*Official* England in South Africa Thread

[Pratters]

That's an opinion fondly held by plenty of people - one of the most romanticised parts of cricket.
And it's infuriating, too.
There are times when avoiding defeat is imperative.

My argument would be that it'd be quite insane to be convinced about Steyn from the little I've read about him.

It surely becomes crucial to avoid defeat in circumastances but surely one should not go with that attitude in the first match of a series.

I am not convinced about Steyn. South Africa could do with a potent strike bowler without which they cannot return back to the match winners they were. Some one needs to fillt that gap. If players are stopped being tried for fear of losing, no one will emerge.

 

[Richard]

which pretty much comes down to when hes bowling home/away.

More often than not but nonetheless there have been occasions (entire winter of 2001\02; Lord's Test of summer 2003) where the trend is bucked.

 

[Richard]

It surely becomes crucial to avoid defeat in circumastances but surely one should not go with that attitude in the first match of a series.

I am not convinced about Steyn. South Africa could do with a potent strike bowler without which they cannot return back to the match winners they were. Some one needs to fillt that gap. If players are stopped being tried for fear of losing, no one will emerge.

Equally if players are tried too early when not yet good enough, it will a) lose matches in the short-term and b) risk damaging the confidence of the player concerned.

 

[wpdavid]

(re. Steyn) Equally if players are tried too early when not yet good enough, it will a) lose matches in the short-term and b) risk damaging the confidence of the player concerned.

There's a fine line here, isn't there. It's not exactly unknown for young quicks to appear from nowhere and make an impact so, as long as there's some experiened support, it isn't that much of a risk. If they go for loads, their ability or otherwise to come back will tell us something about their character. That being said, the English experience is that our players don't cut it at test level until their mid/late 20's. And I certainly wouldn't want a repeat of the 2003 situation where virtually the entire attack is unproven at test level (apart from one Yorkshire legend who was clearly well past his best).

I don't see Steyn as a huge risk. If he struggles, there's enough other bowlers in the side to see them through. And I don't know what SA's alternatives are anyway. Plus, England don't look in great shape, so it's not like he's being thrown in against Aus (anywhere) or India (away).

 

[Richard]

How many South African bowlers are really proven Test material?
Pollock - yes, all right, but there aren't any indications of any help in the pitch for him and since 2001 he's almost never provided too much incision without some help from the pitch.
Ntini - bowls crap on non-seaming pitches mostly. One of the most overrated Test bowlers of the current time.
Hall - unquestionably got potential but has had only a handful of good games and of late has done precisely nothing.
Boje - never really caused many problems to settled batting-line-ups on pitches that haven't helped fingerspinners.
I think you've just a little overestimated the South African attack - there's very little firepower there, especially with Nel not firing on anything close to all cylinders.
It requires everyone to pull together and keep the thing tight - something they actually did pretty well at Eden Gardens - and if you've got one guy misfiring it could go a long way to costing the match.
IMO there couldn't be many worse times to blood one such as Steyn.
If he'd looked more convincing in his First-Class career, maybe, but right now it seems he's purely a "got potential" bowler, not someone who is being expected to come in and do the job asked of him.

 

[Richard]

There's a fine line here, isn't there. It's not exactly unknown for young quicks to appear from nowhere and make an impact so, as long as there's some experiened support, it isn't that much of a risk. If they go for loads, their ability or otherwise to come back will tell us something about their character. That being said, the English experience is that our players don't cut it at test level until their mid/late 20's.

This is also a moot-point - how many players actually appear from nowhere? It's not that common an occurrance. Teenagers and early-20s Test-players of calibre are pretty rare.
Maybe the ability to come back after going for loads might say something about their character (it might also say something about the batsmen's inability to sustain the standard), but it nonetheless can play a part in losing matches.
Something SA aren't really in a position to do right now.

 

[marc71178]

It surely becomes crucial to avoid defeat in circumastances but surely one should not go with that attitude in the first match of a series.

I would say that the first game of the series is where that is most crucial.

 

[wpdavid]

This is also a moot-point - how many players actually appear from nowhere? It's not that common an occurrance. Teenagers and early-20s Test-players of calibre are pretty rare.
Maybe the ability to come back after going for loads might say something about their character (it might also say something about the batsmen's inability to sustain the standard), but it nonetheless can play a part in losing matches.
Something SA aren't really in a position to do right now.

I think the "coming from nowhere" is as much a reflection on the other side's knowledge of their opponents domestic game as anything else. But purely from an English point of view, Jeff Thomson & Patrick Patterson are obvious examples. Yes, it's rare, but it can happen. As for SA & Steyn, I'm trying to work out what their options are. After the top 5 we're probably looking at Hall, De Bruyn, the WK, Pollock, Ntini & one other. Given the injuries to Boje & Nel, who else is there? After the SA 'A' game, it seems a surprise that Langeveldt isn't in the squad, but maybe he's viewed as being too old.

 

[Pratters]

I would say that the first game of the series is where that is most crucial.

In any game if you go with an attitude of avoiding defeat, you are bound to lose.

SA should play the best 4 bowlers they feel can perform. If its Steyn, then go for him despite his inexpirience.

 

[Pratters]

Equally if players are tried too early when not yet good enough, it will a) lose matches in the short-term and b) risk damaging the confidence of the player concerned.

This is why Steyn wasnt taken to India if you heard what the South African management said. They didnt want to try him too early.

But extending this forever would mean no one would ever make his debut.

 

[Pratters]

How many South African bowlers are really proven Test material?
Pollock - yes, all right, but there aren't any indications of any help in the pitch for him and since 2001 he's almost never provided too much incision without some help from the pitch.
Ntini - bowls crap on non-seaming pitches mostly. One of the most overrated Test bowlers of the current time.
Hall - unquestionably got potential but has had only a handful of good games and of late has done precisely nothing.
Boje - never really caused many problems to settled batting-line-ups on pitches that haven't helped fingerspinners.
I think you've just a little overestimated the South African attack - there's very little firepower there, especially with Nel not firing on anything close to all cylinders.
It requires everyone to pull together and keep the thing tight - something they actually did pretty well at Eden Gardens - and if you've got one guy misfiring it could go a long way to costing the match.
IMO there couldn't be many worse times to blood one such as Steyn.
If he'd looked more convincing in his First-Class career, maybe, but right now it seems he's purely a "got potential" bowler, not someone who is being expected to come in and do the job asked of him.

According to you, as South African attack isnt up to the mark, there is all the more reason to give a youngster an opportunity.

I do believe they have a good attack but need that extra edge. Steyn may or may not be an answer but players who are promising have to be tried.

 

[Richard]

I think the "coming from nowhere" is as much a reflection on the other side's knowledge of their opponents domestic game as anything else. But purely from an English point of view, Jeff Thomson & Patrick Patterson are obvious examples. Yes, it's rare, but it can happen.

Personally I don't think it's any coincidence that both players actually turned-out nothing special.

As for SA & Steyn, I'm trying to work out what their options are. After the top 5 we're probably looking at Hall, De Bruyn, the WK, Pollock, Ntini & one other. Given the injuries to Boje & Nel, who else is there? After the SA 'A' game, it seems a surprise that Langeveldt isn't in the squad, but maybe he's viewed as being too old.

You cannot be serious about Hall batting above De Bruyn? Have you seen the guy bat: he should have been playing Tests for 4 years IMO.
Personally I'm not in the least surprised that Langeveldt isn't in the squad - I don't believe in basing Test-selection on a single game.
I am, however, astounded that yet again David Terbrugge has been overlooked. You could say the same about Willoughby - yet to play a home Test.

 

[Richard]

In any game if you go with an attitude of avoiding defeat, you are bound to lose.

No, you won't!!!! It's just something people say to avoid "condoning negative play"!!!!!
Playing for a draw at times is an imperative - and ATM oft-forgotten - part of the cricket.

SA should play the best 4 bowlers they feel can perform. If its Steyn, then go for him despite his inexpirience.

I seriously doubt Steyn is one of the best performing bowlers in South Africa ATM.

 

[Richard]

This is why Steyn wasnt taken to India if you heard what the South African management said. They didnt want to try him too early.

But extending this forever would mean no one would ever make his debut.

If he starts looking like he's worthy of selection ahead of some others (firstly the 4 "A"-team bowlers, though I certainly have my doubts about Mbhalati) then maybe there's a case for him making his debut.
Right now I'd say there are plenty of bowlers who deserve selection ahead of him.

 

[Pratters]

No, you won't!!!! It's just something people say to avoid "condoning negative play"!!!!!
Playing for a draw at times is an imperative - and ATM oft-forgotten - part of the cricket.

I seriously doubt Steyn is one of the best performing bowlers in South Africa ATM.

Thats why I said 'if'. The idea is to give the most promisng the chance. I havent seen Steyn bowl as I dont think you have. So we cant say how good he is really.

Regarding draws being an oft forgotten part of cricket.. It looks great looking at the past and seeing well fought out draws. Believe me usually defensive play or safe play from ball one would be some thing which is totally distasteful and inobjective. Best case would be Sri Lanka in recent times who have played the draw game more than any other team I have watched in the late 90s.

 

[Richard]

It's distasteful only if that's not to your taste.
It's only in the last 2 or 3 years that draws have become so rare, and IMO that won't last that long.
We can't say for certain how good Steyn is, but we can take some guesses from stats and reading the little people write about him.

 

[Pratters]

It's distasteful only if that's not to your taste.
It's only in the last 2 or 3 years that draws have become so rare, and IMO that won't last that long.
We can't say for certain how good Steyn is, but we can take some guesses from stats and reading the little people write about him.

Draws are not good in soccer or in cricket. Its distasteful because sport is as much about trying your best to win as it is about sportsmanship. Draws throw that concept out of the window.

I love defensive play and I love tactics in cricket and some times giong for draws is an imperative option. But going for a draw right before a match starts, specially for South Africa as a home team? Nah

 

[Richard]

I'm not saying they should go for a draw (before the match) in this instance - but sometimes it's the sensible option. Eg, West Indies at home to Australia 2 springs ago. They got pilloried for playing for a draw and saying they were doing so - but IMO it was the sensible tack.
Sport is about trying your best - full-stop. If a draw is your best hope, go for it I say.

 

[Pratters]

I'm not saying they should go for a draw (before the match) in this instance - but sometimes it's the sensible option.

There is no logic in going for a safer more experienced attack in the opning test which you yourself say lack teeth. Better to try a promising player.

Yeah draws are the best options at times but even Bangladesh shouldnt look for one before a match starts vs India. Sport is all about trying to win as far as possible. After that we go for the stale mate (love the term)

 

[Richard]

No, sport is about doing the best you can.
If that's a "typical English" attitude, sorry, I don't care - I think it's the right one.
You should not expect anyone to achieve above what they're capable of.