Bold declarations

Lose the first Test of a three-Test series and it is monumentally difficult to come back and win the series. Indeed, it has only happened on a handful of occasions, which makes the bold declarations by captains Fleming and Waugh in the first Australia-New Zealand Test all the more remarkable.

It is one thing to set the opposition an achievable target in pursuit of a result once the series has already been won, as Adam Gilchrist did in the fourth Test against England when Australia had an Ashes-winning 3-0 lead. But to do it in the first Test of a short series, which has a large bearing on the result of that series, is quite courageous.

Even though Australia must still be heavily favoured to win the remaining two Tests, a loss in the first followed by possibly more rain in another drawn match would have resulted in the loss of a world championship point and given more ground to impending rivals South Africa, presuming either side are paying attention to the standings.

Waugh says he would have set New Zealand a target anyway. But if New Zealand had managed to bat on longer and were not interested in chasing, the intriguing last day would not have eventuated. As underdogs, New Zealand had less to lose by declaring, but a loss for either side would have invited criticism of the approach. Perhaps that would have been the true test of the praise for it. In the end, the fact New Zealand got so close meant they took more out of the match than Australia.

Such declarations happen all the time in domestic first-class cricket, but it seems there has been a reluctance to make them at the highest level because ‘this is Test cricket’, as if there is so much more attached to winning and losing that it is somehow morally wrong to make a game out of it and entertain the spectators, an aspect often ignored but which both Fleming and Waugh spoke of.

It is true that a result under those circumstances is contrived because the match has not followed its natural course of events, which in a way does devalue the outcome. Is it not so different, though, from the early days of Test cricket on uncovered pitches when rain could also have a massive impact on the fortunes of a team? In both cases, the natural outcome of the match has been altered by the weather, it's just that in this instance the captains have responded to the circumstances by taking matters into their own hands. Whereas Test cricket used to have terminology like “slippery wicket” and “sticky wicket” to describe pitches affected by rain, now rain-hit matches can be associated with terms like “limited-overs game” or “declaration victories”.

Of course, the match-fixing revelations put declaration-inspired results in a new light. The most infamous one was the fifth Test of South Africa’s ‘99/ ’00 series against England, when Hansie Cronje forfeited South Africa’s second innings in a highly contrived match England ultimately won by 2 wickets. For a conservative captain like Cronje we now know such a radical step was suspicious. For progressive leaders like Fleming and Waugh who see draws as pointless, it’s safe to say their motives were pure, although nothing can ever be assumed anymore.

Behind the captivating last-day action – when an amazing 459 runs were scored – was the rest of a Test match, one which saw some positive and negative occurrences for both sides. For the home team, Brett Lee returned to normal service after the first form setback of his international career during the Ashes. Then, after returning from injury, it seemed like he tried to bowl too fast and consequently was wayward, but on the bouncier Gabba pitch it appeared he was back to bowling with a rhythm from which 150kmp/h+ pace will surely come. Back on track, he should only improve.

With New Zealand needing 20 off 12 to win, Lee was trusted to bowl the penultimate over ahead of Warne and Gillespie and had Cairns caught at long on to end the Kiwis' victory aspirations. When a match was in the balance, Shane Warne used to be the one bowler Australia would turn to above all others. Worryingly, that is no longer the case. Warne did take three wickets, including Astle to break a 100-run partnership, but saw Cairns and McMillan blaze 17 runs from what was his final, almost match-losing, over. It revived memories of the last day of the third Test in India, when the rate of runs scored off him meant he could not be trusted to bowl in the dying stages.

For New Zealand, Chris Cairns made a bid to be considered ahead of Pollock and Kallis as the world’s premiere all-rounder. Unquestionably New Zealand’s best player, he took 6 of the 10 Australian wickets to fall to bowlers, helped New Zealand avoid the follow on by scoring a rapid 61 in the first innings and then almost won the match in the second innings with 43. Initially believed by the Australians to be mentally frail, Cairns made an impressive impact on the ‘99/’00 series in New Zealand and is doing so again here. He bowls with heart and is an imposing presence at the crease, especially the way he faces up to Warne. At present, Australia is struggling to find a way to even contain him.

On the negative side, New Zealand’s specialist support bowling is threadbare, as had been suspected. O’Connor, Nash and Vettori took 0/225 between them in Australia’s first innings before O’Connor injured his knee and Nash suffered an abdominal strain that ruled him out of the rest of the tour. It is unlikely Australia’s middle order will continue to succumb to McMillan, so finding solid pace support Cairns is a matter of priority in the remaining Tests, otherwise there should be more partnerships like the 224-run union between openers Hayden and Langer.

At first glance, Hayden and Langer are an unlikely pairing, as they are both left-handed and one is relatively new to the position. Yet presently they are successful, with a century and double century partnership from two innings together. It is impossible to say how long it will last, as Australia could just as easily have been 1/0 were it not for an umpiring mistake. With productive openers a rarity around the world, though, all Australia can do is enjoy the prosperity while it lasts.

New Zealand has also found a surprisingly effective opener in Mark Richardson. Apparently he doesn’t believe in footwork, which one would think would be a fatal mistake against McGrath and Gillespie, yet he has driven well and so far outperformed top-order team-mates Bell and Sinclair. To prevent more starts like 4/55 in the first innings, he’ll need to sustain it.

More Columns

Mail Daniel Laidlaw