sa take on aus

Impressed with Clarke's decision to declare.

We've got problems at 2 (Peterson), 4 (du Plessis) and 6 (Duminy) in the batting line-up (at least two of them need replacing but I wouldn't go the Dean Elgar route...will give reasons regarding this later...) with Smith clearly intimidated by thought of facing Johnson and Amla going through worse period since his first 10 tests...to compound matters, Steyn is unwell, Morkel is still bowling too short and wide to consistently trouble even mediocre batsmen and Philander has not pitched up...

And then to field first when we win the toss and have a very poor fielding day...Warner had more chances in his innings yesterday than he is likely to get in a 5 test series...we were always behind in this match from the time we decided to field...

Do we see this as a once-off aberration that repeats every first test of a series or is this indicative of a team that has problems that have been tolerated as we have somehow come back to win / draw series in the last few years...we don't want to change a winning team yet this is the exact same problems that Aus and WI had when they where dominant...change took place too late to continue dominance rather than slowly replacing players that had done their time and weren't contributing anymore...we keep players based on past performance and reputation and long enough for them to play an inning or take a wicket haul to extend their stay...

Amla pressures partly stem from having to come in early (openers not seeing off the new ball) and he is not picking up the ball part very well (many bowled / LBW of late) and AB is carrying an enormous load that will eventually see a curtailing of his ability to continue to perform at the highest level...

We need 20 wickets to win a test match and, on average, Steyn and Philander get 5 each per match...so where does the other 10 come from...Morkel good for at most 3 per match and all-rounder / part-time spinner will get you maybe 2...we are still 5 short if we are to continue our dominance...get Abbott / Hendricks / de Lange into the team as 4th and 5th bowler as we have and will not have a spinner that is going to take the 5 wickets we need...get specialists in to do a specific job...all-rounders are for ODI and T20...and Kallis was not a true all-rounder...he would not be in the team purely on his bowling ability...he was a top class batsmen who bowled a little and who, due to the length of career, took almost 300 wickets...

6 batsmen (including wicket-keeper batsmen in AB) and 5 specialist (fast) bowlers (our strength) to take 20 wickets in a test...

Just see that Petersen dismissed in 2nd innings...Amla in too early again...

What a catch..-D

davetheflower Wrote:

---

> What a catch..-D


I wonder what the reaction time was?

How embarrassing.......

No we haven't got any replacements that are ready to step up........

I really think Amla has also got some problem ( maybe personal) as he is definitely not his old self!. Why was he fielding on the boundary?. Normally our best close up catcher!!.If we look at his last few innings ( in all games) there is something wrong with the poor lad.

O well on the positive side, things cant get any worse..............



P.S. How on earth can bookies now be offering 8/1 a SA win.?................<

faf du plessies to bat for two days like he did in Adelaide to save the test

Like to see Mitchell Johnson hit all over the park...
Pratt thinks he's Merv Hughes,I have to laugh when he tries to look intimidating..
Not that I'd like to face an over from him.

I do like this cameraman and he likes bikinis..
Plenty of talent on show..X(

ANYONE else as an opener will do better than Petersen is doing at the moment (we need an opener to last 10-15 overs and Peterson has been having a poor run of late with just the odd inning to prolong the agony...he's had trouble against Pakistan, India and Aus bowlers so it's not like the Smith problem that is largely confined to Johnson) and Stiaan van Zyl at number 6 is something that we need to try now...

I'm a bit doubtful about Quinton de Kock as opener as he plays away from his body (technical deficiency) and gets away with it in one day cricket (will be found out soon enough though...)...also benefits from the fact that youth gives one big hand-eye benefits that show up as one gets older and won't be able to overcome the technical deficiency...

For me, the test team starts with the bowlers (as a unit must be able to take 20 wickets) and then decide on how many batsmen required...if 6 can't do the job, 7th one not going to help...but 5 bowlers will almost always take 20 wickets and put sufficient pressure on opposition batsmen that they will not score so many to be able to put our (6) batsmen under pressure...

Somehow, we have been sucked into thinking that 4 bowlers are enough...you can do that if you have the 4 WI greats or Warne+McGrath+Gillespie/Fleming (Aus team of 90's/00's) but you cannot do so if you only have Steyn / Philander...and we think that because it has worked in the past it will work in the future so there is no need to change...we see that when one of Steyn or Philander are below par, we cannot bowl teams out...with 4 bowlers, you place yourself under big pressure if one is injured / ill / below par to take the 20 wickets and are therefore playing for a draw or to avoid a loss or dependent on the other team declaring (loss of control of the game) to create a probability of a win...with 5 bowlers, you always keep a win possible and retain control of the game...

So, my test team would be
Smith...how much longer I don't know...may need two openers within the next year...
A.N. Other opener...
Amla
de Villiers
du Plessis
Stiaan van Zyl
Philander
Abbot
Hendricks / Parnell...need a left arm fast bowler otherwise our bowlers are all the same
Steyn
Morkel / Hendricks / Parnell

And for those that think that the "tail" is too long, bowlers are there to take 20 wickets and create pressure on opposing batsmen and limit scoring of the opposition...the runs they make for us are a bonus above what the batsmen should be making...if you need bowlers to get you out of trouble with runs then the batsmen are not good enough for test level...

That's virtually the match to the Aussies. I had high hopes that Amla would bat the day out so PE now is a must win for the Proteas.

Duminy batting for his place in the team...can't see him continuing if he fails again...

TNaicker Wrote:

---

> ANYONE else as an opener will do better than
> Petersen is doing at the moment (we need an opener
> to last 10-15 overs and Peterson has been having a
> poor run of late with just the odd inning to
> prolong the agony...he's had trouble against
> Pakistan, India and Aus bowlers so it's not like
> the Smith problem that is largely confined to
> Johnson) and Stiaan van Zyl at number 6 is
> something that we need to try now...
>
> I'm a bit doubtful about Quinton de Kock as opener
> as he plays away from his body (technical
> deficiency) and gets away with it in one day
> cricket (will be found out soon enough
> though...)...also benefits from the fact that
> youth gives one big hand-eye benefits that show up
> as one gets older and won't be able to overcome
> the technical deficiency...
>
> For me, the test team starts with the bowlers (as
> a unit must be able to take 20 wickets) and then
> decide on how many batsmen required...if 6 can't
> do the job, 7th one not going to help...but 5
> bowlers will almost always take 20 wickets and put
> sufficient pressure on opposition batsmen that
> they will not score so many to be able to put our
> (6) batsmen under pressure...
>
> Somehow, we have been sucked into thinking that 4
> bowlers are enough...you can do that if you have
> the 4 WI greats or Warne+McGrath+Gillespie/Fleming
> (Aus team of 90's/00's) but you cannot do so if
> you only have Steyn / Philander...and we think
> that because it has worked in the past it will
> work in the future so there is no need to
> change...we see that when one of Steyn or
> Philander are below par, we cannot bowl teams
> out...with 4 bowlers, you place yourself under big
> pressure if one is injured / ill / below par to
> take the 20 wickets and are therefore playing for
> a draw or to avoid a loss or dependent on the
> other team declaring (loss of control of the game)
> to create a probability of a win...with 5 bowlers,
> you always keep a win possible and retain control
> of the game...
>
> So, my test team would be
> Smith...how much longer I don't know...may need
> two openers within the next year...
> A.N. Other opener...
> Amla
> de Villiers
> du Plessis
> Stiaan van Zyl
> Philander
> Abbot
> Hendricks / Parnell...need a left arm fast bowler
> otherwise our bowlers are all the same
> Steyn
> Morkel / Hendricks / Parnell
>
> And for those that think that the "tail" is too
> long, bowlers are there to take 20 wickets and
> create pressure on opposing batsmen and limit
> scoring of the opposition...the runs they make for
> us are a bonus above what the batsmen should be
> making...if you need bowlers to get you out of
> trouble with runs then the batsmen are not good
> enough for test level...


Very nice post....................-D