The Ashes 2013 Results: What England's First Test Win Means Going Forward
The first test match of the 2013 Ashes series is in the books, and though it wasn't easy, England managed to withstand the Australian side to claim a crucial victory in the five-match series' opening clash.
Ultimately, the match came down to a late showdown between James Anderson and Brad Haddin, with the Australian side in need of 15 runs in order to snatch the win away from England.
But in the end, Anderson got him out, sealing the game's outcome, even if not everyone in attendance was immediately aware of it, via Derek Pringle of The Telegraph:
Fate always made it likely that technology would have the last say, given its strong influence on the match. That final process seemed to take an age though, time suspended in an Test that, at times, seemed to rush by for both teams.
Finally, with 11 England fielders and two Australian batsmen gazing at the giant replay screen, Aleem Dar changed his original decision and Anderson, after one premature celebration with team-mates, set off with arms splayed wide to acclaim England’s victory.
Despite the slim margin that the match hinged on, England's victory is obviously an encouraging sign, especially given how little success the national side has enjoyed during opening matches in past Ashes.
In fact, England hadn't won the opening test match against Australia since 1997, even though the country has claimed three of the last four Ashes.
However, Trent Bridge is a special place for Anderson, as the 30-year-old has now registered a pair of 10-wicket performances in Nottingham.
For his part, Haddin's heroics shouldn't go unnoticed, as he whittled away at the English lead until it was down to 16, but Anderson wouldn't be beaten.
Though it remains to be seen how bowling a 13 over spell on the final morning will impact Anderson's performance at Lord's later this week, at least on this day, English captain Alastair Cook's decision to let him finish things off paid dividends.
Going forward, the hosts looks to be in good shape, because if we've learned anything from the last few editions of the Ashes, it's that England gets better as the series wears on.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?