Chris Read another chance?

[marc71178]

And would you say wiht such vigour it if the better 'keeper had been the one to drop the catch?

It is less likely it'd have been dropped, and it would've been less of an issue because if it's the better keeper there, the team's not being compromised.

By that way, that looks like you've accepted how crucial a drop it was.

 

[Richard]

no he made a fool of himself for his first 2 innings, after that hes managed to somewhat redeem himself. but if anyone had watched the game they would have realised that flintoff performed better than him in the first 3 innings. certainly only a fool would say that hes batted better than flintoff for all of the last 3 tests.

And funnily enough I didn't actually say in every innings Jones has outperformed Flintoff, did I now?
All I said was that if this series was the first for both, first-impressions would be that Jones was slightly the better player.

 

[Richard]

except that this time we actually are the more talented team?

Well that's all a MOO anyway (if you ask me there are some players who entered this tour with inflated reputations), but it doesn't matter in this case, the simple fact is whoever has the more talent the result is invariably closer than would be expected - even in 1999\2000, when "England weren't good enough to be touring South Africa", we drew 2 Tests and made them follow-on in 1.

 

[Richard]

It is less likely it'd have been dropped, and it would've been less of an issue because if it's the better keeper there, the team's not being compromised.

So it's less of an issue, because the wicketkeeper you favour was the one who'd have comitted the error.

By that way, that looks like you've accepted how crucial a drop it was.

No, I don't see that it was anything close to certain to have had an impact on the match. More of an impact that I first thought, yes - but I don't reckon England winning was close to certain but for that drop.

 

[marc71178]

So it's less of an issue, because the wicketkeeper you
favour was the one who'd have comitted the error.

No it's less of an issue because the better keeper is in place so under less scrutiny as regards keeping.

No, I don't see that it was anything close to certain to have had an impact on the match. More of an impact that I first thought, yes - but I don't reckon England winning was close to certain but for that drop.

So having to bowl an extra 2 hours to one man when they only had about 7 hours to bowl them out wasn't significant at all then?

Why not, did Flintoff tell you that?

 

[Richard]

No it's less of an issue because the better keeper is in place so under less scrutiny as regards keeping.

So a better 'keeper deserves less criticism for what would be an equally vital error (be it pivotal or totally insignificant)

So having to bowl an extra 2 hours to one man when they only had about 7 hours to bowl them out wasn't significant at all then?

Why not, did Flintoff tell you that?

You can't know that it was - because another man would have come in at a different time and the whole thing would have panned-out totally differently.
Whether it would mean England would have won or the game would have been a formality of a draw can only be guessed at.

 

[tooextracool]

And funnily enough I didn't actually say in every innings Jones has outperformed Flintoff, did I now?
All I said was that if this series was the first for both, first-impressions would be that Jones was slightly the better player.

you said that jones has performed better than flintoff in the last 3 tests, when he only really has done so in the last test. and if you think that jones made a greater first impression with his disgraceful performances in his first 2 innings, then you clearly didnt watch the series closely enough.

 

[tooextracool]

Well that's all a MOO anyway (if you ask me there are some players who entered this tour with inflated reputations), but it doesn't matter in this case, the simple fact is whoever has the more talent the result is invariably closer than would be expected - even in 1999\2000, when "England weren't good enough to be touring South Africa", we drew 2 Tests and made them follow-on in 1.

err we should have lost 2-0. thats not exactly a close result. they were competitive in one game and fortunate enough that cronje was generous for his declaration in another. they were outplayed in the 2nd test.

 

[marc71178]

You can't know that it was - because another man would have come in at a different time and the whole thing would have panned-out totally differently.
Whether it would mean England would have won or the game would have been a formality of a draw can only be guessed at.

Well seeing as they finished 8 down with an exposed tail, I think 2 hours is a quite significant delay.

 

[Richard]

you said that jones has performed better than flintoff in the last 3 tests, when he only really has done so in the last test. and if you think that jones made a greater first impression with his disgraceful performances in his first 2 innings, then you clearly didnt watch the series closely enough.

I think that the series - taken as a whole - would mean that most people would consider Jones the better batsman if they'd seen nothing previously.

 

[Richard]

err we should have lost 2-0. thats not exactly a close result. they were competitive in one game and fortunate enough that cronje was generous for his declaration in another. they were outplayed in the 2nd test.

Yep - and given that 4-0 having been totally outplayed with little exception wouldn't have been an incredibly unexpected result I think I was justified in saying the series was closer than expected.

 

[Richard]

Well seeing as they finished 8 down with an exposed tail, I think 2 hours is a quite significant delay.

Yes, yet the whole thing could quite easily have gone totally differently if the catch had been caught.

 

[marc71178]

With the whole momentum that existed?

Pull the other one.

 

[Richard]

With the whole momentum that never really exists in England-South Africa series - something we may well see again tomorrow morning.
No-one could really have given South Africa a realistic prayer of saving the Kingsmead Test from the position just before Tea - it was quite remarkable that they managed to.
Yet they're now at 1-1.
And I'd not be surprised if England took a quick advantage tomorrow morning.

 

[tooextracool]

Yep - and given that 4-0 having been totally outplayed with little exception wouldn't have been an incredibly unexpected result I think I was justified in saying the series was closer than expected.

oh of course, we were expecting to lose 4-0! what a close series that was. we never really stood a chance from ball 1.

 

[Richard]

No, we didn't - but after that First Test the series was much closer than I think anyone - certainly me - expected.
I never said it was a close series when no-one expected it to be, just that everyone expected it to be a total trampling and it wasn't - just a pretty comfortable victory.
Even in the Third Test in which we were thoroughly outplayed we certainly had our moments - such as before Klusener came in and when Atherton and Hussain were hammering it everywhere.

 

[tooextracool]

I think that the series - taken as a whole - would mean that most people would consider Jones the better batsman if they'd seen nothing previously.

take it as whatever you want, anyone whos watched the series closely enough would realise that jones outperformed flintoff in the last test, while the latter did so in the first 2. the only reason he had a better average was because he performed far better than flintoff in the last test, and was fortunate enough to come in a comfortable situation in the 2nd inning of the 2nd test.

 

[marc71178]

With the whole momentum that never really exists in England-South Africa series - something we may well see again tomorrow morning.

In a short spell at the end of the day, momentum does play a big part.

 

[wpdavid]

No, we didn't - but after that First Test the series was much closer than I think anyone - certainly me - expected.
I never said it was a close series when no-one expected it to be, just that everyone expected it to be a total trampling and it wasn't - just a pretty comfortable victory.

I think that's pretty fair. England's batting lineup was inexperienced after the top 3, and SA had a superb side then. After the first test it was even more obvious that Donald & Pollock were much better than our quicks, and I could see us going down 4-0, no problem. Let's face it, 2-1 flattered us.

 

[Richard]

In a short spell at the end of the day, momentum does play a big part.

You can never, ever gurantee that - as demonstrated by today's play - who would have guessed England would dominate most of it so much?
Not many, that's who. South Africa apparently "had the momentum", but England turned it around. I'd not be too surprised to see South Africa continue to do so tomorrow morning.