2007 NZ tour to SA thread

mercurial said:
and when the ball gets older it's harder to spot and bounce is inconsistent. the ball gets soft. so ur argument is null and void.
Click to expand...

lol!!!! bounce is only inconsistent on a variable bouncing pitch. an old ball doesnt swing as much, doesnt bounce as much, doesnt swing as much etc.

if you want, we could arrange a session where I bowl a brand new cricket ball to you compared to an old ball. after this experiment, you will choose to face the old ball :)
 
WonderBob said:
Agree fully.

I wont call him the best captain we ever had. But he is far from being the worst, and is also the only option we have at the moment.

Kallis was offered the captaincy more than once, and declined more than once. He even quite the vice-captaincy.

Same with Boucher, was offered more than once and declined more than once. Even declined the vice-captaincy.

Smith was offered the captaincy after playing only a handful of tests at the age of 22. And took the job without complaining. That in itself has to tell you something about the man. Even if its just that he rates himself, but you need that as an international captain :)
Click to expand...

smith is the right man for the job.
 
Syzygy78 said:
if you want, we could arrange a session where I bowl a brand new cricket ball to you compared to an old ball. after this experiment, you will choose to face the old ball :)
Click to expand...

lol. keep in mind that the new ball goes quicker to the boundary than the older one ;)
 
mercurial said:
i don't think we're being petty, i think we are allowed to criticise where we see fit. be honest, when last has Graeme made any form of contribution with the bat? he is a captain and a batsman. that's 2 jobs and as harsh(yet fair) as it sounds, he should be doing both. ATM he is only doing one. but thank God for people like Kallis & Amla, who's great batting performances makes Graeme's poor batting displays go unnoticed.
Click to expand...

from your post above:

be honest, when last has Graeme made any form of contribution with the bat?

IN PAKISTAN.

did you forget about that then, or was it not good enough for you. That is all I was asking.

Then you say he is only doing half his job at the moment and so forth.

And then all of a sudden after trying to argue against all the knowledge and opinion in world cricket that opening the batting is easier than batting lower down, you turn your argument around.

:confused:
 
WonderBob said:
from your post above:

be honest, when last has Graeme made any form of contribution with the bat?

IN PAKISTAN.

did you forget about that then, or was it not good enough for you. That is all I was asking.

Then you say he is only doing half his job at the moment and so forth.
Click to expand...

i'm saying that some of these "stars" make one big score and that's it. i would opt for consistency ie: 50 each innings than score one big hundred over 10 innings.
 
mercurial said:
i'm saying that some of these "stars" make one big score and that's it. i would opt for consistency ie: 50 each innings than score one big hundred over 10 innings.
Click to expand...

the problem is, an opening bat will be inconsistent. The much raved about Matthew Hayden has an inconsistent last 10 test record. Here it is:

0 - - - 1 W 2nd Test v SA in SA 2005/06 at Durban [1792]
- DNB 2 0 2
102 - - - 3
- DNB 1 0 4
- DNB 1 0 1 W 3rd Test v SA in SA 2005/06 at Johannesburg [1795]
3 - - - 2
- DNB 1 0 3
0 - - - 4
- DNB 2 0 1 W 1st Test v BD in BD 2005/06 at Fatullah [1797]
6 - - - 2
- DNB 1 0 3
72 - - - 4
- DNB 2 0 1 W 2nd Test v BD in BD 2005/06 at Chittagong (CDS) [1799]
29 - - - 2
- DNB 1 0 3
21 - - - 1 W 1st Test v Eng in Aus 2006/07 at Brisbane [1817]
- DNB 1 0 2
37 - - - 3
- DNB 0 0 4
- DNB 0 0 1 W 2nd Test v Eng in Aus 2006/07 at Adelaide [1819]
12 - - - 2
- DNB 2 0 3
18 - - - 4
24 - - - 1 W 3rd Test v Eng in Aus 2006/07 at Perth [1821]
- DNB 2 0 2
92 - - - 3
- DNB 0 0 4
- DNB 0 0 1 W 4th Test v Eng in Aus 2006/07 at Melbourne [1824]
153 - - - 2
- DNB 0 0 3
- DNB 1 0 1 W 5th Test v Eng in Aus 2006/07 at Sydney [1826]
33 - - - 2
- DNB 1 0 3
23* - - - 4
43 - - - 1 W 1st Test v SL in Aus 2007/08 at Brisbane [1845]
- DNB 0 0 2
- DNB 0 0 3
 
mercurial said:
that's exactly my point. 100 pushes up his average for the series. it doesn't mean he was consistent in the series. it actually means, the other scores were low. but you guys are taking it a little too far.
Click to expand...

He scores was as follows

42

25

46

133

The only real low score there is 25.

I don't see any problem with any of those scores. And in my opinion he performed very well in Pak.
 
mercurial said:
i'm saying that some of these "stars" make one big score and that's it. i would opt for consistency ie: 50 each innings than score one big hundred over 10 innings.
Click to expand...

50 every innings ???

Any selector in the world would give their left testicle for a player like that.

But unfortunately this is the real world, not fantasy.

And as proved above with Haydens stats. Opening the batting is not easy.
Bowlers take wickets with the new ball. Thats the way it is supposed to be. Otherwise they might as well put 2 bowling machines at each end, and play 11 batsmen.
 
mercurial said:
ur acting rather immaturely :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Nope the biggest truth is what you think or say about yourself! So then what must others think if you say it was cr@p!

Rather agree you made a blunder and accept that that is exactly what makes cricket...er...cricket. The uncertainty and when a top performer fails on the day and a back-ender suddenly achieve that makes it all great. The expectations, trial and tribulations. Thats Cricket! NZ was ahead at the end of the first day, What happened? They slipped! Thats cricket!
 
WonderBob said:
50 every innings ???

Any selector in the world would give their left testicle for a player like that.

But unfortunately this is the real world, not fantasy.

And as proved above with Haydens stats. Opening the batting is not easy.
Bowlers take wickets with the new ball. Thats the way it is supposed to be. Otherwise they might as well put 2 bowling machines at each end, and play 11 batsmen.
Click to expand...

posting mattie hayden's stats has no bearing on graeme's performances.
 
.geek said:
You fail to take in to account the political pressure involved in the make up of the team during Smith's reign as captain over that period, in both the ODI & Test teams. Hansie experienced it towards the end of his time as captain.

The South African cricket team has not always been selected on merit.
Click to expand...
If you want to look at it that way compare to Polly's record. He's probably the captain who was most under the cosh politically speaking.
 
mercurial said:
Jacques Kallis performed well. Graeme was average.
Click to expand...

average ??

his batting average was 61, he scored more than 200 runs in 4 innings.

He is a mere mortal, not a batting god by any stretch of the imagination.

Add the fact that it was the first time that a team won both the ODI and TEST series in 1 tour. I think he performed well above average.
 
WonderBob said:
average ??

his batting average was 61, he scored more than 200 runs in 4 innings.

He is a mere mortal, not a batting god by any stretch of the imagination.

Add the fact that it was the first time that a team won both the ODI and TEST series in 1 tour. I think he performed well above average.
Click to expand...

his 100 was good. the other scores were average.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X