View Poll Results: Should Freddy be included in team for the second Test?

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    35 79.55%
  • No

    9 20.45%
Page 3 of 467 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 6996
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: ***Official*** South Africa in England

  1. #31
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On a trip to the moon
    Posts
    48,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    This account truly does have uncanny similarities to SW\BLE. I'm pretty sure it's not, but it's odd.
    LOL yes on both counts

    In all seriousness, I expect a close series. They usually are between us.
    Quote Originally Posted by DingDong View Post
    gimh has now surpassed richard as the greatest cw member ever imo

    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  2. #32
    State Vice-Captain gettingbetter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Down By The River
    Posts
    1,460
    Will be good to see Smith v KP in the longer form.

  3. #33
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by gettingbetter View Post
    Don't know why you put a question mark against his name. ATM he is better than Bell. Also, when was the last time he was dropped? I could be wrong, but he has had a pretty solid run in the team since the India series, while Bell has been the one who has constantly disappointed.
    Indeed he is, but Bell is obviously a far better batsman than Collingwood and his recent form has been better. Collingwood despite being a fixture ever since the Third Test in Pakistan has always been playing for his place, always just a few failures away from the axe being over his head. Even he himself has admitted this.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  4. #34
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,432
    I believe that the form of Cook and Strauss could be crucial to England's success against South Africa. From what I have noticed, Dale Steyn does not tend to get left handed batsmen out and so, the two openers should look to cash in on the bowler's weakness by getting England off to a good start. I also believe that Morne Morkel could be the dangerman for South Africa, he bowled very quickly against India and if he can pitch the ball on a good length, he could get the ball to seam and bounce sharply.
    The speed at which a fielding team gets through the innings is overrated.


  5. #35
    Cricketer Of The Year wpdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    8,890
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    It's far from nailed-against certainly TBH. Things are looking pretty decent for us currently, there's a decent amount of stability, but as mentioned the same thing is currently true of SA.

    I mean, even now you can be near enough certain of the teams that will stroll out on the opening morning (fitness permitting obviously):
    Strauss, Cook, Vaughan, Pietersen, Bell, *, Ambrose, *, Sidebottom, Anderson, MSP.
    Smith, McKenzie, Amla, Kallis, Prince, de Villiers, Boucher, Harris, *, Ntini, Steyn.

    There's only one place in the SA team up for grabs, really, it's a question of Nel or Morkel. With England there's absolutely no guarantee of either Collingwood or, especially, Broad, being in the line-up.

    Collingwood, of course, has never played a Test against South Africa - the only team he's not yet faced. And the team which has conquered him best in ODIs.
    Not convinced that stability alone makes us a decent team. I know that's easy to write after this morning's debacle at OT, but it's been clear enough for a while anyway. SA should win the series by a mile. England's only hope is that was true for their previous 3 series over here, and they ballsed it up each time.

  6. #36
    Hall of Fame Member TT Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    .
    Posts
    16,568
    Just canít see England winning the test series if they select the side which is currently playing against New Zealand.

  7. #37
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by wpdavid View Post
    Not convinced that stability alone makes us a decent team. I know that's easy to write after this morning's debacle at OT, but it's been clear enough for a while anyway. SA should win the series by a mile. England's only hope is that was true for their previous 3 series over here, and they ballsed it up each time.
    Oh absolutely. But stability tends to suggest that players are performing well and earning their continued presence. If we don't have a stable side, we won't be a good one.

  8. #38
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Venter View Post
    And quite frankly I've never understood the view held by some on this forum that England are a great team in the making.
    Such as?
    They had some reasonable success against relatively weak opposition in 2004 and were in the right place at the right time against Australia in 2005. And they've been largely poor since.
    South Africa in 2004/05 were far from weak opposition, though one or two circumstances did conspire in their (England's) favour. And while there was indeed an element of right-place-at-right-time to 2005 (Gillespie's virtual on-the-spot decline, McGrath's injuries, to an extent the couple of bad decisions against Martyn) there was far more of overpowering players who had always been weak in the areas others aside from England were not good enough to exploit (Hayden, Gilchrist, Martyn) as well as making excellent players appear merely decent (Ponting) and good ones appear poor (Katich).

  9. #39
    Hall of Fame Member steds's Avatar
    Breakout Champion!
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    ****ing cold and ****ing wet
    Posts
    17,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Venter View Post
    I can't see England genuinely challenging Australia for that world no.1 spot - England don't have the talent for that.
    That's obvious. No one has said otherwise in this thread and it has nothing to do with the series in question. So why bother bringing it up?

  10. #40
    Hall of Fame Member steds's Avatar
    Breakout Champion!
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    ****ing cold and ****ing wet
    Posts
    17,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    But stability tends to suggest that players are performing well and earning their continued presence.
    Much like James Anderson, who continues to get carted and is being persevered with through lack of a genuine pace option?

  11. #41
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Anderson was persevered with for the opening Test of the NZ series through bad selection. No more. Same thing that somehow resulted in Shah losing-out to his vast inferior Bopara.

  12. #42
    Soutie Langeveldt's Avatar
    Pinball Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    29,542
    2-0 to SA.. Unless England pick Hoggard and Harmison in which case 2-1 or 2-2..
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    Don't like using my iPod dock. Ruins battery life too much.
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    Thanks Dick Smith. Will remember to subscribe to your newsletter for more electronic fun facts.

    ****.

  13. #43
    International Vice-Captain andruid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sometimes I'm online, Sometimes I'm offline
    Posts
    4,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Langeveldt View Post
    2-0 to SA.. Unless England pick Hoggard and Harmison in which case 2-1 or 2-2..
    Even with Hoggard and Harmison I still expect S.A to see off England fairly easily
    Quote Originally Posted by fredfertang View Post
    Why don't the boxers have any head protection any more?
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    Burgey submitted a class action suggesting they harden the **** up.

  14. #44
    Cricketer Of The Year wpdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    8,890
    Quote Originally Posted by andruid View Post
    Even with Hoggard and Harmison I still expect S.A to see off England fairly easily
    Harmison would be a complete irrelevance. Hoggard might possibly make a difference, though I doubt it.

  15. #45
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On a trip to the moon
    Posts
    48,453
    Quote Originally Posted by TT Boy View Post
    Just canít see England winning the test series if they select the side which is currently playing against New Zealand.
    Who you supporting anyway?

Page 3 of 467 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. *Official* CW XI in South Africa
    By Mr Mxyzptlk in forum Cricket Web XI
    Replies: 552
    Last Post: 07-01-2007, 04:08 AM
  2. *Official* England in South Africa Thread
    By Richard in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 4577
    Last Post: 19-02-2005, 05:35 PM
  3. England in South Africa Tour !
    By Legglancer in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-12-2004, 12:14 PM
  4. *Official* South Africa in England Thread
    By Rik in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1008
    Last Post: 17-09-2003, 06:01 PM
  5. *Offical* England u-19 v South Africa u-19
    By Craig in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 20-08-2003, 11:35 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •