**Official** South Africa in England 2012

[Shri]

IMHO, the difference between England this series and England that got to #1 is, apart from playing against the opposition possible, mostly their batting. When it comes to bowling, the big absentee was Swann. Probably it is all about his injury, but the Swann we've seen this series is nowhere like the Swann of a year ago.

Smalishah was telling the truth then.

 

[Prince EWS]

Maybe I'm wat too fast into this, but I've noticed, while having a look at the WC U19 results, that SA have a very very talented keeper in Quinton de Kock. He's only 19, has 12 FC matches, averaging 63, and has 54 catches + 4 stumpings.

You have to be very careful with South African First Class stats because they have two levels of First Class cricket, one of which is really "First Class" in name alone. People try to pass it off as being the same as the difference between first and second division county cricket when they're being kind but that's frankly bull**** as the lower tier actually feeds the upper tier, rather than just being the worst of all the teams in the free market. If you're not good enough to play franchise cricket then you play three day provincial cricket which (quite unjustly IMO) retains First Class status.

In proper First Class cricket he's played 2 matches and averages less than 14. For this reason he really shouldn't be anywhere near the Test side.

 

[Shri]

You have to be very careful with South African First Class stats because they have two levels of First Class cricket, one of which is really "First Class" in name alone. People try to pass it off as being the same as the difference between first and second division county cricket when they're being kind but that's frankly bull**** as the lower tier actually feeds the upper tier, rather than just being the worst of all the teams in the free market. If you're not good enough to play franchise cricket then you play three day provincial cricket which (quite unjustly IMO) retains First Class status.

In proper First Class cricket he's played 2 matches and averages less than 14. For this reason he really shouldn't be anywhere near the Test side.

Inb4 Ruan Pietersen.

 

[Viscount Tom]

Inb4 Ruan Pietersen.

That guy is gun on ICC2010 tbf.

 

[Prince EWS]

That guy is gun on ICC2010 tbf.

Haha, Shri picked Ruan Pietersen in a draft because he had a good First Class average and in the end Pietersen hadn't played a single game that counted as per the draft rules (no three day amateur SA **** being the first and only rule) so he was the worst pick of all time.

 

[nsniks]

Brilliant effort from Prior

So Kirsten becomes 1st coach to take two countries to test no. 1 spot??

 

[benchmark00]

Stapel loves de Kock. itstl.

 

[Shri]

Haha, Shri picked Ruan Pietersen in a draft because he had a good First Class average and in the end Pietersen hadn't played a single game that counted as per the draft rules (no three day amateur SA **** being the first and only rule) so he was the worst pick of all time.

 

[SeamUp]

You have to be very careful with South African First Class stats because they have two levels of First Class cricket, one of which is really "First Class" in name alone. People try to pass it off as being the same as the difference between first and second division county cricket when they're being kind but that's frankly bull**** as the lower tier actually feeds the upper tier, rather than just being the worst of all the teams in the free market. If you're not good enough to play franchise cricket then you play three day provincial cricket which (quite unjustly IMO) retains First Class status.

In proper First Class cricket he's played 2 matches and averages less than 14. For this reason he really shouldn't be anywhere near the Test side.

The provincial system is extremely important to our overall system and with such a large country its good for them to get regular games at a decent level pushing for franchise cricket. Quite a few players moving into our franchise system who have done well have had to perform in the Provincial system first.

Very important to get the best club cricketers and talented schoolboy cricketers and reserevs from the franchise playing together.

 

[Prince EWS]

The provincial system is extremely important to our overall system and with such a large country its good for them to get regular games at a decent level pushing for franchise cricket. Quite a few players moving into our franchise system who have done well have had to perform in the Provincial system first.

Very important to get the best club cricketers and talented schoolboy cricketers and reserevs from the franchise playing together.

Oh I agree; it's definitely a good stepping stone to have and it should absolutely continue to exist and run as it is.

There's just no way it should have First Class status IMO. It's just really misleading in general.

 

[SeamUp]

Oh I agree; it's definitely a good stepping stone to have and it should absolutely continue to exist and run as it is.

There's just no way it should have First Class status IMO. It's just really misleading in general.

Fair point.

It is tough in Australia & South Africa having only 6 sides so FC opportunities will always be limited, thats why there is talk of South Africa going back to the Provincial system of 12 teams. I'm a bit undecided myself because I think the franchise system has been brilliant.

I do love the fact that the provincial games are done live on cricinfo though because its under FC & List A.

 

[Jacknife]

IMHO, the difference between England this series and England that got to #1 is, apart from playing against the opposition possible, mostly their batting. When it comes to bowling, the big absentee was Swann. Probably it is all about his injury, but the Swann we've seen this series is nowhere like the Swann of a year ago.

There was that but for me Broad although he had good spells, was nowhere near as good as he was last year and in the winter, he's lost a bit of pace and he couldn't maintain that great length and accuracy that we became accustomed to seeing.

You could also argue that Anderson although he was very consistent didn't bowl as good as he has been doing, that's not taking away anything from how SA batted mind.

That first test they all collectively went missing, you could say it was a bit of a choke by England.

 

[Dissector]

So what do people think should be done about Morkel? He keeps on flattering to deceive doesn't he? He will have a good spell or even good series every now and then but he can never sustain it for long against good opposition. And he is at his worst when his team needs him most, tough fourth innings against good teams. Who are the promising pace prospects ? I remember Tsosobe looked quite decent against India and IIRC some new bowler did well against Sri Lanka recently.

Tahir is also a difficult case. I think he has some potential but he probably needs a couple of years to hone his bowling and become more consistent. Right now he is not good enough but does SA have a better spinner? Boje obviously brings something with the bat but I don't think he is really a better bowler.

 

[hazsa19]

So happy about Philander. Great bowler to watch and he hasnt been given enough credit for the start to his career. High time the Sky team start watching tests not involving England, I think it was disappointing how a guy who broke 100 year records, 50 wickets at 14, was not getting the hype he deserved, because they hadn't bothered to watch him. A bit unlucky in the first few tests, but here got his rewards and could have had 8 if Smith had caught Finn.

Also clears up this whole bowling attack debate. Steyn and Philander are in a different league to the whole English attack. Finn maybe has the potential to be really special, but Anderson and Broad aren't anywhere close to those 2.

England are still a very good team, it's just what I said before that caught them out. Even when they were deservedly the number 1 team, there were not enough great players, just a collection of 9-10 very decent cricketers, but to be a great team you need some players who are great.

I have no problem admitting SA were the better side this series in all departments, but that is absolute rubbish.

 

[hazsa19]

Is anyone watching the C5 highlights? Boycott and even Vaughan wanted us to go for the draw! Apparently there's more pride in that...

 

[Jacknife]

I have no problem admitting SA were the better side this series in all departments, but that is absolute rubbish.

Agree they are better but different league is pure hyperbole imo.

 

[Dissector]

It's too soon to judge Philander but Steyn clearly is a different league from Anderson and Broad. The latter have had 2-3 good years but they need to keep it up for at least another 2-3 years before they can be considered in the same league as Steyn.

 

[Prince EWS]

It's too soon to judge Philander but Steyn clearly is a different league from Anderson and Broad. The latter have had 2-3 good years but they need to keep it up for at least another 2-3 years before they can be considered in the same league as Steyn.

Yeah; I saw this series as a big opportunity for Anderson to try and close the gap on Steyn a bit and at least be deservingly mentioned in the same breath even if just as a clear but close second, but Steyn's just opened up the gap. Clear class above now; no-one can deny it.

I definitely think Anderson bowled a fair bit better than his stats suggest - not so much because of the plays and misses he generated with the new ball (not a new thing and not really unlucky as such IMO when it's habitual) but because of the amount of edges he actually enduced that squirted into gaps, fell short of the slips or were put down. But he was a long, long way behind Steyn.

 

[hazsa19]

Indeed, Steyn a clear front runner.

However, I think SA still would have won the series with Englands bowlers. Smith, Amla & co. were the big difference imo.

 

[GIMH]

England ratings


Strauss - 0. Not putting runs on the board is all well and good when you're leading the team to victory after victory. As it is, we've had chaos and poor performances for a lot of the year. Love the bloke but it's time to step aside. I hope to be proved wrong.
Cook - 5. Not as bad as most of the other batsmen, tbf.
Trott - 6. Actually probably had a better series than it seemed but inability to kick on cost us in both Tests we lost.
Pietersen - 7. ****e at The Oval, immense at Headingley. Who knows whether he was missed or not here? Long way back without him.
Bell - 4. Forgettable series really with a couple of reasonable knocks.
Bopara - 1. Bowled better than he batted. Yeah, I'm serious.
Taylor - 4. Don't want to be too harsh, but nothing of note yet. Looked decent in his 34, never get going in this match.
Bairstow - 9. Deserved a ton, and deserved some kind of platform in the 2nd dig.
Prior - 8. Excellent with the bat, not up to his usual standards with the gloves. Obviously the best in the world and it's not even close.
Broad - 5. Hit and miss, just not the same Broad we saw against India or in the winter.
Bresnan - 3. All at sea.
Anderson - 5.5. Our best seamer overall, but below what we should expect.
Finn - 6. Gets a higher rating than Anderson just because he wasn't part of the 1st Test demolition but the gulf in class between them was there for all to see; in spite of this Finn takes wickets for fun. Long may it continue.
Swann - 3. 3rd best spinner in the series, after Pietersen and Tahir. Looking back to form with the bat though so there's a bonus. And I'm being harsh because he did his job fairly well, to an extent, here.