View Full Version : Looking forward to South Africa vs Australia 1st test
SeinDude
21 Feb 2002, 11:58
I am really looking forward to this test series in South Africa which will decide who is the best test team in the world.
Steve Waugh & Ricky Ponting warmed up with hundreds in the tour match and Glenn McGrath took 5 for 17 in a game ruined by the weather.
The 1st test starts Friday night at 7:30pm. It's live on Foxtel which will be great, and I believe the ABC will also be broadcasting live.
Any thoughts on how you think the test series will pan out??
SeinDude :)
Should be great.
Australia to win the series 2-0 with the other a draw.
Cheers
Bigger Kev
21 Feb 2002, 12:08
This is the crucial series. Australia MUST win to earn back the respect they have earned in the last 12 months. They are the number one side they just have to play like it....
Australia's test form has been great. We destoyed SA here and people forget that we had NZ on the ropes in Brisbane and Hobart. NZ only had a sniff after a very generous Oz declaration in Brisbane but were completely outplayed for most of that test and the Hobart test.
I think we'll see an Australian 2-0 result. The big question will be the form of the Australian middle order who didn't perfrom to well in Australia. We can't realistically expect Hayden and Langer to keep giving us 200 run starts.
dogboy23
21 Feb 2002, 15:04
Blewetts double ton over there last time was just about the best innings I have seen.Really gutted the south africans.Mcgrath was good over there last time as was M.Waugh and S.Waugh.We will thump them I reckon.They will ask there curators to prepare "juicy" pitches but we will bowl them out for under 200 every time.
wagstaff
21 Feb 2002, 16:02
Originally posted by SeinDude
I am really looking forward to this test series in South Africa which will decide who is the best test team in the world.
I'd be looking forward to it even more if I had Foxtel. :(
Still, you can go to various places to watch it and the ABC coverage makes up for no TV somewhat.
As for the series itself, I would've put Australia as certainties to win the Test series although the endless series of controvesies that have engulfed them in the last few weeks would undoubtedly have destabilised them.
Having said that, South Africa look anything but intimidating, especially as they have virtually the same side that toured here - Australia to win fairly comfortably.
By the way, I just checked that Australia are a very generous $2 at Sportsbet to win the series. My advice would be to take those odds.
Really looking forward to this. A 7.30 start is an ideal time to kick back & enjoy it all too. It'll also provide a distraction if things get ugly tomorrow tomorrow night in Cairns ;).
I think Australia will win the series, S.A. have no answer to Glenn McGrath.
Originally posted by Bigger Kev
This is the crucial series. Australia MUST win to earn back the respect they have earned in the last 12 months. They are the number one side they just have to play like it....
In order to turn around a disappointing 3-0 victory over them here in the summer? :confused:
Originally posted by Spogs
Australia's test form has been great. We destoyed SA here and people forget that we had NZ on the ropes in Brisbane and Hobart. NZ only had a sniff after a very generous Oz declaration in Brisbane but were completely outplayed for most of that test and the Hobart test.
Last time I checked, you had to take twenty wickets to win a test, as opposed to batting for sixty five percent of the available match time during your first innings.
Aye, Australia batted well against New Zealand but remind me again which test Australia looked like winning.
This isn't first class cricket, nobody is playing for first innings points.
On this series I really have no idea how South Africa will go, but commonsense tells me the Africans will be far more competitive at home.
Originally posted by Player
On this series I really have no idea how South Africa will go, but commonsense tells me the Africans will be far more competitive at home.
Well they were terrible here so that wouldn't be hard would it?
Aussies 3-0.
Originally posted by BT
Well they were terrible here so that wouldn't be hard would it?
Aussies 3-0.
That is so true.
The ACB should have organised a fourth test from the 'extra' sessions not needed from the test series to see if Australia could have won the series 4-0.
The Hippie
21 Feb 2002, 21:01
Originally posted by Player
Last time I checked, you had to take twenty wickets to win a test, as opposed to batting for sixty five percent of the available match time during your first innings.
Aye, Australia batted well against New Zealand but remind me again which test Australia looked like winning.
This isn't first class cricket, nobody is playing for first innings points.
On this series I really have no idea how South Africa will go, but commonsense tells me the Africans will be far more competitive at home.
C'mon Player, you don't think Australia wasn't on top in the first test when the rain came? If it had been allowed to play out they wouldn't have had to declare at 2/80 in the second dig to try and push for a result. Same situation in the 2nd test, NZ were way short of the follow-on target with 1 or 2? wickets in hand. If both games were to run their normal course, Australia would have been heavy favourites to win.
I'm not saying they were shoe-ins, because anything can and does happen, but you can't deny Australia, if the weather hadn't have had a say, were in better positions to win either of those games than the Kiwis.
Dippers Donuts
21 Feb 2002, 22:10
aussies to win 2 nil.
Steve Waugh to score 2 tons.
Player, you're on drugs.
Big blow for South Africa with Pollock and Ontong out.
This is probably the biggest test series Australia has had since the Windies 94/95.
From a team perspective, if we lose, we are no longer able to officially call ourselves world champions. And after our 0-0 draw with New Zealand, questions will be asked about just how strong our side really is.
And for a number of the players it is huge.
Mark Waugh and Steve Waugh seem to be on thin ice, and a best series for either of them will see at least a temporary, if not permenant end to their careers.
Ricky Ponting will be on a high after being named as one-day captain, and it will be very interesting to see how he handles the test series. Even though he is not officially higher in the team in the test arena, he will now, effectively be the next in charge after Gilchrist.
Hayden and Langer are in great form, but it will be a huge test to see if they are one summer wonders, or if this partnership really is the real deal.
Martyn and Gilchrist are really the only two of our top seven that this is "just another series" for them. Neither have really high expectations on them, and neither are in jeopardy of being dropped from the team.
For Brett Lee it is massive. Hes form is all over the shop - one minute he's a world beater, next minute he's a park cricketer. He has "potential" {<--- the dirty word again} but he needs to turn it into performances like he did two summers ago.
Jason Gillespie will be under heavy scrutiny. He is constantly moving up the ranks of Australian quickies, to the point where he is now solid as our number two quick, however, injuries have taken their toll on him, and this is his longest run without injury, so his body will be a talking point.
For Warne and McGrath they're experienced campaigners. They know what needs to be done, they've gone through all the pressue, and like Martyn and Gilchrist, they're the two bowlers will be going into this series with full confidence of achieving their expectations and not having to worry if they don't.
GoEagles
21 Feb 2002, 23:24
Looking forward to this series, should be a ripper! Hard to predict without sounding too cocky but I think Australia could win 3-0 or 2-0 if the Proteas hold out for a draw. Is this Donald's test swansong, will the Waughs survive this test series, will Warne bounce back from a disappointing one day series? Lots to look forward to!
Briedis
22 Feb 2002, 08:20
It's a shame for South Africa that Pollock is out, because I thought that they would win this series, but they will probably lose this first test now that he is out and that could put them under pressure.
It's dangerous to judge a team's form when they come to Australia. Australia has become the hardest place to win for touring sides. India came here and got smashed 3-0 as well, yet they won their series over there. The Windies were smashes 5-0 only 18 months after a 2-2 series in the Caribean.
We have not seen the best of players like Hayward, Gibbs, Kirsten and McKenzie. Pollock was also very ordinary in the tests out here.
I think it will be a very even series and it will end in a 1-1 draw.
London Dave
22 Feb 2002, 08:41
It will be a lot closer than the Oz series...2-1 will be the result if it doesnt rain off a test. 2-1, to whom?
dogboy23
22 Feb 2002, 10:25
Originally posted by Briedis
It's a shame for South Africa that Pollock is out, because I thought that they would win this series, but they will probably lose this first test now that he is out and that could put them under pressure.
It's dangerous to judge a team's form when they come to Australia. Australia has become the hardest place to win for touring sides. India came here and got smashed 3-0 as well, yet they won their series over there. The Windies were smashes 5-0 only 18 months after a 2-2 series in the Caribean.
We have not seen the best of players like Hayward, Gibbs, Kirsten and McKenzie. Pollock was also very ordinary in the tests out here.
I think it will be a very even series and it will end in a 1-1 draw. Briedis last time we were out there we killed them and we were carrying Taylor and also had a few injury problems.Mcgrath thrives on the wickets over there and Lee and Gillespie(who punished them last tour also
)will also be able to thrive on the pitches over there.We have a heap of improvement from last series that will hold us in a good position.I expect the Waughs to have a good series and also Ponting.Gilly will look for a better return to.I think we will smash them.Steve Waugh looks in a punishing mood.
We hardly killed them last time. 2-1 with a close win in Port Elizabeth. I think we were 8 wickets down in the second innings when Healy hit that 6 to win the match.
Having said that I don't think SA are as strong now as they were then but I'm expecting a much better performance from them than they put in out here.
dogboy23
22 Feb 2002, 12:25
Originally posted by BMD
We hardly killed them last time. 2-1 with a close win in Port Elizabeth. I think we were 8 wickets down in the second innings when Healy hit that 6 to win the match.
Having said that I don't think SA are as strong now as they were then but I'm expecting a much better performance from them than they put in out here. Admittedly it was closer than I made out but if you have a close look we should have pumped them.We won the first test by a street.Made a 500 plus total in reply to a mediocre one then bowled them out reasonably cheaply again.The next test we batted **** on the first day.They had a meeting and vowed never to play such defensive cricket again boowled them out for 200 odd from 1-100 then Mark Waugh played possibly the greatest innings of his career.Last test was a dead rubber and we had players out.All this was done with Taylor in the worst part of his form slump.Healy barely fit enough to play and a few other injuries.In the second test after coming back from oblivion we were cruising at 4 or 5 for with not many to get when we lost a couple of quick ones right at the death. For the one dayers we fielded what was almost an a side at that time and were experimenting with the side.We still beat them.
Briedis
22 Feb 2002, 13:55
Originally posted by BMD
Having said that I don't think SA are as strong now as they were then but I'm expecting a much better performance from them than they put in out here.
They are really going to miss Pollock. With him out the Aussies should win the first test.
But, I'm not too sure if they were stronger then. I think Kallis and Pollock are both better bowlers now then they were then, especially Kallis. Donald has lost his fire, but is still reasonable. Hayward and Ntini both showed some dramatic improvement in their tour out here and it will be interesting to see if they can continue that growth. The difference in this series is that SA do not have the quality variety of Pat Symcox. They will miss a quality spinner, although it sounds like the tracks are not all that condusive to spin anyway.
Their batting is a little weaker without Cullinan, Cronje and Rhodes - well maybe not Cullinan! But Gibbs has proven that he is now realizing his potential and he and Kirsten have been rock-solid for SA. Kallis has come into his own in this side and is a far better batsman than he was last time. That just leaves McKenzie, Ontong and Dippenaar to perform. These guys are the players the Aussies will attack and try to keep down.
Originally posted by The Hippie
C'mon Player, you don't think Australia wasn't on top in the first test when the rain came? If it had been allowed to play out they wouldn't have had to declare at 2/80 in the second dig to try and push for a result. Same situation in the 2nd test, NZ were way short of the follow-on target with 1 or 2? wickets in hand. If both games were to run their normal course, Australia would have been heavy favourites to win.
I'm not saying they were shoe-ins, because anything can and does happen, but you can't deny Australia, if the weather hadn't have had a say, were in better positions to win either of those games than the Kiwis.
Games running their normal course? What is that day six?
Don't they have weather forecasts at the cricket anymore?
New Zealand got kodus for all the planning they did but if Australia can not be arsed adapting their game plan to the conditions then don't go around bitching about how the weather ruined the chance for victory.
First Test:
Australia were still batting in their first innings late into day three. I was more than happy to see Australia bat, and bat, and bat, because they certainly were not improving their chance of winning, instead they were doing the job of the New Zealand top order and saving the test.
Australia may have been on top but they certainly were not winning this test.
Second Test:
Australia put on probably the best top order batting display I have ever seen, but nobody held a gun to their head and forced them to score almost 600 in a test everybody knew was going to be shortened by rain.
The fact that New Zealand had a mini collapse and lost their middle order in the first innings on day five, expect for a centurion from the third test, should make it obvious to all Australia was never going to win this test either.
The only regret I have from this series is that one day it may be looked back at as the good old days of New Zealand cricket.
Kane McGoodwin
22 Feb 2002, 18:42
With Pollock out potentially for the full series, I can't see the Proteas getting anywhere near the Australians. 3-0 whitewash IMO. Only a magical inning from a Kallis or Kirsten could prevent this. Would be feeling even more confident if Boof was playing instead of the under-achieving M Waugh.
The Hippie
22 Feb 2002, 22:24
Originally posted by Player
Games running their normal course? What is that day six?
Don't they have weather forecasts at the cricket anymore?
New Zealand got kodus for all the planning they did but if Australia can not be arsed adapting their game plan to the conditions then don't go around bitching about how the weather ruined the chance for victory.
First Test:
Australia were still batting in their first innings late into day three. I was more than happy to see Australia bat, and bat, and bat, because they certainly were not improving their chance of winning, instead they were doing the job of the New Zealand top order and saving the test.
Australia may have been on top but they certainly were not winning this test.
Second Test:
Australia put on probably the best top order batting display I have ever seen, but nobody held a gun to their head and forced them to score almost 600 in a test everybody knew was going to be shortened by rain.
The fact that New Zealand had a mini collapse and lost their middle order in the first innings on day five, expect for a centurion from the third test, should make it obvious to all Australia was never going to win this test either.
The only regret I have from this series is that one day it may be looked back at as the good old days of New Zealand cricket.
Mate, I was talking about if the games weren't affected by the weather at all, Australia with the starts they had would have been in a better position than NZ after the first innings of both games, if the weather hadn't played it's part. All hypotheticals now, though.
wagstaff
24 Feb 2002, 23:31
Originally posted by wagstaff
By the way, I just checked that Australia are a very generous $2 at Sportsbet to win the series. My advice would be to take those odds.
I rest my case.
red+black
25 Feb 2002, 12:01
you're on drugs mate. you make it sound like Australia are in the doldrums. so we drew with NZ. we would have won without the rain, but excuses aside, NZ are a bloody good team. too bad to SAf, so what if they had Pollock out then Donald injured. We lost McDermott and Fleming before the Windies tour in 95 yet we still won the series, although I predicted a 4-0 series loss at the time.
To even question our openers shows that you have a few screws loose. But I give you credit for your comments on Marto, Gilly, Fatboy and Ooh Aah.
Originally posted by hourn
Big blow for South Africa with Pollock and Ontong out.
This is probably the biggest test series Australia has had since the Windies 94/95.
From a team perspective, if we lose, we are no longer able to officially call ourselves world champions. And after our 0-0 draw with New Zealand, questions will be asked about just how strong our side really is.
And for a number of the players it is huge.
Mark Waugh and Steve Waugh seem to be on thin ice, and a best series for either of them will see at least a temporary, if not permenant end to their careers.
Ricky Ponting will be on a high after being named as one-day captain, and it will be very interesting to see how he handles the test series. Even though he is not officially higher in the team in the test arena, he will now, effectively be the next in charge after Gilchrist.
Hayden and Langer are in great form, but it will be a huge test to see if they are one summer wonders, or if this partnership really is the real deal.
Martyn and Gilchrist are really the only two of our top seven that this is "just another series" for them. Neither have really high expectations on them, and neither are in jeopardy of being dropped from the team.
For Brett Lee it is massive. Hes form is all over the shop - one minute he's a world beater, next minute he's a park cricketer. He has "potential" {<--- the dirty word again} but he needs to turn it into performances like he did two summers ago.
Jason Gillespie will be under heavy scrutiny. He is constantly moving up the ranks of Australian quickies, to the point where he is now solid as our number two quick, however, injuries have taken their toll on him, and this is his longest run without injury, so his body will be a talking point.
For Warne and McGrath they're experienced campaigners. They know what needs to be done, they've gone through all the pressue, and like Martyn and Gilchrist, they're the two bowlers will be going into this series with full confidence of achieving their expectations and not having to worry if they don't.