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

[MrPrez]

The thing is though, you don't really need extra overs of spin as such. I don't think having two spinners as part of your five man attack in South Africa would really be ideal, even if it basically operated more as having 1.5 spinners in a 4.5 man attack. I think Duminy should just take over the spin duties; I legitimately think he has more to work with as a bowler than Robbie P anyway.

Indeed. If Duminy is playing as a complete all-rounder at number 7, then definitely. But if they continue to see him in the role he's been playing in recently, then we need a proper spinner as well.

long term morkel will need to pull up his socks. parnell coming in for morkel will certainly help balance out the side with kallis gone.

Not a chance. I would stop supporting the team if Parnell replaced Morkel at this point in time.

What people don't realise is that the side doesn't need balancing now that Kallis is gone. Kallis' bowling was a luxury, particularly in a team that also has Duminy. Between Duminy and Faf we easily have sufficient support for the main four.

 

[akilana]

Just a quick thing about the BCCI spat with Lorgat, I don't know why anyone's surprised, Indians are unsurpassed in their ability to keep grudges going. My uncles didn't speak to their cousin for over 30 years because he married the wrong person, almost everyone I know in India has had some ridiculous spat with someone over a missing wedding invite or not coming over for supper.

Even my own wife squabbled with her cousins because they sent her an email invite to a wedding there was no chance she was going to attend.

Hey come on don't generalize.

 

[Garson007]

I disagree with AB at #4. I think he fits #5 perfectly, and not only because of the gloves but because of his temperament. As for Amla, he's our best and most adaptable batsman and should be in at #4 for when scoring is both quick or slow.

No worse than having JP in the team. What has he done to get picked?

He's our best spinner.

But yeah, he hasn't done much - the problem is that none of the top order can bowl anywhere near as well as he does and we need someone that can tie up an end and bat in the top 6.

 

[MrPrez]

Why cant de kock play a Gilchrist type of game for us?

He could, but it'd be more useful if he could open and bat because we have less test-quality opener prospects than middle order prospects. Also, as far as I'm aware, De Kock has been opening at franchise level, so it his main position in the batting order.

 

[Prince EWS]

Long-term I agree that de Villiers shouldn't be number 4 and keeper, but he's done it well until now

He hasn't done it at all. He's been at five. I just really don't think your wicket keeper should be batting above five in Test cricket; it's too heavy a workload. I think five is fine but if he wants to bat higher he needs to weigh up what he wants more; I'd even let him make the call himself but with du Plessis doing so well whenever he's had to go up the order and de Villiers being so suited to the acceleration required at times at five anyway I think I'd prefer him to just keep the gloves and stay where he is.

If de Villiers really wants to bat four then de Kock comes in and bats six or seven for mine. Preferably six so Duminy gets the message loud and clear to devote more time to his bowling as the main spinner.

Ideally I'd like to see de Kock opening though. Alec Stewart style. I know it's a big ask, but it's been done before and can be done, imo.

Bit of a weird one. When Stewart did it the international schedule was far less exhausted and they still ended up dropping him down the order because he kept making starts and getting out due to fatigue after keeping all innings. 7 Tests, 12 innings, 2 fifties, 0 hundreds and they decided to drop him down. The very situation you're using as an example was deemed a failure. I think the only time you'd look to do that was if you were only expecting consistent little starts from your wicket keeper anyway; I think the tactic worked reasonably well with Engineer for that reason. More should be expected of de Kock than that.

 

[kykweer.proteas]

Alviro
Smith
Amla
faf
abdv
jp (not a huge fan. but usefull in post kallis era)
elgar (start phasing in de kock)
robbie p
verne
steyn
morkel (start phasing in parnell who could be an excellent 6 to replace jp and bring in merchant)

but there will still he room for jp

 

[MrPrez]

I disagree with AB at #4. I think he fits #5 perfectly, and not only because of the gloves but because of his temperament. As for Amla, he's our best and most adaptable batsman and should be in at #4 for when scoring is both quick or slow.


He's our best spinner.

But yeah, he hasn't done much - the problem is that none of the top order can bowl anywhere near as well as he does and we need someone that can tie up an end and bat in the top 6.

Amla averages 50+ predominantly as a number 3. De Villiers averages 50+ predominantly as a number 4. No reason to fiddle with that - besides, you usually want your best two middle order batsmen at 3 and 4, and Du Plessis is a few rungs below Amla/De Villiers

On Duminy, he'd not be in the team if it weren't for his bowling. But I still believe he's a genuine 40+ batsman once he fulfils his potential. Whether he will, is another thing.

 

[SeamUp]

He could, but it'd be more useful if he could open and bat because we have less test-quality opener prospects than middle order prospects. Also, as far as I'm aware, De Kock has been opening at franchise level, so it his main position in the batting order.

I suppose they are hoping to give him as much middle time as possible for such a talented cricketer ? Will set-up more victories for the Lions batting there than at 5/6

I get what you are saying though. When he has kept he has opened or batted 3.

 

[The Battlers Prince]

MotS De Villiers

 

[SeamUp]

Alviro
Smith
Amla
faf
abdv
jp (not a huge fan. but usefull in post kallis era)
elgar (start phasing in de kock)
robbie p
verne
steyn
morkel (start phasing in parnell who could be an excellent 6 to replace jp and bring in merchant)

but there will still he room for jp

Merchant needs to get on a damn cricket field ! Hardly played this season and may miss the beginning of the Ram Slam T20

 

[Garson007]

De Villiers averages 50+ predominantly as a number 4.

Uh, he's had two innings at #4. While I do think he'd make an okay #4, I don't think its suits his temperament as well as #5. For me, long term the position of #4 is only open to Amla.

Secondly, I disagree with #3 and #4 being your best batsmen. To me it's all about temperament, more so than ability. For one AB was a bit of a failure as an opener because he wasn't great with the new ball doing a lot. He'd be thrown into early collapse situations more regularly at #4. Especially if there isn't someone ahead of him who would gladly leave everything as Faf has shown he can do.

 

[kykweer.proteas]

with both quinton and abdv in the top order we still have the advantage that if someone who had less batting could keep...

even if both scored double centuries we can let amla keep cause he had to have done ****all batting anyway.

 

[Prince EWS]

Uh, he's had two innings at #4. While I do think he'd make an okay #4, I don't think its suits his temperament as well as #5. For me, long term the position of #4 is only open to Amla.

I think Amla prefers #3 anyway. Definitely no point messing with that.

 

[MrPrez]

He hasn't done it at all. He's been at five. I just really don't think your wicket keeper should be batting above five in Test cricket; it's too heavy a workload. I think five is fine but if he wants to bat higher he needs to weigh up what he wants more; I'd even let him make the call himself but with du Plessis doing so well whenever he's had to go up the order and de Villiers being so suited to the acceleration required at times at five anyway I think I'd prefer him to just keep the gloves and stay where he is.

If de Villiers really wants to bat four then de Kock comes in and bats six or seven for mine. Preferably six so Duminy gets the message loud and clear to devote more time to his bowling as the main spinner.

He basically has been, tbf. Kallis has batted horribly recently, so De Villiers has essentially been taking on a lot of responsibility.

As I say though, I'd rather see us bring in de Kock than push de Villiers down the order.

Bit of a weird one. When Stewart did it the international schedule was far less exhausted and they still ended up dropping him down the order because he kept making starts and getting out due to fatigue after keeping all innings. 7 Tests, 12 innings, 2 fifties, 0 hundreds and they decided to drop him down. The very situation you're using as an example was deemed a failure. I think the only time you'd look to do that was if you were only expecting consistent little starts from your wicket keeper anyway; I think the tactic worked reasonably well with Engineer for that reason. More should be expected of de Kock than that.

Difference being that De Kock has kept and opened throughout his (admittedly short) career. In FC matches. It's his USP.

 

[kykweer.proteas]

Merchant needs to get on a damn cricket field ! Hardly played this season and may miss the beginning of the Ram Slam T20

yep im talking like from 2015 onwards. give morkel another year to be on the verge of greatness...

 

[MrPrez]

*push down the order refers to the fact that AB would by default move up the order to fill the void left by Kallis.

I'm getting confused with AB's positioning in ODIs. Still, he's head and shoulders the obvious choice for number 4 when not keeping.

 

[Garson007]

I think Amla prefers #3 anyway. Definitely no point messing with that.

Yes absolutely, if that's his preference going forward.

I'm just running with the idea that everyone wants to bat at #4.

 

[Prince EWS]

Some good chat about the role Jakes has done over the years. Eventhough he has still been able to bowl 140 and look threatening he just hasn't been needed to bowl too much and strike too much. I think in his last 38 tests he got 41 wickets or something. Still crucial of course.

But I do like PEWS way of thinking. We just need a bowler who can support the 4-man seam attack and in SA we can look to a Duminy to support the main 4 seamers ?

Although fair play Robbie P, I though his 3 years of peak cricket were over. He did well this test match. Harmer must be pretty close too mind. He actually spins it.

Yeah the way I'd be looking at it is this.

Duminy is the fifth bowler now. If the fifth bowler counts as half a bowler, then your choices become..

Choice A: 4 seamers, 0.5 spinners
Choice B: 3 seamers, 1.5 spinners

In South African conditions I would overwhelming vote for A, especially given the fact that Abbott is a better bowler than Robbie P in terms of pure quality. It was different when Kallis when the fifth bowler as 3.5 seamers and 1 spinner - the ideal balance for RSA conditions really - was a far better balance and 4.5 seamers and no spinners.

 

[Prince EWS]

*push down the order refers to the fact that AB would by default move up the order to fill the void left by Kallis.

I'm getting confused with AB's positioning in ODIs. Still, he's head and shoulders the obvious choice for number 4 when not keeping.

Yeah there's nothing wrong with him batting four in ODIs; that's a bit different, especially since he doesn't always keep in those anyway. I just think asking someone to bat four and keep is a bit much, especially when Faf and de Kock both exist and he's doing well at five anyway. Even if nothing else I think it's just unnecessary. I'd absolutely bat him at four if he didn't have the gloves, but I think it's one or the other.

 

[MrPrez]

Yeah Pews, even as is, Duminy is only a fraction worse than Peterson, and with a bit more focus on his bowling, would eclipse him imo.