South Africa in England July-Sept 2012

[StinkyBoHoon]

Not "pining", just Finn offers different.

I think finn is a very similar bowler to broad so I don't really see the logic here. I still think people wanting finn have fallen for the notion that he's a young prodigy that bowls more aggressively and bresnan, who's a bit slower, shorter, and was older when he started getting noticed just doesn't have that charismatic x-factor.

I've yet to see him bowl any better than bresnan has at international level.

 

[goldenboy48]

Strauss is showing good foot movement...coming fully forward...expecting a big score from him...

 

[Sulaiman7]

I think finn is a very similar bowler to broad so I don't really see the logic here. I still think people wanting finn have fallen for the notion that he's a young prodigy that bowls more aggressively and bresnan, who's a bit slower, shorter, and was older when he started getting noticed just doesn't have that charismatic x-factor.

I've yet to see him bowl any better than bresnan has at international level.

Not agreed , Broad is a top class bowler and a good captain too I think but Finn isn't a bowler of that class of Stuart Broad because Broad has a total bowling delevries , as he can bowl a yorker with 85 + speed where as Finn also has a book of deleveries that he can bowl but not with a great pace to beat the/a batsman .

Stuart Broad is more valueable than Finn because he's an all rounder and he bowls better than Finn .

And also Broad can read the batsman also who faces him often plays him so Broad know about him very well and know's where to pitch .

One reason is that Broad is experienced a lot in his career and has conceded 6 in 6 from Yuvraj Singh but know he has experienced Yuvraj so now he's the key to dismiss Yuvi . ( this is one reason he is captain in t20 ) .

 

[shravi]

What's with the speeds? England's bowlers aren't even bending their backs. I know they were never express by any means, but it has been very slow these 2 tests.

 

[puddleduck]

A good point was made that South Africa have appreciated that the English attack's success has been built on consistently hitting the right areas and making scoring difficult. They've really knuckled down and earnt their runs.

 

[War]

A good point was made that South Africa have appreciated that the English attack's success has been built on consistently hitting the right areas and making scoring difficult. They've really knuckled down and earnt their runs.

True, but it also helps the Protea's that they have a top-order of batsmen with solid techniques that could handle England's bowlers in such a way.

Which is massive difference to the Australian, Indian, Pakistan and Windies batting line-ups that Anderson and co have had success over in the last 18 months.

 

[puddleduck]

It does, but the fact isn't lost that with Petersen dropped on 30, the extra 150 he contributed has turned South Africa's total into a massive one. Essentially England have themselves to blame for letting the game slip away from them so early.

Not mentioning of course the fact that Swann is the natural second slip and liable to have caused a few more problems than KP.

Still, England bowled very well at times, and where other teams have grown frustrated and played loose shots to get out, South Africa have waited patiently for the scoring deliveries.

 

[sifter132]

Ignoring the test match for a moment and i found it interesting that England were able to bowl 87 overs on a rain hit day, with an all seam attack.

Regularly i hear cricket fans and pundits saying that playing an all pace attack could cause very slow over-rates. But today was a good example of how why that really is not the case with modern teams who wish to use this tactic.

I agree with you! We've butted heads on this before, but if teams just hurried up with their over rate, then they give themselves the option of 4 seamers ALL the time. It's not rocket science - stop switching fields on the last ball of an over, set goals on how quickly you can swap ends - it's not that hard.

My argument in the past is that Australia couldn't pull off 4 seamers because Ponting and Clarke to a lesser extent just don't have the urgency. We've also had bowlers who dick around during their over with long run-ups etc. - much easier when you've got guys like Hilfenhaus who try and bowl overs in 3 minutes.

 

[Owzat]

Maybe their should be limits on number of field changes per over, one of my pet hates. An over every four minutes should not be that difficult to execute, sides showing purpose can do it.

England definitely needed to have a better second day, the openers have done ok so far but frankly if you look at all the days of the series so far I'd say England arguably had the better of the first day but have South Africa "lost" any days (since) ?

Definitely a key session and indeed day coming up, England need to be batting at the end of it and how many wickets down could then decide which way the series will go. To save it I reckon batting through the day will be a big step towards it, if England can reach close of play with less than six wickets down I reckon they've a chance of gaining an unlikely win.

South Africa will want to make regular inroads, probably set out for 2-3 wickets per session. Not sure they'll push for victory, despite what TMS think I'm not convinced 400 is a winning total, it may well end up with a 1st innings lead, but I think England should score at least 300.

Oh and TMS were debating breaking Tests down into leagues, six teams in the top league with promotion and relegation. Glad they've FINALLY drawn a bleeding obvious conclusion re the overall format of Test cricket and the benefits of including the rest of the cricket world. But why is it always "poor little West Indies, will they suffer not being in the top tier?"...............?!?!?!? It's sad, but if they don't pick their socks up and get back into the fray then that may just be their lot..........

 

[Owzat]

Cook gone already, could be a long day ahead (for both sides) I'd say the tendancy to selfish use of reviews was exposed today, I thought sides were getting better but maybe the decision responsibility should lie with the non-striker who would only be swayed by a good argument from the victim eg "I hit it" or "I am certain it was too high", with the victim being up in front of the beak if he is proven wasteful.

I would have to beg the question where should the newbie bat? Unless he's an opener you wouldn't expose him to the new ball, three is a bit high even for someone who aspires to bat there, so that only leaves 4-6.

I'd say 4-5 are the best spots, six is too low really as he'd have not only to mind his own game but potentially herd the tail. I'm guessing as newbie the senior batsmen will be selfish and so he'll get six, even though for me six is a key position and therefore should have experience holding that role.

 

[Sulaiman7]

Pietersen and Trott have to stick to the wicket in order to win .

 

[swacker]

Cook gone already

The only question was whether it pitched in line or not but it always looked like it did, couldn't see it being overturned in a million years.

 

[shravi]

We're seeing something special here. Love it when KP plays like this.

 

[Sahil 7]

brilliant knock from kp there really love to see him when he is on song. james taylor falls now so prior have to bat with kp for long period

 

[Auwais]

Solid start by Taylor. Shame he couldn't reach a half-century though.