**Official** South Africa in England 2012

[Woodster]

Have been amazed (if not surprised) at some of the negative articles and media pieces about England after that opening defeat, albeit a very heavy one. Talk of how difficult it is going to be come back from that size of defeat to even draw the series, etc, etc. There is no doubt this touring side is indeed a quality one, and will continue to ask questions of England in the remaining two Tests, but England haven't got to number one by chance, we got there from playing prolonged periods of high quality cricket which was missing from the opening Test but I'm sure will return.

Our ability to bounce back from such defeats in recent years has been outstanding and I expect a similar performance at Headingley next week.

Steve Finn is now our supposed saviour, despite this attack being excellent in recent times it seems a bad Test is one too many in certain people's eyes. If there are fitness concerns over Bresnan or Broad, then a change should be made, if not, I back these guys to re-assess how they bowled at the Oval and put it right in Leeds.

 

[longtom]

Packing Kallis in cotton wool ain't gonna help anybody - least Kallis. Don't like it ...

 

[Pup Clarke]

Steve Finn is now our supposed saviour, despite this attack being excellent in recent times it seems a bad Test is one too many in certain people's eyes. If there are fitness concerns over Bresnan or Broad, then a change should be made, if not, I back these guys to re-assess how they bowled at the Oval and put it right in Leeds.

TBH it's how both both Broad and Bresnan 'look' at the moment that's concerning. Bresnan is obviously fatigued and when you have a couple of in-form replacements in Finn and Onions then past performances shouldn't count if you aren't match fit at the present.

 

[Woodster]

TBH it's how both both Broad and Bresnan 'look' at the moment that's concerning. Bresnan is obviously fatigued and when you have a couple of in-form replacements in Finn and Onions then past performances shouldn't count if you aren't match fit at the present.

I agree, if they are below the requisite fitness levels or match sharpness at the moment then yes it is largely irrelevant what they've done in recent times in terms of selection for Headingley.

The fact that we have Finn and Onions on the fringes of things does demonstrate our strengths in this area, I'm sure they won't hesitate to change it if fitness is the issue.

 

[Cricketismylife]

The Steyn-Anderson comparisons are annoying, especially when I read that Steyn somehow "proved himself" to be better than Anderson on the basis of 1 test match.

Regardless of what happened in this test match there is a massive gulf in their records with one averaging 23 and the other 30...so clearly Anderson isn't in Steyn's league as an overall bowler. If we were considering who is the better bowler in English conditions then it becomes more interesting.

Have to say it's bizarre how the struggling Morkel takes his wickets slightly more cheaply than the consistent Anderson. It's a mystery how Anderson rarely bowls badly but has only a solid record rather than a great one.

I expected England to be favourites at the Oval as it's a flat surface and I believed their bowlers to be good enough to take wickets in any conditions (with Swann against Tahir), but their batsman as very vulnerable on helpful wickets. So I thought flat English (not subcontinental) conditions would be an advantage, but obviously I got that completely wrong.

In hindsight the clues were there in the West Indies series. Once the new ball was over and the weak top 4 West Indians were hopelessly exposed, the middle order seemed to find batting very easy. Chanderpaul, Samuels, Sammy, Ramdin and even Tino Best made runs, so when you take a much stronger SA line up that only lost Alivro Peterson to the new ball, then you can see why they really cashed in.

Now I'm predicting a South African win with Philander to be MOM at Headingley.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Regardless of what happened in this test match there is a massive gulf in their records with one averaging 23 and the other 30...so clearly Anderson isn't in Steyn's league as an overall bowler.

Maybe it's just me but I don't understand this. What has their overall record got to do with the bowlers they are now?

 

[Cricketismylife]

Maybe it's just me but I don't understand this. What has their overall record got to do with the bowlers they are now?

Career record is important in showing the overall performance of the player, Steyn's is comfortably ahead of Anderson meaning that he is more than likely to perform better than him all factors being equal. Of course this might not happen over a single series but it's likely to happen.

I understand that Anderson has improved and his form has been very good over the last few years, but Steyn's has been even better and he's younger than Anderson and also in his prime. So in terms of both career form and recent form there is only really 1 winner.

It's a bit like comparing Tendulkar during his prime years in terms of age, at the top of his form versus a player like Darryl Cullinan, who may be a decent player and in good form but isn't in the same league as Sachin. Sachin would be so far ahead that you wouldnt need to discuss who the better batsman is.

Like that I don't see any real argument on Steyn-Anderson, Steyn is clearly ahead.

 

[marc71178]

Maybe it's just me but I don't understand this. What has their overall record got to do with the bowlers they are now?

Absolutely bugger all, but it's an easy way for someone to just say Steyn is better without any real analysis etc. (especially when you then compare the gap between them to that between Tendulkar and Cullinan)

He is the better bowler, but not by as much as people are trying to make out.

 

[Cricketismylife]

Absolutely bugger all, but it's an easy way for someone to just say Steyn is better without any real analysis etc. (especially when you then compare the gap between them to that between Tendulkar and Cullinan)

He is the better bowler, but not by as much as people are trying to make out.

Ok I accept that comparison was weak and Anderson has improved, I just don't see him as comparable to Steyn even in his new and improved form. Like I said he seems to bowl very well without demolishing teams, whereas Steyn seems to take wickets even when he is off.

One comparison that may make more sense is Herath and Swann. I consider Swann to be the better spinner, but Herath's current form is much better. I'd still hesitate to say Herath is currently a better spinner, because I trust the career record more than short term variables. If he maintains his form over Swann over a longer period I may accept it. I admit that argument doesnt really work with Anderson, because he's a completely different bowler to the old Anderson and his performances in the last 3 years are all better than his career average indicating that it isnt just short term fluctuations. So my mistake here, but I still say that Steyn is noticeable better in the short term, and far better in the long run.

 

[Dan]

Absolutely bugger all, but it's an easy way for someone to just say Steyn is better without any real analysis etc. (especially when you then compare the gap between them to that between Tendulkar and Cullinan)

He is the better bowler, but not by as much as people are trying to make out.

This. Anderson of 2003 is nothing like Anderson of 2012. Using his career record is pretty pointless, at least in his case.

Very few bowlers that I can remember have started out so badly and then become so good.

 

[uvelocity]

This. Anderson of 2003 is nothing like Anderson of 2012. Using his career record is pretty pointless, at least in his case.

Very few bowlers that I can remember have started out so badly and then become so good.

warney

 

[Spark]

Warne came good wayyyyyy quicker than Anderson, who took about five-six years or so

 

[uvelocity]

yeah

 

[Jono]

Do you think Ravi has done enough to be selected for the next test?

Do you think we should use snicko in the UDRS?

 

[Prince EWS]

Do you think we should use snicko in the UDRS?

 

[marc71178]

Warne came good wayyyyyy quicker than Anderson, who took about five-six years or so

Yes, Warne's start is more of a blip, plus they did keep faith in him. Anderson had the problem of being next cab off the rank for a long time which meant he barely played any cricket for a few years. Once he became a first choice pick his record started well and has just got better and better.

 

[Hurricane]

I think NZ was the coming out party for Anderson and Broad and they never looked back.

 

[uvelocity]

 

[CricAddict]

Absolutely bugger all, but it's an easy way for someone to just say Steyn is better without any real analysis etc. (especially when you then compare the gap between them to that between Tendulkar and Cullinan)

He is the better bowler, but not by as much as people are trying to make out.

Steyn is the all time best bowler if you believe in this analysis.

A Dale amongst Goliaths | Cricket News | Cricbuzz.com

 

[kingkallis]

Packing Kallis in cotton wool ain't gonna help anybody - least Kallis. Don't like it ...

Probably its Kallis who wanna spend some time back @ home with his close mate Boucher...