Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

England v South Africa Test Series

i take the point, but there's a good player in there, as soon as he gets his head sorted. which may never happen of course.
How long do you wait, though? He's already played over 50 tests. Mark Ramprakash was probably the most gifted player of his generation, and he never got it right.

Bell's bought himself another go. And he's been helped by the fact that the four-bowler strategy looks like it has worked too. But this innings proves nothing – in fact I called it as soon as he came in. :D
 
A hat-trick is called a hat-trick because bowlers used to be rewarded with a gold-laced hat or similar for achieving one.

alternatively it was because the bowler could then pass his hat round the crowd for donations to mark the achievement

I've also heard it said that it refers to the three points of a tricorn hat
 
alternatively it was because the bowler could then pass his hat round the crowd for donations to mark the achievement

I've also heard it said that it refers to the three points of a tricorn hat

I read it in Simon Hughes' book 'And God Created Cricket' but it doesn't strike me as a scholarly tome based on exhaustive research.
 
I can't remember the last time England dominated a Test like this against world class opposition.



Oh now I remember, it was at the Oval this summer. :cool:
 
An England win at Durban will keep India at the top of the ICC rankings, SA needed a 2-0 or better series win to return to the top.

Obviously we wait and see what the series outcome will do to England's position. A 3-0 win would see us very close to South Africa but I'd say this is unlikely given our historic dislike of Tests at Newlands
 
all over before i wake up! england win by an innings and 98 runs. swann gets another 5 and broad finishes with 4.
 
unbelievable to think swann only made his debut in december last year. fantastic first year in test cricket.
 
ah they just updated

1 823 D.W. Steyn SA 897 v India, 03/04/2008
2 809 M.G. Johnson AUS 825 v England, 08/07/2009
3 756 G.P. Swann ENG 756 v South Africa, 30/12/2009
4 752 M. Muralidaran SL 920 v Bangladesh, 11/07/2007
5 720 Mohammad Asif PAK 743 v New Zealand, 03/12/2009
6 712 Harbhajan Singh IND 765 v New Zealand, 12/12/2002
7 697 S.C.J. Broad ENG 697 v South Africa, 30/12/2009
8 685 M. Ntini SA 863 v India, 26/12/2006
9 682 S.R. Clark AUS 863 v West Indies, 12/06/2008
10 676 S.E. Bond NZ 778 v West Indies, 09/03/2006
 
It's a slightly bizarre list. Bond played one test in the last two years, and has now officially retired from tests. Clark has been dropped by Aus for no longer being effective and doesn't look like coming back. Ntini has taken something like 12 wickets at an average of 60 in the tests he's played this year, and may have played his last test.
 
Ntini wont be back,great career though,stu clarke has had the bomb and bond too.Mitch Johnson joined a rare group as well being only the seventh player in the history of Tests to take more than 50 wickets(61) and hit more than 500 runs in a calendar year.
India's Vinoo Mankad first achieved the feat in 1952
Since then that performance has been emulated by Ian Botham, Kapil Dev and Shaun Pollock (twice each) along with Andrew Flintoff and Daniel Vettori.
Well done to Broad and Swann they have come on well in the last year
 
Both Swann's bowling and batting averages are better in Test cricket than first class. It's great to see a player finally who thrives on the big stage. Botham and Gower both did better the bigger the stage too, but there have been quite a few in recent years for whom the reverse has been true. I was a bit skeptical about Swann at first, but he's turning out to be a genuine star. :)

I feel a little sorry for SA over Ntini. He is their only black player (in the old apartheid classification) and he wouldn't have been picked for the last test if he hadn't been. But he's lost it and they're obviously desperate for him to get it back again, but I can't see how they can pick him again.
 
Someone posted this on the BBC cricket boards, it's the various occasions on which Bell has scored runs under pressure, i.e. when the score wasn't looking so good:

Year - score when coming in - score

2005 97-2 Aus 3rd test scored 65 (out going for quick runs.)
2005 19-1 Pakistan scored 71
2005 2-39 Pakistan scored 115
2005 2-30 Pakistan scored 92
2006 2-50 against India scored 57 out of 181 in the 3rd inning. Great rearguard innings over almost 3 hours in intense heat, only specialist bat to score more than 14.
2006 110-3 against Pakistan scored 119.
2006 2-28 Aus scored 50 out of 157
2006 2-45 Aus scored 60
2006 1-0 Aus scored 87. 4th innings, batted over 4 hours to try and save match. Cook and Bell partnership of 169 which should have seen England save the match, England capitulated after Bell was out - 350 all out.

2007 Aus 1-45 scored 71 out of 291.
2007 WI 132-4 scored 97 turned match around and England won from a precarious 1st innings position.
2007 4-124 63 top scored and allowed England to get to a respectable 345 and get a draw. Also scord 67 in 2nd innings to secure the draw.
2007 SRI L 1-0 scored 87 and gave England the platform for a 97 run 1st innings lead
2007 SRI L -4 74. 2nd innings of above match. England 4-55 at one point. Bell batted for over 5 hours in an effort to save the match almost single handedly for England. Only support came from Prior and just failed to save match in one of the great rearguard innings of recent times.
2008 SA 3-117 scored 199
2008 SA 3-74 scored 50
2009 Aus 2-60 scored 53
2009 Aus 1-12 top score 72 gave England platform to win Deciding Ashes test.
 
Hmmm. Batting at three, he averages 31 with no test hundreds. That's poor, especially given the flatness of pitches around the world nowadays. A few gritty half-centuries when others have failed, yes. He hasn't been an unmitigated disaster, just a qualified failure.
 
Bell's average under Fletcher: 43.72

Bell's average under Moores: 38.68

Bell's average under Flower: 37.45

I'll give the Flower/Strauss regime of self reliance and self improvement a little time before passing judgement on their handling of Bell but I bet his average starts improving PDQ. I'm pretty sure the Moores regime did him no favours though.
 
We've just won a Test with four bowlers, do you mean for CT specifically or in the foreseeable future?

I wouldn't get ahead of ourselves, SA will come back at us hard and we will need those 20 wickets. With Broad and Swann looking like a permanent feature of future sides we can afford to have 5 bowlers.

For the next test I'd keep the same side but soon someone will need to be dropped and we'll need to find an intimidating seamer.
 
I wouldn't get ahead of ourselves, SA will come back at us hard and we will need those 20 wickets. With Broad and Swann looking like a permanent feature of future sides we can afford to have 5 bowlers.

For the next test I'd keep the same side but soon someone will need to be dropped and we'll need to find an intimidating seamer.

right, so we keep the same side for CT and barring injuries Joburg. Then we experiment in Bangladesh.

Sounds good to me
 
I think England got away with it a bit in the last test with just the four bowlers. Trott was trundling in on the first afternoon, when England should have been pressing home the advantage. And they are very reliant on Swann delivering. Broad and Anderson are patchy, Onions is dependable but not deadly.

Bell's still the first man to lose his place if they opt for five bowlers, which you can guarantee they won't now. I don't see the problem with a 6,7,8 of Prior Broad Swann. Graeme Swann must be just about the best number 9 ever to play for England.

What a difference a test makes, I suppose. England's selection looked conservative to the point of lacking in confidence in the first test. I'm not sure so much has changed. They've basically replaced a bowling allrounder with a batsman. I'm still not comfortable with that.
 
The one thing they mustn't do is try to make Swann a 'proper' allrounder. In the first innings, at least, he must always have full licence to play his shots. So number 8 is a good spot for him, I think, even if he keeps that average up. Just like Australia did very well to keep Gilchrist at 7, Swann should be kept at 8.
 
I think England got away with it a bit in the last test with just the four bowlers.

On a flat wicket if Smith and Kallis get going your three seamers are really going to feel it. That batting line up may not blitz you out of a match but it could easily grind a three man pace attack into the dust. Cape Town though is usualy cooler, less humid and breezier than Durban. Dale Steyn is a genuine world class bowler. He is coming back form injury and if he starts getting anywhere near form in Cape Town could really hurt England. A returning to form Steyn, Morkel and de Wet could put far more pressure on the England batting line up that happened in Durban.

The South Africans may be boring but dont fall for all that Aussie guff about them being chokers, they can be a very tough cricketing team.

Really hope Collingwood plays though. The phase 'heart of oak' is doubly applicable to him.
 
Back
Top Bottom