South Africa v Australia, 1st Test, Cape Town, 9-13 November, 2011

Well that performance was a farking pile of complete and utter sh!t.

Glad it happened when Clarke was skipper tho. Suck sh!t dickhead.

He did score a century, in fairness.

And didn't hunt red ink.

Australia has watched in gaping-mouthed astonishment as its once-mighty cricket team has been bowled out for under 100, on three separate occasions – 88 all out against Pakistan in Leeds in July 2010, the Boxing Day MCG abomination against England (98 all out), and now 47 at Newlands. Three times in 12 Tests. They had posted a two-figure score just once in their previous 277 Tests over 25 years. They had not been skittled for under 100 three times in two years since 1887 and 1888.

It has seen its cricket team win a Test match – in their previous four series, they won three, drew three and lost six. The previous time they won three or fewer games in a run of 12 Tests was between December 1987 and June 1989.

The absolute fact is that on current form, JUST ONE (Clarke) of the 'Strine team would make it into an England Test XI.

The rest - it has to be said - are pure sh*te.

How the "mighty" have fallen ..... and how far!

Red wrote:

taipan wrote:

Red wrote:Weirdest test match for some time. Shocking second innings batting from the Aussies. Shocking first innings collapse from the Saffers but they had the last laugh!

So no congratulations?

Ok congratulations then. Pretty amazing to win from being in such a parlous position and your hero Philander played no small part in the win.

Anyway a big win for test cricket. Nothing can beat a match where all the various vicissitudes keep fans on the edge of their seats.

And a thumbs down to starting a test mid-week. As mentioned the other day, there's always a chance that the weekend crowds don't even get to see a ball bowled.

Jeez red, thanks. And it almost sounded genuine.

And by the way, it was me who made the comment about the match not reaching the weekend. But no matter.

Merlin wrote:The absolute fact is that on current form, JUST ONE (Clarke) of the 'Strine team would make it into an England Test XI.

The rest - it has to be said - are pure sh*te.

How the "mighty" have fallen ..... and how far!

I personally don't think so. I reckon they're prone to more f*ck ups, but they'll be competitive in every series they play IMO.

Possibly the most freakish thought is this: They're most likely the 3rd best Test team.

Merlin wrote:The absolute fact is that on current form, JUST ONE (Clarke) of the 'Strine team would make it into an England Test XI.

The rest - it has to be said - are pure sh*te.

How the "mighty" have fallen ..... and how far!

Clarke might make the SA team at 6 if we decide to jettison Prince.

We all talk too soon sometimes (if you read this thread ...), but you'z overreacting a tad bit there surely, Merloes.

(Though not as much as Zim.)


To talk of pure shite is a bit of a contradiction in terms anyway.


Let's see how the rest of the series pans out, before panning the Aussies as you (both) have done. With a big Le Creuset. And the rolling pin too.

Will be interesting too to see how the winning team responds to emerging from those insane twists and turns.

A big opportunity to flourish in confidence and make giant strides, you would think. If you can rise from the cesspit smelling of roses, anything seems possible.

PeterCS wrote:We all talk too soon sometimes (if you read this thread ...), but you'z overreacting a tad bit there surely, Merloes.

(Though not as much as Zim.)

To talk of pure shite is a bit of a contradiction in terms anyway.

Let's see how the rest of the series pans out, before panning the Aussies as you (both) have done. With a big Le Creuset. And the rolling pin too.

Not so Petey.

To paraphrase the Monkeh's earlier post :

... in their previous four series, they won three, drew three and lost six....

The Strines are presently bordering on the precipice of a sh*te mountain, with one foot firmly in it.

I repeat - only Clarke would merit a place in the England test team right now - perhaps with the exception of Watto, the rest(whilst I agree may well be scrappers) are certainly a bunch of 2nd XI triers when compared to their illustrious predecessors.

I too look forward to the rest of this series, but frankly don't hold out much hope for the Strinnoes - though 47 a/o ought to serve as a cornerstone.

Re. a "freaky third" in the table .... nah Monkeh ... I'd put them more like a close 5th ... behind England, Saffers, India and Pakistan.

Well basically Smith, Amla, Kallis and AB would walk into the England top 6. So where does that leave Clarke?

Who said test cricket was dying?

Smith - No - we've got two more than decent openers who've strung a few century partnerships together of late. No need for another left handed opener.
Amla - Yes - for certain.
Kallis - No ... too slow and getting on a bit - no room for red-inkers.
AB - maybe - if IRB fails to deliver!

Brass Monkey wrote:

Merlin wrote:The absolute fact is that on current form, JUST ONE (Clarke) of the 'Strine team would make it into an England Test XI.

The rest - it has to be said - are pure sh*te.

How the "mighty" have fallen ..... and how far!

I personally don't think so. I reckon they're prone to more f*ck ups, but they'll be competitive in every series they play IMO.

Possibly the most freakish thought is this: They're most likely the 3rd best Test team.

Don't think India have fallen behind despite their crapularity in England. So 4th at best, and Pakistan, assuming they are giving their best efforts, would have more than a shot against them as well.

There's a lot of dross around though, Sri Lanka's attack without Chuck, Joe and the Slinger is barely county standard, NZ are no longer punching above their weight and the West Indies' revival is a slow one despite a few more promising signs recently.

Merlin wrote:Smith - No - we've got two more than decent openers who've strung a few century partnerships together of late. No need for another left handed opener.
Amla - Yes - for certain.
Kallis - No ... too slow and getting on a bit - no room for red-inkers.
AB - maybe - if IRB fails to deliver!

Fark me, the poms are coming over all bannie.

First Trev reckons Jimmikins is better than Steyn.

Now this PMSL

I think the future of Australian Test Cricket lays with the new selection panel. They can go one of two ways. Start making some bold but necessary cuts or revert to type & just keep making excuses for retaining the same dead wood ala Hilditch & co.

Big Dog wrote:I think the future of Australian Test Cricket lays with the new selection panel. They can go one of two ways. Start making some bold but necessary cuts or revert to type & just keep making excuses for retaining the same dead wood ala Hilditch & co.

So where to BD?

Cut Ponting, Hussey, Haddin and Mitch. Drop Watson down the order. What then?

Invader Zim wrote:Well that performance was a farking pile of complete and utter sh!t.

Glad it happened when Clarke was skipper tho. Suck sh!t dickhead.

Clarke was man of the match for Aus, if it hadn't of been for him SA's first innings score would probably have been enough for an innings victory.

taipan wrote:

Merlin wrote:Smith - No - we've got two more than decent openers who've strung a few century partnerships together of late. No need for another left handed opener.
Amla - Yes - for certain.
Kallis - No ... too slow and getting on a bit - no room for red-inkers.
AB - maybe - if IRB fails to deliver!

Fark me, the poms are coming over all bannie.

First Trev reckons Jimmikins is better than Steyn.

Now this PMSL

That's a bit like saying: Eugene Terreblanche, Kepler Wessels - that proves it, THE Safs are all a bunch of qunts.

Not that I am saying Merls resembles ET. Or that Henry is much like "Empty" for that matter.

ET phone home .... ET phone home ....!!

Taips sadly also exhibiting his bannie instincts by inferring that the likes of Sniffer, Jacquie and ab (note, no capitals for this particular ab) are of similar calibre to Strausser a/o Chef/ KP /IRB ...

I rest my case.... also PMSL.

kallis is a greater player than any english test player

smith is a blow hot/cold kind of guy. but he is most certainly better than strauss

AB above bell is a bit of a grey area. much of sameness

I cant believe i actually agree with TO

Strauss is so overrated.

Kallis at his peak was better than any current England player, but is he now?