Cricket: England tour of South Africa 2009/10

K

killadoob

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
46,571
I don't think lance is a rock.

You realize what a rock is? tiny % of the population :D. Poms refers to an entire nation.
 
L

LancelotSA

Banned
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
14,713
phoneJunky said:
I feel we played better than England, but the fact remains that we drew the series and that that England did hold on to their draw twice. We did something wrong, either we took to long to declare or we have a bowling problem. I think it was the declaration.
Click to expand...

I strongly disagree.

My view is that it is just the nature of sport. Anything can happen. England just got the roll of the dice at the time. One edge goes to hand, one ball zipping passed the outside edge actually takes the edge and it is a different story.

First test : SA left England 363 runs to score off 96 overs at a RR of 3.28

In the England 1st innings they scored at 3.42 RPO.
In the SA 2nd innings they scored at 3.5 RPO.


Third test : SA left England 465 runs to score off 141 overs at a RR of 3.29

In the England 1st innings they scored at 3.1 RPO.
In the SA 2nd innings they scored at 4.01 RPO.

We had 141 overs to bowl England out!

In both cases if he declared earlier and England made the total then he'd be condemned for doing so. In hindsight, as a result of us getting so close the timing of the declaration is being questioned. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

In test cricket it is common to ensure you have made the game safe before declaring.
 
L

LancelotSA

Banned
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
14,713
CHURCHILL said:
Sorry guy's let me explain what i meant, this last test match really changed the way the Stats look regarding total runs/wickets, SA went on the rampage, what i'm refering to is before this last test, it was SA's inability to take vital wickets that got them into a 1 down 1 to play situation, like you all say, if SA took those wickets, it would have been 3-1, but they did not/could not.
Click to expand...

Ok, so then we'll do a comparison but just exclude the 2nd test too as this was when England went on the rampage. If we do that then we have both teams taking 36 wickets in the other two tests. Still does not show England to be far superior in the bowling department.

And in those two tests in which you state SA were unable to take vital wickets it will be worthwhile to show the fall of wickets in the England second innings :

1st test : 5-205 (Trott, 81.4 ov), 6-207 (Bell, 85.2 ov), 7-208 (Prior, 87.5 ov), 8-209 (Broad, 88.4 ov), 9-218 (Swann, 92.5 ov)
13 runs. 5 wickets!

3rd test : 6-272 (Collingwood, 127.3 ov), 7-278 (Prior, 129.6 ov), 8-286 (Broad, 137.4 ov), 9-290 (Bell, 138.1 ov)
18 runs. 4 wickets!

Extremely poor bowling display?
 
Last edited:
C

CHURCHILL

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
1,135
killadoob said:
I don't think lance is a rock.

You realize what a rock is? tiny % of the population :D. Poms refers to an entire nation.
Click to expand...

Lol, well the way he comes across when talking anything about English cricket i assumed he was, my mistake.
 
C

CHURCHILL

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
1,135
LancelotSA said:
Nah, he is English we all know he is unable to stand up to the good South African balls!
But now we are going off subject and letting my wonderfully posted stats get lost ;)
Click to expand...

lol, Mr Onions did it on 2 occasions, give some credit.
 
K

killadoob

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
46,571
Trouble with england is onions batted better than peterson and trott hahah

You know you are in trouble when it takes the last batsmen to help you out.
 
sand_man

sand_man

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
35,845
CHURCHILL said:
My opinion is , SA was by far the better batting side through out the series, and England was the better wicket taking side, not run rate, England gave away alot of runs though, but took alot of wickets.
Click to expand...
That's a contradiction in terms..
 
M

milomak

Honorary Master
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
12,571
LancelotSA said:
I strongly disagree.

My view is that it is just the nature of sport. Anything can happen. England just got the roll of the dice at the time. One edge goes to hand, one ball zipping passed the outside edge actually takes the edge and it is a different story.

First test : SA left England 363 runs to score off 96 overs at a RR of 3.28

In the England 1st innings they scored at 3.42 RPO.
In the SA 2nd innings they scored at 3.5 RPO.


Third test : SA left England 465 runs to score off 141 overs at a RR of 3.29

In the England 1st innings they scored at 3.1 RPO.
In the SA 2nd innings they scored at 4.01 RPO.

We had 141 overs to bowl England out!

In both cases if he declared earlier and England made the total then he'd be condemned for doing so. In hindsight, as a result of us getting so close the timing of the declaration is being questioned. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

In test cricket it is common to ensure you have made the game safe before declaring.
Click to expand...


have to agree with this. there was nothing wrong with the cape town declaration. just that we sucked donkey balls while collingwood and bell were in.
 
S

Smooth Criminal

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
3,895
For all Broad's antics, he's gotten away with quite a few things.

But WHY was no action taken for him showing dissent after being given out by the 3rd umpire??? There's no grey areas for that one because dissent is dissent. And why was England not penalised for over rates of 10 overs per hour during the Cape Town test when they were doing their best to waste time?

I also like how the poms were moaning about the referral system when Biff was given not out, but didn't have any problems when decisions went against us (with on-field calls being reversed in the absence of conclusive evidence) in the previous tests.

They seem to moan a lot about everyone else, but fail to see their own shortcomings.
 
Last edited:
K

killadoob

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
46,571
England just suck ass

Worst cricket nation on the planet in terms of attitude, you can understand the aussies arrogance because well they are good legends but england i cannot understand.

Arrogant cheating swine is what they are :D
 
Nerfherder

Nerfherder

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
29,703
Smooth Criminal said:
For all Broad's antics, he's gotten away with quite a few things.

But WHY was no action taken for him showing dissent after being given out by the 3rd umpire??? There's no grey areas for that one because dissent is dissent. And why was England not penalised for over rates of 10 overs per hour during the Cape Town test when they were doing their best to waste time?
Click to expand...

I don't get why he went to bother the 3rd umpire after he walked off the pitch ? The next batsman was already scoring runs and the game was moving on, did he expect them to send him back on to the field ?? What was the point of making an arse of him self.

He is a good player but has a serious issues with accepting the decision of the umpire. Its going to start affecting his career.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top