Emirates

Australia v England, 1st T20, Adelaide

Nerveless Woakes seals record win

The Report by Andrew McGlashan at the Adelaide Oval

January 12, 2011

Comments: 99 | Text size: A | A

England 9 for 158 (Morgan 43, Watson 4-15) beat Australia 7 for 157 (Watson 59, Yardy 2-28) by one wicket
Scorecard


Chris Woakes celebrates hitting the winning run as England beat Australia by one wicket, Australia v England, 1st Twenty20, Adelaide, January 12, 2011
Chris Woakes kept his cool to guide England to an eighth Twenty20 win in a row © Getty Images
Enlarge

Chris Woakes showed nerves of steel on his international debut to seal England a thrilling one-wicket victory at Adelaide and a world-record eighth Twenty20 win on the trot. Woakes finished unbeaten on 19 from 15 balls as he struck the final ball over midwicket having lost Graeme Swann at the start of the last over with four needed.

Ajmal Shahzad faced two dot balls before scrambling to the non-striker's end then Woakes scythed Shane Watson, who produced an outstanding all-round display with 59 and four wickets, through backward point to level the scores and ensure, at worst, England couldn't lose. They really shouldn't have pushed it so close having always been in control of the asking rate, but it's a credit to their belief that they could still pull through for victory despite a late clatter of wickets.

Watson will feel the defeat particularly acutely having almost pulled the match back for Australia. Eoin Morgan, in his first major innings since September, had eased 43 off 33 balls when he drove to cover and Michael Yardy fell first ball as he failed to get his bat out of the line of a short ball. But Woakes, a replacement for Stuart Broad in the England squad, showed why he was sent in ahead of Swann when he pulled Shaun Tait for a mighty six and was there to see his side home.

Australia were still some way short of the standards they set themselves having lost momentum with the bat after a fine start, the combined eight overs of Tait and Brett Lee went for 81, and their fielding display included a number of errors. They should have struck first ball of the innings but Steve O'Keefe dropped a regulation chance at square leg as Ian Bell went to pull Tait. Bell responded with three boundaries, including an effortless back-foot drive which oozed the class he has shown all tour.

England clearly weren't going to hold back in the first six overs. It was thrilling cricket to watch as the sides traded boundaries and wickets. Steven Davies drove his second ball to cover to give Brett Lee a wicket on his international return then Bell was given a second life, again off Tait, when David Warner dropped a tough chance at backward point.

Bell, playing his first Twenty20 international since 2008, unleashed an uppercut over third man of which Virender Sehwag would have been proud and Kevin Pietersen didn't want to be left behind as he joined in the boundary hunt. Australia continued to lapse in the field as O'Keefe let one through his legs at deep square-leg with England scoring at more than 10-an-over.

The batsmen didn't want to rein themselves in, however, even though the asking-rate was plummeting, and Bell drove Mitchell Johnson's third ball to cover. O'Keefe, meanwhile, must have feared how his evening would develop when Pietersen hit his first two balls for four and six but the left-arm spinner struck back when Pietersen failed to clear a leaping David Hussey at mid-off. It was a needless shot in terms of the run-rate, but England's tactic - which has reaped rich rewards - has been to go hard regardless in the first six overs.

The situation was made for steady accumulation and for a period Morgan and Paul Collingwood calmly ticked off the runs. It was hard to tell which batsman had barely played an innings since the end of the English season. Morgan pulled Lee for six then placed him perfectly over mid-off, but kept losing partners when Collingwood top-edged a sweep and Luke Wright walked across his stumps. And for once, Morgan couldn't finish the game himself.

Australia had threatened a far greater total than 157 when Watson was cutting loose to take Swann's first over for 26 on the way to a 27-ball half-century. He added 83 for the first wicket with Warner, but when the pair were separated the innings struggled to regain momentum and Australia failed to double their score.

Watson struck one boundary off Bresnan so hard that his bat broke, but the real damage came against the spinners. Yardy's opening over cost nine before Watson took Swann's first three deliveries over midwicket for increasingly large sixes and he added another boundary to reach fifty. Yardy, though, is a canny operator and fired one past Watson's attempted cut to give England a much-needed boost and he later had Warner taken at deep midwicket.

Despite Watson's departure Swann was whipped out of the attack but when he returned he produced a tight three overs which only went for 14. Hussey struggled to find his usual striking range, and though he eventually pulled Bresnan over midwicket for six. he then missed a perfect yorker next ball. England's bowlers were superb in the closing overs and the final result once again showed how the smallest of margins can make the difference in Twenty20 cricket.

Innings Dot balls 4s 6s PP1 16-20 overs NB/Wides
Australia 57 17 4 41/0 35/1 0/2
England 45 14 4 64/3 29/4 0/2

Andrew McGlashan is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Andrew McGlashan

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by   on (January 13, 2011, 23:33 GMT)

As a Brit I'm glad for England that they got the record for T20 wins, but this brings up a niggle that I've had for a long time regarding limited-over cricket - the fact that it's only runs that count. Which was the better team in Adelaide? Australia, because they scored 157 with the loss of 4 wickets, while England managed 158 with the loss of 9 wickets. But England won. Wouldn't it be fairer for limited overs cricket to be won on a combination of runs scored and wickets lost? Something as simple as average per wicket: then Australia would have won with an average of 39.25 per wicket against England's 17.5. Surely this is a better reflection of the teams' qualities on the day, and it would give more reward to bowlers to aim to take wickets. OK, some of the immediate excitement of the final over might be lost, but it would be simple to have the scoreboard show the running average per wicket.

Posted by   on (January 13, 2011, 21:06 GMT)

Congrats to England on the win, it was a very entertaining match to watch. I feel Lee's second last over though lost it for Australia, his bowling just was not tight enough. Watson did particularly well under pressure to reign it back in. But Woakes was outstanding for such a young man.

Posted by 5wombats on (January 13, 2011, 19:22 GMT)

@Marcio; "Check Please". Waiter; "Certainly sir - what kind? Reality"? @landl47 - don't worry - I don't know what he's talking about either. But it's FUN isn't it!

Posted by selvasnz on (January 13, 2011, 9:32 GMT)

Hi, Iam happy about England winning, anyone notice that while Brett Lee bowling in the last over, he blocked deliberately Swan running and hitting by leg and pulling again, there is no sportive approach at all. If somebody there in Lee's place, they would have complained, there only Aussies are staying, still.

Posted by indoorminer on (January 13, 2011, 9:17 GMT)

Eng should have had the game wrapped up after that explosive start, but Aussies hung in there and Eng looked to have thrown it away. Woakes held nerve admirably on his debut. Watson can count himself unlucky to be on the losing side (was it me or did he seemed to have more intensity here, even though this is supposed 'fun cricket'?). Good game though. (As for Runsters comments, Scgboy is right. And great teams make their own luck - apart from their undoubted ability they also had the ability/desire to claw a game back when things weren't going well. I watched games that they looked to have lost but give them a sniff, and they were back in it. And after time that developed into an aura of almost invincibility. I'm an Eng supporter, but those Aussies teams were great and its churlish to say otherwise).

Posted by LALITHKURUWITA on (January 13, 2011, 8:05 GMT)

Can you believe Poms made a world record? Aussies can make a world record too. How many T20 matches lost in a row by a country. Aussie lost 5 now. (most recent first) Australia LLLLL England WWWWW

Posted by azzaman333 on (January 13, 2011, 7:20 GMT)

We lost because Tait and Lee bowled too many boundary balls. 11 fours and 3 sixes came of their combined bowling. Can't afford to play both of them unless the pitch is lightning fast. Warner's 14 dot balls at the top of the order when it was easiest to score didn't help either.

Posted by Something_Witty on (January 13, 2011, 6:55 GMT)

@ftb93, so one long overdue pull shot to a half-tracker which cleared the tiny square boundaries at Adelaide Oval, makes up for the 3 or 4 overs of meandering along at less than a run-a-ball? It shouldn't take you 20 deliveries to be able to play the pull shot. Watto, Warner, White, Paine, Smith and others (heck even Clarke), can play the pull shot successfully as soon as they come in. If you can't come out and blast balls (regardless of length/line), from the first ball, then you have no place in T-20 cricket. I hate to say it, but David Hussey really needs to do something about it. It's quite obvious that he hates short-pitched bowling, and if he can't score quickly off short balls, bowlers will never do anything else but bowl back of a length and short. Basically, he's been found out, and needs to change his game or he will never be able to justify his place.

Posted by   on (January 13, 2011, 6:24 GMT)

Does anyone else wonder why the two best attacking w/k batsmen in the world cannot get into thier respective ODI sides? It seems bizarre to me that after the series they have both had that they are not deemed good enough for the joke cricket. There is no point changing the side for the sake of change is there? I am not saying that either Payne or Davies are bad players but it seems stupid. Neither Haddin or Prior are about to retire.

Posted by straight_drive4 on (January 13, 2011, 6:19 GMT)

@ scgboy - spot on... where have rrunster and all his mates been hiding for the last 15 years? in someones back door - thats where.

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
Australia v England at Perth - Feb 6, 2011
Australia won by 57 runs
Australia v England at Sydney - Feb 2, 2011
Australia won by 2 wickets (with 4 balls remaining)
Australia v England at Brisbane - Jan 30, 2011
Australia won by 51 runs
Australia v England at Adelaide - Jan 26, 2011
England won by 21 runs
Australia v England at Sydney - Jan 23, 2011
Australia won by 4 wickets (with 24 balls remaining)
More results »
Ashes Videos
Tremlett not blaming fatigue

Tremlett not blaming fatigue
(01:24) | Jan 28, 2011
Andrew Strauss: 'Fatigue no excuse'

Andrew Strauss: 'Fatigue no excuse'
(00:39) | Jan 23, 2011
Ashes post mortem

Ashes post mortem
(04:13) | Jan 18, 2011
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days