Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: Steve Waugh's Fault

  1. #1
    U19 Cricketer Speersy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    495

    Steve Waugh's Fault

    I think it was S.Waugh's bio that I remember reading how he always thought South Africa were a good team but that they would never dominate and take the game away from you. I understood what he was saying, but now I am thinking that the South Africans are not happy with that and ready to prove him wrong.

    "The one thing that is really noticeable about our group is the belief that has crept in. We now have the belief that we can dominate games rather than just sitting back and waiting for things to happen. We know that we can grab a game by the scruff of the neck and make it ours. If you look at that last series, we won nearly all of the key moments. If we can do that again, I'm confident we will go on to win the series at home." -Steyn

    You think Steyn read that book? Are we about to get dominated by a far more willing team?

    Hussey please stand up!
    Time: "Despite its gentlemanly manner, the sport generates tremendous passion in Britain and its former colonies."

  2. #2
    International Captain Redbacks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    5,247
    Firstly, you need the ability to be able to go out dominate matches. However to play in an more aggressive manner there needs to be some good results to back it up. A team is likely to find an equilibrium in their style of play which is governed by one thing Winning and increasing the probability of winning under all circumstance (I.e. Federer's game plan for a tennis example). Thus as South Africa push on and develop as a top side they will aim to play in a manner where they dictate play and set up matches in a manner most likely to get results. The feedback mechanism will be results. It worked for Aus so we continued to play in that manner, if it doesn't for another team they will simply adapt and find a new solution.

    It's hardly Steve Waugh's fault and I doubt he was the inventor of an aggressive mindset towards cricket. Success IMO is required to back up more cavalier play. It's wouldn't make sense for England to suddenly be batting at 4-5 runs an over when batting as they don't currently have the bowling or batting attack to turn this into a winning formula with a high enough probability of success.

  3. #3
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    You think it wasn't known that Waugh felt this way pre-book? It was a very common train of thought amongst the Australians of his time - Border, Hughes, Warne, Healy, etc. The South Africans have always been aware of it and have always been keen to prove it wrong. Previously they've let themselves down and not managed to; this time they have.

    The biggest reason, though, as I've said many times now, is not that the South Africans have gotten better but that the Australians have gotten worse.

    South Africa of 1996/97 and 2001/02 > South Africa of 2008/09. But Australia of 1996/97, 1997/98 and 2001/01 >>>>>>>>>>> Australia of 2008/09.
    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. #4
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    13
    Given the youth in South African team Steve Waugh would be ancient history for most. Don't think you can blame him. I'm glad the South Africans have put the "choker" tag to rest. It's taken a while since that semifinal, but I think we are over it now.
    Middle Stump - Cricket News, Previews and Betting Tips. Updated Regularly.


  5. #5
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    SAfricans were known as chokers looooooooong before that semi.

    And TBF, that semi proves nothing IMO, as I've always said. Except that Lance Klusener made a bad call for a single. I'm sure he's made bad calls for singles (and even twos and threes) before and since TBH.

  6. #6
    U19 Cricketer Speersy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    495
    You say there predecessor's where better and yet they lost against Austraila.
    When they finally win against Australia (at home) you say that Australia has gone down hill.

    How is it that you compare how good a team is, if its not how they perform against the best team int the world?

  7. #7
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Speersy View Post
    You say there predecessor's where better and yet they lost against Austraila.
    When they finally win against Australia (at home) you say that Australia has gone down hill.
    Are you seriously telling me that the Australian team of 2008/09 was as good as the one of 1997/98? 'Cos, well... it just wasn't. Plain and simple.

    Taylor, Slater, Blewett, M Waugh, S Waugh, Ponting, Healy, Warne, Reiffel, Kasprowcz, McGrath is just so unspeakably better than Hayden, Katich, Ponting, Hussey, Clarke, Symonds, Haddin, Johnson, Hauritz, Lee, Siddle.

    If this South African side of 2008/09 had faced the Australian one of 2001/02 or 1996/97, or 1997/98, or even 2005/06, they'd have been beaten. Handsomely. And equally, the South African team of 1996/97 or 2001/02 would've annihilated the Australian side of 2008/09. Absolutely wiped 'em off the park.
    How is it that you compare how good a team is, if its not how they perform against the best team int the world?
    Look at the players. Simple as.

  8. #8
    Hall of Fame Member Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    15,463
    Gotta agree with Richy boy here. The Australian team now looks nothing like the domineering ones of the past. I also agree that the past S.African teams were probably better - they just faced a better Australia side and couldn't beat them. They were born a bit too early I guess.
    ★★★★★

  9. #9
    Global Moderator vic_orthdox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    29,569
    The one question over the SA teams of the past was whether or not they had a batsman who could grab the game by the scruff of the neck and lead. They do now in Smith.

  10. #10
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    They did, several, and these batsmen did against other teams. It's just that to attemping to grab an attack by the scruff of the neck that contains the likes of McDermott, Warne, Reiffel, McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowicz and Clark is something that's only going to work once in a blue-moon. Many tried and failed; many others realised that to not try was their best bet. Unfortunately, this only marginally increased your chances.

    South Africa did have the bowling attack to dominate the Australian batting and sometimes they did, but not as often as they needed to. Often, of course, they were let down by their catching, which again against other teams was usually excellent.

  11. #11
    State Vice-Captain
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    Gotta agree with Richy boy here. The Australian team now looks nothing like the domineering ones of the past. I also agree that the past S.African teams were probably better - they just faced a better Australia side and couldn't beat them. They were born a bit too early I guess.
    I think this is indisputable. I do think, however, if this current South African team continues like this, they could be considered better than Hansie Cronje's team of the late 90s. The batting may already be there.

  12. #12
    International Debutant Evermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,250
    Yes, South Africa want to win test matches just to get back at Steve Waugh.

  13. #13
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by subshakerz View Post
    I think this is indisputable. I do think, however, if this current South African team continues like this, they could be considered better than Hansie Cronje's team of the late 90s. The batting may already be there.
    I don't see this bowling-attack of Steyn, Ntini, Morne Morkel, Harris, Kallis being a remote patch on either of Donald, de Villiers, Matthews, McMillan or Donald, Pollock, Kallis, Klusener, Adams\Elworthy\Terbrugge\AN Other.

    The top-order batting, though, is getting toward being as good as the top-order circa '99 but in terms of depth it's still lagging way behind. Kirsten, Gibbs, Kallis, Cullinan, Cronje, Rhodes, Boucher, Klusener, Pollock is unbelievable. McKenzie and ABdeV are still the wrong way around for my liking, but Amla and Prince are making constant strides (Prince has been for a good while of course) and Duminy has long looked the business, it was just a question of when he stopped being wasted in ODIs and got into the game-form he's actually good at. The only worry is whether Kallis still has many years ahead of him - you just never know with him, for someone who can be so impenetrable he can also be very poor from time to time.

  14. #14
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    67,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I don't see this bowling-attack of Steyn, Ntini, Morne Morkel, Harris, Kallis being a remote patch on either of Donald, de Villiers, Matthews, McMillan or Donald, Pollock, Kallis, Klusener, Adams\Elworthy\Terbrugge\AN Other.

    The top-order batting, though, is getting toward being as good as the top-order circa '99 but in terms of depth it's still lagging way behind. Kirsten, Gibbs, Kallis, Cullinan, Cronje, Rhodes, Boucher, Klusener, Pollock is unbelievable. McKenzie and ABdeV are still the wrong way around for my liking, but Amla and Prince are making constant strides (Prince has been for a good while of course) and Duminy has long looked the business, it was just a question of when he stopped being wasted in ODIs and got into the game-form he's actually good at. The only worry is whether Kallis still has many years ahead of him - you just never know with him, for someone who can be so impenetrable he can also be very poor from time to time.
    Rich and Ikki on the money here for mine. SA are playing great cricket atm but their beating Aus in the last series had plenty to do with the attack Australia put out in the series. Even allowing for injuries etc (which all teams get), if the bowlers Australia put on the park had an extra 20 odd tests each under their belts, they'd probably have taken the series, baringg in mind they were on top in each of the Perth and Melbourne tests but were beaten by SA's resilience in the end.
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie

    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
    - JK Galbraith
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    You need to clap a cows c**** over your head and get a woolly bull to f**** some sense into you.

    "Do you know why I have credibility? Because I don't exude morality." - Bob Hawke

    #408. Sixty three not out forever.

  15. #15
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Marburg, Germany
    Posts
    27,072
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    The one question over the SA teams of the past was whether or not they had a batsman who could grab the game by the scruff of the neck and lead. They do now in Smith.
    This. Even in the past, their best batsmen still tended to grind the opposition out of the game, rather than take control. The closest they had to a game-breaker was someone like Cullinan. Cronje threatened early but after a while, even he was a pretty high-percentage player.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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