• 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.

Did South Africa choke?

Furball

Evil Scotsman
I'd like to see more replays of Berhardien's drop of Elliot (calling it a drop is generous as he didn't get any hands onit), as although Duminy is certainly guilty of a massive brain fade it looked to me on replay that Berhardien had his eyes solely on the ball, misses it and is then run into by Duminy.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'd like to see more replays of Berhardien's drop of Elliot (calling it a drop is generous as he didn't get any hands onit), as although Duminy is certainly guilty of a massive brain fade it looked to me on replay that Berhardien had his eyes solely on the ball, misses it and is then run into by Duminy.
Would've had Duminy running towards him at 50 mph in the corner of his eye
 

GotSpin

Hall of Fame Member
A fielding mistake or two and a bad shot doesnt equal a choke. Have you guys even seen what South África has done in other knock outs?

I would love to continue great choke label but a less than flawless performance in the field doesnt satisfy the requirements of a choke .
 

anil1405

International Captain
This is really not anything to do with SA and choking. I constantly hear about how a player just saved 4 runs and it is something that 80 percent of people who field in the position would have stopped. From what I can tell, if you dive you save 4 runs but it is just a regulation stop otherwise which did not save 4 runs (?).
80% of fast bowlers who are injured wouldn't dive at the third man boundary to stop the ball that is coming from around 50 mts distance. I might not even expect 20% of injured bowlers to do that. Anyway my point is the amount of intensity Proteas showed in the field yesterday was commendable. And yes I might not expect many teams to have saved the amount of runs Proteas did yesterday taking into account the ground size and the hostile atmosphere.
 

gvenkat

State Captain
these are **** posts
No one is taking the credit away from NZL. If a team repeats the same things again and again under crunch situations, What do you really call that? I myself I'm conflicted and hence the thread. No need to get all potty mouthed. :)
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
We can all unanimously agree that it wasn't a choke, but it doesn't matter. That's how it's going to be remembered. It just fits the pre-existing narrative too well.
 

viriya

International Captain
Could be wrong here, but did Kane not have Faf plum when they were scoring very slowly, but decided not to review it? They made their fair share of mistakes as well, heck imagine the abuse Ross Taylor would have got if Steyn had delivered in that final over.

I am adamant they have choked horribly/hilariously before especially in 2011, but today its a little harsh on them.

Also unlike in 2011, when they were a much superior side to NZ which made the choke even more horrid, this time round, they are evenly matched, heck a combined team from both would have more NZ players.


Mc Cullum
Guptil
Kane
ABDV
Miller
Corey
Ronchi
Southee
Boult
Tahir
Abbot
Faf over Kane (Kane has been Amla-like)
Morkel over Southee (obvious)
 

viriya

International Captain
Don't know if this has been said yet, but I think one thing South Africa have to do is not to let the losses hurt them so much. That's the only way they can overcome the pressure in crunch situations and big matches, and win. They should not make these games a matter of life and death the way they do. Just see how devastated AB was at post match presentation and press conference. Take a leaf from Dhoni's book.
Agreed.. they hyped this way too much that I'm worried that those players would never be the same.
 

viriya

International Captain
yeah there are only two other sides who could have withstood the intensity on display last night and they play a semi tomorrow.
SL could've.. if the match was played in the subcontinent somewhere and everyone was fit..

So basically I'm saying they couldn't have.
 

karan316

State Vice-Captain
SA batting: After a couple of early blows, it was exceptional, they way Faf absorbed all the pressure and the rest of the batsmen chipped in, it was a really good performance. And NZ would have had a lot of problems if the game would have been a full one, their main bowlers had hardly any overs left and SA batsmen were scoring at a brisk pace, they could have got plenty of runs in the last 10 overs, 350-370 was definitely on. Rain did affect SA's batting plans.

SA bowling: As usual, Morkel and Tahir looked the most threatening, Steyn and Philander are pretty much hit or miss in ODIs, don't know why Steyn is rated so high as an ODI bowler, he is an average bowler in limited overs cricket. Plus, SA doesn't have a dependable 5th bowling option. This was their main issue right from the start of the tournament. And yes, Steyn didn't bowl badly under pressure, he gets whacked every now and then. People shouldn't say that he failed because he couldn't handle the pressure.

SA fielding: Some of the fielding errors by SA were not because they were under pressure. It had rained heavily, their fielding was excellent if you consider the condition of the outfield. They players were pretty fearless and putting their body on the line. Its difficult to field in a wet outfield. I feel other teams would have failed badly in the field in similar conditions.

I don't feel SA choked or if their players crumbled under pressure. They performed exceptionally well. And secondly, the knockout games also involve a bit of luck factor if we have two evenly matched teams.SA played like a champion team, they should be proud of the way they have performed over the years.

There are some legendary actors around who haven't got an Oscar, does it really matter? Legends don't need an approval from anyone, they are just there, right up.

WC is special, but its not a measure of a team's success.

I wish my friend Dawood could join this thread. He would written a nice poem on SA. :ph34r:
 
Last edited:

MyLord

School Boy/Girl Captain
A choke is losing despite being in a comfortable position to win purely due to demons in the mind.

Where South Africa ever in a dominant position in the match? No. Did they implode? No. Did they turn a winning position into a loss? No - match was fairly evenly poised all day till the end and SAF were switched on and completive till the penultimate ball of the match. How is this a choke?

If the question is did fumbles in the field happen due to the intense pressure situation? The yes it did happen - both by NA and SAF. If the standard is that SAF make zero fielding mistakes while a losing high pressure match for it to be classified as a non-choke - well then thats just stupid.
 
Last edited:

Le Mac

Banned
The reality is that both sides choked. Just that SA choked more. They both did their best to throw the game away after being in a dominant position. NZ won by default. No matter who they play in the final they will get pounded. The only difference is that if they play Australia there won't be any lube used.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
They both did their best to throw the game away after being in a dominant position..
SA were never in a dominant position for any extended period during the chase. For 3/4 of the match NZ were ahead. The only time it looked in SA's favour was when AB was batting and just before the chase began.

Had NZ lost it would have been a mini choke as they were extremely comfortable during Anderson and Elliott's partnership.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
SA were never in a dominant position for any extended period during the chase. For 3/4 of the match NZ were ahead. The only time it looked in SA's favour was when AB was batting and just before the chase began.

Had NZ lost it would have been a mini choke as they were extremely comfortable during Anderson and Elliott's partnership.
I don't agree. South Africa clawed their way back into the game and although the partnership between Eliott and Anderson was excellent, they didn't score quickly enough to really put South Africa to bed, they were always just about clinging on with the run rate (not that I'm criticising them - it would have been easy to panic or try and stay too far ahead of the game and play a daft shot, which Anderson did when he got out), and credit due to them because virtually every time I said to myself "New Zealand really could do with a boundary here" then the next ball disappeared over the rope, but I wouldn't exactly call the chase comfortable, and in fact I'd say that South Africa got themselves into a position where they probably ought to have won the game. Particularly when you leave them needing 12 off the last over and then 10 off 4 balls with the number 8 batsman on strike.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
SOrry, extremely comfortable is the wrong words. What I meant to say is that SA were never in a dominant position, and most of the match NZ were slightly ahead.
 

Top