England v South Africa, 4th ODI, Lords, 2 September, 2012

He's incapable these days, Red.

skully wrote:He's incapable these days, Red.

Suck, suck, suck.

Still pretending to have me on ignore after your melt down last month?

Surely it's a bit premature to write a cricketer off on the basis of his first three international ODIs?

Many are slow starters.

My own observation was merely that maybe the SAf second-string were not quite as good as I thought. Which if true was more my mistake than their shortcomings. McLaren, Tsotsobe, Elgar, but perhaps most of all, Faf are not (not yet, at least) matching up to their Test "counterparts". That may change.

Parnell hasn't been bad. Though he continues to look a bit of a work in progress, still on the way to fruition.

Oddly enough, the much-maligned Peterson hasn't done that badly. I suppose that might partly based on an optical illusion, since the base of expectation of him was pretty low (and SAf perhaps don't really have another world class spinner to eclipse him, with apologies to the ever-willing and not bad Tahir). He can hit the ball, too.

PeterCS wrote:Surely it's a bit premature to write a cricketer off on the basis of his first three international ODIs?

Many are slow starters.

My own observation was merely that maybe the SAf second-string were not quite as good as I thought. Which if true was more my mistake than their shortcomings. McLaren, Tsotsobe, Elgar, but perhaps most of all, Faf are not (not yet, at least) matching up to their Test "counterparts". That may change.

Parnell hasn't been bad. Though he continues to look a bit of a work in progress, still on the way to fruition.

Oddly enough, the much-maligned Peterson hasn't done that badly. I suppose that might partly based on an optical illusion, since the base of expectation of him was pretty low (and SAf perhaps don't really have another world class spinner to eclipse him, with apologies to the ever-willing and not bad Tahir). He can hit the ball, too.

At last a sensible post. The point is, as I said before the ODI series started, is that Elgar is more suited to the FC game. As he can't get a run I the test team the selectors wanted to have a look at him in international conditions. I would also suggest you have a look at Tsotsobe's ODI figures for the last could of years.

Elgar is shit. That is all.

skully wrote:Elgar is shit. That is all.

Well reasoned. Any second now you will accuse him of being on rags. That is your normal line of debate.

taipan wrote:...

... I would also suggest you have a look at Tsotsobe's ODI figures for the last could of years.

I'm too lazy/busy to do the filtering at the mo, but he has an overall ODI bowling av of 22, which is pretty good.

PeterCS wrote:

taipan wrote:...

... I would also suggest you have a look at Tsotsobe's ODI figures for the last could of years.

I'm too lazy/busy to do the filtering at the mo, but he has an overall ODI bowling av of 22, which is pretty good.

That's my point. He's not second string. Just battling on the slow wickets prepared for this series.

Is Rilee Rossouw in the squad? (and in the T20 WC squad)

His record suggests if he might be pushing for contention too, esp in the shorter forms. (And all the more so if Elgar is not temperamentally suited to whacking the ball around.)

PeterCS wrote:Is Rilee Rossouw in the squad? (and in the T20 WC squad)

His record suggests if he might be pushing for contention too, esp in the shorter forms. (And all the more so if Elgar is not temperamentally suited to whacking the ball around.)

Not in the ODI squad, would have to recheck the t20 squad.

taipan wrote:

PeterCS wrote:Surely it's a bit premature to write a cricketer off on the basis of his first three international ODIs?

Many are slow starters.

My own observation was merely that maybe the SAf second-string were not quite as good as I thought. Which if true was more my mistake than their shortcomings. McLaren, Tsotsobe, Elgar, but perhaps most of all, Faf are not (not yet, at least) matching up to their Test "counterparts". That may change.

Parnell hasn't been bad. Though he continues to look a bit of a work in progress, still on the way to fruition.

Oddly enough, the much-maligned Peterson hasn't done that badly. I suppose that might partly based on an optical illusion, since the base of expectation of him was pretty low (and SAf perhaps don't really have another world class spinner to eclipse him, with apologies to the ever-willing and not bad Tahir). He can hit the ball, too.

At last a sensible post. The point is, as I said before the ODI series started, is that Elgar is more suited to the FC game. As he can't get a run I the test team the selectors wanted to have a look at him in international conditions. I would also suggest you have a look at Tsotsobe's ODI figures for the last could of years.

The point is he's playing ODIs and so that's what he gets judged on at this juncture.

Doubt Roussouw is in the squad for T20s. Think Levi probably is though. Slow pitches probably haven't helped SA quicks but Tsotsobe has seemed to lose some form.

Elgar reminds me of a left-handed Peter Forrest

Brass Monkey wrote:Elgar reminds me of a left-handed Peter Forrest

poor Elgar...that is almost an elegy

He bats like an ele-phant.

Those words are hardly elegant.

I thought them eloquent.

Certainly not enigmatic, or varied.

And more dim clod than Nimrod.

I'm not writing him off, but then I'm not writing Forrest off. Both have been pretty shitehouse so far. Certainly, I wouldn't be happy with such plodding in the England side. Hence my castigation of numbers 1, 2 and 3 in our set-up.

I calls it as I sees it. He did nothing to make me think he's South Africa's next genius batsman. If he turns out to be the next Graeme Pollock, I will be the first to say I misjudged based on early viewings.

Brass Monkey wrote:I'm not writing him off, but then I'm not writing Forrest off. Both have been pretty shitehouse so far. Certainly, I wouldn't be happy with such plodding in the England side. Hence my castigation of numbers 1, 2 and 3 in our set-up.

Exactly Dan. Which is why I have been saying for years he is more suited to the longer form..