• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*** Official*** South Africa in England 2017

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
The only way this can become an issue is if it rains off a session or two and they end up hanging on for a draw. It was a conservative declaration but there is nothing inherently wrong about that, especially for a guy who is just starting his captaincy career. Erring on the side of caution is not always a bad thing.
 

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
Am I the only one that sees the big up side of keeping the Saffers in the field for as long possible? Next test starts on Friday.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Declaring at 350 a would've given England less time to bowl South Africa out rather than more. I thought the declaration came a little late too, but not that late.




You don't get extra points for finishing early.

You mean as in the time they can go for wickets as compared to having to think of a loss if RSA get near that score?
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Am I the only one that sees the big up side of keeping the Saffers in the field for as long possible? Next test starts on Friday.

Not just that though. It does make sense to bat during the best conditions. Declaring early when its a belter and then having to waste time as the opponent is rushing towards a win after you have dominated pretty much the whole game before that is just stupid.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
350.

Might have finished off the game yesterday.
Oh my god, you're actually Shane Warne aren't you?

Clueless comments about declaring early, check.
Ridiculous agenda against great servants of your nation's game, check.
Ridiculously pressing the claims of the minorities that you like, check.

When's the next round of plastic surgery then Shane?
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
You mean as in the time they can go for wickets as compared to having to think of a loss if RSA get near that score?
Assuming no more rain, they gave themselves 136 overs to bowl South Africa out. If they'd set them 350, in all likelihood they'd have less time to get them out because South Africa would score quickly enough to pass the target if they didn't get out before then. As a first principle your declarations should always give you more time rather than less to bowl out the opposition.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Yeah that is what I asked basically :p The runs/over threshold should be such that you give yourself maximum time to try and get the 10 wickets without having to worry about runs being conceded.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Am I the only one that sees the big up side of keeping the Saffers in the field for as long possible? Next test starts on Friday.
Has there been any update on whether Vern is over his arse-spraying mayhem and will be fit for the next test?
 

StephenZA

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Has there been any update on whether Vern is over his arse-spraying mayhem and will be fit for the next test?
I don`t think he has been truly fit for any of the tests..... but assuming it was just a virus that he has gotten over then he should be alright for the final test.
 

S.Kennedy

International Vice-Captain
I see I am in the minority here but I've always preferred attacking declarations/follow-ons and earlier victories for a few reasons, one being the psychological factor, the other being more rest time. Thirdly you are also not subjecting your middle order/tailend to needless outs and buggering up their averages unnecessarily - nobody wants to see a procession of batsman when none is required.
 

S.Kennedy

International Vice-Captain
Oh my god, you're actually Shane Warne aren't you?

Clueless comments about declaring early, check.
Ridiculous agenda against great servants of your nation's game, check.
Ridiculously pressing the claims of the minorities that you like, check.

When's the next round of plastic surgery then Shane?
Maybe. Maybe.I do not have the fake blond hair either.

By the way, you know you're in love with white ball Andy, right? That is where the problem with me lies, isn't it, as I do not share your fondness for the slaphead?
 
Last edited:

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I see I am in the minority here but I've always preferred attacking declarations/follow-ons and earlier victories for a few reasons, one being the psychological factor, the other being more rest time. Thirdly you are also not subjecting your middle order/tailend to needless outs and buggering up their averages unnecessarily - nobody wants to see a procession of batsman when none is required.

I dont think any of your arguments or points do not have merit. They do. But you can also see why Root would do what he did, right? Especially when conditions are helpful to the batsmen, declaring early and then in case one of them plays a great knock, you are there with your backs against the wall in a game you should be dominating. As I said, it is definitely a conservative move but there are times where its ok to be conservative, this being one of those.
 

S.Kennedy

International Vice-Captain
I dont think any of your arguments or points do not have merit. They do. But you can also see why Root would do what he did, right? Especially when conditions are helpful to the batsmen, declaring early and then in case one of them plays a great knock, you are there with your backs against the wall in a game you should be dominating. As I said, it is definitely a conservative move but there are times where its ok to be conservative, this being one of those.
I thought he declared far too late, even continuing beyond Bairstow's fifty which was the height of silliness (although it was good fun seeing Roland-Jones biff the ball about). Alright, I'll meet you chaps halfway: at a minimum he should have declared 400 up. I actually felt sorry for Malan because he felt the need to go at a prodigious strike rate aware of a potential declaration; he went and the declaration didn't arrive until far later than I'm sure he expected. He could have played more circumspectly.

But it is done now. I suppose there is more than one way to skin a cat and the England way tends to be, to lump more runs on and bat a team out of contention.

It wasn't as bad as that ridiculous game v Pakistan last year where Cook chose to not enforce the follow-on 5 billion runs in front, came out and had a little net session.
 

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
I thought he declared far too late, even continuing beyond Bairstow's fifty which was the height of silliness (although it was good fun seeing Roland-Jones biff the ball about). Alright, I'll meet you chaps halfway: at a minimum he should have declared 400 up. I actually felt sorry for Malan because he felt the need to go at a prodigious strike rate aware of a potential declaration; he went and the declaration didn't arrive until far later than I'm sure he expected. He could have played more circumspectly.

But it is done now. I suppose there is more than one way to skin a cat and the England way tends to be, to lump more runs on and bat a team out of contention.

It wasn't as bad as that ridiculous game v Pakistan last year where Cook chose to not enforce the follow-on 5 billion runs in front, came out and had a little net session.
Look mate, cricket is a team game and sometimes a batsmen has to play a different game for the betterment of the team. This argument re Malan and protecting the batsmen's averages is just a nonsense and should never be in consideration when making declaration/follow on decisions.

The other point you made that I just can't get my head around, was what you said before about rest time. Lets say Root had enforced the follow on (if it was available as you were screaming for) and we ended up winning by an innings........we'd have ended up bowling more overs in the test than the Saffers. As it is they've now bowled 180+ overs to our current 58 with 6 wickets left to get. In terms of workload and recuperation this is a vastly better situation for England with a test starting on Friday.

And with an earlier declaration you're just reducing that 180 overs that they've bowled........so you're reducing their workload and giving them an extra day off. What benefit is there in that to us?

Edit:

This post is all over the place on account of the fact I forgot they got passed the follow on target. Either way, in either scenario that you wanted, ie enforcing the follow on or early declaration you're letting them off the hook in terms of workload......and your trying to use rest time for us to prove your point just doesn't work.
 
Last edited:

91Jmay

International Coach
Need an early wicket today, if they get to lunch 4 down could get a bit twitchy. Backing Moeen to make an impact, thought he looked pretty good yesterday.
 

Moonsorrow999

U19 Debutant
IMO it only becomes an issue if you fail to bowl a side out. If England fail today, then bring up that debate, otherwise this is plenty of time to bowl a side out.
 

Top