South Africa in England
- Thread starter Sureshot
- Start date
angryangy
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
Even though England won't make a big score, South Africa are hardly back in. 100 runs is a long deficit, especially if England bowl as well as they did on day 1. South Africa are only in the game if they make an above average score, something over 400. The way this innings is refusing to die, even 400 will not make for a comfortable target.
BigCrickNan
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2005
That was always going to happen. Monty better pull his weight with the ball!
Highlander999
ICC President
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2006
- Location
- London
Harmy called him through for the single. It wasn't Monty's fault
BigCrickNan
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2005
Cricinfo said monty hesitated mid-pitch, and it went to the third umpire, so yeah.
DPRA
International Cricketer
Another good start, we just need to build on this, I am not holding my breath though! 
:
:
I think this could be Ambrose's last test match. Another failure and with Prior in the ODI team, if he impresses then he is fighting Ambrose for the place of keeper. With a 5-man attack we need a keeper scoring runs. That's Prior.
Haven't seen this Harmison in a while. I think the captain change has done good for England. Vaughan wasn't inspiring enough. Pietersen is getting more out of everyone. Except Broad, who continues to be out of his league.
SA need to start fighting. Ntini was playing for something, no one else seemed to give a toss.
Ntini and Harmison proved me wrong to an extent. But they do suit this kind of pitch. It's the flat ones where they get hit about.
SA need to start fighting. Ntini was playing for something, no one else seemed to give a toss.
Ntini and Harmison proved me wrong to an extent. But they do suit this kind of pitch. It's the flat ones where they get hit about.
Collingwood and Pietersen have played in 37 Tests together and batted together just 29 times. All stats apply only when both play in the same Test
PARTNERSHIPS
0 : x2
1-19 : x6
20-49 : x6
50-99 : x8
100-199 : x6
200-299 : x0
300+ : x1
Average : 66.28
Highest : 310 vs Australia
100+ : 6/29 = 20.69%
AVERAGES
Collingwood : 2,575 runs @ 42.92
Pietersen : 3,376 runs @ 51.94
RESULTS
P37* W11 D12 L13
*includes current Test, result as yet unknown
And in answer to your question, when one or other scores 50+ these are their partnerships (where applicable)
Collingwood 50+ (x17) : 8 partnerships with Pietersen, 949 runs @ 118.63.
Pietersen 50+ (x21) : 15 partnerships with Collingwood, 1,441 runs @ 84.76
Both score 50+ (x4) : 4 partnerships, 751 runs @ 187.75
Oddly enough every time they both score 50 they bat together at some point during the innings. It's a lot less likely than you'd think, they've batted together 29 times and 38 times they haven't. Neither has reached 25 in the same innings 15 times (22.39%) Vaughan's bad patch of form lasted 10 Tests before he resigned, Collingwood was left out/dropped only five Tests after making three fifties in four innings.
RoboRocks
Chairman of Selectors
Prior will make runs no doubt but how many runs does he concede to dropped catches? I think he conceded more runs to dropped catches that the actual runs he scored himself, which is unacceptable.
Better drop Cook then............................
Today's morning session isn't quite crucial, but England must aim to get at least a couple of wickets. The deficit should be all gone by lunch, England won't want to be chasing more than 200-250. 120/2 say would be well set to put up a 200+ target, it may not equate to much of a lead at that score, but with wickets in hand they'd be in front and from that size deficit on 1st innings you would want to get to parity with less than 3 wickets down.
England Leads/Deficits Since 2000
100+ runs ahead : P36 W27 D8 L1 (Won 75.00%)
1st innings leads : P61 W39 D19 L3 (Won 63.93%)
So chances are England will win, the only defeat from 100+ runs in front was the disaster in Pakistan (Multan 05/06) when England were 144 runs in front. I still blame the spinners, Giles and Udal took just two wickets between them in the match while conceding 205 runs. In the context of the 1st innings, they took 1/91 when Pakistan were bowled out for 274 which isn't a good contribution from 2/5 of the bowling attack. 2nd innings they took 1/114, almost exactly 1/3 of the runs, 1/10 of the wickets from 2/5 of the attack. Udal should never have been picked at his age, nothing more than a catastrophic move by England and the Ashes were followed up be a pretty poor run of series (P3 W0 D2 L1) Still a pretty good record overall, only losing three times having been ahead on 1st innings since 2000
And with regards the two losses this series :-
2nd Test : 100+ runs behind : P33 W3 D8 L22 (Won 9.09%)
3rd Test : 75-99 runs behind : P3 W0 D2 L1 (Won 0.00%)
The three wins from 100+ runs behind were against :
179 deficit vs New Zealand (2nd Test, Old Trafford 2008)
138 deficit vs Australia (4th Test, Headingley 2001)
133 deficit vs West Indies (2nd Test, Lords 2000)
All at home, the only side of serious note declared to make a game of it at Headingley and Butcher made 173no. Once we got that far behind against South Africa it was unlikely we would win, shows the importance of making runs in the 1st innings. In 112 previous Tests involving England since 2000, the sides that have held a 1st innings lead have this record : W70 D30 L12 (Won 62.50%) Only on four occaisions has someone turned around a 100+ run deficit (3.57%) so the omens are good for England. England's average 1st innings total is 345 compared to the opposition's 343 - 1/3 were against New Zealand, Bangladesh, West Indies and Zimbabwe who make up 28 of England's 48 wins in that period
Last edited:
Wasn't that mainly due to Jayawardene's huge ton?
His keeping form was pretty poor. We shall see what it is like in the ODIs. I think it has improved from watching him and speaking to members, players, etc.
Good spell by Broad this morning, Amla looked in fine fettle too.
DPRA
International Cricketer
This is going to be a very close game, and I think this could swing England's way with a few quick wickets tomorrow.
I shall be listening in work. :cool:
I shall be listening in work. :cool:
FINALLY Broad looking like a Test bowler, didn't last long though. I seriously wonder whether he was the right selection, can't see the Indians worrying too much about his bowling. In fact you have to wonder how many of the players should be in the tour party.
The game is swinging back towards an even keel, England will almost certainly want a couple of wickets this morning (if there's any play) to make sure South Africa don't start getting towards a hundred lead with only two or three wickets down. I gather Ambrose has been injured, I certainly cannot believe the criticism he got on TMS for his 'drop.' Ironic that C5 should show the last day of the 2005 Ashes series when Gilchrist took a fantastic catch, so if he missed that would that be a 'bad miss' ? Bad misses are one or two the aussies put down that day, cost them the Ashes.
If England don't win this Test then that will be the FOURTH series in a row against the top six sides without a solitary Test win in the series
AUS 5-0 ENG
ENG 0-1 IND
SRI 1-0 ENG
ENG 0-2 SAF
With a pretty tough tour ahead that could easily be five in a row, it may not mean much in the greater scheme of things, but a win could just be what England need (before losing the forthcoming winter tour)
