Re: South Africa v Australia, 2nd Test, Johannesburg, 17-21 November, 2011

by horace Tue 22 Nov 2011, 06:55

I thought the saffies fielded well....morkel may have thrown his shoulder out in the past and is consequently careful when throwing

by Red Tue 22 Nov 2011, 07:02

So as I hoped the weather cleared and we won.As I said the sun coming out was a help though it was tough going early. As it turned out the following factors were in Australia's favour
the Wanderers is a free scoring ground
SA doesn't win series against oz at home
Steyn was allegedly carrying an injury
SA hasn't won a home series for some time
SA had two very inexperienced bowlers test wise, though ironically Philander was their best
SA's fielding has been shoddy under pressure.
SA struggles to bowl tightly for long periods
Johnson bats well in SA

The biggest irony was that the beleagured Punter, Johnson, Haddit and to a lesser extent Hussey got them over the line.

Interesting to note that Haddin's runs put Boucher in the spotlight. With his lack of runs and their long tail, they surely have decisions of their own to make, including Rudolph (Morkel or Tsotsobe) and whether to persist with Tahir. The latter looked dangerous but their mix of bowlers means that they struggle to contain a team for long periods. Kallis is also very much on the wane as a bowler.

Punter may have given himself a stay of execution. Johnson should almost certainly go, Hussey is on borrowed time and Haddin needs to be replaced by Wade for the kiwi tests. Also they have to avoid over-hyping Cummins who will never be quite as fearless again or not necessarily having (as he said) the ball swing for a whole innings.

Philander proved many wrong and looks to be a competitor.

by taipan Tue 22 Nov 2011, 07:07

taipan wrote:
PeterCS wrote:Where is Red? ...

One might hope she would be gracious in victory but. ...

As expected the cheap jibes.

by Henry Tue 22 Nov 2011, 07:12

Henry wrote:I will fill in for Red tonight. I'm sure Peter Roebuck would be proud of something like this-

South Africa didn't take enough wickets. Australia looked in trouble at one stage, then looked comfortable again, then in trouble again, but they made enough runs. This was a good test match. Graeme Smith Didn't do well. Test cricket is good. This should have been three tests.

by taipan Tue 22 Nov 2011, 07:16

Henry wrote:
Henry wrote:I will fill in for Red tonight. I'm sure Peter Roebuck would be proud of something like this-

South Africa didn't take enough wickets. Australia looked in trouble at one stage, then looked comfortable again, then in trouble again, but they made enough runs. This was a good test match. Graeme Smith Didn't do well. Test cricket is good. This should have been three tests.

Yep, she has become a parody of herself.

by skully Tue 22 Nov 2011, 07:47

taipan wrote:
skully wrote:And did I see former Aus fielding coach Mick Young in the SAffie sheds? Certainly looked like him sitting beside Kirsten.

Yes

Cheers, taips.

by Fred Nerk Tue 22 Nov 2011, 08:45

Well there was one I threw away!

Packed it in around 5-200, just as Braze and Haddit were getting established. I was watching BorderThommo/MayMcDermott/WarneLeeKaspa all over again and expected the same result. It was 1 am local and I was stuffed. All added up to 'sod it - need this like a hole in the head'. Maybe Paddy Cummins knew nothing of that and it helped.

Mitch's contribution should not be underestimated, even if him telling Paddy to 'keep his head' was a bit like Red telling the forum to 'get off Clarke's back'. 78 invaluable runs in two innings - and without looking it up, I'm fairly sure it made him the only Oz batsman to pass 20 twice in the series. Now if only he could remember something about how to bowl....

But for mine Johnno's gonno. Likewise Ponting. His batting last night confirmed it - even walking out with 50 on the board, he looked out of form and surviving on memory. The Watson situation shouldn't save him - with Hussey and Clarke (80 Tests each) there is no lack of experience, which everybody seems to be worried about.

Siddle has to stay, even if it's just to be the hack bowler supporting the new Boy Wonder, who now needs very careful handling. At least with Sid you know you'll get effort and his batting is usually OK too (obv last night wasn't his finest moment). If he does get the axe, he must be replaced with another experienced bowler (Hilf?).

Lyon looks like anything but a Test bowler in demeanour but gets blokes out - a bit like Peter Taylor. He'll have to do for the moment but it will be interesting to see what even an aging Lax and Tendles make of him.

by lardbucket Tue 22 Nov 2011, 09:03

Fred, re Ponting ... I thought his survival for the first half hour yesterday, runs or not, was fairly critical to the final result. Given the injuries we have, I doubt he'll miss out in Brisbane, and it honestly would not surprise me if he turns his prolonged run of poor form around.

I acknowledge being biased towards the Tasmanian but stand by the assessment.

by skully Tue 22 Nov 2011, 09:26

I agree with the piefellow. Drunky's application shows that he's still got it, and probably wasn't concentrating hard enough each time he went out to bat. By going back to basics and playing in the "V", he was pivotal in giving us a chance at victory, after the early departure of Watto and Fuse.

Drunky will be in the XI in Brisbane, and hopefully for the locals, in the XI in Hobart, where Simple Simon, myself and hopefully BD will be watching some good cricket together. I'd love to see a big innings from him at Bellerive.

by taipan Tue 22 Nov 2011, 09:30

skully wrote:I agree with the piefellow. Drunky's application shows that he's still got it, and probably wasn't concentrating hard enough each time he went out to bat. By going back to basics and playing in the "V", he was pivotal in giving us a chance at victory, after the early departure of Watto and Fuse.

.

How is playing in the "V" going to solve his falling over problems? He is playing straight when that happens.

by skully Tue 22 Nov 2011, 09:33

Disagree, taips. He was playing across the line and trying to hit the ball to midwicket at the beginning of his innings, hence the falling over. By staying upright and playing straight, he eliminated the problem in his most recent innings - IMHO.

by Henry Tue 22 Nov 2011, 09:38

Ponting has always had a problem falling over his stumps early in his innings. Hell, I remember screaming at the TV a couple of times in the 2002-03 Ashes because he got away with a couple of plumb LBWs early in his innings before going on to smash us. Umpires are given the illusion the ball is going down leg because he gets so far across his stumps to play a leg side shot.

There are two differences now- 1, The reflexes aren't quite as good and he's missing the ball more often, and 2, The DRS has shown what the umpires often missed in years passed.

by taipan Tue 22 Nov 2011, 09:42

skully wrote:Disagree, taips. He was playing across the line and trying to hit the ball to midwicket at the beginning of his innings, hence the falling over. By staying upright and playing straight, he eliminated the problem in his most recent innings - IMHO.

On some of them he was trying to play straight but too far offside and had to play around his legs leading to the balalnce problem

by Red Tue 22 Nov 2011, 09:54

Yes Punter was always highly vulnerable early and had their been better quicks at some stages he would have had many more single figure scores simply because of that flaw so early in his innings unlike a Greg Chappell whose motto was to always play in the 'v' until he was set.

And Taipan you really do have to address the problem of Boucher, his lack of runs and what that means for the tail.

by taipan Tue 22 Nov 2011, 09:57

Red wrote:Yes Punter was always highly vulnerable early and had their been better quicks at some stages he would have had many more single figure scores simply because of that flaw so early in his innings unlike a Greg Chappell whose motto was to always play in the 'v' until he was set.

And Taipan you really do have to address the problem of Boucher, his lack of runs and what that means for the tail.

Another cheap jibe. You really are the worst type of sports fan. Ignorant and and opinionated to go with it.

by Henry Tue 22 Nov 2011, 09:59

I actually agree with Red about Boucher. He hasn't done much for a while. Why not try de Kock against the Lankans?

by Fred Nerk Tue 22 Nov 2011, 10:11

Er....they're afraid he'll Kock it up?

by taipan Tue 22 Nov 2011, 10:16

Henry wrote:I actually agree with Red about Boucher. He hasn't done much for a while. Why not try de Kock against the Lankans?

The problem is that De Kock isn't getting a regular gig for the Lions because Tsolikile is there. Personally I would blood him in the ODI team.

by Henry Tue 22 Nov 2011, 10:18

Ah, the Q word strikes again. He'll never play regularly as long as Tsolekile is there.

Well, there's always England......

by Red Tue 22 Nov 2011, 10:38

taipan wrote:
Red wrote:Yes Punter was always highly vulnerable early and had their been better quicks at some stages he would have had many more single figure scores simply because of that flaw so early in his innings unlike a Greg Chappell whose motto was to always play in the 'v' until he was set.

And Taipan you really do have to address the problem of Boucher, his lack of runs and what that means for the tail.

Another cheap jibe. You really are the worst type of sports fan. Ignorant and and opinionated to go with it.

So why is that a cheap jibe? In the longer, earlier post I addressed the problem of Boucher and am interested in whether you agree. I think SA has some generational change problems as well. Prince could be replaced for the Lankans by someone more likely to be part of the future, can't see any reason to keep Boucher and Rudolph has to perform otherwise he really is a carbon copy of his earlier test career and what Alviro Petersen produced.

by taipan Tue 22 Nov 2011, 10:44

Red wrote:
taipan wrote:
Red wrote:Yes Punter was always highly vulnerable early and had their been better quicks at some stages he would have had many more single figure scores simply because of that flaw so early in his innings unlike a Greg Chappell whose motto was to always play in the 'v' until he was set.

And Taipan you really do have to address the problem of Boucher, his lack of runs and what that means for the tail.

Another cheap jibe. You really are the worst type of sports fan. Ignorant and and opinionated to go with it.

So why is that a cheap jibe? In the longer, earlier post I addressed the problem of Boucher and am interested in whether you agree. I think SA has some generational change problems as well. Prince could be replaced for the Lankans by someone more likely to be part of the future, can't see any reason to keep Boucher and Rudolph has to perform otherwise he really is a carbon copy of his earlier test career and what Alviro Petersen produced.

It is cheap because if Aus had lost you wouldn't have been here today. You have no conception of sportsmanship.

by Henry Tue 22 Nov 2011, 10:52

It's amazing how millimetres determine cricket matches. Haddin would have edged the ball early in his innings IF the ball had been half a millimetre closer to his bat. Imran Tahir was about 2 centimetres from getting Cummins LBW with a sh*tting himself Nathan Lyon waiting to bat.

Either of those things, and South Africa would have won 2-0. So when we talk about the problems a certain team has, guys who should be dropped etc, it's sometimes good to remember those millimetres.

by taipan Tue 22 Nov 2011, 10:59

Henry wrote:
Either of those things, and ~~South Africa would have won 2-0~~ red would have missed out on a couple of wanks.

by Henry Tue 22 Nov 2011, 11:02

She must be spent. And the series was only drawn.

by Brass Monkey Tue 22 Nov 2011, 11:04

taipan wrote:
It is cheap because if Aus had lost you wouldn't have been here today. You have no conception of sportsmanship.

Fri 11 Nov 2011 - 10:34

SA win the 1st Test.

Fri 11 Nov 2011 - 12:30

1st Test Match Thread

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!

by Sponsored content