South Africa v WI, 2nd Test, Cape Town, 2-6 Jan

Will there be another on the cards?

Sure hope so ... if only for the entertainment a deranged Bliks can provide us all

I like how our :affraid:s in synchrony.

Go WIndies!

SA is in serious trouble with none of its batsmen aside from Kallis having a technique of international standard.

Red wrote:SA is in serious trouble with none of its batsmen aside from Kallis having a technique of international standard.

That makes them even with the Windies.

The Windies seem to be unearthing some good young quicks again which is exciting news.

JGK wrote:

Red wrote:SA is in serious trouble with none of its batsmen aside from Kallis having a technique of international standard.

That makes them even with the Windies.

Except the Windies have a more venomous pace attack.

No, not really. SAfrica's bowlers are a notch above the WIndies.

Gibbs dropped- always thought he was a top notch player (albeit a bit dim) but apparently has been struggling the past few years. Certainly far better than Smith.

The Windies batting bar Chanderpaul is as weak as a blind, de-clawed kitten. Shouldn't think they'll trouble Safrica for the rest of the series.

South African batting does seem to be in a dire state at the moment when McKenzie and Dippenaar are still considered the two best batsmen outside of the test team. McKenzie is a decent player. Not much clue against spin but classy against pace. Dippenaar always looks decent when he plays his shots. Doesn't play them much though at international level.

If you look at some of the current lineup- Smith, Amla, Prince........Are there any decent batting coaches in SA at the moment? Three of the dodgiest techniques going around. May be safe to say that Graeme Smith has well and truly been worked out at international level. And Herschelle Gibbs has completely lost it at test level. Strange considering he still piles on the runs in ODI cricket, and previously had an excellent test record.

At the moment in South Africa, Kallis is the best batsman, with daylight second, and AB De Villiers third. When you think about it, South Africa haven't had many world class batsmen at all since re-admission- Cullinan, Kirsten, Kallis, and Gibbs are the only four I can think of in the last 16 years. They've had some decent bats like Cronje, Rhodes, and Hudson, but only those four could really go down as world class.

Prince is quite good actually. Better than ABdV currently and for the last 3 years atleast.

Henry wrote:The Windies seem to be unearthing some good young quicks again which is exciting news.

Are they tall ?


In fact I was thinking if ICL could send a team to WI and just pick up some tall youngster from Jamaica or elsewhere, give him a contract and introduce him into international cricket right away.

AB's record as an opener is appalling (averaging 9 during his last stint) so I wouldn't rate him. Even Cronje, Rhodes and Hudson were all just plodders while Cullinan was severely embarrassed by Shane Warne.

It's hard to imagine how a country which purports to be a major cricketing nation selects losers like Smith though (and makes him captain) and persists with guys like Prince and Amla who lack ability and technique.

Gibbs has always had technical problems despite his talent, while Smith is arguably one of the worst ever test batsmen - no technique, no shots - no clue!!!.

And WI have Gayle in addition to Chanderpaul. At least in him they have a skipper who can lead from the front.

Kallis is a (rather dull) phenomenon though. Better than any English batsman in modern times. Apparently Gibbs only averaged 26 over his last 26 tests- deserved the drop you have to say.

What South Africa were famous for since re-entry was their lower order scoring almost as many runs as their top order with a whole trough of decent semi all-rounders (Mcmillan, Symcox, Matthews, Boje, Pollock, Richardson, Hall, Boucher etc.) who were all bloody infuriating as you'd get them five down for not too many half the time and they would then double their score. That lower order isn't that special these days which accentuates the limitations of the top order.

Are they tall ?

It's a bit of a myth that all of the Windies' great pacemen of the 70's and 80's were 6'5+. Only Garner(6'10), Croft(6'7), Ambrose(6"8)and Walsh(6'5) were exceptionally tall. Holding was around 6 foot, Marshall was about 5'9, Roberts was about 6 foot....

I remember that lower order.

Australia and England have advantages though in that there are decent schools with coaches and facilities. RSA's education system apparently is in a mess, hence their players emerge from schools that don't offer coaching etc.

And their head coach Mickey Mouse Arthur is a goose who doesn't understand technique.

I'm still flummoxed though that they select someone like Smith at 22 who isn't even worth a place in the team - can't bat, bowl, field, or captain for that matter. It only took Mr Cool Gayle one match to show him up and demonstrate how a team which actually likes you can play for you.

What South Africa were famous for since re-entry was their lower order scoring almost as many runs as their top order with a whole trough of decent semi all-rounders (Mcmillan, Symcox, Matthews, Boje, Pollock, Richardson, Hall, Boucher etc.) who were all bloody infuriating as you'd get them five down for not too many half the time and they would then double their score. That lower order isn't that special these days which accentuates the limitations of the top order.

That's true, but the good teams like Australia realised that the lower order was relying a lot on the opposition bowlers thinking the job was done and then cashing in on some loose stuff. All the Aussies did was make sure they bowled as well to the lower order as they had to the top order and South Africa had nothing. Typically, teams like England let them off the hook through laziness.

A team FULL of average players should still be a team full of average players, if you know what I mean.

Holding 6'3
Bishop 6'7
Patterson 6'7
Symonds 6'5 (not a fast bowler)

Smith has been found out, but he isn't that bad, to be overshadowed by Gayle. Gayle did nothing in he 1st innings except slog and could have been out 5 times. WOuld have been in another day.

Marshall was the exception being a sub six footer.

BTW I remember those lower order Saffas giving the Aussies some trouble too, especially Symcox and Klusener was dynamite in one dayers.

I'm wondering if Gayle has the potential to be a future C. Lloyd ??

But his trysts with betting mafia along with Samuels isn't very encouraging. Clive Lloyd didn't have such temptations during his playing days.

Gayle is a gun and an inspiration. And how does someone who has been found out continue to get a game?

The Aussies and poms go into test cricket technically equipped so I don't why the Saffas think they can get away without observing the basics.

Since Re-Admission, South Africa's batting was at it's strongest around 99-00 when Cullinan was world class, Kallis was world class, Kirsten was world class, Gibbs was coming of age, and Cronje was making useful contributions.

Cronje's record is pretty poor though and he wasn't even opening. How would he have coped with the new ball?

Cullinan was useless against the Aussies though with Warne just having to turn up to dismiss him.

Thing I like about Gayle though, despite some inconsistency, is that he can destroy an attack.

In contrast Smith has no shots and would have to edge his way to any decent score he makes.