View Full Version : How does the SAF performance in the 1st Test compare to other SAF performances?
Ricketts
19 Mar 2006, 15:42
I'd have to say that was the worst South African XI and worst South African effort i've ever seen.
Firstly they picked only two bowlers. You can't take 20 wickets with only two bowlers. I said in the other thread that we would make 500+ if we didn't throw our wickets away. Well we threw them away and could only manage a 100 run lead.
Australia's batting in the match was terrible.
Their batsmen had no idea either. They were all weak as pi** and got out after making it into double figures, with Captain Smith leading the way. They fell in a heap against a bowler playing in his first ever match.
It was a spineless batting performance.
Their fielding was attrocious too.
The overall result flattered the South Africans. A 7 wicket loss. The Aussies bowled well, but had they batted well too the result should have been an innings plus plenty.
It's no surprise to see no crowds turning up to watch them play.
I'd have to say that was the worst South African XI and worst South African effort i've ever seen.
Firstly they picked only two bowlers. You can't take 20 wickets with only two bowlers. I said in the other thread that we would make 500+ if we didn't throw our wickets away. Well we threw them away and could only manage a 100 run lead.
Australia's batting in the match was terrible.
Their batsmen had no idea either. They were all weak as pi** and got out after making it into double figures, with Captain Smith leading the way. They fell in a heap against a bowler playing in his first ever match.
It was a spineless batting performance.
Their fielding was attrocious too.
The overall result flattered the South Africans. A 7 wicket loss. The Aussies bowled well, but had they batted well too the result should have been an innings plus plenty.
It's no surprise to see no crowds turning up to watch them play.
One of the South African critics said he can envisage a day when they only play one day cricket. Perhaps they should be banned from tests given that they're clearly not equipped to play them. I must admit I much prefer test cricket but it's painful to watch them play tests. They just haven't got the history or culture to play tests.
Gunnar Longshanks
19 Mar 2006, 15:56
One of the South African critics said he can envisage a day when they only play one day cricket. Perhaps they should be banned from tests given that they're clearly not equipped to play them. I must admit I much prefer test cricket but it's painful to watch them play tests. They just haven't got the history or culture to play tests.You've got a pretty short memory.
Don't be fooled by the fact that we won the last series 2-0. That was a very even contest, and had rain not intervened in Sydney, it probably would have finished at 1-1.
Even in the Test we won, South Africa had us on the ropes early on.
So we smashed South Africa in the First Test of the return leg. Big deal. We won because of the contributions of 3-4 players.
It's ridiculous to act like we're suddenly an awesome unit while the poor little Proteas simply can't take a trick.
thewhippersnapper
19 Mar 2006, 15:58
I'd have to say that was the worst South African XI and worst South African effort i've ever seen.
Firstly they picked only two bowlers. You can't take 20 wickets with only two bowlers. I said in the other thread that we would make 500+ if we didn't throw our wickets away. Well we threw them away and could only manage a 100 run lead.
Australia's batting in the match was terrible.
Their batsmen had no idea either. They were all weak as pi** and got out after making it into double figures, with Captain Smith leading the way. They fell in a heap against a bowler playing in his first ever match.
It was a spineless batting performance.
Their fielding was attrocious too.
The overall result flattered the South Africans. A 7 wicket loss. The Aussies bowled well, but had they batted well too the result should have been an innings plus plenty.
It's no surprise to see no crowds turning up to watch them play.
If only Katich was playing.
Ricketts
22 Mar 2006, 18:53
If only Katich was playing.
True.
But we know he cant bat in the middle to lower order and it would be hard to squeeze him in in front of Hayden, Langer or Ponting in the top order.
The overall result flattered the South Africans. A 7 wicket loss. The Aussies bowled well, but had they batted well too the result should have been an innings plus plenty.
The South Africans didnt bowl well. But had they bowled well the result might have been different. :confused:
You can take so many different sides to an arguement ...
The South Africans didnt bowl well. But had they bowled well the result might have been different. :confused:
You can take so many different sides to an arguement ...
If we batted well, it would have made more of a difference.
Blues_Man
22 Mar 2006, 19:09
If we batted well, it would have made more of a difference.
If your grandmother had balls she'd be your grandfather too ...."If's" are just wishfull thinking by losers
If your grandmother had balls she'd be your grandfather too ...."If's" are just wishfull thinking by losers
I was answering the statement above.
Have your eyes deserted you old man?