-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* England in South Africa
- Thread starter James
- Start date
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
He has looked threatening in every Oval test since WI 2004. Plus you can use the example of Lord's 05 & Old Trafford 06, again similar bouncy decks like today where he was very good.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
Oval tests - 2005? Not really. 2006? Ineffectual for most of the time, eventually picked up a couple of wickets when we were already in trouble. Maybe didn't play in 2007? 2008 had his moments although his figures weren't as stellar as some would have you believe.
Lord's 2005 - bowled well in the first innings only. Likewise OT in 2006 actually.
And those two good innings are pretty much it over a five year period. You couldn't really blame Flower & co for suggetsing he spends the winter at the Ashington Working Men's Club.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
Rain, storms, floods, disease, pestilance ...
I'd fly them home tomorrow and be done with.
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Can't remember the specifics but he took a 5fer in the second dig so you might be being slightly harsh there?
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Bowled better than his 1 for 80 odd suggested. That spell when he ran in hard getting some real extra bounce & really roughed up Langer who has just gotten his hundred was excellent.
Well yea this was the only test he wasn;t that great at the Oval. But again IIRC the pitch when Pakistan batted really flattened out after PAK had bowled us out in the 1st innings.
Yea didn't play in 07 & yes he bowled better vs SA 08 there than his figures suggested for sure.
Actually in both innings of both tests he was very good, especially @ OT 06. But yes thats the story of his career, pretty much a bowler after his superb 7 test period of WI/NZ 04, who needed PERFECT conditions to be really effective. Which in a era of flat pitches was never going to happen..
I dont. They clearly took the option NOT to give Harmo a go on this tour, even though the likelihood of him getting a helpul/helpul surfaces in SA was very likely. Given that like most of us fans we have been very frustrated with his test performances, i dont expect to see him playing for ENG again though..
King Pietersen
International Captain
Sidebottom either bowling too wide, too short or a mix of both. Pitch the bloody thing up ffs.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Sidebottom's getting a lot of movement and his line's been good IMO, but he does need to pitch it that fraction fuller. He's not getting cut or pulled but he's not going to get the edge with that length either.
Last edited:
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
But that was his one good spell. Other than that, he was ineffectual. Compared to Flintoff, who showed what could be achieved by bowling fast and straight on that particular track.
Looked that way because we didn't bowl as well as Pak did. Plus they probably batted better.
Sorry, but he wasn't very good in the 2nd innings at Lord's. 3 for 54 sounds fine, but he didn't take his 1st wicket until they had 255 on the board. After KP'd got us within touching distance of the Aus total, we needed Harmy to roar in and wrest the initiative back again, but he simply wasn't good enough. As for OT 06, his figures in the 2nd innings flattered him massively - cleaning up the tail after Panesar had removed the top order.
EDIT
The other thing I meant to say was about having him available for this sort of pitch actually wasn't an option after he declared that he only wanted to tour if he was an integral part of the side. Words to that effect, anyway. Sort of understandable after his experience in the Caribbean, but no good to coach & captain. He left them no choice really.
Last edited:
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Steyn's dismissal of Bell was top quality bowling. Why Tests are so great.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
Sounds like we have to take our hats off to Steyn & Morkel for bowling outstandingly well today. Obv it doesn't help when Trott & KP give it away like they did, but other than that ....
Looking at the English attack, whoever we'd picked, we're just not quite in that league. I still reckon bringing in Sidebottom for Onions at this point was plain stupid. The venue isn't only about swing - all the build up was about pace and bounce, which is what we saw from Morkel early on today. And in any case, Sidebottom has never done remotely enough against good sides to justify coming in like this, espcially not having played for weeks. But even allowing for all that, we've not once been able to take advantage of helpful conditions in this series, and a bit of reality about the standard of our quicks may be overdue. Especially when faced with genuinely world class performers like Smith, who I thought was brilliant tonight.
Looking at the English attack, whoever we'd picked, we're just not quite in that league. I still reckon bringing in Sidebottom for Onions at this point was plain stupid. The venue isn't only about swing - all the build up was about pace and bounce, which is what we saw from Morkel early on today. And in any case, Sidebottom has never done remotely enough against good sides to justify coming in like this, espcially not having played for weeks. But even allowing for all that, we've not once been able to take advantage of helpful conditions in this series, and a bit of reality about the standard of our quicks may be overdue. Especially when faced with genuinely world class performers like Smith, who I thought was brilliant tonight.
BoyBrumby
Englishman
Just saw the Cook referral. Pains me to say it, but Howler got it right, just.
Some truly, truly awful dismissals tho. Strauss, Trott & KP all culpable.
Series is going to be like one of those exams that you think you've waltzed and then realise with horror there's another side to the question paper and you're actually ****ed.
Some truly, truly awful dismissals tho. Strauss, Trott & KP all culpable.
Series is going to be like one of those exams that you think you've waltzed and then realise with horror there's another side to the question paper and you're actually ****ed.
Woodster
International Captain
Harsh on Strauss I think, don't think he did a massive amount wrong, but was dismissed by an outstanding catch. Trott was culpable, as I said earlier in the thread, more for the way he went about his innings today. He didn't look the composed, solid Trott that we saw on that glorious day at the Oval. He was shot a ball, and not particularly good shots.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Never seen that before from Sidebottom hey.
BoyBrumby
Englishman
Amla was put there specifically for that shot from Strauss, so you have to at least question the thought process IMHO.
Georgeous bit of bowling from Steyn to get Bell, classic swing. Outswinger, outswinger, inswinger.
Prince's non-catch was a shocker tho. I don't think anyone could seriously claim he didn't know he'd dropped that. Only thing in his favour is he was non-commital.
Last edited:
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Did day three of the second Test pass you by?
Just seen the ball that Steyn got Bell with, wowzer