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

WIFAN wrote:Rally round the West Indies

we need a new opener with a decent FC record.

Basil wrote:Hang on, Isn't Rudiolph effectively barred from selection by virtue of his contract with Yorkshire?

kkf wrote:

WIFAN wrote:Rally round the West Indies

we need a new opener with a decent FC record.

The thing is we don't have one. That's why we keep on bringing back Smith and Ganga. We'll drop them they go back to First class cricket and then they will bat out of their skins till the point where we have to bring them back then they will reach the test level and fail. Our next hope seems to be Bharath who is a teenager.

Red wrote: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.

Henry wrote:

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.

HH_pink wrote:

Red wrote: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.

You don't necessarily need all of that. You need passion to play the game, end of. Players from the subcontinent rarely receive any coaching in school - in fact schools rarely have regular organized sport.

bliksem wrote:Yes. Drop him on 23, 58 and 112 please.

Red wrote:Smith should be banished for life; has single-handedly wrecked SA cricket.

Red wrote:Smith should be banished for life; has single-handedly wrecked SA cricket.

Red wrote:Arthur should go too.

The way SA is going it will become a minnow sooner rather than later.