*Official* England in South Africa Thread

[marc71178]

Archive it, and just for completeness, why not add this one too.

ROFLMAO.

I keep forgetting Neil was the first one I had a major disagreement with on here.

Of course he accepted my better knowledge in the end

 

[marc71178]

You did not see the knock Pollock got did you? The amount of injury can only be known today, whether it is of any serious nature or did not cause much damage for Pollock to be fit to play, but it definitely was an injury at that moment the impact it had on Pollock.

I imagine it may have shook him up, nothing more.

I doubt he'd have had so much treatment had SA been needing every minute they could get to chase a target...

 

[tooextracool]

I think this one needs to go down in the annals of eternity. Saturday, 6.59pm.

a) note the use of the words 'too many'
b) note that hes already taken 7/43 on a seamer before....
might want to add this one that i made during the NZ tour too:
" geraint jones played well but he strikes me as a little over extravagant. he needs to learn to defend a little bit more and not play a shot at every ball. there were quite a few upish drives and cuts,one of which eventually got him out(of styris of all bowlers)".

and this one that i made before the chappell-hadlee tournament:
"you seem to make it out as though i have threatened to exclude one of symonds,clarke or lehmann from the side for hogg. there is also a 4th bowler who bowls 10 overs. ATM the spot is being contested between watson and b.lee neither off whom have been particularly brilliant, certainly on slow turners hogg would be a better option than tht both of them.
as far as players being picked in specialist conditions is concerned, im sure the recent game against england showed precisely that didn it? that australia dont need a specialist spinner to bowl on slow conditions. and of course the fact that both kumble and harbhajan dont play in the same side in ODIs or tests unless they are on turners proves that they are both useless i would presume?"

 

[Zinzan]

Oh no...My worst fear has been realised. England have won. We'll never hear the end of it now....

 

[Tom Halsey]

It was very unclear if it would go on to hit the stumps and I would have given it not out. Lets not get into discussing umpiring decisions now. England played better and deserved to win. Lets keep it at that.

No, it was definately out.

 

[Pratters]

No, it was definately out.

Go and become an umpire if you are so sure! It wasnt definitely out.

 

[Mr Casson]

Go and become an umpire if you are so sure! It wasnt definitely out.

But it was definitely not not out!

 

[SJS]

My composite side:

Gibbs
Strauss
Rudolph
Vaughan (c)
Kallis
Flintoff
Boucher
Pollock
Giles
Ntini
Hoggard

I would put Smith for Rudolph in this side and get Strauss at the pivotal number three spot.

 

[Mister Wright]

I would put Smith for Rudolph in this side and get Strauss at the pivotal number three spot.

Or Vaughan 3, Kallis 4 & Thorpe 5.

 

[Pratters]

But it was definitely not not out!

When in doubt, give it to the batsmen.

 

[Mr Casson]

When in doubt, give it to the batsmen.

Shows that he wasn't in doubt!

 

[Pratters]

Shows that he wasn't in doubt!

Certainly Botham was when he called the decision brave and I was unsure myself. Certainly room for doubt.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

It was very unclear if it would go on to hit the stumps and I would have given it not out. Lets not get into discussing umpiring decisions now. England played better and deserved to win. Lets keep it at that.

Ok let's examine this. It hit him in line, it was straightening a bit, it wasn't high. Where's the doubt? I agree, umpires don't give spinners the LBWs they deserve.

 

[Pratters]

Ok let's exam this. It hit him in line, it was straightening a bit, it wasn't high. Where's the doubt? I agree, umpires don't give spinners the LBWs they deserve.

Hawk eye showed it was hitting the stumps I am not so sure. Its a judgemental call. Would it go a bit higher? Or stray down a bit? I wasnt completely sure it would hit the stumps. So the doubt.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Hawk eye showed it was hitting the stumps I am not so sure. Its a judgemental call. Would it go a bit higher? Or stray down a bit? I wasnt completely sure it would hit the stumps. So the doubt.

Hawkeye showed it hitting him plumb. Not clipping the stumps. Plumb.

On a personal note, I must really re-read my posts for typos before I post them...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Certainly Botham was when he called the decision brave and I was unsure myself. Certainly room for doubt.

He called it brave because umpires don't give it, but not because it wasn't out. As he said, if it was a seamer it would have been out without a second thought.

 

[Pratters]

Hawkeye showed it hitting him plumb. Not clipping the stumps. Plumb.

When Botham termed the decision brave and I was not completely sure it would be out, there was a reason. When not sure, the benefit of doubt goes to the batsman. It wasnt a plumb decision according to me.

And one decision should not and will not be blamed to change the course of a match.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

When Botham termed the decision brave and I was not completely sure it would be out, there was a reason. When not sure, the benefit of doubt goes to the batsman. It wasnt a plumb decision according to me.

And one decision should not and will not be blamed to change the course of a match.

In the mind of Aleem Dar there was not doubt. That's all that matters.

 

[Mr Casson]

In the mind of Aleem Dar there was not doubt. That's all that matters.

That's what I tried to say.

 

[Pratters]

In the mind of Aleem Dar there was not doubt. That's all that matters.

I am not sure people would say the same for the decision earlier on which was plumb and turned down by Dar. It all evens out in the end.