South Africa

Suddenly there's quite a bit of daylight between them and the other teams, isn't there. They seem to be the only team in world cricket who know what they are doing. The rest are just rabbles who are all capable of beating each other on any given day.

They are a terrific side, the addition of Philander is the reason why they are well ahead of the rest of the world! However, they still don't have a quality spinner and it will be interested to see if they can win the series in UAE later this year.

You don't need a quality spinner.

England are not that far behind SA - of course fans tend to be more critical of their team. They are not that bad side at all...compared to the others.

taipan wrote:You don't need a quality spinner.

As their record suggests and thank feck they don't.

Anthony_Gonzales wrote:England are not that far behind SA - of course fans tend to be more critical of their team. They are not that bad side at all...compared to the others.

They are getting hammered by Ken Rutherford's son
You can perhaps argue that they are #2 in the world but they are certainly FAR behind SA.

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Anthony_Gonzales wrote:England are not that far behind SA - of course fans tend to be more critical of their team. They are not that bad side at all...compared to the others.

They are getting hammered by Ken Rutherford's son
You can perhaps argue that they are #2 in the world but they are certainly FAR behind SA.

The odd innings or match does not make a statement.

Even in that 0-3 loss in UAE, they were actually mostly competitive, certainly bowling wise. They are behind SA, but I don't think there is daylight between them....

I'm glad we don't play SA for a while, if we went there now, they'd utterly destroy us. We'd be another 'around the 50 mark' team. Collectively, we show as much application as a 10-year dole bludger.

Anthony_Gonzales wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Anthony_Gonzales wrote:England are not that far behind SA - of course fans tend to be more critical of their team. They are not that bad side at all...compared to the others.

They are getting hammered by Ken Rutherford's son
You can perhaps argue that they are #2 in the world but they are certainly FAR behind SA.

The odd innings or match does not make a statement.

Even in that 0-3 loss in UAE, they were actually mostly competitive, certainly bowling wise. They are behind SA, but I don't think there is daylight between them....

Possibly not but England has now lost two home series in a row to SA but the difference between the SA of the past year or so is that they haven't lost a home series. They've been performing very well away for some time now and better than the rest in this respect but losing points for losing home tests and drawing series they should have won.

Red wrote:

Anthony_Gonzales wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Anthony_Gonzales wrote:England are not that far behind SA - of course fans tend to be more critical of their team. They are not that bad side at all...compared to the others.

They are getting hammered by Ken Rutherford's son
You can perhaps argue that they are #2 in the world but they are certainly FAR behind SA.

The odd innings or match does not make a statement.

Even in that 0-3 loss in UAE, they were actually mostly competitive, certainly bowling wise. They are behind SA, but I don't think there is daylight between them....

Possibly not but England has now lost two home series in a row to SA but the difference between the SA of the past year or so is that they haven't lost a home series. They'Jve been performing very well away for some time now and better than the rest in this respect but losing points for losing home tests and drawing series they should have won.

Anyone translate gibberish?

taipan wrote:

Red wrote:

Anthony_Gonzales wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Anthony_Gonzales wrote:England are not that far behind SA - of course fans tend to be more critical of their team. They are not that bad side at all...compared to the others.

They are getting hammered by Ken Rutherford's son
You can perhaps argue that they are #2 in the world but they are certainly FAR behind SA.

The odd innings or match does not make a statement.

Even in that 0-3 loss in UAE, they were actually mostly competitive, certainly bowling wise. They are behind SA, but I don't think there is daylight between them....

Possibly not but England has now lost two home series in a row to SA but the difference between the SA of the past year or so is that they haven't lost a home series. They'Jve been performing very well away for some time now and better than the rest in this respect but losing points for losing home tests and drawing series they should have won.

Anyone translate gibberish?

Okay let's break this down.

There may not be daylight between SA and England,

nonetheless SA has beaten England twice on their soil in the last two series there. Get that? So clearly SA has to have an edge.

SA has been clearly the best team in terms of performing away.

Until the past year despite these sort of wins, what was holding them back was losing tests at home which sometimes translated into drawn home series hence meant their inability to go clearly up to the top of the pile and sometimes it even resulted in them conceding top spot to the poms. Maybe Gary Kirsten has helped in this regard.

England has lost or drawn away series they might have been expected to win according to rankings so deserved to concede the #1 ranking but as some have suggested the gap is probably bridgeable in the foreseeable future.

At present, the other teams (texting and tweeting, scratching their arses, dreaming of more Ferraris and Lamborghinis, flailing their bats hopefully when it's their turn to trudge out to the crease, yawning) can only wait for some of the established members of the SAf squad to depart the stage. (Kallis, the dodgy-backed De Villiers, being the two more obvious cases.)

Because generally, they have too rarely shown themselves capable of making any sustained use of their variable talents.

But Smith, Amla, Steyn (the obvious examples) have a good few miles left in the tank yet, you'd think. Given good management.

smith is closer to the end than devilliers i think

kallis is the only one who may not last beyond 2015

The One wrote:smith is closer to the end than devilliers i think

kallis is the only one who may not last beyond 2015

As Smith is 4/5 years older....

yes

Well, Smith is 3 years older than DeVilliers, but hasn't had quite the medical record - or keeping duties.

Plus, he is not expected to play in either of the shorter forms, which might 'stretch' his fitness and mental freshness longer.


But hey, my point was not so much about comparing "Who will last a while yet, who won't" - but rather suggesting the fecklessness of the oppositions.

Which on present form seem too much to be hoping for a weakening of the South African squad, when they should in fact be going about developing their own sets of skills more effectively.

Smith's lumbering already - have you seen him take a single? Like a stock car.

Like the Titanic turning for a two.

FWIW (since the three of you seem more intent on picking me up on not awaiting one particular bat's imminent demise, than addressing the real point I was making - where Smith was an ironic sidelight of the feckless attitude of others!)


Hasn't he always lumbered?

He's a lumberjack and he's okay
He sleeps all night and he biffs all day.

He has always lumbered, but it's now getting to Inzi proportions.