Donald think SA has bowling concerns

[jboss]

Cricinfo stated today that Donald says that Arthur and co are concerned about SA taking 20 wickets in the Test series. I am not so sure and I fell that this would be the likely test team for the first test:

1)Smith
2)Elgar
3)AB
4)JP
5)Prince
6)Kallis
7)Boucher
8)Harris)
9)Morne
10)Tsotsobe/Langeveldt/Theron
11)Steyn

There are no concerns in the batting for me and I feel there enough people in line for sharing the new ball with Steyn. Morne has hit form again and they may well play him due to his success 2 years ago vs England. Tsotsobe has been part of SA plans since Australia and there is always Langeveldt that has the experience. What about Ntini who has not been dropped from the test team? Then you have the youngsters like Parnell and Theron.

Do you see a lack of depth here?

 

[Matt79]

Really depends on which Morne shows up. If it's the poor Morne, then yeah, a lot of responsibility is going to fall on Steyn and it becomes easier for opposing batsmen to just try to sit on him and relieve the pressure at the other end.

 

[DingDong]

Even if u had the 80s pace quartet from the west indies, there;ll be somebody saying the attack is weak because there's no spinner there. donald is just being silly ok. that attack is as good as any in the world.

 

[Uppercut]

Really depends on which Morne shows up. If it's the poor Morne, then yeah, a lot of responsibility is going to fall on Steyn and it becomes easier for opposing batsmen to just try to sit on him and relieve the pressure at the other end.

They'd probably do that anyway, considering he's the best bowler in the world. I don't know whether it's the right way to play someone who bowls as aggressive a line and length as Steyn does.

I'd go for Morne/Tsotsobe (depending on how they're bowling at the moment), Parnell, Steyn, Harris and Kallis. I think that can definitely take 20 English wickets.

 

[Matt79]

Agreed, but becomes a less feasible option when there aren't easy runs from the other end.

 

[Uppercut]

It's true, and it's why Paul Harris has been so effective in his role as a deceptively good spinner who loves being attacked. Largely because of the jobs he and Kallis do for the side, South Africa's bowling has worked really well as a unit for a long time now. Looking at their lineup and wondering where 20 wickets are going to come from would be ignoring the fact that they've rarely looked especially fantastic on paper recently but have still been the best side at putting 20 wickets together from somewhere.

 

[chaminda_00]

There a lot of pressure on Parnell to step up this Test series. Lets not forgot he yet to make his Test debut. His FC record isn't that great either, his yet to take a 5-fer in FC matches. I think he good enough, but if he takes the new ball, that is a lot of pressure to be the 2nd main strike bowler.

 

[wpdavid]

They might struggle to take 20 Australian wickets, but England are usually more obliging. Especially when SA's batsmen have racked up 400+, which is likely to happen more often than not.

 

[Scaly piscine]

They might struggle to take 20 Australian wickets, but England are usually more obliging. Especially when SA's batsmen have racked up 400+, which is likely to happen more often than not.

Yea was just going to say that you rarely have to worry about taking 20 *England* wickets. Half of them will be handed on a plate, then the rest will be mostly the tailenders.

 

[wpdavid]

Cricinfo stated today that Donald says that Arthur and co are concerned about SA taking 20 wickets in the Test series. I am not so sure and I fell that this would be the likely test team for the first test:

1)Smith
2)Elgar
3)AB
4)JP
5)Prince
6)Kallis
7)Boucher
8)Harris)
9)Morne
10)Tsotsobe/Langeveldt/Theron
11)Steyn

No Amla?

 

[Uppercut]

They might struggle to take 20 Australian wickets, but England are usually more obliging. Especially when SA's batsmen have racked up 400+, which is likely to happen more often than not.

Even against Australia they went okay- took the 20 four times in six matches. Their three victories were all on fairly flat decks too.

Shouldn't really be too much to worry about here.

 

[wpdavid]

Even against Australia they went okay- took the 20 four times in six matches. Their three victories were all on fairly flat decks too.

Shouldn't really be too much to worry about here.

Not from a SA perspective, anyway.

 

[Matt79]

If Steyn stays fit.

But then, that's true of nearly every team and their top bowler.

 

[jboss]

No Amla?

It is a tussle between him and Prince. I am making the prediction that Elgar to make debut due to form and that we need an opening batsman. Prince has been more consistent than Amla so he will prob get the vote.

 

[BoyBrumby]

If Steyn stays fit.

But then, that's true of nearly every team and their top bowler.

TBF England are like Kryptonite for Steyn; he's almost invariably bowled gash against us.

Not that it mattered in 2008, mind. Kallis stepped up big time.

Anyway, Donald's comments are quite interesting. Not so much that he says SA has problems, but that he rates our attack higher,

"I think the South Africa attack is a bit weaker than England's. The England attack is a nose in front with tall bowlers, guys who can make the ball talk, guys who bowl heavy lengths."

Not really sure who he means. Of the likely starters only really Broad is what I'd call "tall" in seam bowling terms.

 

[jboss]

They'd probably do that anyway, considering he's the best bowler in the world. I don't know whether it's the right way to play someone who bowls as aggressive a line and length as Steyn does.

I'd go for Morne/Tsotsobe (depending on how they're bowling at the moment), Parnell, Steyn, Harris and Kallis. I think that can definitely take 20 English wickets.

I would bet out of those that Parnell with the ability to make some runs will be first in line.

 

[Notorious1]

Donald is quite right, apart from Steyn I don;t see any other consistent performer with the ball in the SA line up.

 

[Notorious1]

Kallis is certainly not as good as he used to be.

 

[Uppercut]

TBF England are like Kryptonite for Steyn; he's almost invariably bowled gash against us.

Not that it mattered in 2008, mind. Kallis stepped up big time.

Yeah, Steyn was a bit underwhelming. Bowled absolute poo at Lord's then was lethal at Headingley on an overcast first day (as you'd expect) before suddenly getting injured and missing the rest of the series.

Wouldn't underestimate his contribution though. His spell either side of lunch at the start of the Headingley test was the crucial point in the series. It's a little bit like Flintoff in this year's Ashes.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I am not sure why Donald rates England's bowling attack better than South Africa's..unless he knows something I dont.

Based on how the South African pitches have behaved in the past, I wouldnt really thing South Africa would struggle against Anderson, Onions and Broad. On the other hand, Steyn is a proven match winner, Langevelt is promising and Morkel has the potential to be a serious threat.