Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Also recall Haddin's dismissal differently, to me it looked like he tried to shovel a ball that was too full and beat him in the air a little over mid-on/mid-wicket, thus doing exactly what the English had set a field expecting him to try to do.I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Haddin's second innings dismissal was one of the unluckiest (after Smith). He had to have a go, it's the way he plays, and he happened to get one that spun viciously from the rough. So instead of the ball going over long-on for a one-bounce four it was taken at short midwicket.
On that note, anyone else notice how the whole "two left-arm pace bowlers gives Lyon rough to bowl in" spiel is complete bull****. England have an off-spinner too . . . and he's just as likely if not more likely to benefit from the rough created by Mitchells than Lyon. Especially if England bat first, Moeen will benefit a whole lot more than Lyon from any footmarks.
'That's the way he plays' shouldn't be expected to be good enough in local grade cricket at the upper levels, let alone test cricket. You're paid hundred of thousands of dollars a year, part of that should require you to be smart enough to think about what's required in a given situation on a given deck. The best way to adjust to it is to stay in long enough to work out what's going on. If you're beaten by a good ball before that can happen then it's unlucky, if you go out all guns blazing because 'that's the way you play', it's really dumb.
It's the way Warner plays too, but he at least had the nous to try to hang around in the second innings until he thought he knew what was going on wih the deck, and then he played a few shots. Given how England were bowling, he needed some luck. But he got enough to get through a tough period and still be in a position to go on with it.
But then I suppose that's what the selectors are there for in the end, to work out whether a bloke was a victim of the conditions, or his own stupidity.