*Official* South Africa in Pakistan

[pup11]

Frankly i just can't see the point in 2 test playing nations playing a 2 test match series, and TBH South Africa has had a long streak of 2 test match series while playing away from home.
BTW, @ the title of the thread.

 

[Pup Clarke]

No way, Taufeeq is average. Scores his runs against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Hafeez and Farhat should open, Butt should be the reserve if either of the openers take injuries or hit a poor run of form.

Imran Farhat, don't want to see him near a Pakistan test side tbh. It will be intereseting if they return to opening with Shoaib Malik which imo might be a good move. Still not convinced by Hafeez or Butt though.

 

[Pup Clarke]

I'd like to see...

Butt/Hafeez
Malik
Younis
Yousuf
Inzamam
Hameed

as the top 6

 

[Perm]

Imran Farhat, don't want to see him near a Pakistan test side tbh. It will be intereseting if they return to opening with Shoaib Malik which imo might be a good move. Still not convinced by Hafeez or Butt though.

Butt has returned to domestic cricket and scored runs fairly heavily, looks a class player. Imran Farhat has a very good First Class record, showing he can score runs, and has had a decent start to his Test career aswell. I think, given that Mohammad Yousuf has joined the ICL and Inzamam no longer in the frame, that Shoaib Malik would be better served in the middle-order, where Pakistan have less options. Mohammad Hafeez was mighty impressive during his 95 against England I thought, and did well in the West Indies. Unfortunately he had a poor tour of South Africa so may not be considered as one of the first-choice openers.

 

[Perm]

I'd like to see...

Butt/Hafeez
Malik
Younis
Yousuf
Inzamam
Hameed

as the top 6

I'd like to see that aswell, but as I said, Yousuf has gone to the ICL and Inzamam is pretty well out of the picture, unfortunately.

 

[Richard]

No way, Taufeeq is average. Scores his runs against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

And South Africa, bizarrely.

 

[Richard]

I thought you were a fan of Yasir Hameed? Or do you just not want him opening?

Certainly don't want him opening, and I actually can't remember ever saying much about him on here TBH. I've never really made-up my mind about Hameed the middle-order batsman - my Jury's still out.

 

[TT Boy]

Nah, imo that batting line up is a bit too fragile,would always try and find a place for Nel in a SA side. TT where does Dippanaer usually bat?

For the Free State Eagles, number three- which is his preferred batting role but with Amla playing with South Africa A, he has to bat lower down.

And in regard to Nel, his value to the side has gone down dramatically in recent times and it wouldn’t surprise me if he wasn’t selected to tour Pakistan, let alone play in the first eleven. Whilst Morkel has impressed everyone since being selected last year and his performances in the off-season in England, Australia and India have probably put him strong contention. Thoroughly deserves his opportunity.

 

[Richard]

TBH I don't really see either Nel or Morkel doing much in Pakistan. Still rate Nel the better bowler for when it rolls around to South Africa though.

 

[James]

Threads merged guys

 

[Pup Clarke]

Still rate Nel the better bowler for when it rolls around to South Africa though.

"Rolls around to South Africa"?

 

[Prince EWS]

"Rolls around to South Africa"?

Home test matches.

 

[Prince EWS]

IIRR his favoured slot is at the top of the order, but I don't know if he really has one.

I recall him saying in a post-match interview after one his many recalls that he prefers to bat in the top three, but obviously he doesn't mind a great deal as long as he's in the team.

The last thing I want is for a similar thing to happen to ABdeV. If Gibbs opens, he doesn't play. When Gibbs goes (which may well be soon) he opens with Smith. It's just a shame those two haven't been ensconced at the top of the order since 2004\05, really.

Is Kallis really likely to bat three in a Test again? Presuming not, surely the ideal thing is to have the three openers at the top? Then Prince at five obviously.

Well, someone has to bat #6. Personally I don't think De Villiers's technique is good enough against the moving ball to open, even thought he's had quite a bit of success there. His front foot footwork is rather lax as he just plants it straight down the wicket, so if the ball moves away, he's in trouble. Gibbs has been pretty much figured out as an opener of recent times; bowl off cutters or late inswingers and he struggles; essentially the opposite to De Villiers. Batting down at four suits his technique and style a lot better IMO, even if he does prefer opening.

As far as technique, style, ability and balance goes, this would be the best lineup IMO:

1. Smith
2. Dippenaar
3. Kallis
4. Gibbs
5. Prince
6. De Villiers

Obviously that's not very likely at all though, as Amla will probably play (*shudders*), Kallis will want to bat at #4 and either De Villiers or Gibbs will open. I'm expecting something that resembles:

1. Smith
2. Gibbs
3. Amla
4. Kallis
5. Prince
6. De Villiers

Which is looks a bit brittle in places for mine.

 

[Richard]

I'll be astonished if Haaashim Amlaaa doesn't play TBH, I think we all know he's very likely to.

You say de Villiers' technique doesn't appear suited to opening - why's he made a lifetime as an opener, then? He's batted there since he first picked-up a cricket-bat IIRR - sometimes even with the wicketkeeping gloves on. And as such, down the order he's done virtually nothing of note in Tests. I hate trying to manufacture openers into middle-order batsmen just because their technique appears to be vulnerable. UIMM de Villiers hasn't got into excessive trouble with the away-swinger (the way Gibbs did for quite a while with the indipper) yet in his career and it's unfair to deprive him of a spot at the top of the order until it does IMO.

I've moreoreless given-up on Dippenaar as a Test batsman anyway - about 4 years ago, too. I just can't see it, he's a bit of a Ganga or Ramprakash.

Oh, yeah - of course you need someone to bat #6, but there's not exactly a shortage of options. Prince can bat there easily, as the first of them.

 

[Prince EWS]

Oh, yeah - of course you need someone to bat #6, but there's not exactly a shortage of options. Prince can bat there easily, as the first of them.

Well then you need someone to bat at #5. My point wasn't so much that someone had to bat #6, but that you'd seemingly picked only 5 batsmen.

You say de Villiers' technique doesn't appear suited to opening - why's he made a lifetime as an opener, then?

Because bowling at lower levels hasn't been good enough to exploit it. He likes pace on the ball, so he prefers opening - and as long as he could perform well there, no-one ever thought to move him. At test level, I think he'll struggle there, TBPH. I think he'd perform much better down the order, and with no outstanding candidates to bat there, I'd rather play Dippenaar and bat him (ABdeV) down the order than pick someone like Amla.

I've moreoreless given-up on Dippenaar as a Test batsman anyway - about 4 years ago, too. I just can't see it, he's a bit of a Ganga or Ramprakash.

It is highly likely that I'm just biased, as I've always been a big fan. However, he seems very much still in the reckoning, and I'm convinced he's a better option than Amla at very least.

 

[Richard]

Well then you need someone to bat at #5. My point wasn't so much that someone had to bat #6, but that you'd seemingly picked only 5 batsmen.

Well that wasn't my intention. Was merely arguing the ABdeV case.

Because bowling at lower levels hasn't been good enough to exploit it. He likes pace on the ball, so he prefers opening - and as long as he could perform well there, no-one ever thought to move him. At test level, I think he'll struggle there, TBPH. I think he'd perform much better down the order, and with no outstanding candidates to bat there, I'd rather play Dippenaar and bat him (ABdeV) down the order than pick someone like Amla.

TBH I'd back a specialist middle-order player ahead of him every time, and there are several of them, even if you have to go back the Neil McKenzies and Zander de Bruyns (who in the case of the latter got a ridiculously raw deal ITFP). Plus, I'm kinda resigned to Amla playing anyway.

It is highly likely that I'm just biased, as I've always been a big fan. However, he seems very much still in the reckoning, and I'm convinced he's a better option than Amla at very least.

You like temperamentally-frail-but-technically good players like Ganga and Boeta?

 

[Prince EWS]

You like temperamentally-frail-but-technically good players like Ganga and Boeta?

Yes! Chopra, Hafeez and Geraint Jones can join the club as well.

 

[Richard]

Not really sure Geraint Jones is temperamentally frail TBH, just (similar to Afridi) lacking in batting brain. Jones, obviously, is good technically where Afridi is poor, as well as being intillectually very smart (though I've never been sure about Afridi there, I don't like to judge too much on people whose first language is not English) but Jones just plays the same way wherever, as opposed to the likes of Ramprakash, Chopra, Ganga and Boeta who seem to be able to play brilliantly at the domestic level but rarely at the international. And maybe Hafeez too, but curiously he's started well in Test cricket despite a below-average FC record after all those matches of awfulness in ODIs despite an excellent domestic-OD record.

 

[pup11]

Should Amla be in the side, i think he was pretty average in the home series against India and Pakistan, Van Wyk should be included in the test-side IMO.

 

[Richard]

Not sure about van Wyk in Tests TBH, though he's one of several options.

He must be getting on a bit now too.