***Official*** Australia in South Africa 2018

[Arachnodouche]

It's man's caveman mentality. Always more fun to make off with the enemy's women from under his nose, etc.

 

[StephenZA]

I agree with all that; what I fail to understand is how an international match played between two competing teams becomes "more important" for one team "less important" for the other. So is that match as a whole important or not important? What then is the big deal about winning an "away" game, if the home team is expected to believe that the game is not important to them?

The match is always important you just have more to overcome outside the cricket, when in a foreign country......hence it is considered more difficult and a greater accomplishment, to combat those difficulties and pressures.

 

[Tom Flint]

So basically what you are saying is the reason south africa do better away from home than any other team is because they are quite happy to get away from south africa for a couple of months

 

[SeamUp]

There isn't much more to add to the subject. An away win is = to a home win but the rewards to players winning in more challenging circumstances/conditions (away) leaves a greater feeling in my opinion.

 

[srbhkshk]

The match is always important you just have more to overcome outside the cricket, when in a foreign country......hence it is considered more difficult and a greater accomplishment, to combat those difficulties and pressures.

Even though I agree that away wins are more important, what does it say about teams who can't dominate even with all these factors in their favor? As much as it is held against India that they don't win enough overseas, is not it an equal black mark on other teams when they fail to dominate in their homes the way India do even with all these factors?

 

[StephenZA]

Even though I agree that away wins are more important, what does it say about teams who can't dominate even with all these factors in their favor? As much as it is held against India that they don't win enough overseas, is not it an equal black mark on other teams when they fail to dominate in their homes the way India do even with all these factors?

It was the black mark on the SA team during their dominate period yes we never lost away for 10 years, but we lost and drew some crucial home series in that time, which we should have won.

SA have a clear advantage with our variation of pitches, that are not dominated by batsmen. This gives us an edge going overseas when we have to compete in totally foreign conditions. However it also gives opposition the chance to compete in SA.

 

[kykweer.proteas]

There isn't much more to add to the subject. An away win is = to a home win but the rewards to players winning in more challenging circumstances/conditions (away) leaves a greater feeling in my opinion.

So its not really equal.

 

[SeamUp]

So its not really equal.

In a round-about way

 

[SeamUp]

It was the black mark on the SA team during their dominate period yes we never lost away for 10 years, but we lost and drew some crucial home series in that time, which we should have won.

SA have a clear advantage with our variation of pitches, that are not dominated by batsmen. This gives us an edge going overseas when we have to compete in totally foreign conditions. However it also gives opposition the chance to compete in SA.

This.

I mean we dished out Colombo in Durban for Fatty to to get really excited once.

 

[srbhkshk]

It was the black mark on the SA team during their dominate period yes we never lost away for 10 years, but we lost and drew some crucial home series in that time, which we should have won.

SA have a clear advantage with our variation of pitches, that are not dominated by batsmen. This gives us an edge going overseas when we have to compete in totally foreign conditions. However it also gives opposition the chance to compete in SA.

My point is not about SA or India, they are just examples. Assuming two hypothetical teams, Team A goes 3-0 at home and 0-3 away, Team B goes 2-1 at home and 1-2 away. The general sense in the thread is that Team B is better for having won a test in more challenging conditions, but from another perspective it has also lost a test in favorable conditions - do the positive and negative credit not cancel out here?

 

[vcs]

It comes down to personal preference I guess.. would you prefer a batsman to average 45 everywhere or 60 at home and 35 away?

 

[Burgey]

Agree with this, think Australia felt victimized (or insulted, pick the word you like) after the second test, and really really wanted to win the third test, when it started getting away from them - they imploded. The 4th test is not a good reflection of how the series was before that.

That said - their batting does have issues which Smith had been covering up for a long time. The one series he failed, it showed.

Been the problem for years tbh.

 

[burr]

What an abject performance by Australia.

Well done South Africa.

 

[quincywagstaff]

Been the problem for years tbh.

In last 13 away Tests, the only Oz batsmen to score centuries apart from Smith have been Warner (2 v Bangladesh), Maxwell (India) and S Marsh (Sri Lanka).

 

[Borges]

It comes down to personal preference I guess..

Yes. A lot of things in cricket are based on personal preference, which are then touted as absolute truths. Usually to win brownie points on internet debates.

As in the case of this ludicrous overrating of Rahane. Must be a truly great batsman. Why? Because he has scored a few runs away. "Away!!"

Or this laughable underrating of Root. Why? He does not "convert". Cook must be much the better batsman, even today; he does convert on those rare occasions that he manages to get to fifty.

When I came here, years ago, there were many who argued that Kallis can't be considered to be a great batsman. Why? Because he does not score many "big" centuries / double centuries.

 

[kykweer.proteas]

We beat Australia for the first time in nearly 50 years at home... That is a sweet feeling. Winning Sri Lanka and India here is almost a given... But nothing is better than a rare series win ever and most of those rare series wins will be away.

 

[kykweer.proteas]

Anyone contempt with losing all their test series away as long as they win home series are simply Not reaching high enough or has given up.

 

[Victor Ian]

In a weird way, it is nice to have the monkey of the back - even though that monkey that was nice to have. I hate long streaks of winning because then there is too much stress going to play knowing you have a streak to maintain. It is also kind of nice to be rock bottom - only way is up, though lets hope it does not take years to achieve.

yes - i do realise the douchery of talking about this like I am a part of the team

 

[StephenZA]

My point is not about SA or India, they are just examples. Assuming two hypothetical teams, Team A goes 3-0 at home and 0-3 away, Team B goes 2-1 at home and 1-2 away. The general sense in the thread is that Team B is better for having won a test in more challenging conditions, but from another perspective it has also lost a test in favorable conditions - do the positive and negative credit not cancel out here?

I was just trying to use the SA circumstance as an example were losing at home hit their reputation....

But I think people actually do concentrate more on the away wins, because they are so much more difficult to do....... but you also have to consider the opponent. you lose/win in SL as Eng, Aus, RSA you've done well (at home expected), because SL tough at home (similar to Bangladesh). You beat India in India were almost nobody wins and you get a few extra stars.... even if they come and steal a test off you later at your home.

It is not a straightforward that all tests for all teams and places are equivalent... you can't take away the opposition, or who won where, when considering a teams good/bad home/away record.

 

[SeamUp]

Tristan Holme doing what he does well

When South Africa soared above physical and emotional strain - Cricbuzz