It's been over 100 years...

taipan wrote:

holcs wrote:
taips - I take your points on the side, but Ntini was in better nick than now, and Pollock was still quality back then. Steyn I will give you was raw, and AB and Rudolph newbies.

Was more baiting the trap than anything else.

#

Aye. But there were valid points in there also.

Amla will get worked over a treat over here BTW I reckon!

holcs wrote:

taipan wrote:

holcs wrote:
taips - I take your points on the side, but Ntini was in better nick than now, and Pollock was still quality back then. Steyn I will give you was raw, and AB and Rudolph newbies.

Was more baiting the trap than anything else.

#

Aye. But there were valid points in there also.

Amla will get worked over a treat over here BTW I reckon!

That's why it works so well.

Any decent quickie with a bit of swing will work Amla over. Ahve been saying thet for years. But he has tightened up a bit. The backlift isn't as bad.

Fearing we'll feed more fodder for Smith unless Sidey can do a Hoggard for us.

Interestingly looking at the 2003 SA tour here, remember Bazza Richards telling us they were the best team to come out of SA for years?

Look at some of the pap in the 1st test FFS (granted Kallis was missing)

*GC Smith
HH Gibbs
G Kirsten
HH Dippenaar
JA Rudolph
+MV Boucher
SM Pollock
RJ Peterson
D Pretorius
M Ntini
CM Willoughby

JKLever wrote:Fearing we'll feed more fodder for Smith unless Sidey can do a Hoggard for us.

Interestingly looking at the 2003 SA tour here, remember Bazza Richards telling us they were the best team to come out of SA for years?

Look at some of the pap in the 1st test FFS (granted Kallis was missing)

*GC Smith
HH Gibbs
G Kirsten
HH Dippenaar
JA Rudolph
+MV Boucher
SM Pollock
RJ Peterson
D PretoriusM Ntini
CM Willoughby

These were just gashlords!!!

Their batting lineup in 2003 was stronger than it is now. Their bowling was crap, however.

JKLever wrote:Fearing we'll feed more fodder for Smith unless Sidey can do a Hoggard for us.

Interestingly looking at the 2003 SA tour here, remember Bazza Richards telling us they were the best team to come out of SA for years?

Look at some of the pap in the 1st test FFS (granted Kallis was missing)

*GC Smith
HH Gibbs
G Kirsten
HH Dippenaar
JA Rudolph
+MV Boucher
SM Pollock
RJ Peterson
D Pretorius
M Ntini
CM Willoughby

I can't recall any Saffie calling that.

Should still have walked the series though.

taipan wrote:
I can't recall any Saffie calling that.

Should still have walked the series though.

Richards did a pre-series talk with Nicholarse about how great they were

Agree with you, we must've fielded 4 different bowling attacks in 4 different tests!

JKLever wrote:

taipan wrote:
I can't recall any Saffie calling that.

Should still have walked the series though.

Richards did a pre-series talk with Nicholarse about how great they were

Agree with you, we must've fielded 4 different bowling attacks in 4 different tests!

As I said, no Saffie said that

Barry Richards = Peter Roebuck then?

Wasn't it around 2003 that Roebuck accused Flintoff of being a chucker? F*cking twat....

JKLever wrote:Barry Richards = Peter Roebuck then?

Well Richards is married to a Aussie, more like Greig tbh.

Didn't we field an aged Bicknell, and Kirtley in that series?

holcs wrote:Didn't we field an aged Bicknell, and Kirtley in that series?

Yes and yes. Both of them actually bowled us to test wins- Kirtley at Trent Bridge, and Bicknell at The Oval. I remember the Headingley test in that series being one of the biggest debacles in English cricket since the late 80's.

Willoughby's tearing it up in CC this year!

Kirtley,Bicknell & Kabir Ali topped the bowling averages - FFS!!!
http://uk.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/2003/RSA_IN_ENG/STATS/RSA_IN_ENG_JUN-SEP2003_TEST_AVS.html

JKLever wrote:Kirtley,Bicknell & Kabir Ali topped the bowling averages - FFS!!!
http://uk.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/2003/RSA_IN_ENG/STATS/RSA_IN_ENG_JUN-SEP2003_TEST_AVS.html

Jimmy - 15 wickets at 40.

Worse - Fred 10 at 59

Although the stats don't reflect it - this was the season he started to kick on as a bowler...

Actually, his main contributions in that series were with the bat.

Henry wrote:Actually, his main contributions in that series were with the bat.

Hence the.... 'although the stats don't show it' remark

Anyone notice the fact that everyone of our top 6 scored 100's in that series?

That will never happen this time around! And apparently this lot were/are better??

We still miss Tresco and his S/R

His 219 in 2003 and 180 in 2004/5 were pretty much series defining moments...