England edge ahead as wickets tumble in third Test

England lost two early wickets after dismissing Pakistan for a low score of 99.


Afp February 03, 2012

DUBAI: England edged to a slender five-run lead over Pakistan at the close as 16 wickets fell during an extraordinary opening day of the third and final test at Dubai Stadium Friday.

Routed for a low score of 99 in their first innings by England pacemen Stuart Broad (4-36) and James Anderson (3-35), Pakistan spinners moved to the fore to leave England struggling at 104-6.

England, playing for pride after losing the first two Tests and the series, now hold a slight lead on a seemingly batting-friendly pitch.

At the close, Andrew Strauss was unbeaten on 41 and James Anderson was on three not out.

Paceman Umar Gul led Pakistan's fightback by dismissing opener Alastair Cook (one) and Jonathan Trott (two) before Strauss added 57 for the third wicket with Kevin Pietersen (32) during their bids to overcome batting frailties.

England's batting had flopped during their two wicket defeat in the first Test here and in the 72-run defeat in the second match in Abu Dhabi.

Pakistani spinners Abdul Rehman and Saeed Ajmal, who grabbed 34 of the 40 wickets in the first two Tests, then grabbed four more wickets, with Rehman dismissing Pietersen and Eoin Morgan (10) and Ajmal accounting for Bell (five).

Pietersen's dismissal made it 34 leg-before dismissals for the series, beating the previous record of 33 in the Pakistan-West Indies series in the Caribbean in 1993.

Rehman, who took 3-23, then bowled Matt Prior (six) with England just one behind Pakistan.

Earlier in the morning, England's pace duo of Broad and Anderson bowled well to expose Pakistan, who won the toss and batted. Asad Shafiq topscored with 45.

Anderson struck in the first over, trapping opener Taufiq Umar for a duck.

Broad then clicked into gear, snaring Ali in his third over through a caught behind and Younis in his next, caught off a rising delivery, again by wicket-keeper Prior.

He then claimed Hafeez's wicket trapping him leg before. Australian umpire Simon Taufel initially turned down the appeal but changed the decision after England called for a review.

Hafeez mocked the decision review system and may face a hearing from match-referee Jeff Crowe of New Zealand after the day's play.

From the other end Anderson trapped Misbahul Haq for one in a decision challenged by the Pakistani skipper to no avail. That left Pakistan struggling at 21-5.

Shafiq and Adnan Akmal (six) added 18 for the sixth wicket before Broad changed ends to dismiss the wicket-keeper, again with a sharp incoming delivery which caught the batsmen in front of the stumps.

Graeme Swann then teased a miscued a drive from Rehman (one) gathered by a grateful Pietersen at mid-off, leaving Pakistan in danger of being bowled out for their lowest ever Test total - 53 against Australia in 2002.

Shafiq hit his first boundary in the last over before lunch to take Pakistan to that lowest mark and then hit another off left-arm spinner Monty Panesar to avoid the ignominy.

But Panesar, who took 2-25, had the last laugh, breaking the 34-run stand - the best of the innings - between Ajmal (12) and Shafiq after lunch.

Gul made 13 before Anderson bowled him to wrap up the innings.

England resisted the temptation to change their line-up but Pakistan brought paceman Aizaz Cheema for Junaid Khan.

COMMENTS (15)

the Skunk | 12 years ago | Reply

@Truth From Pakistan: @sahir: @One:

That's the spirit. As long as our cricketers play assiduously and cleanly, the game will be played as it should be, with grace and goodwill. There will be victories and losses but in the technique and focus will gain the glory.

Salams to Pakistan and both teams

Blithe | 12 years ago | Reply

Pakistan can win this.

Just one constructive criticism: we need to be better at referrals - England could have been all out today if we had correctly referred two would-be dismissals.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ