South Africa in England July-Sept 2012

Morne gets Strauss again. Surprise surprise.

Steyn gets Trott. Didn't see that coming...

Act 1 Scene 3- Philander gets Cook? Nope, but England in some real trouble here.

Bairstow in. Bring on the short stuff.
 
Last edited:
This is limp pathetic cricket from the world number one test side, where have we heard that before? History is repeating itself. England's batting is going to lose us this test and should have lost us the Headingly test (if not for KP). The circumstances of the dropping of KP and the weak batting today could focus the spotlight on Strauss and Flower. This could be the beginning of the end for that particular dynasty.
 
Barely followed county cricket this season, so who's touted to replace Strauss if he's axed or retires or whatever?
 
Yet again BBC deems a football transfer and rumours/non-events more important than a crucial Test :noway

Just as f in wellf we didn't play five bowlers or we'd be in a right state. England are capable of winning when one or two players are in form, or things go their way, but we need steel, grit and resilience when in trouble.

We may fight back, but I think our chances of winning from here have dwindled to near non-existent. We need to add another 150-200 runs minimum and while we do have Prior, Broad and Swann to come we did decide on bowling (Finn) over batting (Bresnan) so there isn't that much to come.

Let's just face it, we have our moments but we're not a real number one side. We've struggled against the saffers, one series win in the last half dozen or so is it? I think we last beat them at home in 1998 or thereabouts, one away win in 04/05 since their return to Tests. We aren't convincing against India except when they're at a low ebb like their last tour here, the aussies we seem to be on top of but that alone's hardly domination.
 
Some people are so dramatic the second things start going slightly wrong. You've gotta have faith. I certainly do in this team.
 
That was really poor batting from Bell. Played and missed at the first 5 balls and then played a loose drive outside off to inevitably nick on to the cordon. Fair enough he's done something by getting to 50, but he's also thrown it all away.

Bowlers have been fairly erratic, but I'm getting so bored of Strauss getting out for 10-30 odd. Someone mentioned an opener, why not Trott and Cook since they basically do the job anyway :rolleyes

Basically, Strauss has to go. There is nothing left keeping him in the job anymore. The old rubbish about his management skills and being popular has been nothing more than a fallacy created by a team that kept winning. When the results have turned, so has the team spirit he apparently fostered so well. How can he tell anyone in the team how to act or behave, when essentially he's the weak link on the field?
 
Last edited:
Well batted Bairstowe I reckon. I could live with the following going to India:

Cook
Trott
KP
Bell
Taylor (?) maybe Compton
Bairstowe
Prior
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Finn/Panesar (depending on conditions)

Personally I'd prefer Swann as captain but Cook is obviously going to replace Strauss.
 
Strauss really has to go doesn't he? I know I've been saying it for the last few series, but he can't hide behind the team's success now that the team aren't actually all that successful.

He's had a good run, but it's time to hand over to Cook now and with players like Bairstow/Taylor coming in with Finn, it's time for the new team.

Anyone know how many runs Trott has contributed since his initial glut of runs? Can't really remember too many big scores lately?
 
I've generally defended Strauss in the past but the way he's blown the KP issue for me is the final straw. You can only get away with poor captaincy and 20s and 30s if the team is winning.
 
Anyone know how many runs Trott has contributed since his initial glut of runs? Can't really remember too many big scores lately?

Hasn't scored heavily but for someone out of nick he is still contributing. Averaging 36 this year, 40 last year.
 
I'm certainly not advocating dropping him, but 40 and 36 aren't exactly great numbers either. They're acceptable, and it isn't lost on me that he's practically opening these days, but our attacking middle and lower order success is built on good steady innings from one of the top 3.
 
The fact is the third umpire must always give the benefit of the doubt to Kallis and he couldn't be absolutely sure. The ICC need release some more detailed guidline for the third umpires. Or maybe two third umpires who have to agree?

But there doesn't need to be any more guidelines, they know the rules, they aren't blurry (in cricket, they generally aren't) quite why the decision was made as it was, I have no idea*. It'll be interesting if they release any details (or have done and I've missed it).

*I did wonder if they kept trying to see if there was a white spot on the face of the bat as it passed it. But there wasn't.

AngryAngy said:
From the laws: "any part of a glove worn on the batsman?s hand holding the bat". Holding, not possibly touching the bat or brushing the other glove. Very clear. As soon as he releases the bottom hand, that hand shouldn't get him out caught.

Hmm, I'll have to check my Tom Smith's, as I'm not sure on this. I'm fairly sure that you can be out if the ball hits the armguard, if the armguard is touching the glove (including the elasticy bit that goes over the wrist). Likewise, if the other glove was off the bat, but was touching, I think he would have been out, but again, I'll have to check the book.

All mute though, as it wasn't. Odd decision.

----------

Some mettle from Bairstow today, and although Bell got out (and you could see how angry he was with himself for falling to an obvious plan) he has got us out of a situation that could have lead to us being out of the game.

Not sure I agree on Boycott's statement, at all. Bowling hasn't been great, but not that bad. They've finally picked the right attack, only taken until the series has gone...

+1 on Strauss going.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top