***Official*** India in South Africa 2013/14

[Burgey]

Just sitting down to watch the two hour highlights package. How good is Francois? Seriously.

 

[Spark]

So Australia chased 310 in Wanderers so that makes South Africa weak and Australia better? 310 wasnt a record chase and its 148 runs short of what South Africa needed to chase, and we were 1 player short. This team chased 414 in Australia so theres no way anybody should call them weak. India played very negatively and they had to, to be fair to them, and every captain would have done what Dhoni did, each and every one of them, exept maybe for Ponting and he is in record for the second worst loss in Test cricket chase.

This team did what Viv's team couldnt do, and what Waugh's didnt even attempt to do. This team is right up there with the best, and the last thing they deserve is to be booed by thier own fans, otherwise we'll continue to have inferior batsmen like Clarke winning Player of the Year instead of Amla. Before you condemn me for calling Clarke inferior, check the test rankings.

We're not talking about them chasing 458.

We're talking about them chasing 16. In three overs. India played negatively because they didn't think they could win. South Africa could. If they had gone out for the draw at the outset, like in Adelaide, and succeeded, then no one would have begrudged them for a moment. But they didn't - they tried to chase down the score for 150-odd overs and then stopped at the last hurdle for reasons that still haven't been fully explained.

But do go on with that nationalistic rant of yours, I'm sure it'll be well recieved (hint: it won't, and you should stop this line of argument immediately)

the singles were offered to vernon not to steyn. who had to face short wide balls. it was not easyonthepads balls he cohld plant the front foot and knock around.

Yeah but the weird thing - and confusing thing for so many watching live - was that they didn't even try. They simply stopped. Had they had a genuine crack in those last three overs, but found it too difficult to score the 5rpo required without taking undue risks, then sure, but they didn't even try. It was so weird.

 

[NUFAN]

This team did what Viv's team couldnt do, and what Waugh's didnt even attempt to do. This team is right up there with the best, and the last thing they deserve is to be booed by thier own fans, otherwise we'll continue to have inferior batsmen like Clarke winning Player of the Year instead of Amla. Before you condemn me for calling Clarke inferior, check the test rankings.

Did WI's when Viv played ever get hit around so much (and not do to well in the first innings) so that they had the opportunity to chase 450+ in a fourth innings? Genuinely curious..

 

[GotSpin]

1st Test: West Indies v Australia at Bridgetown, Apr 7-11, 2012 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo
2nd Test: South Africa v Australia at Johannesburg, Nov 17-21, 2011 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Saying "oh they shouldn't have gone for it because they might have been called chokers" is just a sign of underconfidence tbh. If they believed they could win - and for the majority of the chase they clearly did - then that shouldn't have bothered them.

I mean, we're not talking about 25 off 3 overs. We're talking 16. Most of that can be accrued with risk-free singles, many of which were on offer at the time.

It was completely bizarre.

They just completely gave up and shouldered arms. So strange

 

[Spark]

It was completely bizarre.

They just completely gave up and shouldered arms. So strange

And then to top it off they started slogging wildly in the last over and hence took far more risk than they would have had to otherwise! Weirdest ****, I swear.

There must have been some breakdown in communication out there because that just made no sense at all.

Let's be clear here: it's not a case of "they were playing cautiously but still looking for the win if the opportunity presented itself, and India's tactics prevented them winning". Nope. They completely gave up.

 

[MrPrez]

What people aren't realising, and what people are completely missing from Spark's posts, is that it was possible to get those runs with no risks. Philander was playing some beautiful, yet safe, drives. He was batting beautifully overall. Steyn has shown he can play with a straight bat and score low-risk runs. All they needed to do was poke it around, get singles, and punish the bad balls. If they were struggling to get singles, then sure, they could have given up. But given the situation they were in, they didn't even try.

 

[Spark]

What people aren't realising, and what people are completely missing from Spark's posts, is that it was possible to get those runs with no risks. Philander was playing some beautiful, yet safe, drives. He was batting beautifully overall. Steyn has shown he can play with a straight bat and score low-risk runs. All they needed to do was poke it around, get singles, and punish the bad balls. If they were struggling to get singles, then sure, they could have given up. But given the situation they were in, they didn't even try.

Spot on. If it's too hard it's too hard but have a go ffs. For example, with every bloke on the boundary it's not too hard to tap it into an open space and hare back for two, it happens all the time in ODIs.

 

[kykweer.proteas]

That's really strange thinking if so. They were playing a very much live and potentially historic Test, why worry about Durban?

Sure, if you lose the Test you can't win the series but conversely if you win the Test you can't lose the series.

At this stage I have my emotions in limbo. not sure how to feel. I was at the edge of my seat for 136 overs where I missed maybe 3 or 4. where we could lose this match in the space of 4 or 5 balls at any stage out of over 800 balls they had to face. with crucial moments such as the smith run out and that "here we go again" feeling when amla got out to a half tracker that hit off stump. Morkel who was injured, so we assumed we were about 1 down from the start and with duminy there I thought we were already 2 down when we went out to bat.

Then Faf and Ab came in and played mentally draining efforts that we all felt, even felt more so in the changing rooms by the batting team.

In the space of three balls in th last four overs, all of this could not have meant a thing.

I wanted us to win really bad, but in the bigger scheme of things, we didnt get to the number one position where we are dominating world cricket by not playing the way we do.

If we win in durban though this test will still be regarded as an EPIC escape. Which it should be regarded as.

I dont believe it was a fear of steyn to have a go, which steyn was likely itching to do... but the biggest fear of letting your mates down after working so hard that led to the approach, I can respect that. BUT it also looked like AB was frustrated that they are not giving it a go.

 

[MrPrez]

And then to top it off they started slogging wildly in the last over and hence took far more risk than they would have had to otherwise! Weirdest ****, I swear.

There must have been some breakdown in communication out there because that just made no sense at all.

Let's be clear here: it's not a case of "they were playing cautiously but still looking for the win if the opportunity presented itself, and India's tactics prevented them winning". Nope. They completely gave up.

Yeah, not sure what was going on. Moonda's article on cricinfo says that Smith's instructions were to set it up for the last over. This morning, Russell Domingo said that they were playing for the draw once Steyn came in. How the two of them believe different messages were sent out, beats me. Reeks of lies and slander, all of which I think leads back to a very disgruntled changeroom.

 

[rza]

That's really strange thinking if so. They were playing a very much live and potentially historic Test, why worry about Durban?

Sure, if you lose the Test you can't win the series but conversely if you win the Test you can't lose the series.

This is a test series, and Australia and West Indies great teams are admired for the fact that they won a lot of them. Why should SA risk losing a series when they can get the greatest draw in history? This was the main mission at the start of day 5 and they achieved it. The fact that they came close is because India were that poor.

People forget that this wasnt an ODI match where theres a limited number of fielders on the boundary, and you cant bowl wides. Dhoni defended and there was no way Vern and Steyn were gonna score the runs without risking runouts or be caught in the deep. India needed only one wicket and they would have had Morkel who only lasted around 3 balls in the first innings and Tahir who lasted one, if i remember correctly. You would have called them chockers for losing, yet you want to call them chokers for batting for 4.5 sessions. The same team gets credit for drawing in Adelaide, yet you deny them credit for the draw here, even though they were very positive.

 

[Garson007]

Domingo claims Abbot will be added to the squad "but Kleinveldt will probably play."

FMD.

If Tahir and Kleinveldt plays I'm going to break something. Tahir especially, since Kleinveldt can still bat and score 30.

 

[akilana]

The tailenders usually bat like rabbits caught in headlights under pressure. With an injured Morkel and Tahir to come, It wasn't a horrible decision to not go for the win at the end in a 2 tests series.

@spark Australia had nothing to lose in that match and everything to gain against SA. It's kind of similar to Smith declaring with Australia needing 280 in 70 something overs because they had nothing to lose back in 2006.

 

[Spark]

At this stage I have my emotions in limbo. not sure how to feel. I was at the edge of my seat for 136 overs where I missed maybe 3 or 4. where we could lose this match in the space of 4 or 5 balls at any stage out of over 800 balls they had to face. with crucial moments such as the smith run out and that "here we go again" feeling when amla got out to a half tracker that hit off stump. Morkel who was injured, so we assumed we were about 1 down from the start and with duminy there I thought we were already 2 down when we went out to bat.

Then Faf and Ab came in and played mentally draining efforts that we all felt, even felt more so in the changing rooms by the batting team.

In the space of three balls in th last four overs, all of this could not have meant a thing.

I wanted us to win really bad, but in the bigger scheme of things, we didnt get to the number one position where we are dominating world cricket by not playing the way we do.

If we win in durban though this test will still be regarded as an EPIC escape. Which it should be regarded as.

Yeah I can understand that, and obviously Faf's and ABdV's innings should be remembered as genuinely great innings. But it's extremely confusing stuff.

I disagree with "we didnt get to the number one position where we are dominating world cricket by not playing the way we do" in the sense that I don't think those last three overs were really the way SA got to #1, though. It's just the mindset which is strange - how can you push so hard for the win then give up so thoroughly so close to the end?

 

[MrPrez]

I spent a lot of time in those last few deliveries analysing the body language of the players. Steyn was incredibly pissed. He's been getting a lot of flak from the fans, but I'm almost certain he wanted to go for the win, but was told not to.

The camera panned to the SA dressing room where AB was caught looking rather annoyed. He soon realised the camera was on him, and turned to a teammate, trying to hide his emotions from the viewers.

 

[MrPrez]

The tailenders usually bat like rabbits caught in headlights under pressure. With an injured Morkel and Tahir to come, It wasn't a horrible decision to not go for the win at the end in a 2 tests series.

@spark Australia had nothing to lose in that match and everything to gain against SA. It's kind of similar to Smith declaring with Australia needing 280 in 70 something overs because they had nothing to lose back in 2006.

That's not true, Morkel has very decent technique for a number 10. Of course he had his injuries but still.

Besides, noone was asking for them to take risks ffs. Pushing a ball through the covers is quite honestly no more risky than trying your best to dead-bat everything.

 

[Spark]

This is a test series, and Australia and West Indies great teams are admired for the fact that they won a lot of them. Why should SA risk losing a series when they can get the greatest draw in history? This was the main mission at the start of day 5 and they achieved it. The fact that they came close is because India were that poor.

I don't buy this. If they were set on a draw then ABdV and Faf would have played precisely the same way they batted at Adelaide ie. with a totally dead bat, with no interest in even the slightest amount of risk. That wasn't how they batted yesterday, that partnership could only come from a mindset which believed the team could win. And they were right to do so.

People forget that this wasnt an ODI match where theres a limited number of fielders on the boundary, and you cant bowl wides. Dhoni defended and there was no way Vern and Steyn were gonna score the runs without risking runouts or be caught in the deep. India needed only one wicket and they would have had Morkel who only lasted around 3 balls in the first innings and Tahir who lasted one, if i remember correctly. You would have called them chockers for losing, yet you want to call them chokers for batting for 4.5 sessions. The same team gets credit for drawing in Adelaide, yet you deny them credit for the draw here, even though they were very positive.

Please go through this thread and count the number of instances of people calling SA "chokers".

 

[Spark]

That's not true, Morkel has very decent technique for a number 10. Of course he had his injuries but still.

Besides, noone was asking for them to take risks ffs. Pushing a ball through the covers is quite honestly no more risky than trying your best to dead-bat everything.

Steyn clearly wanted Philander to take those singles too.

I actually thought, at the time, that the plan was for Steyn to see off Sharma who was probably getting too much bounce for a new bat to handle comfortable, then for Philander to try and score off every ball of the 2nd last over. You can target 8-10 runs if the field is totally spread, if it was, and then the last over becomes real interesting.

 

[GotSpin]

And then to top it off they started slogging wildly in the last over and hence took far more risk than they would have had to otherwise! Weirdest ****, I swear.

There must have been some breakdown in communication out there because that just made no sense at all.

Let's be clear here: it's not a case of "they were playing cautiously but still looking for the win if the opportunity presented itself, and India's tactics prevented them winning". Nope. They completely gave up.

Yeah this isn't hindsight speaking either. They just completely gave up and stopped playing any shots.

The Indian bowlers weren't swinging and seaming the pill all over the place. All they had to do was to knock the ball around in the gaps and pick up some easy singles.

To play so well and come so close to winning a truly a historic match...Oh boy.

Steyn pumping a 6 on the last delivery. Amazing.

If Australia did this I would be so bitterly dissappointed.

 

[rza]

Spot on. If it's too hard it's too hard but have a go ffs. For example, with every bloke on the boundary it's not too hard to tap it into an open space and hare back for two, it happens all the time in ODIs.

This is not ODIs. In ODIs a bowler has to bowl to the batsmen, in tests you dont have to, you can bowl wides if you want to and wont get punished. In ODIs you can only have few fielders in the boundary. So stop comparing this to ODIs.

 

[Spark]

This is not ODIs. In ODIs a bowler has to bowl to the batsmen, in tests you dont have to, you can bowl wides if you want to and wont get punished. In ODIs you can only have few fielders in the boundary. So stop comparing this to ODIs.

This actually backs up my point if you would stop and think about what the point actually is.