West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Bridgetown, 3rd day

Clarke fights but West Indies still on top

The Report by Brydon Coverdale

April 9, 2012

Comments: 64 | Text size: A | A

Australia 248 for 5 (Clarke 73, Hussey 47*) trail West Indies 449 for 9 dec by 201 runs
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details


Darren Sammy had David Warner caught at slip, West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados, 3rd day, April 9, 2012
Darren Sammy had David Warner caught at slip © AFP
Enlarge
Related Links

West Indies remained firmly on top after three days of attritional cricket in Barbados, where Darren Sammy's early strikes and Devendra Bishoo's variations kept Australia's batsmen from making significant progress. At stumps on day three Australia were 248 for 5, with Michael Hussey on 47 and Matthew Wade on 19, and while they had almost passed the follow-on mark they were not yet safe in the match.

The big challenge for West Indies remained finding a way to turn their impressive performance into a victory. Rain again played a part on the third afternoon and their task for the final two days was to run through Australia's lower order quickly, bat again and set the visitors a target, and then skittle them a second time. The way this match has unfolded so far, that looked like it would be easier said than done.

But through Sammy and his colleagues West Indies had at least put themselves in the much stronger position. Last time the two sides met in a Caribbean Test series, the hosts had several days of inspired cricket but were unable to string together enough in one match to take a victory from Australia. This time they had started with two encouraging days, and worked through the third in the same fashion.

Michael Clarke provided Australia with a fighting half-century but threw his wicket away, while Shane Watson and David Warner also failed to capitalise on solid starts. Watson was also accountable for the ugly run-out of Ricky Ponting, a calamitous confusion that left Ponting fuming as he walked off the field.

The pair had come together after Sammy removed both openers in almost identical fashion, pitching the ball on off stump and nipping it away from the left-handers Warner and Ed Cowan. Cowan was on 14 when his thin edge found the wicketkeeper and Warner had made a promising start and had 42 when he edged to second slip, and Sammy's accuracy and persistence was impressive.

Those strikes were followed by the run-out of Ponting for 4 when Watson turned the ball behind square leg and took a single, and then called for the second, hesitated, and called Ponting through again. The throw from the deep to the wicketkeeper's end found a confused Ponting out of his ground as Watson loitered halfway down the pitch and Ponting's frustration was evident.

Watson was nearly involved in another run-out later when Clarke was saved only by a wayward throw. That, together with poor use of the review system, were the only real blemishes that could be attached to the West Indies fielding effort. Twice Watson survived lbw appeals that could easily have gone against him, once when he offered no shot to a prodigious inswinger from Sammy, who asked for a review and saw the replays show a perilously close prediction that had the ball hitting off stump, but only in the "umpire's call" zone.

In the next over, Kemar Roach appealed for lbw against Watson and also received a not-out verdict. This time Sammy decided against asking for a review but replays showed the ball would have struck enough of leg stump to have the decision overturned. West Indies wasted their second review after lunch when Sammy was off the ground and the vice-captain Kirk Edwards asked for the third umpire to check another Roach lbw appeal that was clearly sliding down leg.

But those errors of judgment didn't prove too costly. Watson threw his wicket away in the first over after lunch when he flashed impetuously at Roach and was caught behind for 39. It was hardly the innings Australia needed from Watson in his first Test batting at No.3. Clarke and Michael Hussey led a fightback with an 82-run partnership and they had to work hard against Bishoo, whose variations kept them from scoring freely.

Clarke used his feet against the legspinner and lofted him straight down the ground for six, but otherwise the Australians typically waited for poor balls from Bishoo and did the best they could to keep the good ones out. Clarke brought up his half-century from his 121st delivery with a fine cover-driven boundary from the part-time offspin of Narsingh Deonarine, and he was fortunate to have got there after a contentious review when he was on 27.

Clarke was adjudged caught behind off a Bishoo ball that stayed low and he immediately challenged the out decision from the umpire Tony Hill. Replays did not clearly show that he hit the ball but nor did there seem to be overwhelming evidence to overturn the call, but that was what happened and it was a serious let-off for Clarke.

Eventually, Bishoo had his reward when Clarke tried to clear long-off but succeeded only in skying a catch, and it was an unwise shot selection at a time when Clarke and Hussey needed to continue building their partnership. Hussey was more watchful and by stumps was approaching a half-century, and Wade struggled against Bishoo with a packed close-in field, but he was good enough to put away the bad balls when they came.

Bishoo's challenge on the fourth day will be to run through the tail, although with the new ball due Sammy will first turn to his fast men to do that job. And if they can manage it, victory will be a possibility, although a draw remains the more likely outcome.

Brydon Coverdale is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

RSS Feeds: Brydon Coverdale

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by zenboomerang on (April 11, 2012, 7:22 GMT)

@TheHoneymonster... Agree... At present the only likely way of getting Watto down to no.6 is for Hussey to be brought up the order - Hussey was an opener for many years in domestic cricket so is familiar with batting in the top order... Also Watto is prone to breaking down & losing a top order batsmen is much more detrimental to the team than losing a no.6/7 who can be replaced by another allrounder if need be...

Posted by zenboomerang on (April 11, 2012, 6:48 GMT)

@JG2704 :- "I'm sure WI fans would have been happier with a draw pre test than Aus fans"... I don't know if you realise it, but most Aussies would rather lose fighting for a win than go for the draw... For me a draw is worse than losing...

Posted by Meety on (April 11, 2012, 4:36 GMT)

@200ondebut - mate your easily pleased!

Posted by 200ondebut on (April 10, 2012, 15:46 GMT)

What a fascinating test this has been. On Sky HD it has been great to watch the excitement of the grass growing and the paint drying in between deliveries to the Aussie batsmen.

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (April 10, 2012, 15:24 GMT)

Clarke was out and Aus should have been 120-5. West Indies will have to ride out their bad luck, clearly Australia are there for the taking once again.

Posted by A_Vacant_Slip on (April 10, 2012, 13:33 GMT)

@Posted by RednWhiteArmy on (April 10 2012, 11:15 AM GMT). "Michael Clarke at 3? HA! I wouldnt leave him in charge of a jelly" - pardon me - he IS in charge of a jelly.... @David Nelson - beat India, eh? So what - everyone is beating India these day.

Posted by TheCricketeer on (April 10, 2012, 12:53 GMT)

Another stinker of a DRS decision when Clarke was given not out. Nobody can tell for sure from any of the replays if there was a nick or not. That being the case, surely the standing umpires decision must remain.

In any event I thought the replays were if anything, showing a little under edge. There was a noise at the right moment and from the side on angle it even looked like there may have been a deviation.

I'd kill to have a beer with the umpires and hear how they came to that decision....

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 12:52 GMT)

It's a mystery as to why this Australia side beat India so badly just a few months ago. Their ability shown so far on this tour is far below poor. I can't imagine this team matching up to England or South Africa, especiallyin the spinning department. This guy Lyons can't bowl six good consecutive deliveries even if his life depends on it. Old as Hogg is, he should be in this side along with Ponting & Hussey. Lyons is not Test Material by any means, so is Cowan or dare I say, Warner. West Indies deserves to win this one, and if Australia continues to preform like they did so far on this tour, win the series 3-0.

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 12:42 GMT)

The key to the match is how quickly the Aussies can wipe off the deficit, if at all. WI have to control the run rate & at the same time take wks. How? Well, Roach at one end & Bishoo at the other. The Aussies r comfortable with Roach & will attack him in order to increase the run rate, hence mistakes r liable to be made. We must maintain a spin/pace attack thru out the day. No Roach/Fidel together. It is difficult for WI to lose so why not try to win it. Keep yr spinners at one end at all times. Deo is very capable agst the Aussies. And keep the fielding tight. Let's c how that works.

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 12:33 GMT)

@RedWhiteArmy Clarke is the ICC number one batsman in the world and he's the Australian captain and Australia just beat India 4-0 in the last series and won the Tri-Nation one day series against Sri Lanka and India; the three top one day teams; I think he's doing alright, yeah?

Posted by SDHM on (April 10, 2012, 11:36 GMT)

The Windies seem to me to be wisely taking a page from Pakistan's book - after years of occasionally inspired but often awful performances, they're trying to rebuild through solidity and stability. It's worked wonderfully for Pakistan, so I think it's a good move; build confidence through competing and not losing, and work your way up to all guns blazing, winning cricket. They could still lose this match of course, but they're going about it the right way for them at the moment. As for the Aussies, I wouldn't just chuck Clarke up to 3 - he's such a good player of spin that coming in against spinners in the middle order is easier for him than most, and I'm not sure exposing him to the new ball is a great idea. Watson has to drop down, preferably to 5 or 6 - he can play more freely against a ball doing less, and he could also bowl more overs without having to worry about his batting. If they're reluctant to move Ponting back up to 3, then that leaves Hussey, and he wouldn't let you down!

Posted by VivTheKing on (April 10, 2012, 11:32 GMT)

Next time around if Sammy is asked for a comment, he should make it clear that Windies are not the underdogs anymore. West Indies best X1 could be like this, Gayle, barath/Brathwaite, Kirk Edwards, bravo jn, chanders, bravo sn, baugh, sammy, edwards/rampaul, roach, bishoo.

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 11:29 GMT)

We call West Indies No 8side in the World but the way they given Asutralia tough times put India sTop ranked status to shame.I hope West Indies to beat Asutralia this time in test series

Posted by RednWhiteArmy on (April 10, 2012, 11:15 GMT)

Michael Clarke at 3?

HA! I wouldnt leave him in charge of a jelly

Posted by Guernica on (April 10, 2012, 11:07 GMT)

Fidel Edwards been disappointing so far. Might have been better to play another specialist spinner, Benn or Narine, or have they been taken by IPL?

Posted by VillageBlacksmith on (April 10, 2012, 10:59 GMT)

Astonishingly randyoz is right for once! The only way is down with Mickey 'Mouse' Arthur... As it's being proved.... All other coaches I can think of would have had RSA at the No 1 ranking for years... Bad news for the aussies, great news for everyone else, esp with back to back ashes coming up. I await his succession policy with interest, but it seems like only Koala, Forrest, Smith or Hughes (Border said Hughes was the finished article on commentary v RSA recently), hardly the Waughs Hayden or Langer

Posted by Moyna.Miyan on (April 10, 2012, 10:46 GMT)

Nice to see WI played a good cricket!

Posted by kempvet on (April 10, 2012, 10:21 GMT)

Why did both team agree to a DRS system for this series without 'Hotspot'?? think that it has more to do with technology security, and will the cameras be used correctly and be stored correctly and returned intact, I suspect that this was the issue as to why they were not used in the recent WC in India

Posted by Guernica on (April 10, 2012, 9:50 GMT)

Good stuff from the Windies. Great to see they have found some young players who don't just want to be T20 stars and are prepared to play long innings.

Posted by JG2704 on (April 10, 2012, 9:33 GMT)

I can see this as finishing in a draw.There will be no follow on and the only way I could see a result was if Aus got bowled out for less than 250 or if they lost fewer wickets and scored faster and neither has happened. Re Clarke and his position in the batting line up - I don't know the full stats of what he does at 3 compared to 5 - but by him going up the order , while it would strengthen the top 3 it would weaken the lower middle order. It must be good for Oz to have Hussey and Clarke coming in at 5 and 6. Aus will be hoping for sportier pitches for the further tests. I'm sure WI fans would have been happier with a draw pre test than Aus fans

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 9:19 GMT)

Interesting to note that not a mention about the possibility of MrCricket batting at No:3.How about watto and Hussey switching places all the way to 2k13 ashes(hopefully both will play well enough to hold their places..)Watson is not suited to open r and the only slot he has moved down is to No:3!!!(isnt it right at the top..wat if the opener gets out in the first ball)and so many comments about Cowan but Warner is also being played on prayer really..cannot really mark him based on his performances against India(although there are encouraging signs,no doubt). Right now all the Top3 are suspect which is dangerous under any circumstances but of course they can turn the tables any time...

Posted by RandyOZ on (April 10, 2012, 9:07 GMT)

@jmcilhinney - I never wanted Khawaja dropped, so try and get your facts straight; I know it's hard for one eyed supporters like yourself. If you don't believe me, go searching!

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 8:48 GMT)

with this oz bowling attack india lost 4-0,what a shame on indian cricket

Posted by jmcilhinney on (April 10, 2012, 8:36 GMT)

I think Clarke has shown that he has matured recently. Indeed, the captaincy really seems to have spurred him on to greater heights. I could be wrong but I think that Clarke is ready for that #3 spot, and certainly more ready than any of the alternatives. As for DRS without HotSpot, I would assume that it was a financial issue, just as it was for SL hosting England just recently.

Posted by Sulli001 on (April 10, 2012, 7:38 GMT)

Why did both team agree to a DRS system for this series without 'Hotspot'??

Posted by mabless on (April 10, 2012, 7:14 GMT)

both teams are average and they will cancel each other out in the end. OZ didn't have the firepower to bowl out the Windies, the WI are not taking Australian wickets quickly enough, much like they didn't score at a good pace. There are still 5 Aussie wickets still to be found heading into the 4th day. It will take the Windies atleast two sessions to get the and then try to increase the lead, which will take a further two sessions. After that they must try to get 10 Australian Wickets, which is going to happen in two sessions, Maybe SA at their devestating best can do it, not West Indies! I'm afraid the only result these two equal teams can produce is a 'good old' delicious DRAW.

Posted by koolramesh on (April 10, 2012, 7:11 GMT)

Watson is not fit to bat at no.3. Someone playing at top 3 should have the ability to play a long innings. Watson's conversion rate from 50 to 100 is bad and that shows the time he spends in the middle. Best case for him in test cricket is to play the role of Symonds did at no.6. If he is not bowling regularly then Aussies might look at dropping him and pick Khwaja.

Posted by mukesh_LOVE.cricket on (April 10, 2012, 7:07 GMT)

Well i thought it was obvious even before that watson is a misfit for no.3 spot , he is out of his depth in tests at no.3 spot , khawaja/forrest/bailey has to play there , other obvious choice is clarke but he has been exceptional at no.4 so better dont change it , Australian batting will have to be much better than this if they are to return to the top of test table , and once ponting and hussey goes it is going to be even worse

Posted by karthik_raja on (April 10, 2012, 7:05 GMT)

@Meety. I am indian. And to my knowledge, Ind havn't hosted Bangladesh till date. Get the facts right before u write ill of something.

Posted by othello22 on (April 10, 2012, 7:05 GMT)

I still can't figure out why there's so many people saying Clarke should bat at 3. In the early days he scored almost at will batting at 5, but was a miserable failure after being promoted to 4 and the runs dried up almost completely. Since moving back to 5, he has been almost Bradmanesque and the runs are flowing once again. So my question, friends, is thus: If he struggles after being elevated to 4, what is it that makes you think he'd be a success batting at 3? Makes no sense to me. Besides, he's scoring consistently where he is, and if it ain't broke, why fix it?

Posted by Mitcher on (April 10, 2012, 7:04 GMT)

I'd caution against the idea Clarke should automatically bat at 3 simply because he is the best batsman in the team. In a perfect world he would make this position his own but past experience has shown he plays his best cricket at 5. Altering that could be dangerous. At least until he consolidates this stunning run. Allan Border played a pretty good role as captain and best batsman down the order. As for the agenda against Mickey Arthur. It's barely worth a mention. I can't explain what it's based on, but it's nothing to do with fact. Lastly, great to see the Windies showing some backbone.

Posted by zenboomerang on (April 10, 2012, 6:56 GMT)

Nothing has been learnt by Clarke in his batting order selection... Our no.3 is always the teams best (most solid) batsman & usually spends time in the middle order before advancing... That has to be on form either our no.4,5,6 at present... Watson has failed with the bat since being made VC & shows he can't handle the pressure, let alone lead by example... I've been arguing for years that Watto isn't suited to the top order & would be better at no.6/7 where he isn't as likely to run out Ponting, et al... Clarkes shielding of Watto's responsibility on run-outs is staggering & looks more like a "cut & run" by him...

Posted by Mary_786 on (April 10, 2012, 6:53 GMT)

It is time to get rid of punter, bring in Forrest, punter failed in his last 5 ODI innings and also failed in the shield final when it really mattered, he won't be able to play the POMS attack in swinging conditions. Pontings run out was his fault, he was asleep to the two, it was Watson's call and Watson would have made the second running to the danger end. If Ponting was awake rather than ball watching and twiddling his thumbs after the first run, then we wouldn't be talking about this.

Posted by zenboomerang on (April 10, 2012, 6:48 GMT)

@jmcilhinney... You have only repeated the same questions I've asked randyoz many times this summer about Mickey bashing - still haven't heard one reply, let alone any justificiation... I doubt Arthur has as much pull as Clarke in team selection & not sure if Inverarity is touring as well... Still the batting order selection is always the Oz captains job & I for one haven't been happy with it this last year...

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 6:25 GMT)

Nice to see Windies holding their own.

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 6:22 GMT)

some realistic modification to UDRS is needed. If you leave a ball n it is hitting the stumps on replay, even marginally, bowler should get benefit of the doubt, forget the umpire zone n all bullshit.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (April 10, 2012, 5:28 GMT)

@RandyOZ, that said, I do agree with you about Clarke playing at #3. All those years that he was #4 behind Ponting, I just assumed that he would move up when Ponting left. Obviously Ponting hasn't left yet but Australia has obviously decided that they want to cement the #3 spot for the future sooner rather than later. I don't see why they feel the need to experiment when they seem to have the ready-made solution. His recent performances seem to suggest even more that he should be the one to take that pivotal spot.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (April 10, 2012, 5:22 GMT)

@RandyOZ, I'd be very interested to hear from you the reason(s) that you keep singling Mickey Arthur out. Australia dropped in the rankings well before Arthur took over as coach. In fact, he only took over as coach as a result of the inquiry into why Australia were doing so badly. He is one of 5 selectors, one of whom is Clarke and the other three of whom are Australian as well, yet you continue to single out the one non-Australian-born in the group. While the team is on tour, I'd guess that Arthur's voice carries a little more weight than Clarke's but I'll wager less than the other three when picking the initial squad. If Khawaja isn't in the squad then how is it Arthur's fault alone? For all we know he may have wanted Khawaja. Anyway, it wasn't that long ago that you yourself called for Khawaja to be axed for not performing. Is this an example of that great depth in batting in Australia that you keep taunting us England fans with? If so then you can keep it.

Posted by chad_reid on (April 10, 2012, 5:19 GMT)

Australia depend too much on michael clarke and hussey lets hope wade can become the 3rd dependant the rest well are hit and miss batsman

Posted by righthandbat on (April 10, 2012, 5:15 GMT)

The Australian order needs a reshuffle. Clarke needs to be at 3, Watson at 4 and Ponting/Hussey at 5 and 6. This allows for new blood to come in at 5 and 6 instead of attempting to put people at 3 ala Shaun Marsh. Clarke is now the best batsman in the team and he is good enough to be at 3. Watson can play the Kallis role at number 4 more easily without the burden of first-drop. Ponting and Hussey can bat out their careers at 5 and 6 without facing the new ball too often.

Anyway, it's good to see the Windies playing reasonably well again.

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 5:08 GMT)

A fascinating game from a neutral perspective; & one that has so far confirmed many of the feelings I had about both sides prior to the start of the series, viz: that, at long last, the West Indies have found their collective mojo again; that Gibson's youth policy is bearing fruit quicker than many expected; that Cowan will never be anything more than a journeyman opener lucky to win any Test caps at all; that Watson is ludicrously out of position at the top of the order, as his mindset is firmly locked into batting at a notional No. 6 where quick but risky runs are de rigueur; that Matthew Wade is now streets ahead of Haddin; that the Australian selectors erred yet again in leaving out the exceptional Pattinson in favour of the old workhorses Harris & Siddle; & that Nathan Lyon, like Cowan, is a journeyman state cricketer at best. Unfortunately, the Windies may yet rue the extra hour that Chanderpaul frittered away selfishly in pursuit of his 25th hundred.

Posted by Meety on (April 10, 2012, 4:43 GMT)

@maddy20 - or what, host Bangladesh annually like India do? BTW, what did India do in the WIndies, oh that's right a one nil win, & trailled on first innings on most occassions AND were hardly convincing at home. No maddy20, Oz cricketers won't shy away from performing overseas. Oz have not lost yet buddy! @athem79 - I agree with most of what you said except the bit about Gayle. Who knows, but I ssupect he would not have played well on this pitch, or at least - not bettered Barath & Braithwaite.

Posted by athem79 on (April 10, 2012, 4:08 GMT)

I am least concerned about the outcome of this test. What I see is the regain of momentum in the WI camp which was lacking for more than a decade. Drawing the ODI series and now three days into the test and they are on the top. Kudos to WI. Guess the outcome if inform Gayle and Pollard make it to the national squad .. WI team would move up the ranking in next 12 months . . .

Posted by maddy20 on (April 10, 2012, 4:00 GMT)

So the OZ is struggling to to beat an under-strength WI outfit .Perhaps like they should stick to playing in Australia?

Posted by gloriouscricket on (April 10, 2012, 3:07 GMT)

Good day for WI; If there is no rain or stoppage of any kind,WI holds the upper hand. The bowlers have a job to do, run through the lower half, of course a little luck is neded, at some point some of these calls will favour the WI, then they will bat at a pace of at least 3.5 runs per over, a lead of 100+additional runs, the Aussies can find themselves in a hole.How deep will be the question. approximately 1 hr. after lunch on day 4 will tell us the story.Cricket glorious uncertainty? Sez whom? hahaha.

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 2:59 GMT)

IT is good t see the west indies doing so well.. this is very good progress for them and will give the fan some much need and long awaited cheer..

Posted by   on (April 10, 2012, 2:49 GMT)

Dilshan would have loved to be in Clarke's shoes. No wonder the Indians are skeptical about thr UDRS. What was so obvious that Clarke's dismissal was overturned? The LBW to a ball not played at even if it shows that it would have hit the stumps, still not out?

Posted by novelwolf on (April 10, 2012, 2:40 GMT)

so much fun watching pointing get run out..ROFL

Posted by ttyX on (April 10, 2012, 2:23 GMT)

Considering the scoring rate in this match and off-course the light problems, I'd say a draw is more likely than a win for either team...

Posted by heathrf1974 on (April 10, 2012, 2:23 GMT)

Good day for the Windies. The Aussies are struggling with the lack of pace in the wicket. They need to hold on for a draw.

Posted by Mad_Hamish on (April 10, 2012, 2:20 GMT)

On the Clarke review the side on shot clearly showed that only the very end of Clarke's bat was down low enough to hit the ball at the time it went past and the front on view showed that it was going past him a long way up from the end of the bat. So between the two views it was clear that he couldn't have hit it. There was also another view that showed pretty clearly that the ball was past before his bat got down there.

Posted by Hammond on (April 10, 2012, 2:03 GMT)

Let's see here- Australia going like a snail against inexperienced bowlers on a road of a wicket that the opposition just made 450 on. Mmmmm. Interesting times ahead for Australian cricket.

Posted by purna478 on (April 10, 2012, 1:50 GMT)

naraine need for spin attack 2 wi

Posted by Marabellaboy on (April 10, 2012, 0:33 GMT)

West Indies DECLARED! On Australia! This story has to be at least 25 years old. My gosh! Dis is not the same "Whipping Boys" team. If so, the "Cricketing World" would do well to sit-up and take note. West Indies are due to visit "The Mother Country" soon.

Posted by RandyOZ on (April 10, 2012, 0:29 GMT)

Right it is plain and clear to everyone now that Clarke has to step up to #3. Absolutely no more excuses pup. You cannot have 2 out of the top 3 as cowboys, especially one coming in at 3. Cowan has proved now he isn't up to the top level and must be replaced by Khawaja IMMEDIATELY. The balance is completely out of whack and it is clear for everyone to see EXCEPT THE USELESS SELECTORS. Why can't Arthur see how OBVIOUS these changes are??????????

Posted by popcorn on (April 10, 2012, 0:20 GMT)

What were they thinking when they played those identical silly shots to get out to medium pacer Darren Sammy? Instead of driving,they attempted to edge - a 100% landing in the slips or in the wicket keeper's hands.Grow up, Ed Cowan and David Warner.

Posted by hayden_w.i. on (April 9, 2012, 23:58 GMT)

West Indies run rate is actually higher than that of Australia. I am not hearing all those who were saying that West Indian batsmen were not scoring quick enough now - especially Chanderpaul, whose innings and run rate look really good now in the context of the match. Australia was supposed to have about 600 now?

Posted by   on (April 9, 2012, 23:58 GMT)

After an encouraging innings with the bat, its good to see captain Sammy doing well with the ball too. Some early wickets in the morning will do WI well. All the best to them.

Posted by   on (April 9, 2012, 23:26 GMT)

The Aussies are grinding their way past the follow on mark. All this talk of Australia scoring 600+ and Ponting and Clarke scoring triple hundreds is rubbish. The pitch is proving more difficult for the Aussies than WI, their scoring rate is slower than WI. The pitch dictates play and not the bat or ball. Australia have only got the bowlers to come, Wade and Hussey are the only recognised batsmen. Could be a good contest in the end, with only two days left it could be a draw.

Posted by Meety on (April 9, 2012, 23:14 GMT)

Good attritional cricket. I think that if Oz can bat to around Tea time, the match is drawn. Wonder if the WIndies get a lead of around 100 on 1st innings - will they try & push for a target?

Posted by RoJayao on (April 9, 2012, 23:01 GMT)

Prediction come true. Terrible performance from the top order, disgraceful effort from Watson and disappointing from Clarke who knows a lot better. Watson's innings was a summary of the arguments for him batting at six; he is hit on the pad way too much to be effective at the top, he runs out way too many top order partners, he plays boundary studded cameos more than substantial innings which are better suited for when the team already have 300 on the board, not when they're 1 down for not many. Very, very rusty performance on an incredibly docile pitch from Australia who need to really lift against a marvellously spirited WI team.

Posted by Nerk on (April 9, 2012, 22:35 GMT)

Watson involved in a run out? Not really that surprising. A war of attrition this test match, real battle between both teams. Not quite calypso cricket, but the pitch isn't really conducive to quick scoring, even though it is flat. Nevertheless, there are still two days left and all results are still possible. Australia will hope to bat a bit more quickly tomorrow morning and get close to the Windies, and bowl them out quickly to set up a run chase on the final day. The Windies will look to fire out Australia, bat through the fourth day and ask Aus to chase on the final day.

Posted by   on (April 9, 2012, 21:59 GMT)

draw seems to be the most likely result.......go WI go

Posted by HatsforBats on (April 9, 2012, 21:57 GMT)

Watson, if he's not going to learn how to run singles he can move down the order. Also very lucky with his lbw reprieve. With the ball even just clipping the stump, I'd like to see the review go the way of the bowling side if the batsman isn't offering a shot. WI well on top but I'd say a draw is the likely outcome with 2 days to play.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Brydon CoverdaleClose
Brydon Coverdale Assistant Editor Possibly the only person to win a headline-writing award for a title with the word "heifers" in it, Brydon decided agricultural journalism wasn't for him when he took up his position with ESPNcricinfo in Melbourne. His cricketing career peaked with an unbeaten 85 in the seconds for a small team in rural Victoria on a day when they could not scrounge up 11 players and Brydon, tragically, ran out of partners to help him reach his century. He is also a compulsive TV game-show contestant and has appeared on half a dozen shows in Australia.
Tour Results
West Indies v Australia at Roseau - Apr 23-27, 2012
Australia won by 75 runs
West Indies v Australia at Port of Spain - Apr 15-19, 2012
Match drawn
West Indies v Australia at Bridgetown - Apr 7-11, 2012
Australia won by 3 wickets
WICB Pres XI v Australians at Cave Hill - Apr 2-4, 2012
Australians won by 8 wickets
West Indies v Australia at Bridgetown - Mar 30, 2012
West Indies won by 14 runs
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days