True and i believe IMHO that if he had hit the straps from the off in this series, the series would have been over before the 4th test( i mean England 3-0 South Africa). For those who didn't see this guy bowl last summer, there was that over to Kallis( i think it was first over in one of the morning sessions) to show you how deadly and absolutely unplayable he is when he gets is right.Loony BoB said:So Harmison hasn't done well.
Not really - that's the problem - his much vaunted batting has not actually been as good as it needs to be to guarantee his spot.Tim said:I know Jones is an average keeper at best, but he's been batting pretty well hasn't he?
That should become 5 in a row against Bangladesh, which is quite a rare feat. It will be the 16th time that a side has won 5 or more tests in a row (the record is 8 and is already held by England, between 1884 and 1892), and the first time an English team has done it since 1969-71.Jono said:4 in a row now.
To be fair to Vaughan, Butcher was a shoein at 3 so he went at 4, and doesn't wnat to be shunted around.SJS said:Sending the Keys or the Bells is just a case of the senior player's (in this case the skipper) shirking their responsibility.
I still don't get what you base that on?chris.hinton said:I think that England are playing well and doing the right thing against a VERY POOR south Africa side
The thing is, nobody knows yet which he is...Marius said:Smith - having a poor series, but class is permanent, form is temporary
The thing is, whereas when England played NZ and beat them 3-0, it flattered England.Loony BoB said:The two teams, in my opinion, are still very closely matched, and people who think otherwise purely on the basis of a series win need to think again.
An England team performing well below their best is better than a SA team performing towards their best.Loony BoB said:"SA in comparison didn't throw anywhere near as many wickets away with horrible shots" - so what you're saying is, they were outdone by sheer quality fielding or bowling? So you're saying England were performing very well in the field?
Harmison is good enough, just he's way below his best - Steyn simply wasn't good enough whether he was at his best or not.Loony BoB said:"their others bowlers simply weren't good enough" - Boje? Giles. Harmo? Steyn.
Because they're simply not that good as bowlers, it's inevitable England will eventually play them properly and Nel & Langeveldt won't bowl as well, the conditions won't help them or they'll not be as lucky as before.Loony BoB said:"in the long run if Nel & Langeveldt had played more they'd have been put away eventually" - Assumption, nothing more. Who are you to say who does well when and where?
How does saying Gibbs might have done better with some previous form help my initial argument (that SA were a mediocre side playing well and England were a good side playing badly in essence)?Loony BoB said:"Gibbs did well despite coming in late and might have done better on another day with some previous form" - Ha, assumption again! So you say that Gibbs "might do better" but Nel and Langaveldt "would have been put away eventually"... nice to make assumptions always work in favour of your argument, eh?
No Smith was just found out by Hoggard moving the ball into him, Thorpe was just out of form and could barely get the ball off the square a lot of the time.Loony BoB said:Although to be fair, you said that Thorpe has been below his best, I can say Smith has been below his best.
Rudolph averages 40 because of Bangladesh, I see him as the equivalent of Key really - one big 200 each but otherwise they look ropey.Loony BoB said:You can say Vaughan has been terrible, I can say he's been terrible a hell of a lot longer than just this series, and that Rudolph has been terrible (Rudolph averages 40, Vaughan averages 45, both averaged 30 this series).
Hall wasn't really below par, he played as you'd expect - hard working but nothing special, Boucher was also about as you'd expect, considering G Jones & Flintoff in the past 6-12 months you'd certainly say their batting was down on what it was then.Loony BoB said:Flintoff and Jones below par? Hall and Boucher below par even more than Flintoff and Jones!
Loony BoB said:In no way have England played their best?
GospelNeil Pickup said:Job done. Simple as.
For the time being i don't care if he is a bad traveller as this will indicate he will be back on it for the ashes!! Good to see tres doing well this series with all the talk about his poor foreign form overseas, though to be far SA is about as similar to england as your going to get. I think so long as Harmy clicks and people i.e Flintoff regain there home batting form we will stand a chance in July.SpeedKing said:For me, his being out of form (with BALL ) is what has made this series as tight as it is. unless last year's harmison comes back in the summer (hopefully its just that he is a bad traveller) we have no hope against Aus.
Don't Klusener & Fat Gray have a bit of history?Loony BoB said:http://usa.cricinfo.com/link_to_dat.../2005/JAN/167688_RSAENG2004-05_25JAN2005.html
If Klusener does not make one's ODI squad (let alone starting side) - how does Klusener not get into the A side either? Are they still holding grudges in South Africa, or has he been performing that badly in both internationals and domestics?
nopeTim said:I know Jones is an average keeper at best, but he's been batting pretty well hasn't he?