***Official*** South Africa in England

[steds]

 

[fredfertang]

So 229 for 1 today. SA are back in with a chance of saving this game.

What a fascinating, if frustrating for we English, day

In 92 overs - proper test cricket - why do some folk want to change it?

Would anyone who actually likes cricket really rather watch 2 20/20 games instead of today's play ?

 

[Shaggy Alfresco]

Past behaviors determine the future behaviors. ECB officials are scared of losing another home series.

I'm not sure if the ECB even control the preperation of test wickets. I thought that was the counties' decision.

 

[open365]

I'm not sure if the ECB even control the preperation of test wickets. I thought that was the counties' decision.

David Lloyd said that it is in countries, but in England the team/staff don't have a say in the type of wicket that's prepared

 

[stumpski]

i dont see england winning this match tomorrow

Me neither - but it could be interesting if we have to chase 120, say, in an hour and a half. Not out of the question by any means.

 

[Dissector]

I too would be surprised if England pull out the win tomorrow. The only silver lining is that SA is scoring fairly slowly which will give England a smaller target to chase if they can get them all out sometime in the last session. If SA bats around 75 overs tomorrow and scores another 180 runs that will leave England with a very gettable target of 75 or so in about 12 overs. Realistically though I think SA will just bat through the day.

 

[zaremba]

Surprised to see Smith out, having concentrated well all day, to such a rotten shot to the new ball. Good knocks from him and McKenzie. England never threatened and I can't say I'm optimistic as to their chances to getting Kallis out tomorrow, even if they succeed in getting him in.

So a draw it will be, and England's big chance has been blown - again! It's a pity that the only team apparently capable of forcing wins on the Lord's pitch is Australia.

 

[Richard]

Past behaviors determine the future behaviors. ECB officials are scared of losing another home series.

Ind33d. (@ Bennett)

England are going to lose another home series sometime, as is everyone else in existence. You're not going to get anywhere trying to delay that. Past behaviour obviously doesn't determine future behaviour in any way, and I doubt there even was all that much preparation involved in this pitch with the amount of rain there was for the 3 days before the Test there.

I'm not sure if the ECB even control the preperation of test wickets. I thought that was the counties' decision.

Lord's wickets are the responsibility of MCC. Mick Hunt is generally a good fellow, though - you're certainly not going to see him running counter to England's wishes.

 

[open365]

I always laugh every time a commentator has to call him Michael Hunt, poor guy

 

[Richard]

It's a pity that the only team apparently capable of forcing wins on the Lord's pitch is Australia.

In no small part that's due to loss of playing time though. If lost time could be made-up, there'd probably only have been 6 draws at Lord's in the 42 Tests there (Bangladesh in 2005 and Zimbabwe in 2003 excluded) since the statutory minumum overs per day started in 1982. They being, of course, Pakistan 2006, Sri Lanka 2002, India 1996, New Zealand 1994 (and both of these were skin-of-teeth escapes from England), New Zealand 1986 and Sri Lanka 1984. This one may, of course, make it a 7th out of 43.

The draws against New Zealand earlier this year, India and West Indies in 2007, Sri Lanka in 2006, Australia in 1997, West Indies in 1991, New Zealand in 1990 and Pakistan in 1987 all lost time to the weather, and in every case you could say a result would have been possible had the overs been made-up.

 

[Manee]

Good to see a South Africa comeback - even better to see that my prediction of South Africa scoring big in this innings is coming to fruition. Looks like England merely got a day where the pitch became somewhat lively and it has returned to its original state.

 

[zaremba]

In no small part that's due to loss of playing time though. If lost time could be made-up, there'd probably only have been 6 draws at Lord's in the 42 Tests there (Bangladesh in 2005 and Zimbabwe in 2003 excluded) since the statutory minumum overs per day started in 1982. They being, of course, Pakistan 2006, Sri Lanka 2002, India 1996, New Zealand 1994 (and both of these were skin-of-teeth escapes from England), New Zealand 1986 and Sri Lanka 1984. This one may, of course, make it a 7th out of 43.

The draws against New Zealand earlier this year, India and West Indies in 2007, Sri Lanka in 2006, Australia in 1997, West Indies in 1991, New Zealand in 1990 and Pakistan in 1987 all lost time to the weather, and in every case you could say a result would have been possible had the overs been made-up.

Well I wouldn't want to second-guess your extensive research on this! Particularly after a long day at the cricket.

However this pitch is depressingly lifeless. If Smith hadn't lost his concentration against the new ball he would still be batting with McKenzie when Vaughan shook hands with them at 5.30 tomorrow afternoon.

 

[Richard]

Yeah I certainly don't like to see pitches like this at all, but you've got to sympathise with Mick Hunt - he'd hardly have had a particularly good chance to prepare it well with all the rain before the Test, would he?

And as I say - wickets like this in Lord's Tests have been, refreshingly, a rarity.

 

[Barney Rubble]

but you've got to sympathise with Mick Hunt

Anyone with a name like that certainly has my sympathy.

 

[Richard]

I wonder if anyone here had Sky Sports back in 1990 when they first covered live England cricket?

Remarkable to think that most of their current (and past) commentary team were still playing at that time.
Mark Nicholas (who worked for them up to 1998 IIRR) still had 6 years of his First-Class career to run.
Paul Allott would play another 2.
David Gower had been the forebearer of scandal as he was dropped from the England team for the tour in question, and played for another 4 seasons.
Ian Botham too would play another 4.
Most recent additions Michael Atherton and Nasser Hussain had been out of university less than a year.

Always wondered who was involved. Seem to recall reading from someoneorother that Geoff Boycott was a part; wonder if the likes of Charles Colville, Bob Willis and David Lloyd were?

 

[zaremba]

I watched the 1990 Caribbean series on Sky. Tony Grieg, Charles Colvile and Boycs were all, IRR, on the commentary team. Poor commentary then as now, and there was the slight Sky tackiness about the whole thing. They've come a long way in terms of production values but the punditry still leaves a whole heap to be desired.

 

[grecian]

Well on Radio5 a bloke from the Express seems to think Sidebottom is definitely going to be struggling for fitness for the next match. Not sure whether he's talking out of his arse, but must mean there's a fair chance both Jones and Freddie will be back for the next match....

 

[zaremba]

I fear that when/if Jones returns, he could be exposed as actually being not quite as good as we remember him being, well though he played in three and a half Tests in 2005. The hype to achievement ratio can rarely have been this pronounced for a fast bowler aged nearly 30.

That's my fear. My hope is that he can find pace, accuracy and reverse swing. England could have done with more of these things today.

 

[Manee]

I fear that when/if Jones returns, he could be exposed as actually being not quite as good as we remember him being, well though he played in three and a half Tests in 2005. The hype to achievement ratio can rarely have been this pronounced for a fast bowler aged nearly 30.

That's my fear. My hope is that he can find pace, accuracy and reverse swing. England could have done with more of these things today.

He has been taking them by the bucketful in domestic cricket and has been going in the high 80s in limited overs cricket covered by Skysports. I think England should have him back in the team, but for whom is a question I cannot be arsed to answer this late.

 

[Burgey]

Went to bed early last night so didn't see much of this at all.

Obviously some great concentration fromt eh batsmen, but how was the bowling and fielding? Any/ many chances go down, etc?

How was Anderson? I'm re-reading Gideon Haigh's book on the last Ashes series and he made some pretty deprecating remarks about him back then - I'm wondering did he bowl well in conditions that didn't offer much today? Seems like he's improving, but is he a/ the long term answer for England?