South Africa v England, 2nd Test, Cape Town, 3-7 January, 2020

4/178 when sleep calls.

England 221-6.

Australia 283-3.


Australia's score is exactly where England's should be today. And it shows - in both columns - why the Poms continue to stand at about #6 in the world in Tests, instead of somewhere higher.

We’d be number 9 if it wasn’t for overseas batsmen’s incompetence against anyone who can put a swinging Dukes ball in vaguely the right place.

Broad needs moving down to number 11. And to be told if he doesn’t sort his batting out he’s out of the side.

lardbucket wrote:Does Root still merit mention with Kohli, Smith, and Williamson?

As I said a while back, he’s not even the Andy Murray of this particular big four any more. More equivalent to a talented underachiever like Zverev or Dimitrov.

beamer wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Does Root still merit mention with Kohli, Smith, and Williamson?

As I said a while back, he’s not even the Andy Murray of this particular big four any more. More equivalent to a talented underachiever like Zverev or Dimitrov.

Can we now promote Labuschagne into the big four?

Basil wrote:

beamer wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Does Root still merit mention with Kohli, Smith, and Williamson?

As I said a while back, he’s not even the Andy Murray of this particular big four any more. More equivalent to a talented underachiever like Zverev or Dimitrov.

Can we now promote Labuschagne into the big four?

You can’t have two from the same country, so he’s forever Wawrinka...

We’ll see over the next year or two whether he’s a flash in the pan.

beamer wrote:

Basil wrote:

beamer wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Does Root still merit mention with Kohli, Smith, and Williamson?

As I said a while back, he’s not even the Andy Murray of this particular big four any more. More equivalent to a talented underachiever like Zverev or Dimitrov.

Can we now promote Labuschagne into the big four?

You can’t have two from the same country, so he’s forever Wawrinka...

We’ll see over the next year or two whether he’s a flash in the pan.

Agree with you Beams. He is certainly enjoying a purple patch. BUT it is on our pitches against sub standard attacks. He was good in England but no world beater. Loosechange's technique, like Smith's is not good on the eye. However he was worked like a loon on knowing where his off stump is and is good on the back and front foot.

It will be interesting to see how he goes in the series v the Bangers. This series is our only Test ahead of the next home season. Apparently* he is already setting himself for Oz's next tour of BanIndia.

By his own standards Smith is in a funk. He has dealt poorly with the short stuff from Wagner. His lack of intent early in his innings has not been seen here since Koala Snr. Yesterday it took him 39 balls to get off the mark. Just not good enough.

Interestingly, Warner has been ordinary against NZ. Their one decent bowler in Wagner has found him out even on our flat pitches. Without checking the records I think his last Test ton overseas was v Bangladesh. The goldfish who run CA and their media flunkeys will have the poc inked in for the tour. With passport in hand he is as useless as a Marsh.

As for Root, he fully deserved to be in the big four. He does however seem unsuited for captaincy. What was carefree exuberance in his batting now just seems carelessness. I thought he fought well yesterday without looking in.

Pope aside the middle order and tail effort from the Poms was typically deficient. Buttler should be put on the same bus as Bairstow. Agree about the call to bat Broad at 11. Anderson has no ability whatsoever but always tries his best. Lady Di bats with the confidence of a soldier with PTSD. His tendency to bat next to the square leg ump sends the worst signals to his team mates.

Jimmy is more than capable of hanging around and supporting a capable batsman. Whereas Sturat has seemingly just given up on his batting. While 10 and jack shouldn’t be the focus of our batting failures, everyone has to take some responsibility.

If we lose this 4-0 the captaincy will surely come under serious debate.

6 of England's top 7 made 29 or more but didn't convert (except Pope - well done him).

Simply unacceptable in Test cricket.

skully wrote:6 of England's top 7 made 29 or more but didn't convert (except Pope - well done him).

Simply unacceptable in Test park cricket.

EFA.

QdK and a decent tail aside, the Yarp top order is filled with undistinguished old boys. It is difficult to see a Saffie lead being greater than 100 so the Poms will still be right in this game

skully wrote:6 of England's top 7 made 29 or more but didn't convert (except Pope - well done him).

Simply unacceptable in Test cricket.

I just don’t see a solution to this in the near future, given we have a generation brought up on T20 alongside red ball cricket scheduled during the barely playable outer edges of the English season. The patience and technique to make Test centuries just isn’t something you can develop from that background.

It wasn’t so long ago that every other batsman (and even keeper) we picked made a hundred on debut. Now if someone makes one in his first 10 Tests he’s in for the foreseeable future. That frustrating generation of batsmen who did just enough to keep averaging above 40? Now 30’s a benchmark of almost-competence that will buy you a Test career in the top order.

I’m still tempted by the idea of just sending the ODI side out there to slog the f*ck out of it.

horace wrote:QdK and a decent tail aside, the Yarp top order is filled with undistinguished old boys. It is difficult to see a Saffie lead being greater than 100 so the Poms will still be right in this game

Agree, predicting four nil at this juncture is a bit premature.

beamer wrote:

skully wrote:6 of England's top 7 made 29 or more but didn't convert (except Pope - well done him).

Simply unacceptable in Test cricket.

I just don’t see a solution to this in the near future, given we have a generation brought up on T20 alongside red ball cricket scheduled during the barely playable outer edges of the English season. The patience and technique to make Test centuries just isn’t something you can develop from that background.

It wasn’t so long ago that every other batsman (and even keeper) we picked made a hundred on debut. Now if someone makes one in his first 10 Tests he’s in for the foreseeable future. That frustrating generation of batsmen who did just enough to keep averaging above 40? Now 30’s a benchmark of almost-competence that will buy you a Test career in the top order.

I’m still tempted by the idea of just sending the ODI side out there to slog the f*ck out of it.

Yeah, short attention span certainly seems to be an increasing problem for some Test cricketers. For Aus, both Wade and Head were guilty today.

Broad strikes early, unconvincing start from Inter it seems. Another great catch from Stokes to get Hamza.

SA's batting woes continuing.

Markram can average below 30 for well over a year without getting dropped unless he punches a wall injuring himself. Same with Elgar who's been averaging 25 in the same period. But no whispering campaign laden with innuendo against these two unlike Bavuma.

'tis the afrikaan way.

Aditya wrote:Markram can average below 30 for well over a year without getting dropped unless he punches a wall injuring himself. Same with Elgar who's been averaging 25 in the same period. But no whispering campaign laden with innuendo against these two unlike Bavuma.

'tis the afrikaan way.

Bavuma has only scored one ton in a lot of tests. It's hard to justify his position in the team. Agree that Elgar seems to have a bit of a charmed run. Can see why Markram has been persisted with because he's young and he's demonstrated that he's talented with fast scoring ability and great stroke-play. He played some good innings against Australia in the sandpaper series.

Remember that QDK has been dropped before.

Opening is a different kettle of fish to batting in the middle order. If you average 30 at the top of the order that’s just about respectable in this day and age, and there’s no guarantee you will be able to find alternatives who can improve on that.

The “average average” for Test openers over the past decade is 35, so that perhaps is the benchmark for “good enough”. Although that probably varies depending on the conditions a player faces most often (for example, opening against the swinging Dukes in England is very difficult).

In 2018 the openers’ combined average fell to 28.65. 2000 was the only year of modern times when it was lower.

Geebers. I hope Langer doesn't see those numbers. If so he will open with Mitch Marsh.

horace wrote:Geebers. I hope Langer doesn't see those numbers. If so he will open with Mitch Marsh.

Those kind of wildcard picks can actually be worth a go. I’ve argued for a while that picking specialist openers without another string to their bow these days is potentially a waste of a place in the side.

horace wrote:Geebers. I hope Langer doesn't see those numbers. If so he will open with Mitch Marsh.

Except that he would average lower as an opener.

Red wrote:

horace wrote:Geebers. I hope Langer doesn't see those numbers. If so he will open with Mitch Marsh.

Except that he would average lower as an opener.

Lower than 26? He already holds the worst record of Number 6s with 30+ Tests. As an opener, he could eventually hold the worst record as an opener as well.

With Cam Green slotting in to No.6, Langer will prolly want Marsh as an opener because of his all round skills.