• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** Australia in South Africa

Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Neil Pickup said:
That's not possible.

EDIT: Brain freeze. I was assuming Jamee was an idiot and expected the team following on to win by an innings. Now who looks stupid?
Click to expand...
How isn't it? :p

Team A - 720/4 dec.
Team B - 123 all out
Team B (f/o) - 149 all out

Team A wins by an innings and 446 runs.

EDIT: Beaten by edit. :p
 
Neil Pickup

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
I'm trying to get a filter of matches that led to the batting team having a first-innings lead of > 200 at the moment, and not having much luck.
 
Evermind

Evermind

International Debutant
Could they do it? Could the Saffers pull off the impossible?

Where are all the SA posters, BTW? The forum seems to be dominated by all the annoying Aussies! :ph34r:
 
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Well I must have been thinking of the 2001 game Aus vs Ind, not the 2002 one (there were no Aus vs Ind games in that year).

I was sure I'd heard commentators in the past say that the stats were worse for teams enforcing the follow on that teams who didn't.

I could very well be wrong though - I'd like the statistics.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Prince EWS said:
I'm pretty sure this is it. I could be wrong though. :p

EDIT: I don't think that includes occasions where teams have won by an innings after enforcing the follow-on, actually.
Click to expand...
Neil Pickup said:
All matches won by teams batting first - 149 innings victories: all of these must be after follow ons - so we have 200 wins, 13 draws and 3 defeats after a follow on.
Click to expand...
Prince EWS said:
I don't think we've accounted for three-innings draws that include a follow-on, actually.
Click to expand...
Batted in the third innings after fielding first takes all that in.

Still no way of doing this though:

Neil said:
I'm trying to get a filter of matches that led to the batting team having a first-innings lead of > 200 at the moment, and not having much luck.
Click to expand...
 
Neil Pickup

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Neil Pickup said:
I can get the team batting second having a lead of > 200, which makes me think it ought to be.
Click to expand...
And it is, if I use negative numbers for the lead. Filter: Cricinfo Statsguru - Test matches - Team records

This gives us all the times when a lead of >= 200 has been achieved. And only once before (Cricinfo - 3rd Test: South Africa v Australia at Durban, Jan 20-24, 1950) has batting on after a follow-on led to defeat. South Africa (311 & 99) lost to Australia (75 & 336/5).
 
Neil Pickup

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Neil Pickup said:
And it is, if I use negative numbers for the lead. Filter: Cricinfo Statsguru - Test matches - Team records

This gives us all the times when a lead of >= 200 has been achieved. And only once before (Cricinfo - 3rd Test: South Africa v Australia at Durban, Jan 20-24, 1950) has batting on after a follow-on led to defeat. South Africa (311 & 99) lost to Australia (75 & 336/5).
Click to expand...
A 200+ lead has been achieved 300 times - 301 including the current game at the Wanderers.

There have been 5 defeats: the three famous follow-on wins, Kingsmead 1950 as mentioned, and the Leather Jacket Test, which doesn't count. There have been 219 wins, 200 of them analysed earlier by our filters, so therefore there are 19 wins when a team has batted again, and then bowled the opposition out in the fourth. I now need to analyse the 76 drawn games and work out how many of them have been three-innings draws (eg St John's 2004 - Lara's 400*) and how many have been four-innings draws (eg St John's 2009).

EDIT - this 76 is reduced to 61 if I remove weather-affected games that were 2-innings draws.
 
Last edited:
pup11

pup11

International Coach
I am really worried about the way things are going atm, if the conditions remain the same tomorrow and a full day's play takes place, then South Africa pulling off a win here won't really be out of question, because unless weather intervenes in this game, I think we can pretty safely say that there will be result in this game, one way or the another.
 
Xuhaib

Xuhaib

International Coach
pup11 said:
I am really worried about the way things are going atm, if the conditions remain the same tomorrow and a full day's play takes place, then South Africa pulling off a win here won't really be out of question, because unless weather intervenes in this game, I think we can pretty safely say that there will be result in this game, one way or the another.
Click to expand...
Perth to be replayed I reckon:D
 
four_or_six

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
Nah, will take an awesome batting effort to get this chased, plus some pretty average bowling. Also, lots of wickets have been falling on the mornings of the match.
 
TT Boy

TT Boy

Hall of Fame Member
Shame I won't be able to watch the final day. I agreed to attend an English corner in my local University. Hopefully it is held in a classroom so I can Cricinfo the game or better still stream the game whilst looking interested.

Should be a cracker nevertheless. Pretty simple for South Africa, Amla and Kallis hit centuries, they win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top