*Official* South Africa in England Thread

[marc71178]

I was surprised SA didn't look to score faster and declare sooner.

From what I read during the game, they were trying to, but couldn't.

 

[Rik]

What I can't believe is after being outplayed, we pick an un-changed side...:duh: :duh: :duh:

Oh well at least I'll be busy most of the next Test and won't have to see Smith pile up another huge score...I can't think of a single bowler in that squad worthy of being given another go, including Anderson. McGrath's dismissal was of the type careers are ended by. I wholeheartedly agree with Dermot Reeve, Mark Nicholas et al. He should not have been playing in the 1st place, let alone be in the squad for the 2nd Test.

I am not amused :!(

 

[Mr. P]

unchanged? not entirely. after hussain resignation from the captaincy the side would be in a very different frame of mind. and be experiancing very different emotions

 

[marc71178]

I for one am glad that the selectors are keeping faith. What sort of signal does it send out to make wholesale changes because of one substandard performance?

OK then Rik, if you were selector for the 2nd Test, what side would you pick?

 

[luckyeddie]

I wholeheartedly agree with Dermot Reeve, Mark Nicholas et al.
I am not amused :!(

The day either of those journeyman plodders have anything worthwhile to say is the day that ski sales in hell go through the roof.

If Dermot Reeve especially suggests that someone should be dropped, that's all the more reason for keeping them in the side.

England drew the first test. So what? The pitch was a heck of a lot more difficult to bat on on day 5 than it was on day 1. Maybe if we had won the toss things would have been a little different. Who's to say?

Our Channel 4 idiots would throw away all the progress which has been made over the last 6 months and for what? To give them something else to talk about. Who would they bring in? Matthew Hoggard? Kabir Ali? Mark Ramprakash? Ronnie Irani? Mike Gatting? (Ok, perhaps not Mark Ramprakash).

 

[Craig]

James Kirtley and Robert Key are the two extras just in case. The dropping of John Crawley was completely unjustified.

 

[Rik]

I for one am glad that the selectors are keeping faith. What sort of signal does it send out to make wholesale changes because of one substandard performance?

It sends the message that they think they don't have anyone better and they don't want to win Test Matches.

OK then Rik, if you were selector for the 2nd Test, what side would you pick?

Thorpe for McGrath, give Kirtley a chance because he can hardly be worse than Harmison, give Batty or Brown a go as spinner sometime in the series as Giles isn't warrenting a place on current form. I suppose give Anderson one more Test to prove himself, and we will have to stick with Flintoff even though he couldn't even buy a wicket in Test Cricket. I'll give Gough one more Test.

 

[Rik]

The dropping of John Crawley was completely unjustified.

They justified it by picking Key, who they thought was of similer ability and was the younger of the 2. If you have 2 players of similer ability they will allways go for the younger one. Unfortunately he's proved them very very wrong.

 

[Rik]

If Dermot Reeve especially suggests that someone should be dropped, that's all the more reason for keeping them in the side

It's the only thing he's said I've ever agreed with. And it's a valid point.

 

[luckyeddie]

They justified it by picking Key, who they thought was of similer ability and was the younger of the 2. If you have 2 players of similer ability they will allways go for the younger one. Unfortunately he's proved them very very wrong.

So you've written Key off for good, have you?

I think he's got a lot of talent and may benefit from being left out for a year or so. If he makes another claim in the future, fine. If not, well, there's always Rikki Clarke

 

[luckyeddie]

It's the only thing he's said I've ever agreed with. And it's a valid point.

It's only a valid point to you because you agree with it (and have been rattling on about it for the last 3 months).

And without McGrath, we might well have followed on

 

[Rik]

So you've written Key off for good, have you?

I think he's got a lot of talent and may benefit from being left out for a year or so. If he makes another claim in the future, fine. If not, well, there's always Rikki Clarke

I just don't think he has it in him. Ok he gave some stick back against the Aussies but that's not what a career is made of. Also I feel there are more talented players who will come through ahead of him in the future.

 

[Rik]

It's only a valid point to you because you agree with it (and have been rattling on about it for the last 3 months).

And without McGrath, we might well have followed on

No it's a valid point because, like Australia, you shouldn't leave your best players out. With Thorpe we could have scored more and I'm sure he wouldn't have got out quite as embarrisingly as McGrath.

 

[luckyeddie]

Thorpe (for reasons we won't go into here) proved himself to be unreliable to England - and despite his assurances that his life is fixed, there will remain doubts as to whether he will make himself available for the winter tours until he actually gets to go on one.

By all means bring in Thorpe for McGrath, but I get the impression that you would bring ANYONE in for the bloke.

Re his 'embarrassing' dismissal, that ball 'spat' as much as the one that got Flintoff out 'shot'. Would you drop Flintoff?

If not, why not? He cannot maintain a test career as an all-rounder on three innings and no decent bowling performances, surely?

(and no, I'm not advocating his removal)

 

[Rik]

Thorpe (for reasons we won't go into here) proved himself to be unreliable to England - and despite his assurances that his life is fixed, there will remain doubts as to whether he will make himself available for the winter tours until he actually gets to go on one.

By all means bring in Thorpe for McGrath, but I get the impression that you would bring ANYONE in for the bloke.

Re his 'embarrassing' dismissal, that ball 'spat' as much as the one that got Flintoff out 'shot'. Would you drop Flintoff?

If not, why not? He cannot maintain a test career as an all-rounder on three innings and no decent bowling performances, surely?

(and no, I'm not advocating his removal)

If there was anyone to replace Flintoff I would. He just can't get any wickets and we need someone who can, not someone who can wack a quick 40 and then bowl 20-6-48-0. There is someone to replace McGrath, however, and his name is Graham Thorpe and he is a better batsmen, in fact a world class batsman. The ball he recieved bounced a little more than most of Pretorious' deliveries but nothing amazingly different. His dismissal showed a weakness against the short ball, something which Thorpe does not have. So what if Thorpe messed the selectors around, if he was Australian he would be back in the side pronto. They seem to have realised that in order to win you have to pick your best players, over here we have to be "just" and "fair" to ours. This is one of the reasons why we are not one of the top nations, it's not a lack of talent.

Ta da. Now if anyone feels like they really need to have the last word, take it. I can't be bothered.

 

[marc71178]

It sends the message that they think they don't have anyone better and they don't want to win Test Matches.

No, it shows that they have faith in the side and want consistency in selection. Years ago we were struggling, and they chopped and changed like nobodies business - I bet you were one of the people who complained when they did that?

Thorpe for McGrath,

Not again! The bloke keeps scoring runs and is yet to let the side down. If anyone, I reckon Hussain's in more jeopardy now (for a start we don't want to have too many 34-35 years olds in at once.)

give Kirtley a chance because he can hardly be worse than Harmison,

Balanced attack means that Harmison plays until we find someone else who can bowl quickly and trouble batsmen.

Batty or Brown a go as spinner sometime in the series as Giles isn't warrenting a place on current form.

If Brown comes in we have a tail that starts at 8.

As for Giles' form, well he took more wickets than anyone else at Birmingham, and had a batsman who had over 200 on the board in all sorts of trouble...

 

[luckyeddie]

OK, I'll take the last word then because anything which McGrath does gives Rik a stick to beat him with.

Trescothick scores many of his runs behind square on the off side, yet more often than not it is his downfall. Sides are now placing two or three gullies and a square point against him. Does that indicate a weakness against the ball slanted across him?

If so, should he be dropped?

Anderson cannot keep off the 'no-go' area. Should he be dropped?

 

[Langeveldt]

What I can't believe is after being outplayed, we pick an un-changed side...:duh: :duh: :duh:

Oh well at least I'll be busy most of the next Test and won't have to see Smith pile up another huge score...I can't think of a single bowler in that squad worthy of being given another go, including Anderson. McGrath's dismissal was of the type careers are ended by. I wholeheartedly agree with Dermot Reeve, Mark Nicholas et al. He should not have been playing in the 1st place, let alone be in the squad for the 2nd Test.

I am not amused :!(

Hmm, chill out Rik, England have a better bowling attack than SA do...

Anderson had a bad match, even the greatest do

Pollock, Ntini and Pretorius are class bowlers (I am beginning to rate Dewie) But RSA have no and I mean No back up at all in Willoughby and Peterson... England have Flintoff and Giles, even Butcher who are far more effective...

 

[marc71178]

England have Flintoff and Giles, even Butcher who are far more effective...

If Rik had his way they'd have Botham and Tufnell...

 

[Craig]

Should Craig White be called up? He is a good batsman and bowler.