***Official*** Australia in South Africa

[Sylvester]

If all you've seen of Warner is t20 then you've got no idea about what he's capable of. (Well maybe a little).

Well if they saw his CLT20 knocks they might have a relatively good idea. Back to back 100s in T20 is no easy feat and shows his consistency which we have seen in the other formats.

 

[Viscount Tom]

TBH I reckon Warner will play Test cricket before long; truth be told I'm not convinced Hughes will nail down the spot, even when he's in form he got found out.

 

[Burgey]

TBH I reckon Warner will play Test cricket before long; truth be told I'm not convinced Hughes will nail down the spot, even when he's in form he got found out.

Everyone has been found out in this test. Everyone.

 

[Burgey]

And with Ponting at 3 as well, you'd have thought the experienced players taking responsibility and batting so high up would have worked out. Can't think why it didn't.

Did you see the balls the batsmen from both teams have been dismissed by?

 

[adub]

Well if they saw his CLT20 knocks they might have a relatively good idea. Back to back 100s in T20 is no easy feat and shows his consistency which we have seen in the other formats.

that's why I added the (maybe a little) bit.

Still his steadiness in fc recently is in contrast to those knocks, but he can still be brutal when he wants to be.

 

[Cevno]

Not sure i'd want to play or open with Warner in South African conditions tbh, especially if there is equal(or little less) juice in the wickets for the next match too.

 

[Spark]

If we *do* win, it'll feel so bizarre. Hollow, almost.

Urgh. So conflicted right now. Part of me says "wait and see, keep a cool head etc before getting the pitchforks", but other part of me says "nine for twenty ****ing one".

 

[Spikey]

so if MJ ****s it up today...

 

[Spark]

so if MJ ****s it up today...

We've proven we can win Tests without him now tbh.

 

[Spikey]

oh no i don't mean win. i mean his spot. if he doesn't add anything today that could hurt him pretty badly

 

[adub]

oh no i don't mean win. i mean his spot. if he doesn't add anything today that could hurt him pretty badly

so fingers crossed we roll em with Harris, Watson, Sidds and Lyon getting the wickets and MJ getting another 3 overs that go for 6rpo before being sent of to mind his own at midwicket.

 

[robelinda]

Im not too bothered with losing this one, when you make 47 you can't be hopeful of winning, unless you made 700 in the first innings, we deserve to lose, we bowled not that great to SA late in the day, lots of 4's, can't be spraying it around defending a low-ish total. If only watson reviewed his LBW....

 

[Burgey]

If we *do* win, it'll feel so bizarre. Hollow, almost.

Urgh. So conflicted right now. Part of me says "wait and see, keep a cool head etc before getting the pitchforks", but other part of me says "nine for twenty ****ing one".

Your country is playing in a test match and you're conflicted?

Hand in your Southern Cross tattoo and unwrap the flag from around yourself.

 

[Spark]

Im not too bothered with losing this one, when you make 47 you can't be hopeful of winning, unless you made 700 in the first innings, we deserve to lose, we bowled not that great to SA late in the day, lots of 4's, can't be spraying it around defending a low-ish total. If only watson reviewed his LBW....

That's why I'm saying it'll feel weird if we win. It just feels "wrong" somehow to win with 47 on the board. Can you really win a Test against a top quality side on the back of basically two or three performances?

 

[Days of Grace]

A win is a win, and this has been a mad bastard of a test.

 

[adub]

That's why I'm saying it'll feel weird if we win. It just feels "wrong" somehow to win with 47 on the board. Can you really win a Test against a top quality side on the back of basically two or three performances?

**** that. What right have SA to a win after being rolled for 96?

It cuts both ways. If they can score more than 236 in the forth innings then good for them, otherwise **** em, we made more runs over two innings we deserve to win. That's always been the way it works. Why would getting 284 and 47 be worse than 170 and 161? It isn't.

Plenty of tests are won on the back of two or three players. The great sides just happen to have a different 2 or 3 players doing it for them more often than other sides. If we win this we'll ****ing take it because we'll have had Clarke's innings and they didn't. No different to many other games where a real stand out performance makes the difference.

 

[Spark]

True. But 47 is just...

no words.

I hope we do win, obvs, but it won't be the most satisfying victory we've had.

 

[silentstriker]

Im not too bothered with losing this one, when you make 47 you can't be hopeful of winning, unless you made 700 in the first innings, we deserve to lose, we bowled not that great to SA late in the day, lots of 4's, can't be spraying it around defending a low-ish total. If only watson reviewed his LBW....

Well....if you aren't bothered when the team you support loses because they played badly...when would you be bothered? Losing because you played badly could be said about most Test losses...

 

[silentstriker]

True. But 47 is just...

no words.

I hope we do win, obvs, but it won't be the most satisfying victory we've had.

That's mad. If India ever won after scoring 47, it would be the very definition of the most satisfying victory I've ever had.

 

[Top_Cat]

Agreed, both teams are about even on the 'deserve to win' criteria right now, both have been several shades of poo with a couple of stand-out/freak performances.