Howe_zat
Audio File
I agree, it's the collapse that lost it for them. Williamson doing his best to bat out the 50 overs while taking 8 runs from an excellent Steyn over is a damn good effort.
Last edited:
-
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* Quarter Final 3 - New Zealand v South Africa
- Thread starter James
- Start date
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Kevin O'Brien says hi.
KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
I blame it on Pat Sym***.130-2
153-3
210-8
Ryder and Taylor could have continued on at 4 an over, and NZ still would have been better off.
KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
Or maybe NZ can bowl well.
Somerset
Cricketer Of The Year
Thought we should've made at least 250 given the partnership from Taylor and Ryder, so it was a shame to only reach 220 and really SA should have no issue achieving that. I realise they've a history of losing crucial matches at WCs and we've beaten them in the last two tournaments but I hardly think this current South African bunch are haunted by that. Would love to be proven wrong but frankly we're just not good enough to trouble SA's batsmen with a below par total to defend.
Howsie
International Captain
New Zealand, with eight wickets in hand should have taken the batting PP around the 30th over imo, treat it like like a 20/20.
They're about 30 short imo, 220 is a decent score in a QF but with New Zealand really only having Southee and Vettori as genuine wicket taking options South Africa should do it.
They're about 30 short imo, 220 is a decent score in a QF but with New Zealand really only having Southee and Vettori as genuine wicket taking options South Africa should do it.
smash84
The Tiger King
The 2Ws.......
222 doesn't seem like a stiff target tbh........would require a special effort from SA to lose this one
Shri
Mr. Glass
Yeah, or that.Or maybe NZ can bowl well.
KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
Yeah, the thought process is pretty dire.
I imagine the thinking was to wait until the new batsman were set, which is silly.
Heck, having the fielders in can actually help kick start an innings.
It's pretty weird, because up until this game NZ had been one of the better users of the PP. The way they used it in the Pakistan game was brilliant. The way they used it tonight was pretty Australian-esque. i.e dire
They basically batted at 2-3rpo for 4-5 overs to make sure they had enough wickets in hand and two set batsman all because of a piddly 5 over PP. Mindboggling. No, mindblasting.
I imagine the thinking was to wait until the new batsman were set, which is silly.
Heck, having the fielders in can actually help kick start an innings.
It's pretty weird, because up until this game NZ had been one of the better users of the PP. The way they used it in the Pakistan game was brilliant. The way they used it tonight was pretty Australian-esque. i.e dire
They basically batted at 2-3rpo for 4-5 overs to make sure they had enough wickets in hand and two set batsman all because of a piddly 5 over PP. Mindboggling. No, mindblasting.
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
222 should be easy for SA but with their tendency to blow winning positions ( not going to use c word ) then you can't rule out NZ.
) then you can't rule out NZ.