Langeveldt
Soutie
Nicejot1 said:Winter months are best (July to Aug). Mainly clear skies, very little or no wind, lots of sunshine. Temperature averages about 19 to 21 celsius during the daytime. Seldom rains and no electrical storms at all.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* England in South Africa Thread
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
-dude-
Cricket Spectator
Can someone tell me why players like David Trebrugge keep getting left out of the team. I mean does anyone really think that South Africa would have lost if only they had one more support bowler for Ploock and Ntini? When Langveldt was included look what happened. Great, so SA had a fantastic selection policy for a total of one test...maybe two as Nel was a good choice in the last.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
Yes, I put it on my Christmas list and Santa was good to me. And a very good read it was too. I don't know if you're aware, but the degree of collaboration between the MCC and SA re not picking non-whites goes back a while before then. Duleep was dropped after one game against SA in about 1929, and its pretty well documented that was due to SA objections to him playing. He also didn't tour SA a couple of years later, despite being a regular by then. Also, Ranji wasn't picked to tour SA about 30 years previously, and many reckon that was for the same reason.BoyBrumby said:
Last edited:
Marius
International Debutant
I was at the game on Sun, gave Pietersen some stick Just called him traitor, asked him if he could still speak Afrikaans, and then swore at him in the language . He seemed to take it quite well though. Got wet through walking back to the car when the storm hit though. I just hope our boys can pull it through and give the Poms some competition.
Just called him traitor, asked him if he could still speak Afrikaans, and then swore at him in the language . He seemed to take it quite well though. Got wet through walking back to the car when the storm hit though. I just hope our boys can pull it through and give the Poms some competition.
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
I'm sure they will, although it would help if they got their selections right. I'm surprised not to have read more about de Villiers here over ther last 24 hours. The guy's just scored 200 against us in the 5th test, is hardly a slow scorer, and promptly gets dropped for Adam Bacher/Ashwell Prince (delete as appropriate). It's not as if you need another allrounder in the top 5, so surely you pick the best batsman. Also, I'm sttuggling to see that Justin Kemp's a better bet than Andrew Hall, although admittedly I haven't seen a lot of him. Maybe he'll prove me wrong next time.Marius said:I was at the game on Sun, gave Pietersen some stick
Marius
International Debutant
Linky
Vaughan's men leave sour taste
England have let themselves down off the field, says Neil Manthorp
Sunday January 30, 2005
The Observer
This newspaper decided it would make an interesting change to ask a South African to interview Michael Vaughan. After all, there are only so many questions you can ask a man before you start knowing his answers before he does. A change is as good as a rest and, hopefully, it would be neither onerous nor hard work for either of us.
England have become a very good cricket team under Vaughan, but they may also be creating an image they could regret. Since the moment they arrived in South Africa to this day, they have refused interviews and wrapped themselves in a blanket of comfort and aloofness. At least that is the way it comes across. Unfortunately, the interview never happened so I wasn't able to ask Vaughan whether the impression he was creating was an illusion or unfair. But he has been coming across as both important and successful. Which, of course, he is.
One South African player told me: 'He's been a valuable lesson to all of us on this tour on what can happen to people when they change. In 2003, he was genuinely likeable and there was respect on both sides. Now he's just a genuine....' The word was Afrikaans and is irrelevant. You get the picture. The change is backed up by the remarks of ICC referee Clive Lloyd. Lloyd, who fined Vaughan his match fee after comments made about the umpires at the Wanderers, said: 'I have respect for the England captain and I expect the same from him. If he doesn't respect me, he should at least show respect for [my] position. But he made matters worse for himself with his dismissive and rude attitude.'
At first, it was genuinely difficult to understand how a team with such affable gentlemen as Ashley Giles, Andrew Strauss, Matthew Hoggard and, especially, Andrew Flintoff - come to think of it, there aren't many bad 'uns - could be coming across so badly. But that's exactly the point; it's the team who have been so unco-operative, not the individuals. And if you don't believe me, listen to the local television producer.
'They've generally been extremely difficult. The media, particularly television, are intrinsic to their success, but, for the most part, when they become successful they tell you to eff off. Their attitude is, "Who the hell cares about the media?" They have made life very difficult,' says Richard Parker. Sounds a bit vague. Any specifics? 'We have asked every week of the tour for an England player to come on to our weekly magazine programme and each time have been given a flat "No". A couple of the players, like Flintoff, seemed happy enough to do it, but we were told that Duncan Fletcher vetoed everything,' Parker said. What maddens Parker is the duplicity shown by the England management. 'They asked us to provide them with tapes of AB de Villiers and Dale Steyn because they hadn't seen them play before. It takes a lot of editing time to do that, so I asked if we could have a couple of players on the show. They said, "Fine, no problem." When the time came I was told, "No, the players need to focus." It was pathetic,' Parker said. On South Africa's tour to England in 2003, the team's media officer, Gerald de Kock, estimates that he organised about 40 television interviews and at least as many on radio and one-on-one newspaper interviews.
Fletcher is, seemingly, a very sad man. He made a lot of friends during his time coaching the University of Cape Town and Western Province and was as available and cordial with the media as any other coach I've met. Now I am one of the many, many people he looks straight past - or through - whenever our paths cross. He has been shedding sarcastic comments as fast as a moulting cat loses fur. There isn't space here to provide examples, but you will not find an old colleague or associate who hasn't felt the blast of his icy front. Apart from Fletcher's lemony approach, the main problem appears to be the obsequious and protective attitude of the media liaison team. Fine individuals in their personal capacities, they appear to misunderstand their role, which should be about liaising, not avoiding. I made every effort to contact Vaughan and I very nearly did when speaking to an extremely close friend of his.
'Michael says the problem is that half the time the players don't have a clue what they're turning down. They don't even get to hear about it,' he said. I believe every word of that and it's a badly flawed policy because the players become protected from the real world and end up with no appreciation of what they might have done and who they may have spoken to. Yes they should act as a secretarial filter if that is what the players want, but the message should still get through - perhaps with a recommendation of some sort.
In the case of this interview, however, the message certainly did get through. The request for 30 minutes of the captain's time was made on the evening before the final Test and I was granted a provisional 'Yes' on the second evening with the exact time to be confirmed. Two further confirmations were sought, and received, during the Test match on the understanding that the captain could be flexible with the precise time - more than reasonable, given the man's desire to have a glass of wine or two with his triumphant team as the result became obvious.
So accommodation was rebooked, flights changed and an important appointment cancelled. At 9.39pm on the day of England's first series success on South African soil in 40 years, I called the liaison man to confirm the time. 'Oh, yeah. Umm. I'm with Michael in the bar - just hang on.' The phone became muffled but still audible. 'It's The Observer, the interview tomorrow. Shall I tell him you'll do it next week?' Vaughan's England are a fine team with so much going for them on the field and many warm and sincere characters. But something, somewhere, is going wrong. Remember when the Aussie media dubbed Steve Waugh's all-conquering, all-sledging team 'The Unloveables'? The publicity men went mad and social skills gurus from across the country were hired to fix the image of the team. It worked, too.
A couple of months ago, Vaughan walked out of a Test match to be at the birth of his daughter. It was the right thing to do and a special example to sportsmen the world over. In four or five years' time he will, no doubt, do all he can to be there for her first day at big school. I hope he makes it. Then he can tell me all about it because that's what I gave up to interview him. Not that I blame him - it was my decision. If the England team never speak to me again but do face up to the fact that adopting a 'siege mentality' while on tour is not the way forward to long-term greatness or even success, then it will be worth the sacrifice. I know. I've spent the past 10 years trying to write and broadcast the South Africa team out of behaving with similar suspicion and contempt.
Neil Manthorp is a cricket writer and broadcaster in South Africa
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Printable version | Send it to a friend | Save story
Vaughan's men leave sour taste
England have let themselves down off the field, says Neil Manthorp
Sunday January 30, 2005
The Observer
This newspaper decided it would make an interesting change to ask a South African to interview Michael Vaughan. After all, there are only so many questions you can ask a man before you start knowing his answers before he does. A change is as good as a rest and, hopefully, it would be neither onerous nor hard work for either of us.
England have become a very good cricket team under Vaughan, but they may also be creating an image they could regret. Since the moment they arrived in South Africa to this day, they have refused interviews and wrapped themselves in a blanket of comfort and aloofness. At least that is the way it comes across. Unfortunately, the interview never happened so I wasn't able to ask Vaughan whether the impression he was creating was an illusion or unfair. But he has been coming across as both important and successful. Which, of course, he is.
One South African player told me: 'He's been a valuable lesson to all of us on this tour on what can happen to people when they change. In 2003, he was genuinely likeable and there was respect on both sides. Now he's just a genuine....' The word was Afrikaans and is irrelevant. You get the picture. The change is backed up by the remarks of ICC referee Clive Lloyd. Lloyd, who fined Vaughan his match fee after comments made about the umpires at the Wanderers, said: 'I have respect for the England captain and I expect the same from him. If he doesn't respect me, he should at least show respect for [my] position. But he made matters worse for himself with his dismissive and rude attitude.'
At first, it was genuinely difficult to understand how a team with such affable gentlemen as Ashley Giles, Andrew Strauss, Matthew Hoggard and, especially, Andrew Flintoff - come to think of it, there aren't many bad 'uns - could be coming across so badly. But that's exactly the point; it's the team who have been so unco-operative, not the individuals. And if you don't believe me, listen to the local television producer.
'They've generally been extremely difficult. The media, particularly television, are intrinsic to their success, but, for the most part, when they become successful they tell you to eff off. Their attitude is, "Who the hell cares about the media?" They have made life very difficult,' says Richard Parker. Sounds a bit vague. Any specifics? 'We have asked every week of the tour for an England player to come on to our weekly magazine programme and each time have been given a flat "No". A couple of the players, like Flintoff, seemed happy enough to do it, but we were told that Duncan Fletcher vetoed everything,' Parker said. What maddens Parker is the duplicity shown by the England management. 'They asked us to provide them with tapes of AB de Villiers and Dale Steyn because they hadn't seen them play before. It takes a lot of editing time to do that, so I asked if we could have a couple of players on the show. They said, "Fine, no problem." When the time came I was told, "No, the players need to focus." It was pathetic,' Parker said. On South Africa's tour to England in 2003, the team's media officer, Gerald de Kock, estimates that he organised about 40 television interviews and at least as many on radio and one-on-one newspaper interviews.
Fletcher is, seemingly, a very sad man. He made a lot of friends during his time coaching the University of Cape Town and Western Province and was as available and cordial with the media as any other coach I've met. Now I am one of the many, many people he looks straight past - or through - whenever our paths cross. He has been shedding sarcastic comments as fast as a moulting cat loses fur. There isn't space here to provide examples, but you will not find an old colleague or associate who hasn't felt the blast of his icy front. Apart from Fletcher's lemony approach, the main problem appears to be the obsequious and protective attitude of the media liaison team. Fine individuals in their personal capacities, they appear to misunderstand their role, which should be about liaising, not avoiding. I made every effort to contact Vaughan and I very nearly did when speaking to an extremely close friend of his.
'Michael says the problem is that half the time the players don't have a clue what they're turning down. They don't even get to hear about it,' he said. I believe every word of that and it's a badly flawed policy because the players become protected from the real world and end up with no appreciation of what they might have done and who they may have spoken to. Yes they should act as a secretarial filter if that is what the players want, but the message should still get through - perhaps with a recommendation of some sort.
In the case of this interview, however, the message certainly did get through. The request for 30 minutes of the captain's time was made on the evening before the final Test and I was granted a provisional 'Yes' on the second evening with the exact time to be confirmed. Two further confirmations were sought, and received, during the Test match on the understanding that the captain could be flexible with the precise time - more than reasonable, given the man's desire to have a glass of wine or two with his triumphant team as the result became obvious.
So accommodation was rebooked, flights changed and an important appointment cancelled. At 9.39pm on the day of England's first series success on South African soil in 40 years, I called the liaison man to confirm the time. 'Oh, yeah. Umm. I'm with Michael in the bar - just hang on.' The phone became muffled but still audible. 'It's The Observer, the interview tomorrow. Shall I tell him you'll do it next week?' Vaughan's England are a fine team with so much going for them on the field and many warm and sincere characters. But something, somewhere, is going wrong. Remember when the Aussie media dubbed Steve Waugh's all-conquering, all-sledging team 'The Unloveables'? The publicity men went mad and social skills gurus from across the country were hired to fix the image of the team. It worked, too.
A couple of months ago, Vaughan walked out of a Test match to be at the birth of his daughter. It was the right thing to do and a special example to sportsmen the world over. In four or five years' time he will, no doubt, do all he can to be there for her first day at big school. I hope he makes it. Then he can tell me all about it because that's what I gave up to interview him. Not that I blame him - it was my decision. If the England team never speak to me again but do face up to the fact that adopting a 'siege mentality' while on tour is not the way forward to long-term greatness or even success, then it will be worth the sacrifice. I know. I've spent the past 10 years trying to write and broadcast the South Africa team out of behaving with similar suspicion and contempt.
Neil Manthorp is a cricket writer and broadcaster in South Africa
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Printable version | Send it to a friend | Save story
After seeing very little (but enough) of the erm, is debacle a strong enough word? I gotta say "WHAT THE F@#%&*!!!!" 2004/5 is without a doubt the unchallenged nadir for SA cricket since re-admission. Smithy & Jennings have been very blustery and aggressive verbally, but have been anything but on the field. Oh, to be a selector, concocting SA's lineup yesterday must've taken some pretty strong weed.
It's the end of January, and if the entire panel of selectors aren't sacked and preferrably tarred and feathered, I'm done with Cricket this year, at least Liverpoo......
Ah crap!
It's the end of January, and if the entire panel of selectors aren't sacked and preferrably tarred and feathered, I'm done with Cricket this year, at least Liverpoo......
Ah crap!
-dude-
Cricket Spectator
Yeah...good point. Steyn surely has a future, but he should gain Test experience first against weaker opposition where there is less pressure. The SA selectors opted for experience too late in this series.....the result could have been avoided if they chose more experienced players from the beginning.wpdavid said:
SpaceMonkey
International Debutant
What a load of crap that observer story is
Made me laugh when he started to pull the old emotional strings in the last paragraph
Made me laugh when he started to pull the old emotional strings in the last paragraph
Scaly piscine
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yea, it's reached that time where England have built up enough by the media that they feel compelled to knock them down again.SpaceMonkey said:What a load of crap that observer story is
Made me laugh when he started to pull the old emotional strings in the last paragraph
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Terbrugge is top quality. I really like the way he bowls. Had a good beginning to his international career and left out since. And he is in good form in the domestic circuit this season too.-dude- said:
I would prefer him over Steyn right now. Steyn has talent but is too inexperienced and wayward ATM.
SpaceMonkey
International Debutant
Is Nantie Hayward injured or what? i thought he had said he was willing to play for SA again after turning them down for the £££ of Worcestershire
Have SA decided to punish him by not picking him? or is he just horribly out of form?
Have SA decided to punish him by not picking him? or is he just horribly out of form?
garage flower
State Vice-Captain
While we're on this subject, what about Ngam? Still injured?Marius said:
chris.hinton
International Captain
Hayward is a good bowler who would add a bit to south Africa