England foiled in victory bid

Eurosport - Tue, 15 Jul 17:30:00 2008

South Africa frustrated England's attempts to force a result on the final day of the first Test at Lord's with more stubborn defence on a somnolent pitch to earn a draw.

Neil McKenzie, CRICKET - 0

A rearguard action, which started on Saturday evening when South Africa followed on 346 runs in arrears, ended with the visitors 393 for three in their second innings.

Hashim Amla, playing his first Test at Lord's, joined captain Graeme Smith and Neil McKenzie on the honour's board with 104 not out in 342 painstaking minutes

McKenzie, having resumed on 102 also in his maiden Test at Lord's, was finally out for 138 in the afternoon session following more than nine hours at the crease.

He batted with Smith as a runner in the final stages after straining his right groin. A spokesman for the South Africans said their medical team were hopeful he would be fit for the second Test starting at Headingley in Leeds on Friday.

Jacques Kallis, his team's leading batsman, failed again when he was yorked by an inswinger from Ryan Sidebottom for 13 before tea to give England a glimmer of hope.

But Ashwell Prince, who stood firm in South Africa's first innings with 101 in a paltry 247, survived a chance to Alastair Cook at gully off Stuart Broad when he had scored two to keep Amla company until the close.

Vaughan maintained attacking fields and experimented briefly and unsuccessfully with a version of leg theory with James Anderson bowling around the wicket with six fielders on the leg side.

Monty Panesar, who took four wickets in the first innings, bowled a series of deliveries outside the leg-stump searching for some bowlers' rough, which the batsmen were happy to pad away.

The left-armer was unable to produce the flight that might have compensated for the lack of sharp turn and finished the day with none for 116 from 60 overs.

England batsman Andrew Strauss left the field during the post-lunch session to join his wife who is expecting their second child.

Reuters

Comment 1 - 18 of 18

Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated

  1. They said in the commentary Amla has to handle a lot of short balls early in the innings and I did see the ploy later in the session though not all that many short balls from what I saw. Like you said, a fine line. I think the biggest difference is covered pitch and helmets! Its still not cricket!

    From rockape4, on Tue 15 Jul 12:39PM

  2. Well Bodyline tends to pitch the ball to the batsman's body with men behind square on leg side. Leg Theory aims for the leg stump. Its a very fine line between the two though.

    From Alex B, on Tue 15 Jul 11:46AM

  3. The SA batsmen deserve credit for showing great application after a disastrous first innings. The pitch was prepared to negate the SA quicks - only problem was that it meant England couldn't bowl SA out twice. England didn't bowl badly; I just think SA showed the right attitude and concentrated hard to get the job done. Gregg Quixley, London.

    From greggquixley, on Tue 15 Jul 11:19AM

  4. Just to throw an idea out there, how does bowling from around the wicket to a 6 strong leg side field differ from the infamous body line series of Bradman's era? I don't see any Bradman's in South Africa!

    From rockape4, on Tue 15 Jul 9:50AM

  5. suid-afrika sal wen... haha hahahahaha haha haha hahahaha ha hahahahahahahaha hahaha hahahahah hahah.... vir volk en vaderland!

    From marcuspawson, on Tue 15 Jul 9:05AM

  6. Having watched most of the action on TV and read the bulletin above with interest, there was one aspect of the last day's play which I found quite baffling. South Africa needed to bat out the last day, so that would explain the slow scoring rate, that was understandable.But England needed wickets to try and force a draw. So what was the philosophy behind Panesar's continuously bowling from over the wicket, and pitching substantially outside the leg stump and not posing any threat to two set batsmen? The very fact that just over 150 runs were scored on the last day for the loss of only two more wickets does not speak very highly of England's sense of initiative in trying to force a win in a match in which they had had the upper hand over the first three days. Quite baffling, really.

    From pkdhole, on Tue 15 Jul 6:52AM

  7. At least this time England did not manage to @#$% defeat from the jaws of victory.

    From philreeve50, on Tue 15 Jul 5:03AM

  8. Unbelievable. The home of English cricket and we can't even win there. in fact last team to win being Australia. oh, well same as twickenham i suppose. English teams just do not know how to win consistently. I am humiliated to and englishmen overseas. Come on England and pick yourselves up for the next one.

    From charlie b, on Tue 15 Jul 2:21AM

  9. The wicket was prepared to emasculate the SA fast bowlers Steyn Morkel & Ntini- Steyn first 3 overs said it all- the ball bouncing twice through to Boucher! But it cuts both ways... each side has to bowl on the same wicket...strange tho we heard no moans or derogatory remarks till the last 2 days?

    From GEOFF S, on Mon 14 Jul 10:27PM

  10. Despite the fact that the pitch was dead, we did not have a strike bowler that could put the fear of god into the South African Batsman.
    I think Vaughn tried everything and was very imaginative however we need a fit Simon Jones or a fearful FREDDIE back in ASAP, I have a feeling we will now get rolled over as I think this result will spur the South Africans on.

    From gerryhooper5@..., on Mon 14 Jul 9:11PM

  11. Warrentroye, if you read my post again you will see that I said that I admired South Africa's fightback and did not mention the England batting. I was criticizing the Lords pitch not the South African team. There have now been six consecutive drawn tests at Lords. The pitch is dead and unfit for test cricket.

    Since you raise South Africa's recent record I decided to take a look at it myself. If you consider beating Bangladesh, West Indies and New Zealand and drawing with an Indian side that was greatly distracted by the upcoming IPL "awsome results" then you are easily pleased. Satisfactory perhaps but hardly awsome.

    From Bobito, on Mon 14 Jul 7:45PM

  12. dissapointing really the attack not having enough penetration to bowl out the "plastic aussies" a second time.

    From cec, on Mon 14 Jul 7:30PM

  13. South Africa has ups and downs now and again........they will beat England in the next test even if they play this match on the beach somewhere...

    From Jaques, on Mon 14 Jul 6:34PM

  14. Bobito you have to be joking, unless you are referring to some fictitious Aussie like England batting line up we have not seen before!!! The last 12 months has been fantastic for SA in terms of ODI's and Test cricket. They have been more consistent than I have ever seen them before and have recorded awesome results even in the Sub-continent, which in my mind capitulates how in form this side is. Granted they dug themselves into a nasty hole in the first 3 days and ended up producing boring cricket as a result, but I warn you now that the rest of the series will not follow suit and Hussain and Bumble will be eating their words as Steyn, Morkel & Ntini will cause havoc in the next 3 tests - SA series win with all 3 forms of the game!

    From warrentroye, on Mon 14 Jul 5:52PM

  15. While I admire South Africa's fightback, there is no way that their batsmen are good enough or England's bowlers bad enough for only 3 wickets to fall on the last two days of test match unless there is something seriously wrong with the pitch. Cricket is supposed to be entertainment and, on that basis, the Lords pitch is clearly unfit for test cricket. How can the ECB take test cricket away from Old Trafford and still continue to play two tests a year at this awful venue? Either get rid of groundsman Mike Hunt or get rid of Lords from the international calender.

    A great game,very gritty - talk about trying everthing, the best 'stone-walling we've seen for years. Congratulations to England for keeping your cool after a couple of poor decisions - I question whether an umpire in dark glasses and a wide brimmed hat can really see the close calls? I have tried it and vision is impaired. Check early film footage and you'll see umpires in caps, better vision all round I would suggest.I look forward to the rest of the match - come on England!

    From stephenagordon@..., on Mon 14 Jul 5:36PM

  16. boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom

    From stephenagordon@..., on Mon 14 Jul 5:35PM

  17. While I admire South Africa's fightback, there is no way that their batsmen are good enough or England's bowlers bad enough for only 3 wickets to fall on the last two days of test match unless there is something seriously wrong with the pitch. Cricket is supposed to be entertainment and, on that basis, the Lords pitch is clearly unfit for test cricket. How can the ECB take test cricket away from Old Trafford and still continue to play two tests a year at this awful venue? Either get rid of groundsman Mike Hunt or get rid of Lords from the international calender.

    From Bobito, on Mon 14 Jul 5:20PM

  18. A great game,very gritty - talk about trying everthing, the best 'stone-walling we've seen for years. Congratulations to England for keeping your cool after a couple of poor decisions - I question whether an umpire in dark glasses and a wide brimmed hat can really see the close calls? I have tried it and vision is impaired. Check early film footage and you'll see umpires in caps, better vision all round I would suggest.I look forward to the rest of the match - come on England!

    From M G, on Mon 14 Jul 10:01AM
Sort comments by: Most recent | Most rated

Not already a Yahoo! user ? to get a free Yahoo! Account