Greybeard Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 Even the great Kallis was exposed when he had to come in as an " opener" due to the failure of the current pair. Petersen and Smith are failing dismally and I think that Smith's captaincy begs questioning!
Delgado Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 Ashes:Hard to say how impressive Australia is.Or how terrible England is. Facing the nr 1 Test unit in the world will be a yardstick.Yardstick achieved?
Cellar Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 More importantly we need a 12th man that can catch Kallis or KP
Shebeen Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 Did I just see someone suggesting we go into the second test with three wicketkeepers?! anywho, seen on the internets recently....quite a bit of excitment building up for pe http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2014/02/17/1226829/337087-9d123c72-9775-11e3-9a97-2ed07c1403ff.jpg http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2014/02/17/1226829/337031-674b1fe6-9775-11e3-9a97-2ed07c1403ff.jpghttp://resources0.news.com.au/images/2014/02/17/1226829/336240-25dae500-9775-11e3-9a97-2ed07c1403ff.jpghttp://resources1.news.com.au/images/2014/02/17/1226829/502809-f2ca89f2-978a-11e3-9a97-2ed07c1403ff.jpg
GLuvsMtb Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 Even the great Kallis was exposed when he had to come in as an " opener" due to the failure of the current pair. Petersen and Smith are failing dismally and I think that Smith's captaincy begs questioning!I recon Smith has been dealing with questions about his technique / captaincy since he took over the reigns many moons ago. He has a pretty decent record as a captain. Its a pity that on the odd occasion when his bowlers and fielders let him down he has to deal with this cr@p all over again. He cannot bowl the overs for his bowlers or take the catches for his fielders. Mr Winter and ruib 2
GLuvsMtb Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 Did I just see someone suggesting we go into the second test with three wicketkeepers?! anywho, seen on the internets recently....quite a bit of excitment building up for peit depends... Do you think AB is good enough to crack it as a specialist batsman?
Cellar Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 Did I just see someone suggesting we go into the second test with three wicketkeepers?! http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2014/02/17/1226829/337031-674b1fe6-9775-11e3-9a97-2ed07c1403ff.jpghttp://resources0.news.com.au/images/2014/02/17/1226829/336240-25dae500-9775-11e3-9a97-2ed07c1403ff.jpghttp://resources1.news.com.au/images/2014/02/17/1226829/502809-f2ca89f2-978a-11e3-9a97-2ed07c1403ff.jpg Unless De Kock is good enough to open and keep? Then AB as batsman, and your Stiaan fella as another bat?
Cellar Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 He cannot bowl the overs for his bowlers or take the catches for his fielders. But, he can make runs and better captaincy decisions for them, can't he? Steven Knoetze (sk27) 1
JGR Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 Its no secret MJ is in the form of his life but he average has just under 28, which would indicate he is a player that goes through some crazy form and then not so much. I know their batsmen did quite well and they got three centurions but how good would this team be without him? Would they have battered England as much or whipped us? Would be interesting to see how they fared without him
GLuvsMtb Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 But, he can make runs and better captaincy decisions for them, can't he?No captain will shine when his bowlers are all over the show like they were in that first test. They had a decent game plan, but were unable to execute. It happens. So in true SA fashion we will now question the coach and captains ability based on 1 test.
Cellar Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 No captain will shine when his bowlers are all over the show like they were in that first test. They had a decent game plan, but were unable to execute. It happens. So in true SA fashion we will now question the coach and captains ability based on 1 test. No, we'll question why he chose to bowl first.We'll question the way he rotated his bowlers, and we'll question his limited use of attacking filed placements. For me, the same questions I ask every game.
'Dale Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 Yardstick achieved? Not quite.It's a 3 match Test series.No doubt SA has a bloody nose and blue eye. Delgado 1
GLuvsMtb Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 No, we'll question why he chose to bowl first.We'll question the way he rotated his bowlers, and we'll question his limited use of attacking filed placements. For me, the same questions I ask every game.Bowling first: Do you really think this was his decision alone? After inspecting the wicket, seeing a tinge of green on it, knowing that the wicket will be good for batting on days 2 and 3 he would have discussed the toss with his side and management and they would have provided input for the decision.The Aussies countered very well after the first session and a wicket early in the second session of play. Smith's bowlers lost their line and length and he tried a few things to upset the Aussie game plan. It worked to an extent in that they were contained in the second session, but some brilliant batting and a bit of luck saw them take the game away from us rather quickly. Rotation strategies that has worked well before were very well countered by an Aussie side that was riding their luck and displayed a masterful performance throughout the rest of the game. We were simply not good enough on days 1 and 2 and could never get back in the game since. Would you have felt better if he decided to bat first, we were bowled out for 180 odd and Aus batted once to score 500 plus and had us bowled out by day 4? Either way we would have been outplayed judged by the performance of the Aus batsmen and Johnson in particular. The ball is now in our court to come up with a good game plan for PE and for each and every player to contribute in the field, with the bat and with the ball, otherwise we will be down 2 - 0 come the morning of day 4 of the second test. We responded well in the past with our backs against the wall. Hopefully we will do so again, even without the presence, experience and skill of one Jacques Kallis in our midst. Mr Winter 1
Shebeen Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 No, we'll question why he chose to bowl first.We'll question the way he rotated his bowlers, and we'll question his limited use of attacking filed placements. For me, the same questions I ask every game.looks like you didn't actually watch any of the cricket. hilarious how unappreciated biff is in his own country. he's admitted that bowling first didn't work out..but at 93/4 it didn't look like a bad move. Unless De Kock is good enough to open and keep? Then AB as batsman, and your Stiaan fella as another bat?um, I've always doubted the wisdom of AB playing keeper, as i think it's too much workload on someone who does have an injury history and cramps a lot too. BUT his batting has somehow got better during this time. hard to explain how, but it's the one thing i wouldn't actually change just yet. I think QdK will play test cricket, but not just yet. He is the obvious long term replacement to AB as test keeper. I haven't seen him play first class cricket. the fact that he averages 48 at a 86 SR(yup, 5 an over!) in sunfoil series shows that he probably does hit the k@k out of the ball there just like in odi and t20 format. I'm guessing he gets out a lot caught on boundary or playing attacking shots. Someone of his obvious talent really needs to do the hard yards in whites and learn how to balance strokeplay with treasuring his wicket. I think the careers of sangakara and brendon mccullum are good indicators for how his test approach should be. It's not possible to be an opener and a keeper. Team management will have to decide when he is brought in, but i do think he we will see QdK and AB in the proteas team together in the next two years. not sure who would keep(or even both - imagine swapping every 40 overs!) http://bcove.me/o2r3330e GLuvsMtb 1
Mr Winter Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 looks like you didn't actually watch any of the cricket. hilarious how unappreciated biff is in his own country. he's admitted that bowling first didn't work out..but at 93/4 it Its actually sad how much hate South African's have for Biff Rogers and Clarke were planned wickets, the field and bowling attack had been setup and they fell for it.
Mr Legs Posted February 17, 2014 Posted February 17, 2014 Cellar, on 17 February 2014 - 03:15 , said: No, we'll question why he chose to bowl first. 98/4 is the answer
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now