2nd Test Review: The Steve Waugh of Zimbabwe Cricket?
After his sterling efforts against Sri Lanka, we may well refer to Andy Flower as the Steve Waugh of Zimbabwean cricket
John Ward
02-Dec-1999
After his sterling efforts against Sri Lanka, we may well refer
to Andy Flower as the Steve Waugh of Zimbabwean cricket. He has
batted in exactly the way we would expect of the Australian
captain, fighting it out through constant application and
determination from his position in the middle order. Besides
being captain for the present, he also has the additional burden
of wicket-keeping, and was incredibly right in the middle of the
action for all but two or three hours of the Second Test.
He has now scored a century and two fifties in four innings
against the tourists, and in the other innings he was not out.
Although struggling along with the rest of the Zimbabwean batsmen
this season after being plunged into Test matches against the
world's two strongest teams without any first-class match
preparation, he was the first to recover his true form and has
led his team from the front with the bat. And after a rather
difficult time behind the stumps in Bulawayo, he kept wicket well
throughout.
Like Waugh, Andy has batted right in the middle order, but with
more justification, as he can scarcely be expected to bat in the
first four after keeping wicket throughout the opposition's
innings. Not that this has often stopped him from having to bat
quite early on this season. He has not had as much support from
the lower order as Waugh usually gets, and would probably have
got a century in the Bulawayo Test had he not had to concern
himself with the problem of running out of partners. He might
well have scored a century in both innings in Harare had his
first innings not been cut short by a harsh umpiring decision,
given out lbw playing a stroke at a ball that nevertheless hit
him outside the line of the off stump.
It was perhaps a diplomatic choice of Tillakaratne Dilshan as Man
of the Match for his unbeaten 160. Andy played two superb
innings under much greater pressure than Dilshan had to contend
with; Dilshan failed to score in his second innings, although he
was given out to an umpiring error, and he was involved in the
unpleasant running out of Murray Goodwin. Nevertheless Dilshan
did show superb temperament and concentration in his century,
hanging on though beaten on a number of occasions and selecting
his strokes wisely even when tied down. In most matches he would
probably not have had a rival for the honour.
The last two days of the Test saw Zimbabwe play the best cricket
they have shown since beating South Africa in the World Cup. On
the fourth day they lost only three wickets, which included that
of Goodwin, and both he and Guy Whittall had shown tremendous
fight in the company of their captain. On the final day, when
Sri Lanka needed only 35 to win, they came out full of fight and
determination and made Sri Lanka fight hard to secure their
victory, taking four wickets on the way.
Earlier, in the first innings, Grant Flower had stuck around
gallantly until after lunch until getting out with the hard work
done, and Alistair Campbell had shared the best partnership of
the innings with Andy, before unfortunately getting out to
another soft dismissal, lbw hitting across the line. So five of
Zimbabwe's top batsmen did at least make valuable contributions,
and hopefully they can carry this into the Third Test.
The most startling memory of the Test, though, will always be the
sensational hat-trick by Nuwan Zoysa in the second over of the
match. Never before has a bowler taken a hat-trick so early in a
Test match, or with his first three balls. Once again Zimbabwe
lost the toss and were put in to bat, although this time with the
pitch less lively than it had been against South Africa in
particular and with the Sri Lankan pace attack being much less
dangerous, it was not expected to be such a problem. In fact,
there was just enough movement in the pitch for the first hour to
beat the bat, and this was to prove crucial.
Zoysa bowled three fine deliveries, and umpire Steve Bucknor was
called on to give a decision with each: Trevor Gripper lbw
unwisely padding up, Goodwin caught at the wicket and Neil
Johnson lbw. There were few, if any, complaints about these
decisions, even with Johnson playing forward. Unfortunately Sri
Lanka's first ever Test hat-trick has passed by unrecorded, as
the television service, with brilliant timing, broke down in the
middle of it. Bucknor did appear to blot his record, though, at
the tail end of the Zimbabwean second innings, when he stuck out
Gary Brent, like Andy Flower first time round given lbw when
appearing to play a stroke at a ball that hit him outside the
line of off stump, and Henry Olonga, who could hardly have played
further forward when hit on the front pad, making one wonder how
any umpire could be certain.
It is interesting, although futile, to conjecture as to what
might have happened had Gavin Rennie been playing instead of
Gripper. Rennie was surely unlucky to be dropped after suffering
a dubious decision and a very good ball in Bulawayo. History
turns on very small hinges, and Zoysa's first ball to a
left-handed Rennie rather than a right-handed Goodwin would
surely have been different. Even if the batsman had been
dismissed, the bowler would have had to change his lie and made
other adjustments when Goodwin came in, which made it unlikely
that this ball would have been the same either . . . If Grant
Flower and Rennie had seen through that first hour the whole
course of the match might have been different. But of course
this conjecture can go on for ever; one change anywhere down the
line inevitably has its effect on everything that follows, and we
might have found Andy Flower dismissed cheaply by a ball he was
not in fact destined to receive . . .
Perhaps one day Test matches will be replayed by computer,
altering crucial events, but cricket is such a game that endless
permutations are possible if even one ball is different - and the
earlier in the match the more difference it could make.
After the carnage caused by that hat-trick, Zimbabwe could not
wish for two better players than the Flowers to fight their way
back. Grant is still not in good form, but he fought his way
beyond lunch, and Andy was immovable until that fatal umpiring
decision. It was good to see Campbell playing well, but just so
disappointing that he threw his wicket away again. Then
Whittall, with only a singe to his credit, attempted to hit
Muralitharan out of the ground and was comprehensively bowled -
hardly a percentage shot in that situation. Had these two not
given their wickets away Zimbabwe might well have reached 300.
The Sri Lankan bowling is rather like the present Zimbabwean
attack - steady and industrious rather than fearsome and
penetrative. Their one great bowler is Muralitharan, but there
have been suggestions from the Sri Lankan press that he seems at
present to have lost his competitive edge. Most Zimbabwean
batsmen have found him very difficult to play but have fought
very hard and well to counter him.
The Sri Lankan batting is good quality, but the Zimbabwean
bowlers have not allowed them to run rampant. They have not yet
come off together; in Bulawayo the scoring was dominated by
Atapattu, and in Harare by Dilshan, backed by Jayawardene. The
others did not make major contributions. In the Third Test, will
Zimbabwe be able to prevent any such high scores, or will the Sri
Lankan batsmen get their act together as a team? The answer
could well decide the result of the Test.
Apart from bowling too short at times on a slow pitch to batsmen
adept at the pull, the Zimbabwean bowlers again did a fine job,
with Strang as usual the most economical and difficult to play.
It would no doubt have helped if Andrew Whittall had been
included as a spinner, but the loss of Johnson's bowling until
January at least has altered the balance of the side. Sri
Lankans are superb players of spin bowling, and with conditions
not really favourable to spinners it would probably not have made
much difference. Adam Huckle would have been another story, but
he has still shown no willingness to return to international
cricket, despite efforts to persuade him to play for his country
in its hour of need.
At the close on the third day Zimbabwe were three wickets down in
their second innings and still more than 200 runs behind, and on
recent form probably most people expected that Zimbabwe would go
the way of England and Pakistan, and crash to an innings defeat
without too much of a fight. But Andy Flower felt differently,
as did Goodwin and Whittall. The fourth day, when these three
battled it out in the ditches in what was realistically a
hopeless cause, may prove to be the turning point in Zimbabwe's
fortunes. It was a magnificent effort.
The Sri Lankans sadly lost a lot of friends that afternoon.
Frustrated at their inability to part Flower and Goodwin, their
appeals became increasingly hysterical, as did their behaviour as
the umpires resisted the pressure. Both umpires at different
times spoke to the fielding side about their behaviour. In the
end the Sri Lankans resorted to very dubious tactics to get that
wicket.
Goodwin played the last ball of an over back to the bowler, who
did not feel like bending his back to pick it up, so he kicked it
back towards the slips. Goodwin light-heartedly pretended to aim
a kick at it, and then, forgetting to wait until the umpire had
called "Over," wandered down the pitch to do some gardening or
talk to his partner. Dilshan in the slips, seeing he was out of
his crease, threw the stumps down, and the Sri Lankans appealed.
The fact that umpire Bucknor needed to call for the third umpire
suggests he had subconsciously taken the ball to be dead and was
not looking. Goodwin was clearly out of his crease and clearly
dismissed according to the laws of the game. But was it in the
spirit of the game? Is this the sort of thing we want to see in
Test matches? Andy Flower at the time, clearly unhappy at the
method of dismissal, quietly appealed to Jayasuriya's sense of
sportsmanship but found him quite unwilling to listen.
At the tea interval match referee Jackie Hendriks, the fine West
Indian wicket-keeper of the sixties, spoke to the Sri Lankan
team, and very effectively too, as their behaviour for the rest
of the day was beyond reproach. It is not known whether he said
anything about the Goodwin dismissal, but it was clearly too late
to restore him.
Campbell did not last long, but Whittall batted superbly. He is
quite unpredictable with bat or ball; one never knows what to
expect, but on this occasion he remained fully focused and did
not put a foot wrong. He stayed unbeaten to the end, having seen
Zimbabwe avoid the innings defeat along with Flower.
Zimbabwe came out ready to give all they had as Sri Lanka chased
35. The result was a foregone conclusion, and one or two Sri
Lankan batsmen seemed to play with that attitude, but Zimbabwe
regained some self-esteem and respect by getting thoroughly stuck
in and taking four wickets before the tourists scrambled home; it
would have been five but for a difficult dropped catch.
Has the turning point been reached? The Third Test, beginning on
Saturday 4 December, will tell.