What is the definition of a 'choke'?

[MrPrez]

Originally Posted by Spooony

You didn't win that one it was a draw. Australia finished higher than SA in the Super Six table, and that was determined by the obscurity of net run-rate

Do not flatter yourself. Cronje winning the toss on a Edgebaston pitch knowing to cause troubles for the team batting second. A South African team that lost to Zimbabwe and who's top and lower oder did not fire for the entire tournament almost. Same team who Australia beat by 5 wickets in the same tournament. The wicket of Cronje who he missed by a mile but was given out? South Africa were a 196 after 48 overs. At one stage it was 58 runs of 36 balls needed. You are telling me that everyone thought you would lose the match at that stage? We had no right to win that game and basically did not deserve it. Like against Sri Lanka, Like against Pakistan, Like Against England we were saved or got put close by Lance Klusener. Australia choked just as much as South Africa as they went through on technicality not a win. Klusener clubbed 31 of 16 balls to get us back in that game. In the end the better team went thru and won the world cup.

A choke happens if a team from an unseemingly un-losable (excuse the made up word) ends up losing as a result of the pressure (see NZ v SA at 2011 CWC). Not where a team that is equal to its opponent (or possibly inferior in talent) loses after never being in a commanding position. Australia were in command of that match till he clubbed that 2 fours 3 balls and no wickets in the bank. Klusener couldn't run singles with Donald on the otherside it was 2 or 4. It did not happen.

But how about Australia needing 117 to win in their last innings with a 23 year old called Hansie Cronje as captain in his first match. 5 runs to win Glen McGrath hit it straight back to De Villiers. Can we call that choke?

How about Australia scoring a world record 434 then went on to lose the game? Can we call that a choke.

Getting 332 against NZ couldn't defend it shall we call it a choke?

I can name many other matches as one can almost call any match in ODI cricket as a choke as 1 man can make the difference. We had to break world records in tests and ODI's to beat Australia. That is how good the Australian side were that you have to go to great lengths to topple them. They were always better than SA we just played above ourselves to stay competitive with them until the end.

As for the question did Sri Lanka choke? No. Sri Lanka was carried in the final by Jaywerdena who were they're best impact player.


11 things you don't know about World T20 2012

Firstly: Welcome to the site. Great to have some SAers arriving.

Secondly: The difference between Australia's "choking" and ours is that they have shown that they have the mental strength to win competitions. I reckon all nations to ever play tests have "choked" numerous times(besides maybe those that have never got themselves into a position of superiority). What they have over us is that they don't do it every single time they play in an important global tournament.

[robelinda]

Kallis averaging 8 with the bat in the T20 World Cup. CHOKE?

Somehow i think Australia's stunning record in big tournaments speaks for itself, SA's record of choking is nothing short of abysmal. For every match that Australia choked i could name 20 that SA choked, and choked BADLY. Everyone knows it. Wont even mention the 1996 world cup or 2003 world cup or 2007 world cup........

[Top_Cat]

Originally Posted by Spooony

You didn't win that one it was a draw. Australia finished higher than SA in the Super Six table, and that was determined by the obscurity of net run-rate

Do not flatter yourself. Cronje winning the toss on a Edgebaston pitch knowing to cause troubles for the team batting second. A South African team that lost to Zimbabwe and who's top and lower oder did not fire for the entire tournament almost. Same team who Australia beat by 5 wickets in the same tournament. The wicket of Cronje who he missed by a mile but was given out? South Africa were a 196 after 48 overs. At one stage it was 58 runs of 36 balls needed. You are telling me that everyone thought you would lose the match at that stage? We had no right to win that game and basically did not deserve it. Like against Sri Lanka, Like against Pakistan, Like Against England we were saved or got put close by Lance Klusener. Australia choked just as much as South Africa as they went through on technicality not a win. Klusener clubbed 31 of 16 balls to get us back in that game. In the end the better team went thru and won the world cup.

A choke happens if a team from an unseemingly un-losable (excuse the made up word) ends up losing as a result of the pressure (see NZ v SA at 2011 CWC). Not where a team that is equal to its opponent (or possibly inferior in talent) loses after never being in a commanding position. Australia were in command of that match till he clubbed that 2 fours 3 balls and no wickets in the bank. Klusener couldn't run singles with Donald on the otherside it was 2 or 4. It did not happen.

But how about Australia needing 117 to win in their last innings with a 23 year old called Hansie Cronje as captain in his first match. 5 runs to win Glen McGrath hit it straight back to De Villiers. Can we call that choke?

How about Australia scoring a world record 434 then went on to lose the game? Can we call that a choke.

Getting 332 against NZ couldn't defend it shall we call it a choke?

I can name many other matches as one can almost call any match in ODI cricket as a choke as 1 man can make the difference. We had to break world records in tests and ODI's to beat Australia. That is how good the Australian side were that you have to go to great lengths to topple them. They were always better than SA we just played above ourselves to stay competitive with them until the end.

As for the question did Sri Lanka choke? No. Sri Lanka was carried in the final by Jaywerdena who were they're best impact player.


11 things you don't know about World T20 2012

All the Aussie examples were definitely massive chokes (and there are heaps more) but the reason the people love attaching the tag to SA isn't just because the label fits more often than most; it's because the team and fans are so hilariously defensive about it so cheers for yet another example.

[wellAlbidarned]

There's a massive difference between choking, and being on the receiving end of a one-in-50 amazing performance from the opposing team, people seem to be getting the two mixed up a bit much imo.

Choking is making a complete hash of fairly simple key moments with little exceptional input from the other side.

[smalishah84]

Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned

Choking is making a complete hash of fairly simple key moments with little exceptional input from the other side.

Pakistan seem masters of it by this definition.

[vic_orthdox]

It's a hard term to apply to cricket, especially with regards to batting.

I mean, in individual sports, something like tennis where a guy is serving can constitute choking, as they are in full control of the activity. Same with golf, where it's a stationary ball and you are in complete control when playing the shot, then it's much simpler to identify what people like to call a "choke".

Bowling a wide off the last ball, where only two is needed, that probably constitutes a choke. The game beforehand when Waugh got the runs, that's not a choke. The 2007 WC match against Australia, not a choke. It doesn't take much to make a mistake when on top, and giving your opponent a sniff; I think too often that gets referred to as choking. Even collapses, I don't think really come under choking; it's just plain chaos most of the time.

Where the Saffas come into the "choking" in that WC Semi is simply how they made the same mistake twice in two balls. They didn't have the composure to talk through what their plan was, there was still three balls left after that one to score one run.

[Spark]

What do you think about the 2010 WC quarter?

[vic_orthdox]

Didn't watch the game TBH. Assume you mean the one against NZ?

[BoyBrumby]

Definitely choked against us in the group game last year. Arguably twice, actually. Collapsed from 124/3 to 127/7 and then from 160/7 to 165ao chasing 171.

[8ankitj]

To me 2007 world cup semi final was a big choke by SA. Trying too hard to stay "positive" and getting ahead of themselves, they ended up in a miserable situation in like 15 minutes after the start of the game. Probably the worst choke by SA.

[Heboric]

Originally Posted by Spooony

You didn't win that one it was a draw. Australia finished higher than SA in the Super Six table, and that was determined by the obscurity of net run-rate

Do not flatter yourself. Cronje winning the toss on a Edgebaston pitch knowing to cause troubles for the team batting second. A South African team that lost to Zimbabwe and who's top and lower oder did not fire for the entire tournament almost. Same team who Australia beat by 5 wickets in the same tournament. The wicket of Cronje who he missed by a mile but was given out? South Africa were a 196 after 48 overs. At one stage it was 58 runs of 36 balls needed. You are telling me that everyone thought you would lose the match at that stage? We had no right to win that game and basically did not deserve it. Like against Sri Lanka, Like against Pakistan, Like Against England we were saved or got put close by Lance Klusener. Australia choked just as much as South Africa as they went through on technicality not a win. Klusener clubbed 31 of 16 balls to get us back in that game. In the end the better team went thru and won the world cup.

A choke happens if a team from an unseemingly un-losable (excuse the made up word) ends up losing as a result of the pressure (see NZ v SA at 2011 CWC). Not where a team that is equal to its opponent (or possibly inferior in talent) loses after never being in a commanding position. Australia were in command of that match till he clubbed that 2 fours 3 balls and no wickets in the bank. Klusener couldn't run singles with Donald on the otherside it was 2 or 4. It did not happen.

But how about Australia needing 117 to win in their last innings with a 23 year old called Hansie Cronje as captain in his first match. 5 runs to win Glen McGrath hit it straight back to De Villiers. Can we call that choke?

How about Australia scoring a world record 434 then went on to lose the game? Can we call that a choke.

Getting 332 against NZ couldn't defend it shall we call it a choke?

I can name many other matches as one can almost call any match in ODI cricket as a choke as 1 man can make the difference. We had to break world records in tests and ODI's to beat Australia. That is how good the Australian side were that you have to go to great lengths to topple them. They were always better than SA we just played above ourselves to stay competitive with them until the end.

As for the question did Sri Lanka choke? No. Sri Lanka was carried in the final by Jaywerdena who were they're best impact player.


11 things you don't know about World T20 2012

Welcome nice to see a fellow Saffer.

Mate you wasting your time to debate with that robelinda. He thinks by uploading videos to youtube makes him better than anybody. He can insult players left and right but dare criticise Australia he will swear at you and ban you from his channel. Plus his kindergarden level of abuse of Jacques Kallis

Any way, dont forget Newlands last year that 47 all out game - but I suppose it was just bad luck

[silentstriker]

Malinga 4 wickets in 4 balls almost 5! - YouTube

[Spooony]

The match would have finished much earlier had Kallis and Co. not allowed Mark Waugh to bowl a lot of overs in the middle.

Chasing a target is a lot about identifying threats and weak links in the opposition and then treading with caution against potential threats while going after the weak links. Playing in safe mode can take you only so far; you must change gears at some point.

With that I completly disagree with. Did he forget that Warne bowled Gibbs, then removed Kirsten and Cronje two balls later? 3 wickets in eight balls. Then he went on to bowl 40 more balls. Where Cullinan was the one batsman which was useless against Warne due to Warne's flight which was perfect above Cullinans plane of view and subsequently lost the ball 99 percent of the time he bowled to him.

Cullinan was run out for 6 in the 22nd over leaving us 64-4. Jacques Kallis role in the SA team were the anchor. People thought he was selfish batting for records but he simply played the way he was intructed to play. Play the anchor let everyone bat arouind him.

Rhodes and Kallis brought the score up to 145 using 18 overs. As yopu can see here

How nicely Rhodes and Kallis accelerated taking the run rate from 1.4 to 5 over keeping the run rate below 8. Waugh started the 25th over and ended the 40th over which was part of the period SA managed to stabilize and build a partnership keeping the run rate in check. Then Australia's 2nd best bowler on the day Paul Reiffel took the wicket of Rhodes and Shane Warne came back which was receiving lots of assistance from the pitch removed Kallis. Australia's 2 best bowlers on the day removing two set batsman. Shaun Pollock clubbed Warne for 6 and were bowled by Fleming for 20. This was in the 46 over where the require run rate was 7.5. Then SA lost Boucher and Elworthy in space of 2 balls with Alan Donald who was a complete mug with the ball.

198/9 with 8 balls remaining needing 214. Klusener could only run a 2 or smashed it for a boudary. The very next ball should have been game over but Rifle gave us a life line by dropping Klusener where the ball went for a 6. Strange no one ever mentions that incident which should have been the end of the match on 198. Yet we got to 213 thanks to that Rifle gift.

South Africa have done this more times than any other team

With this. I can say this team have done it more but yet he failed to back up his point. In fact he only referenced one game.

The word chokers were banter and sledging which the Australians started to use and brand the SA team in the Tri series between SA, Aus and NZ and that was way before 99. Reason they called SA chokers was because we went to Australia played them on their home ground on their wickets, reach the final win the first game then lose the next 2. That is when they branded us chokers. But hell we were really not suppose or expected to take it to a 3rd game really.

But we got them back with the help of NZ and broke their streak of reaching the final when we won the final against NZ 2 -0
Manage to beat them at home in a test series and was the first side to do it in 16 years.
We beat England earlier this year and had no problem in eating up the pressure and finished them off. Game vs NZ was a total batting collapse in the WC and NZ were clever by provoking us with the sledging where we lost our heads and threw the game away which was the only real choke

[Spooony]

Originally Posted by robelinda

Kallis averaging 8 with the bat in the T20 World Cup. CHOKE?

Somehow i think Australia's stunning record in big tournaments speaks for itself, SA's record of choking is nothing short of abysmal. For every match that Australia choked i could name 20 that SA choked, and choked BADLY. Everyone knows it. Wont even mention the 1996 world cup or 2003 world cup or 2007 world cup........

Please do name the matches for me. 1996 went into a game no Allan Donald and ran into a Brain Lara at the top of his game. Did you forget the fact that Brain Lara scored a century and Windies scored more runs than they should have had. Ask Australia or any team what happens when you run into a Brain Lara or Tendulkar in the mood. *cough *cough Wills Cup 1998 India vs Australia *cough *cough

2003 a tied match where they misread the D/L calculations. Didn't you find it strange after Boucher smashed a 6 he calmly played the next ball to a fielder not bother to get a single? He and Klusener thought they were ahead in fact it was a tie. So it was no choke. Other point is if NZ decided to go play in Kenya SA and NZ would have gone through were NZ would have had 10 points carried over to the Super Eights. They forfeited SA went out

Ok we were at home went out the first round. But in 1992 SA played their first World Cup which was held in Australia. Australia were the holders and hosts, were the hot favourites. What happened? Australia lost to NZ. Lost to England and lost to SA by 9 wickets. We had 3 ODI's before the WC against India to see how far behind were we. Out of International cricket for over a decade we came back and rubbed the Aussies faces in the dirt at their own home. Pakistan sealed Australia's fate where they lost 8 wickets for 56 runs in a must win match. Yes we got knocked out at home Australia did even worse. In fact in 1992 we were robbed by stupid rain calculations and we would have won by 3 runs if the D/L was held because 1 over was deducted to slow bowling rate.

2007 lets not forget Australia beat us by 83 runs in the group stage and they were a way better side than us. We even lost to Bangladesh in the Super 8's who made it through with Ireland where Pakistan and India were out in the first round.

In the semi final we were beaten by 7 wickets by Australia again. The game was over as a contest in the first ten overs. Poor shot selection and simply lost to the better team. We did not choke just were outclassed by superior opponents. Simple.

2011 against NZ that one you can actually call a choke but **** happens. We played like crap, lost our heads, fell for NZ banter and lost. We would have never made that final anyway. It was decided long ago the path of certain countries to make it to a semi and no way in hell they would prepare a pitch anything other than a dust bowl doing strnge things as a good batting wicket they got beaten by SA after a major collapse.

For Kallis and T20 I think you have missed the fact that we do not give a **** about T20 and our team selection shows it. That is not even our best 11. We use it for development and to bleed in youngsters. Just look at Ontong's avg 11 with the batting in his whole career yet he is in the squad. Kallis was asked to come and play due to the fact we were playing with extra baggage and the selectors are given instructions that they must adhere to quatos which mean color is looked at first and talent ignored. Politicians are under the impression in International cricket you can win games and beat the best sides in the world with 5 or 6 establish players and 5 guys like Ontong who avg 11 in domestic cricket which is really a joke.

You should judge people by what they do - it's wrong to judge people by their race, colour or creed. Everyone should be free to play; selection should be based on merit.Which is not happening. So its hard to be competitive against the top teams in all 3 forms of the game and race and colour is looked at first rather than merit. That is South African sport in reality. That is why KP left.

A reality we are now stuck with as again we were just not good enough to win when they needed to. There was never a choke insight against Pakistan or Australia, they were just inferior to their opposition. This breaks in a new and exciting era for the SA limited overs team, one defined by just not being that great, and I for one am thrilled by it.

There is no denying the quality of the SA limited overs team and the many players that have earned a cap for them over the years, but let’s face it, that all counts for jack **** when it comes to beating who stands in your way of glory. I personally think I am a better looking, more charming and ultimately a better long term prospect than Russell Brand, but that didn’t stop Kate Perry from marrying him… That’s reality, and in reality the SA ODI side is nothing more than competitive.

We have the world’s best Test team, the greatest honour of them all. The fact we aren’t quite as good in this other wishy washy stuff really matters far less, but their losses are treated as life or death happenings. Bull****, we lose games, that’s what happens in sport it’s a bloody reality! Sure, some may think this is a cop-out attitude, but quite frankly much like when people try tell me T20 is the future – I don’t give a monkey’s.

If we just keep picking good players and allow them to play their natural games, the honours will come. If they don’t, well, it’s because they aren’t good enough like they have been over the past few years. Simple as that. Limited overs cricket is a very different game than Test cricket, perhaps we just aren’t as well suited to it.

Everyone with half a brain can see Amla do not belong in T20 as it's not suited for the way he plays. He is a wonderful ODI and test player but he is not one that comes in and smash it around. Simple.

Kallis 8 avg yes he failed fair enough. Shane Watson failed as well when it mattered. With bat and got smashed around with his bowling. I wonder how many matches in must win situations did he perform in? Don't think many.

Originally Posted by Spark

What do you think about the 2010 WC quarter?

What about New Zealand in the Rugby World Cups. 20 Years between winning them was a massive relieve for a team that was no 1 for almost 17 years of that 20 and went every tournament in as the hot favorites end up losing to SA, France, Australia, France and in 2011 almost lost to France in the final again.

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Malinga 4 wickets in 4 balls almost 5! - YouTube

You did not watch that match did you?
1. South Africa won that game.
2. Charl Langeveldt took 2 wickets in two balls and never got the chance to try and complete his hat trick.
3. Muttiah Muralitharan was denied by Justin Kemp deflecting one off the pad to short leg
4. Maling got it luckey but little too late as Maslinga was tapped around ending up with bowling figures of 4-52 in 9.2 overs.
5. He took 2 with his last two balls of the over and then another 2 in the first 2 balls of his next over.
6. HArd to face in swingers yorkers at that pace for a top order batsman let alone tail enders. Waqar Younis anyone?

[MW1304]

This is just comical. No need to read your posts, the fact that you're writing so much about it proves it affects you.