a career-best 195. Following hours of toil, Steven Finn provided England a late boost with a career-best six wickets, but it's a huge task for them to avoid beginning their Ashes defence with defeat.

Facing a tough hour, Andrew Strauss survived a huge appeal lbw first ball when he padded up to Ben Hilfenhaus and Ricky Ponting asked for a review but it had been correctly ruled to be heading over the stumps. However, it was a heart-in-mouth moment for Strauss, who was on a pair until he tucked a single to square leg. He and Alastair Cook fought hard to get through to the close, yet it's only the start of what has to be a huge rearguard and at least two batsmen need to follow the lead of Hussey and Haddin.

Their stand will go down in Ashes folklore and finished second to the 346 added by Don Bradman and Jack Fingleton in 1936-37 in Australian partnerships against England. Hussey played like the man who dominated world cricket for three years after his debut before the lean time that brought his career into doubt. He reached his 12th Test century off 197 balls and celebrated with a huge release of raw emotion. It meant consecutive Ashes hundreds after his futile 121 at The Oval in 2009, but this one has given his team a huge advantage and has put to bed any debate about his place in the team.

Haddin's innings was his finest at Test level because of the way he adjusted his game to weather an early barrage from the new ball before blossoming towards a 222-ball hundred, which he reached with a straight six off Graeme Swann. He was given a life on 63, with Australia just 39 ahead, when Cook spilled a tough chance and another on 113 when James Anderson dropped a top-edged pull as England's fielding showed a few cracks - a bit like the Gabba surface - before eventually being well caught at slip to end the visitors' 93-over wait for a wicket.

Finn then nipped in for a commendable six-wicket haul, but the pick of England's attack by a mile was Anderson, who somehow went wicketless during a brilliant morning burst in a period of play that is likely to define this Test. On 82, Hussey was given lbw by Aleem Dar, but instantly called for the review and was correctly reprieved as the ball had pitched outside leg stump. Then another shout, with the batsman on 85, was stone dead only for Dar to say not out as he heard two noises - which proved to be both pads - yet England had no reviews left themselves.

Anderson wore a rueful smile, and shared a few words with the batsmen, but continued to have the ball on a string with a succession of unplayable deliveries. The opening 10 overs of the day went for just 13 runs and the first boundary didn't arrive until Haddin drove Finn straight after 50 minutes play.

That was a signal for Haddin to play a few more shots, having had to battle against his natural instincts to repel the early barrage. He late cut Finn through gully then drove Anderson on the rise over mid-off as Australia closed in on England's disappointing 260. Anderson finished an eight-over spell at the cost of 14, but it was the perfect example of when statistics don't even tell half the story.

Haddin's aggression took Australia into the lead and Hussey moved through the 90s when he used his feet against Swann in the offspinner's opening over. Moments later, Hussey had his landmark and the ground went wild with similar ferocity as greeted Peter Siddle's opening-day hat-trick.

England's story of near-misses continued when Cook couldn't quite back-pedal under a high catch offered by Haddin as he drove aggressively at Paul Collingwood's first delivery. The importance of Haddin's innings can't be overstated because if the lower order had been exposed to the new ball England would have sensed their opportunity.

The pitch was still good for batting, but the widening cracks and hint of occasional balls disturbing the surface emphasised the importance of the lead. After lunch, the pair put their foot on England's throat with dominant batting as the visitors became increasingly forlorn. A problem for Strauss was that Swann remained below his best and was comfortably picked off by Hussey and Haddin.

They ticked off a host of records including the 276 added by Bradman and Lindsay Hassett against England in 1946 as the best stand on the ground, which was brought up with an inside edge past the stumps by Haddin off Anderson, and also into second place for Ashes sixth-wicket partnerships. After two wicketless sessions, thoughts turned to whether Australia would declare in the evening, but that decision was taken out of Ponting's hands as England showed resilience.

Swann pushed one across Haddin from around the wicket and Collingwood showed sharp reflexes, then Hussey was removed five short of a maiden Test double when he miscued a pull to deep midwicket. It had been a profitable shot throughout the innings and he left to another standing ovation.

Mitchell Johnson had been padded up all day and couldn't get off the mark during an uncomfortable 19-ball stay before he missed a drive and Siddle was early on a pull which he gloved to slip to give Finn his third five-wicket haul. Xavier Doherty (16) suggested he can provide useful runs down the order until handing Finn his sixth as the last five wickets fell for 31. England's bowlers did a good job against top and bottom of Australia's, but one magnificent partnership dominated the innings.

Andrew McGlashan is an assistant editor at Cricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Mitcher on November 29, 2010, 3:35 GMT

    @Jeffrey D Cox: I'm going to go with the assumption you're commenting with tongue firmly in cheek. I dare not think otherwise or I would have to assume the human race has plumbed new depths of stupidity. OR are you accusing a Pakistani and West Indian umpire of being racist against their own. Good to see Cricinfo's censors have no interest in moderating a sensible debate. This website used to have class. Now it's nothing but a welcome mat to personal/national/racial abuse. Congratulations.

  • on November 28, 2010, 16:28 GMT

    Cricket without the use of the third umpire borders on the rediculous! The score book and history will show that Hussey scored 195 in the first test of the 2010 Ashes. Truth is, Husssey scored a mere 85! Batsmen from the subcontinent and the West Indies would have been sent packing! Any of the current teams can be a winner on a given day if the umpiring allows. The time to use the technology is now!

  • Chris_P on November 28, 2010, 0:26 GMT

    @Gopal Krishna Sharma Nandyala, Australia beat SA over there and England drew with them, No other couintry has ever done that, only Aust has beaten them there. When the sub contintent teams can manage to do that, perhaps they can lose that tag.

  • Australia17594 on November 27, 2010, 23:33 GMT

    People saying UDRS needs more reviews are crazy... 2 reviews per innings is enough. The purpose was to limit the amount of stupid review decision by the teams which it worked if Aus and Eng learn from their mistakes...Also dropped catches screwed england

  • on November 27, 2010, 22:59 GMT

    the poms wasted these udrs on pointless appeals on day 2 and it cost them. it's apart of the game. there were 15 terrible decisions in last years ashes series in the first 3 tests. i am tipping if this series was played in england. the poms would have said no to the udrs like they did in the last ashes series

  • Tamsyn on November 27, 2010, 22:27 GMT

    What is this man babbling about? A deficit of 220 with 10 wickets and two days in hand and it's a "a huge task for [England] to avoid beginning their Ashes defence with defeat" with a "huge rearguar"?

    Who does he think England are - some Sheffield Shield B team? Or is he in some pre-'05 timewarp?

  • Iceborn999 on November 27, 2010, 22:27 GMT

    This is the true test for the Australians. Our batting was always good enough to get a monster score on the Brisbane wicket. Bowling is where we are going to be tested. In the short England innings yesterday, the poms looked very comfortable against hilfenhous, Siddle and Johnson. Don't start cheering now Australia, the poms have yet to really bat and they happened to look awfully comfortable in the last innings. It is this innings that johnson and hilfenhous have to proof that they should be in the team.

    For England I think that they were definitely missing a 5th bowler. Throwing the ball to Collingwood was always a joke. Bresnan should be a consideration for the test game perhaps.

  • on November 27, 2010, 22:17 GMT

    They need to expand UDRS. For example each team should have 3 reviews and Umpires should be able call in for review any time they feel they are uncertain. In the particular case of Hussey and 2 sounds, the fault lies with England and the UDRS process. First England exhausted their challenges in very idiotic manner and then if umpire Dar had the permission to refer 2-sounds LBW decision to the third umpire on his own, he would done it. He is such a high caliber umpire that he would have referred that to third umpire to come to a correct decision.

  • Iceborn999 on November 27, 2010, 22:12 GMT

    Great play from the Aussies... I hope Xavier Doherty has a good day.... go you good thing !!!.

  • anunad on November 27, 2010, 22:00 GMT

    This already has proven itself a very much exciting test match. The next 2 days will be crucial for both teams, as Australia want a win to start well, and England will be playing for a draw to stay in form. However the test is not over and it well be interesting to see what both teams do.

  • Mitcher on November 29, 2010, 3:35 GMT

    @Jeffrey D Cox: I'm going to go with the assumption you're commenting with tongue firmly in cheek. I dare not think otherwise or I would have to assume the human race has plumbed new depths of stupidity. OR are you accusing a Pakistani and West Indian umpire of being racist against their own. Good to see Cricinfo's censors have no interest in moderating a sensible debate. This website used to have class. Now it's nothing but a welcome mat to personal/national/racial abuse. Congratulations.

  • on November 28, 2010, 16:28 GMT

    Cricket without the use of the third umpire borders on the rediculous! The score book and history will show that Hussey scored 195 in the first test of the 2010 Ashes. Truth is, Husssey scored a mere 85! Batsmen from the subcontinent and the West Indies would have been sent packing! Any of the current teams can be a winner on a given day if the umpiring allows. The time to use the technology is now!

  • Chris_P on November 28, 2010, 0:26 GMT

    @Gopal Krishna Sharma Nandyala, Australia beat SA over there and England drew with them, No other couintry has ever done that, only Aust has beaten them there. When the sub contintent teams can manage to do that, perhaps they can lose that tag.

  • Australia17594 on November 27, 2010, 23:33 GMT

    People saying UDRS needs more reviews are crazy... 2 reviews per innings is enough. The purpose was to limit the amount of stupid review decision by the teams which it worked if Aus and Eng learn from their mistakes...Also dropped catches screwed england

  • on November 27, 2010, 22:59 GMT

    the poms wasted these udrs on pointless appeals on day 2 and it cost them. it's apart of the game. there were 15 terrible decisions in last years ashes series in the first 3 tests. i am tipping if this series was played in england. the poms would have said no to the udrs like they did in the last ashes series

  • Tamsyn on November 27, 2010, 22:27 GMT

    What is this man babbling about? A deficit of 220 with 10 wickets and two days in hand and it's a "a huge task for [England] to avoid beginning their Ashes defence with defeat" with a "huge rearguar"?

    Who does he think England are - some Sheffield Shield B team? Or is he in some pre-'05 timewarp?

  • Iceborn999 on November 27, 2010, 22:27 GMT

    This is the true test for the Australians. Our batting was always good enough to get a monster score on the Brisbane wicket. Bowling is where we are going to be tested. In the short England innings yesterday, the poms looked very comfortable against hilfenhous, Siddle and Johnson. Don't start cheering now Australia, the poms have yet to really bat and they happened to look awfully comfortable in the last innings. It is this innings that johnson and hilfenhous have to proof that they should be in the team.

    For England I think that they were definitely missing a 5th bowler. Throwing the ball to Collingwood was always a joke. Bresnan should be a consideration for the test game perhaps.

  • on November 27, 2010, 22:17 GMT

    They need to expand UDRS. For example each team should have 3 reviews and Umpires should be able call in for review any time they feel they are uncertain. In the particular case of Hussey and 2 sounds, the fault lies with England and the UDRS process. First England exhausted their challenges in very idiotic manner and then if umpire Dar had the permission to refer 2-sounds LBW decision to the third umpire on his own, he would done it. He is such a high caliber umpire that he would have referred that to third umpire to come to a correct decision.

  • Iceborn999 on November 27, 2010, 22:12 GMT

    Great play from the Aussies... I hope Xavier Doherty has a good day.... go you good thing !!!.

  • anunad on November 27, 2010, 22:00 GMT

    This already has proven itself a very much exciting test match. The next 2 days will be crucial for both teams, as Australia want a win to start well, and England will be playing for a draw to stay in form. However the test is not over and it well be interesting to see what both teams do.

  • on November 27, 2010, 21:57 GMT

    I wonder why no one's saying now that these teams and players are Tigers at home and Lambs abroad? Oh wait!! Neither of them is a sub continent team!! Anyone said Hypocrisy?

  • cricket_spirit on November 27, 2010, 20:42 GMT

    This test is an example of great cricket. Cricket is a wonderful game mainly because of the human factor in the game. Those that complain about umpiring mistakes don't understand the game. Every game has some umpiring mistakes, it is inevitable since umpires are human. If you try to remove this human factor from the game, it will become as mechanical as F1 racing, where the machine is the hero. Cricket should not go that way, it should retain its human face. The referral system is the wrong path if one loves the game.

  • on November 27, 2010, 20:00 GMT

    I assure you people please don't think about Australia will win the test this....... England will not give up at any cost collingwood and bell will be the important part of the game and this game will be draw at any cost........................

  • on November 27, 2010, 19:58 GMT

    @asif_the_spotfixer - i wouldn't say that taking the last 4 wickets for 31 runs was that bad?

  • The_Wog on November 27, 2010, 19:54 GMT

    Fact is at this level Dar should be capable of the "two pads" decision - they don't sound the same. And it wasn't his only blunder - he missed a snick too small for Hotspot (but not snicko) and then sawed off Hussey on a leg stump call. That's 3 big errors in 1.5 innings.

    Despite burning one UDRS, the Poms will be crying about the second one that should have been returned to them. Well, there were no UDRS the last time Dar gifted the Ashes to ENG with one bat-pad LBW after another. And there was none when Billy Bowden gifted the IND-AUS series on one of the truly awful decisions of all time.

  • shri619 on November 27, 2010, 19:07 GMT

    no i think eng could still surrvive the test if they bat out 5 session it is difficult task but they have to try hard if they don't want to go 1 down in the series

  • asif_the_spotfixer on November 27, 2010, 18:25 GMT

    strauss need some tips from sub continent teams how to wrap the aussies lower order...

  • landl47 on November 27, 2010, 17:57 GMT

    It couldn't really have gone any worse for England. Good bowling didn't get rewarded and Hussey and Haddin took full advantage of England's mistakes. A wonderful partnership has put Australia in an impregnable position. England don't have enough time to win the game from here, even in the unlikely event that they get enough runs. So it's a win for Australia, with a draw a very slim possibility if England bat for 5 sessions. Good work by Hussey, Haddin and Siddle, all of whom were in danger of being dropped if they hadn't done well. As for England, remember 2005 and keep fighting. Other than that burst by Siddle, England's quick bowlers have looked better than Australia's and that bodes well for future games. There's a long way to go yet.

  • alfredmynn on November 27, 2010, 17:09 GMT

    Though a (non-fanatical) pom supporter, I must say Aleem Dar comes in for some unfair criticism on these forums. He heard two sounds, so he gave it not out: certainly not something that can be described as a 'howler' by this normally excellent umpire. Hussey deserved his luck; there probably haven't been many 'chanceless' innings of 150+ in Test matches, especially given the batsman had to weather a superb spell of bowling on the way. I'd go as far as to say that most signature innings in Test history were similarly helped by a mixture of umpiring errors and fielding blunders - we're only becoming more aware of it with the technology available.

  • on November 27, 2010, 16:52 GMT

    !!!!! Hussey the best !!!!!!

  • smjr on November 27, 2010, 15:36 GMT

    I think England will survive this test looking at the pitch condition at present and if they plan batting from session to session. They can bat till tea on the fifth day, but past history of Test matches in Australia suggest that there will be decision in this test match as well and chances of result is 100% of which Australia chances of winning is very bright. However England can also win this test provided they gave Australia an excess of 180 plus runs to chase on the final day which is not going to be easy for Australia keeping in view that Swan will surely turn the ball.

  • on November 27, 2010, 15:09 GMT

    they have lifted the spirit of aussies.. awesome partnership..

  • on November 27, 2010, 14:51 GMT

    if eng survive 5 sessions,then we have another ashes series, which could be as competitive as in 2005 & 2009

  • Roger_Allott on November 27, 2010, 14:31 GMT

    Fantastic two days of crikkit. Mostly excellent play but a few moments where players have buckled under the pressure. Anderson this morning was utterly brilliant. Hussey afterwards was equally brilliant. I can't see England saving the match from this position - we're going to need at least 2 of the chaps to make day 4 centuries and at least 2 others to make 50s. Not impossible, but unlikely.

    For me, I love the review system, even if it's been a thorn in the side of England in this match so far. It adds a completely new dimension to the game and to captaincy in particular, and improves the overall quality of decision-making by officials.

  • RohanMarkJay on November 27, 2010, 14:06 GMT

    Yeah Jimmy Anderson was unlucky not to clean up the aussie middle and lower order today. He didn't have the luck today. Thats cricket. However this is a long series, so plenty of time for England to strike back. Remember they only need to level the series to retain the Ashes. Certainly achieveable for this England team against this Australian team. I still even have faith that England can win the series and retain the ashes outright. That should shut the aussie media and supporters up.

  • Jim1207 on November 27, 2010, 13:55 GMT

    All those intelligent people who supported UDRS and criticized indian team would have learned a lesson hopefull todayy, if they are british. 2 reviews bring a lot of confusion every time for the players whether to use or not and if they use it unsuccessfully, it adds more pressure and if all the reviews are over, it's back to how test cricket is played before UDRS. So can anyone explain what UDRS achieves here? As ICC states, does it improve umpiring decisions from 92% to 95% or something? Initially, when UDRS was introduced, it was said that ball's impact on stumps would not be considered by third umpire but now they consider. No one is sure what rule is followed for UDRS, and that too varies depending on what instruments they could afford for a series! Either increase reviews as one review per batsman for batting team and one review for bowling team against every batsman or shut down that. Why do you restrict to only 2 reviews and bring hell a lot of confusions into the game!

  • 2.14istherunrate on November 27, 2010, 13:29 GMT

    That was a nightmare-a ghastly repeat of the last x Ashes openers. Yugghhhhh! The aussies just seem that more agressive at Brisbane-the running is extra forceful, and the defensive shots had purpose. The seamers bowled okay till the scoreline looked ridiculous- Anderson was magical but everything told in the end when even he dropped a catch-almost unheard of. The review is double edged-we needed one for that howler by Dar,but desperation had used up the two allowed. swann really lost his way. He was driven for six by Hussey and promptly forgot his line( and lengths). Wilfred Rhodes said if a batsman drives you for six toss it up more and if he does it again toss it up even more. Paying 20 for Hussey would have been worth it. But like a coy virgin he dropped shorter and shorter, and just got massacred. A felonious exhibition of stupidity. I bet that grin is a bit sheepish now. Monty for Adelaide? Thank God they are only 220 ahead. Brisbane= bane of all tourists dreams.

  • KingofRedLions on November 27, 2010, 13:13 GMT

    Have a look at the comments for this article. Now look at the comments for this one: http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2010-11/content/story/486757.html. A fortnight is a long time in cricket.

  • smjr on November 27, 2010, 13:08 GMT

    The current ICC test ranking is very immature and irrational. How could you label a team as No 1 based on last three years performance and some illogical mathematical formulas just like Dukworh lewis in ODI. The current test/ODI ranking system was introduced in 2002 and it is strange that no cricket board ever objected for it or ICC give a better formula. The current ranking system did not distinguish between away or home series and points are calculated equally. Understandably an away test win should be given more weightage than home test win unless playing condition, weather and pitch condition are same, which is not possible. In my opinion a test championship be made after every 4 years whereby each team play each other on league basis in 8 to 10 months time so there will be nearly 35 test matches. The team winning most shall be declare test champion for next 4 years. The ICC FTP shall also remain in tact.

  • smjr on November 27, 2010, 12:47 GMT

    Glad to see UDRS system for this Ashes series, all this bring transparency to the system and also put umpires vigilant and more concern about their decision. But I think there shall be 6 reviews per inning keeping in view the rise in competition level and massive role the technology plays. The series between Pakistan and South Africa was without UDRS system. Pakistan suffered more than South Africa. Had the UDRS system was in place then Pakistan might win the 2nd test. I think India at present is very good team they are playing as a unit, consistently and all players bringing the act together in a match. But I am afraid they are not voicing for the UDRS system once they lost an away series in Sri Lanka (1-2). ICC must come out of its shell and bring the UDRS system as soon a possible for both Test and ODI to make things transparent and bring public interest, just as home umpiring was replaced by neutral umpiring some 20 years ago thanks mainly to Pakistan who originated the idea.

  • RJHB on November 27, 2010, 12:21 GMT

    What a test! Enthralling, exciting, controversial, scintillating! The English fightback, and surely it'll come, will be fascinating to watch. Pitch looks flat. We need Johnson to fire. If he doesn't, then surely he's cooked.

  • BradHinds on November 27, 2010, 12:13 GMT

    Having been a skeptic, I can't quite believe what I'm about to post. Mike Hussey! Mr. Cricket. What is there to say? I'd be hard pressed to call his innings career-saving. It was career-defining. His pinnacle achievement to this date. When one considers the state he's been - and what has been said about him - these past 24 months, that's a truly magnificent achievement. 195! His batting was magnificent. He performed with a freedom I've not seen from him in several years. An unparalleled determination, aggression and positivity. And in spite of his tumultuous position! Even during England's first Innings, you could see how animated he was in the field. So happy to be out there. I'll not soon forget the way he celebrated his 100. That scream; that display of raw emotion. It was much more than a simple batting achievement; it was an act of defiance broadcast to the world; his time is not quite over just yet. Anyone - Australian, England or otherwise - should appreciate that.

  • andysviews on November 27, 2010, 12:10 GMT

    John Crofts the review system has been frivolously used by both sides. Instead of accepting the umpires decision on 50-50 calls both teams have wasted their reviews as the fielding team. England even wasted theirs as the batting team. Both teams know the limitations of the rules but choose to question the umpire on close decisions. Club cricketers know better than to object.

  • meswaine on November 27, 2010, 12:04 GMT

    @DaveBrace - lol couldn't agree with you more. @BlueCollar - Strauss and Cook sensibly trying to survive the evening is the reason for the downfall of the British Empire. I'm not sure I follow, but I cannot be bothered to give you the education you so desperately require. On a cricket note, nothing has gone England's way luck wise, and they haven't made the most of the opportunities they've had all game. I hope they play normally rather than overtly defensive, and a draw is possible, albeit unlikely.

  • WilliamFranklin on November 27, 2010, 11:55 GMT

    freak events this match; Siddle getting 6 and a partnership like that with so much luck (and focus).

  • on November 27, 2010, 11:40 GMT

    No doubt Hussey is real star for Australia .He always shows his quality batting in ODI's but this time has has done in test match too when his team was in real need.He is real inspiration for young cricketers the ways he takes quick single runs ,his running ability between the ticke.The way he does work in the feild and the best thing is that he always proves himself when his team require him to perform his best!!!!!!!!!!!!He is complete batsmen who gives 100% all the times......Mike hats off to you...............

  • chuckmuchingo on November 27, 2010, 11:37 GMT

    Hussey played well but he has been very fortunate. He looked totally confused when just trying to survive the morning session which he did with a great slice of luck and an error from the normally impeccable Aleem Dar. If he is out at that time, the match maybe turns. He could have been out on 4/5 other occasions. But he wasnt and that is cricket so now England wil either prove their metal or succumb. I sincerely hope that England enjoy the same fortune the Aussies have had because heaven knows they need it.

  • on November 27, 2010, 11:30 GMT

    England have to win at least 2 sessions tomorrow and square one which probably means being about 290/5 to have a 50% chance of drawing the match-possible with a major innings and a bit of the rub of the green.

  • on November 27, 2010, 11:25 GMT

    I think England is capable to bat for another 150 overs and getting a position where they cant loose the match. Hopefully they will utilize their review system in a good manner otherwise Aussie will create a huge amount of pressure on English Batsman. Though I believe Aussie cant bowl out England below 150 overs.

  • chappelis_last_blast on November 27, 2010, 11:25 GMT

    Hussey did bat well but was'nt Anderson unlucky. The channel nine guys said it perfectly when they said that the review systems should be out of the players hands and the third umpire should fix wrong calls. Hussey would of been out for 80 odd and the game would be alot different. The way Anderson was bowling Johnson would of been out a few balls later. But what happens, is what happens.

  • crikey on November 27, 2010, 11:22 GMT

    they should have made another 100

  • on November 27, 2010, 11:09 GMT

    @Bob Young: It wasn't a howler, it took TV six or seven replays to determine that Hussey hadn't hit it. The UDRS was brought in partly because TV highlights errors that are imperceptible to the naked eye.

    The problem was the referral of the Clarke appeal the previous day: I don't think I've ever seen a not-out decision reversed in such circumstances. The fielders heard a noise and were sure, but they should have been a bit smarter and saved their referral. Easy to say with hindsight.

    @Bluey: You are a troll and I shouldn't feed you. Go on then, just a snack: How would Katich have approached that last hour's batting? And isn't the onus on the bowlers to get wickets whatever the batsmen's approach? Warne and McGrath would have, I'm sure.

  • on November 27, 2010, 11:03 GMT

    just as everyone has been saying - Hussey is past it, he should not have been in the team in the first place!! Why do the selectors continue with the old hack who can only score against minnow teams.... drop him now before he ruins the whole series!

  • A_J.. on November 27, 2010, 10:55 GMT

    this is called a "Real player". b4 dis match, d critics r asking d Aussie selectors; Y der's a place 4 Hussey, in d Team? He's played really marvellous....

  • on November 27, 2010, 10:54 GMT

    What do england do now? 200 behind first innings in aus means certain defeat unless you have an indian like middle order or rain intervention, swann has been over hyped by the savage english press and if he doesnt deliver this series they will crucify him and if strauss doesnt avg at least 50 they will burn efigies of him on london bridge, as for 20/20 specialist pieterson he hasnt had that bravado or aura about him since he labelled mcgrath an old man then got his ribs broken for his trouble. I agree with blueycollar in the way body language speaks volumes, once the aussies got on top the heads of the english dropped. They need a captains knock and a dogged performance from colly to even set a target for swann to bowl at he might even turn one in australia come day five. The aussies have just played on dustbowl wickets in india so they should fare ok.

  • StJohn on November 27, 2010, 10:54 GMT

    It's an exciting game. England got a well-below par score in the 1st innings, and credit to Australia's bowlers for that. However, but for the big (and slightly streaky) partnership between Hussey and Haddin, England might even have managed a slender first innings lead. I feel a bit sorry for Jimmy Anderson, who deserved a 5-for but it just didn't happen for him: he was all over the two Hs in that new ball spell. I think on balance so far the Aussies certainly deserve to win this Test. But as the article indicates, but for a decision going the other way here or there, in reality these two teams seem pretty evenly matched. One can complain about the review system etc etc. It is imperfect but it can work both ways; perhaps some improvements might be made. But luck always plays a big part in sport and that's part of the beauty of it: England haven't quite had the rub of the green yet, but it's a long series and these things will probably cancel each other out whatever the review system.

  • Australia17594 on November 27, 2010, 10:41 GMT

    Guys c'mon there were more umpiring howlers last time in england...

  • stuartk319 on November 27, 2010, 10:39 GMT

    othello22 is mostly right; except that India and SAf kept playing to win at Mohali and MCG. It is still game on, provided Eng bat positively from here. If Eng think only of survival tomorrow the match will finish quickly; much like Adelaide in 06/07 and Perth in 02/03. Siddle and Hilfenhaus will be deadly bowling at sitting targets; and Doherty has got his chance through his knack of clinically wrapping up an innings; like Hauritz couldn't.

  • on November 27, 2010, 10:39 GMT

    Aleem Darr is surly tbe best in the world. But he is derectly responsble for the trouble English are heading. I got fed up watching the game after that blunder.

  • StarveTheLizard on November 27, 2010, 10:17 GMT

    Hussey, comes through again! Given he scored 195 and North scored 1, I think the math is clear. His contribution is 195 times greater than North's. Hopefully the selectors are doing the same calculations.

  • Amjad_Bukhari on November 27, 2010, 10:09 GMT

    4th day is going to be vital, if Aussies bowlers got 6 or 7 wickets of england and bring match close to victory on 5th day, england will be demoralised very badly and aussies will come out of pressure (of previos defeats by Ind & PaK). And thus whole course of Ashes Series will be decided. May be England looking for decreased margin of defeat in Ashes then. I assure If Eng cannot come back tomorrow, they have 20% chance to make a come back in series. Note it guys

  • on November 27, 2010, 10:00 GMT

    England gonna lose this.... No point in keeping hope guys.... think about the second test...

  • on November 27, 2010, 10:00 GMT

    The review system had been working quite well until Hussey was clearly plumb LBW to Anderson before he had reached 90. The ball hit both pads confusing Aleem Dar into thinking he had hit it. As Hussey was clearly out if he hadn't hit it, Dar should have given him out and let Hussey use a review. As it was, Hussey got away with one and now England are struggling to save this test. Two reviews per innings are not enough. Two per session is more like it. The whole review idea is to try and nullify umpire error. If the team on the sharp end of an error have no reviews left, then they have to sit on it? No, that's wrong. Think again ICC.

  • on November 27, 2010, 9:35 GMT

    BlueCollar - You know nothing about cricket. There are so many problems with your comment I haven't the time to go into them. I can only assume this is the first match you've seen.

  • on November 27, 2010, 9:33 GMT

    I hope Hussey sends Aleem Daar a huge thank you magnum of champers. If ever an umpire's howler changed the whole course of a test match, this was it.

  • Fantasybob on November 27, 2010, 9:25 GMT

    Bluey collar - maybe you're right that attack is the best form of defence but Strauss tried that in the first innings. Once bitten....they just HAD to be there at the close. Now they regroup get through the first hour tomorrow and begin to attack from there. It's a long haul a real test of character all the way down the order. A real Collingwood situation.

  • on November 27, 2010, 9:24 GMT

    Its impossible for England to win now.... They'll do a great job if they are able to draw this one

  • cabinet96 on November 27, 2010, 8:49 GMT

    BlueyCollar they were simply playing till stumps you wern't complaining when Hussey could do nothing other than miss the ball this morning they scored 21 runs in 12 overs at drinks and the last ball of the over was a 4

  • shri619 on November 27, 2010, 8:26 GMT

    now england are in bit of a trabble but nothing to worry if they bat out full day with 3-4 down then i think they have a slight chance of drawing this match.

  • on November 27, 2010, 8:19 GMT

    once the shine went off the ball, what swing there was. disappeared and the english bowlers became cannon fodder. that's whats going to happen over the seriesand it will show how much they will miss using the duke ball. what a great performance by hussey and haddin. finn tried all day and never gave in

  • BlueyCollar on November 27, 2010, 8:11 GMT

    Strauss and Cooks defensive mindset in the last hour spoke volumes for Englands ambitions in this test match. Upon change of innings I would have liked to see England ask themselves "How do we win from here". Lets be 0-50 at stumps and bat positively on day 4, score 380 and bowl the Aussies out on a deteriating pitch on day 5. But no, they have decided to try to bat for a draw with 6 and a half sessions remaining. 'Who dares wins' hasn't been an attitude adopted by a Englishmen since the second world war in cricket or any other field. That is why England is shadow of its former self, from a world super power 100 years ago to a quaint little museum now and in contrast, Australia punches above its weight in all respects. By the way when we win the Ashes we want the urn in Australia!!!!!!!!

  • othello22 on November 27, 2010, 8:08 GMT

    Great work from Hads and Huss, but if Strauss, Pietersen and co get away with some runs tomorrow, then it'll all be forgotten very quickly, just like Sid's hat-trick. Australia have had themselves in plenty of similar positions over the past few years, now the real question comes into play: Can they finish them off? SA in 2008-09; Ashes 2009; Mohali 2010 - Australia were in winning positions in all of these instances and somehow managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Tomorrow will tell.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • othello22 on November 27, 2010, 8:08 GMT

    Great work from Hads and Huss, but if Strauss, Pietersen and co get away with some runs tomorrow, then it'll all be forgotten very quickly, just like Sid's hat-trick. Australia have had themselves in plenty of similar positions over the past few years, now the real question comes into play: Can they finish them off? SA in 2008-09; Ashes 2009; Mohali 2010 - Australia were in winning positions in all of these instances and somehow managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Tomorrow will tell.

  • BlueyCollar on November 27, 2010, 8:11 GMT

    Strauss and Cooks defensive mindset in the last hour spoke volumes for Englands ambitions in this test match. Upon change of innings I would have liked to see England ask themselves "How do we win from here". Lets be 0-50 at stumps and bat positively on day 4, score 380 and bowl the Aussies out on a deteriating pitch on day 5. But no, they have decided to try to bat for a draw with 6 and a half sessions remaining. 'Who dares wins' hasn't been an attitude adopted by a Englishmen since the second world war in cricket or any other field. That is why England is shadow of its former self, from a world super power 100 years ago to a quaint little museum now and in contrast, Australia punches above its weight in all respects. By the way when we win the Ashes we want the urn in Australia!!!!!!!!

  • on November 27, 2010, 8:19 GMT

    once the shine went off the ball, what swing there was. disappeared and the english bowlers became cannon fodder. that's whats going to happen over the seriesand it will show how much they will miss using the duke ball. what a great performance by hussey and haddin. finn tried all day and never gave in

  • shri619 on November 27, 2010, 8:26 GMT

    now england are in bit of a trabble but nothing to worry if they bat out full day with 3-4 down then i think they have a slight chance of drawing this match.

  • cabinet96 on November 27, 2010, 8:49 GMT

    BlueyCollar they were simply playing till stumps you wern't complaining when Hussey could do nothing other than miss the ball this morning they scored 21 runs in 12 overs at drinks and the last ball of the over was a 4

  • on November 27, 2010, 9:24 GMT

    Its impossible for England to win now.... They'll do a great job if they are able to draw this one

  • Fantasybob on November 27, 2010, 9:25 GMT

    Bluey collar - maybe you're right that attack is the best form of defence but Strauss tried that in the first innings. Once bitten....they just HAD to be there at the close. Now they regroup get through the first hour tomorrow and begin to attack from there. It's a long haul a real test of character all the way down the order. A real Collingwood situation.

  • on November 27, 2010, 9:33 GMT

    I hope Hussey sends Aleem Daar a huge thank you magnum of champers. If ever an umpire's howler changed the whole course of a test match, this was it.

  • on November 27, 2010, 9:35 GMT

    BlueCollar - You know nothing about cricket. There are so many problems with your comment I haven't the time to go into them. I can only assume this is the first match you've seen.

  • on November 27, 2010, 10:00 GMT

    The review system had been working quite well until Hussey was clearly plumb LBW to Anderson before he had reached 90. The ball hit both pads confusing Aleem Dar into thinking he had hit it. As Hussey was clearly out if he hadn't hit it, Dar should have given him out and let Hussey use a review. As it was, Hussey got away with one and now England are struggling to save this test. Two reviews per innings are not enough. Two per session is more like it. The whole review idea is to try and nullify umpire error. If the team on the sharp end of an error have no reviews left, then they have to sit on it? No, that's wrong. Think again ICC.