Attention All South Africans!!

[Richard]

2. Why do you feel the need to lambast the current Sri Lanka and England sides on the one hand, yet feel that you have to go all the way back to 1996 in order to find a South African performance worth talking about?

There are no South African performances worth talking about since 1996?
Now I've heard it all.

 

[Dean]

1. The 'people behind this site' work extremely hard in order to provide a vehicle for sensible, intelligent people to discuss cricket in a friendly manner with fans all around the world. Cricket belongs to the whole world - you of all people should realise that. Hansie Kronje sold it to them.

2. Why do you feel the need to lambast the current Sri Lanka and England sides on the one hand, yet feel that you have to go all the way back to 1996 in order to find a South African performance worth talking about? Oh, wait, there haven't been that many that haven't included the phrases "Yes, no, yes, no, come one, no, wait oh damn" or "I was sure that 229 meant that we won. Do you think it's a typo?" since.

3. Snyde enough?

No, Smith scoring double centuries against your fellows was lucky....
South Africa whipping you guys 4-1 last year lucky...
England winning 2005 Ashes- lucky
The fact that I don't have a physical address for you... Extremely Lucky

 

[Dean]

This website is indeed a great idea, the thought behind it is also commendable. Unfortunatly the people behind it and most of the people who subscribe to it think that cricket belongs to them, and them alone.

Why is'nt South Africa getting ANY credit for bowling Australia out for 96 in Cape Town, instead fans are quick to blame it on the pitch, or an injured Australian line up...
South Africa is definatly the team to watch, but "experts" would rather harp on about a usuless England cricket team, or an inconsistant Sri Lankan team who are failing to impress against Bangladesh...

Don't worry, I'm sure some arrogant Englishman or Australian would come up with a snyde comeback to discredit this post, that's unless the "Almighty Directors" don't lock this post first...

Besides, I said 96 runs, not 96 as in 1996.

If SA had to have a crack at the Ashes, we would have won it more than once in sixteen years.

 

[Richard]

Disliking English cricket fans may be partially understandible, but seriously - le's bark's worse than his bite.

 

[Dean]

Disliking English cricket fans may be partially understandible, but seriously - le's bark's worse than his bite.

Surprisingly, I like the English a lot more than my Southern Rivals... (you know who I'm talking about!)

 

[Smudge]

Why is'nt South Africa getting ANY credit for bowling Australia out for 96 in Cape Town, ...

Because they bowled them out for 93?

Some supporter you are - you gift the opposition three runs and in doing so, denigrate the hard toil put in by your bowlers.

 

[GotSpin]

Surprisingly, I like the English a lot more than my Southern Rivals... (you know who I'm talking about!)

Jealous?

 

[Pratters]

Oh dear, its just because we don't exactly have many fans on this forum..

Ya.

 

[Richard]

Surprisingly, I like the English a lot more than my Southern Rivals... (you know who I'm talking about!)

Well, Mad Bob can't really be surpassed.

 

[marc71178]

If SA had to have a crack at the Ashes, we would have won it more than once in sixteen years.

Because SA have won Test series against Aus haven't they?

Oh no, my mistake.

 

[Goughy]

If SA had to have a crack at the Ashes, we would have won it more than once in sixteen years.

Really....
Using SA's first test series against Aus since readmission in 93/94 as a starting point the below are the figures against Australia.

SA played 21 tests, won 4 = winning % = 19%
Eng played 31 tests, won 8 = winning % = 26%

SA v Aus played 7 series. SA won 0. Winning % = 0%
Eng v Aus played 6 series. Eng won 1. Winning % = 17%

Last time SA beat Aus = 26 years ago (maybe with the greatest ever team)
Last time Eng beat Aus= 1 yr ago.

Hey, neither teams recocord is great, but the quoted stament may be a bit dramatic

 

[luckyeddie]

There are no South African performances worth talking about since 1996?
Now I've heard it all.

If you honestly thought that was a serious reply.....

Oh well.

Edit:

I meant 'worth talking about by me' - you know - wanton ineptitude, playing rubbish, that sort of stuff.

You of all people should know about that - you watch Yorkshire.

 

[luckyeddie]

No, Smith scoring double centuries against your fellows was lucky....
South Africa whipping you guys 4-1 last year lucky...
England winning 2005 Ashes- lucky
The fact that I don't have a physical address for you... Extremely Lucky

Oh, look.

I've been threatened by an idiot on a computer.

 

[Smudge]

Oh, look.

I've been threatened by an idiot on a computer.

You better lock your cyber-doors and arm yourself with a cyber-gun, eddie.

 

[luckyeddie]

You better lock your cyber-doors and arm yourself with a cyber-gun, eddie.

Do you think he bytes?

 

[PY]

Hang your head in shame Eddie.

 

[Smudge]

Do you think he bytes?

Sounds like he has a real chip on his shoulder - I hope he doesn't speak to his mother(board) like that.




Ah, there's my taxi.

 

[Barney Rubble]

Sounds like he has a real chip on his shoulder - I hope he doesn't speak to his mother(board) like that.




Ah, there's my taxi.

Don't worry, I'm sure he's as harmless as a mouse.

 

[tooextracool]

No, Smith scoring double centuries against your fellows was lucky....

considering what smith has done in 8 tests since those double centuries against England, and what a disaster his tour of Australia turned out(as predicted by yours truly), i think i'd put plenty of money on the fact that those double centuries were extremely lucky. one can only thank the likes of anderson and gough, and even steve harmison for dishing up the absolute tripe that they did on that tour.

 

[Richard]

And in Anderson and Harmison's case, the absolute tripe they've dished-up most of their Test-careers.