2009 Ashes / Ed Hawkins / 15 July 2009 / Leave a comment

Ed Hawkins grabs five minutes with the former Australian fast bowler to ask about the impact of the Cardiff draw in the first Ashes Test and Mitchell Johnson's problems

Will the draw at Cardiff feel like a defeat for Australia?

Not at all. Australia dominated probably 90 per cent of the game. They'll be disappointed they didn't get the victory and they deserved to win but full credit to England they played tough cricket on day five.

Were you surprised by Australia's dominance?
Not at all surprised. They're quality side. I said before the Test when everyone was saying that they were two evenly-matched sides that I was'nt convinced. They're closer than the game in Cardiff suggested but I still believe, and I'm not saying this because I'm an Aussie, but they have an edge.

What more could Australia have done to force the win?
Look, I don't know if there was much they could have done. I thought Ricky Ponting was imaginative, he changed the bowlers around, spinners from both ends, quicks from both ends and mixed and matched. You have to give credit to Paul Collingwood, it was a no frills or fuss type of an innings. He said it himself that he just needed to minimise the risks and that's what Test cricket is about

If Australia still feel pretty good, what about England after losing probably 11 sessions in the match?
That's right but they have to take strength from that game. They survived an onslaught on a wearing pitch. Every side is playing to win until you can't and have to switch to saving it so they adjusted well to survival mode. It came down to the last two but still, they did what they had to do and that will hold them in good stead.

Do Australia have a slight psychological hold over England now?
I don't know. I think England, as I said, have got something to hold onto. Australia will be a bit disappointed but both sides know that Australia dominated. Still there'll be totally conditions at Lord's, the pitch will be quicker and it'll seam and swing for the faster men. I can't imagine a team having four centurions here at Lord's. The wicket will give more assistance to the bowlers.

Out of the bowlers, who did well for Australia and who didn't?
Ben Hilfenhaus was very good. He pitched it up and swung it more than anyone else. Peter Siddle ran in hard but could have been a bit more consistent. I thought all the bowlers in the game were five per cent off their best, probably Mitchell Johnson more than most. He was bowling more round arm than he normally does. There' s been a lot of talk about him swinging it back but I don't believe that's his game. If he does it, it'll be a bonus so it should be used as a surprise weapon. His strengths are his stamina and his strength and his ability to bowl long spells at good pace angling across the right hander. But he has work to do. He was poor with the second new ball in the second innings. Ricky Ponting needed him to bowl a good spell but he sprayed it around. But he's such a talented player he still managed five wickets when not at his best and that speaks volumes about his character.

Do Australian bowlers need to adjust their length in England?
You need to be a little bit fuller in the UK. Lord's will show that. Bowlers who pitch it up consistently will be rewarded. If you can get batters trying to play positively through the offside, that'll create opportunities behind the wicket.

Mitchell Johnson's wrist isn't behind the ball which is affecting his ability to swing the ball. Is that a worry?
It never has been behind the ball. I think his arm position is more pertinent because your wrist will follow the arm. You can have the greatest wrist position in the world but if your arm isn't straight then it doesn't matter. It'll always be off. He's a slingy bowler and it's only a minor adjustment. He's still trying to find his feet. He's a champion and he'll show that.

Why do Australia have such a brilliant record at Lord's?
Batters get all the exposure as a general rule in cricket. What a lot of people fail to realise is that to win games of Test cricket you can score 1,000 runs but unless you take 20 wickets you're not going to win a game. Bowlers are the most important so I would dare say that over history Australia have had stronger attacks going into Lord's Tests or ones more suited to this ground. That's my reasoning.

Who will win the second Test?
I'll never back against my own country even though I'm meant to be a fence-sitting media pundit. I believe Australia's bowling attack had more bite in Cardiff and they outbatted England. I expect ball to dominate bat at lord's and hopefully, as Steve Harmison put it, it's not a chief executive's wicket, and we'll see a surface which rewards positive and aggressive bowling.