*Official* South Africa in India

[ret]

Appears as if Ind's defeat has attracted some vultures

 

[0RI0N]

Culture vultures, ratt.
Culture vultures.
Inb4 effigies burnt

 

[Goughy]

The top teams are all pretty much even and can beat each other. This defeat doesnt look good but could happen to anyone. India were never a clear number 1 and I think people got a little hung up on the 'title'.

India are a good team. They could win the next Test. SA are a good team also and they could also win.

 

[SeamUp]

Great performance by the boys and mainly Hash, Jakes & Steyntjie.

But I want to mention our un-sung hero who cops far too much flak in Paul Harris. Harro is the glue behind the success of our bowling attack.

He does the dirty work while the 3 fast-strike bowlers can take wickets and at the same time still go at 4RPO if needed. They continually are able to go for the throat and even are willing to concede runs when Harris ties up an end and chips in with important wickets.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Superior indeed when compared to an under strength Indian batting line-up. Superior without doubt against a side in which a specialist WK who is miles away from international class played as a specialist bat just because there were no suitable replacements present in the ground.

South Africa does look like the superior side after this performance, but see the problem is, in just the last series, they are 0-1 down against England and had to battle hard to win the final test match and draw a home series, something India acheived against England quite easily.
Yes South Africa should have beaten England at home, and they are probably the better side, but they didnt..And no, I dont buy the argument that they dominated the whole series. If they dominated the whole series and were still 0-1 down, then shame on them.
For some reason, South Africa have produced some brilliant performances over the last 2 years but at the same time, have looked pretty ordinary from time to time. They should have beaten England and Australia at home, and they failed for whatever reason.

Dravid and Laxman have poor record against SA.. I don't think their presence would have made any difference.

Tendulkar had a poor record against SA too at home and he got a 100.
You cant write off players based on past record, especially if they have 10000 runs behind them.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Right now, South Africa should mentally and physically prepare themselves for a deadly turner in the second test if they want to win the series.

 

[silentstriker]

Don't think that'll happen at Kolkata mate. Though I'm hoping it does.

 

[silentstriker]

“They (BCCI officials) called me, requesting I come up with a pitch that will suit the Indian brand of cricket. Test cricket is meant to be played on good wickets. Can anyone please define what exactly is a turner? If you want the ball to turn square from day one, why do you need a curator? The Eden Gardens wicket will have even bounce and decent carry. Spinners will come into play as the match meanders along,” Mukherjee told The Indian Express.

There goes the series.

 

[honestbharani]

lol.. some guys care more abt getting themselves famous than about the job they are supposed to do..

 

[silentstriker]

Kolkata always produces good pitches though, I think he is saying he's going to produce the same pitch regardless of the situation. Seven out of the last nine Tests have produced a result, so I think he is rightfully proud of the job that he does. India have won five out of those seven (South Africa in '96 and Pakistan in '99 being the other winners).

Obviously, I want him to prepare a complete dustbowl that'll see a result in three days, but I can completely understand where he is coming from.

 

[honestbharani]

Kolkata always produces good pitches though, I think he is saying he's going to produce the same pitch regardless of the situation. Seven out of the last nine Tests have produced a result, so I think he is rightfully proud of the job that he does. India have won five out of those seven (South Africa in '96 and Pakistan in '99 being the other winners).

Obviously, I want him to prepare a complete dustbowl that'll see a result in three days, but I can completely understand where he is coming from.

nah... my point is, when there is a real request from the home team management, you adhere to it. Same thing happened in the Windies when Lara was aghast that a rank turner was prepared against India.. There has to be some give and take here.. No one is asking him to produce something unplayable, juz something that will drive home the home advantage...

 

[silentstriker]

Like I said, I understand, but it's a thing where I can see both sides. In the old days, I don't think ACB went around telling Perth not to prepare fast bowling tracks, and I don't see Lord's being told to prepare a certain type of pitch, regardless of the situation.

Personally, I'd definitely want him to do that, but he feels a certain way about what tracks produce good cricket for his home ground and fans, and that's his job. I respect that. The only thing I wouldn't respect is that if he produces a track that is dead to ensure a draw - I think that's unfair. Or if he produces a track specifically to spite the home team, like what happened in 2004 tour of Australia (the one Ganguly threw a hissy fit and sat out of). Other than that, if its a result oriented track, and one condusive to good cricket, I think he has done his job.

 

[Uppercut]

There goes the series.

We heard it all before tbf. I don't know what he'll do specifically but he'll make sure the draw is at a distinct disadvantage.

Quite right too.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Curators spend a long time getting the Test pitches ready; their preparation would be going on for a lot longer than just a week or two before, when a cricket board tells them what sort of pitch they want.

 

[silentstriker]

Last time, they just stopped watering the Kanpur pitch on the morning India were getting blown out in Ahemdabad. It worked.

 

[jeevan]

Like I said, I understand, but it's a thing where I can see both sides. In the old days, I don't think ACB went around telling Perth not to prepare fast bowling tracks, and I don't see Lord's being told to prepare a certain type of pitch, regardless of the situation.

Personally, I'd definitely want him to do that, but he feels a certain way about what tracks produce good cricket for his home ground and fans, and that's his job. I respect that. The only thing I wouldn't respect is that if he produces a track that is dead to ensure a draw - I think that's unfair. Or if he produces a track specifically to spite the home team, like what happened in 2004 tour of Australia (the one Ganguly threw a hissy fit and sat out of). Other than that, if its a result oriented track, and one condusive to good cricket, I think he has done his job.

All this might have been fine if Eden Gardens had a history of sporting wickets and if Mr Mukherjee had himself a reputation for raising the domestic game through preparing good wickets (and Indian cricket certainly needs that). Absent that (Eden gardens is more known for featherbeds) - he comes across as a pompous minion overstaying his 5 minutes in the spotlight.

If he does not provide home field advantage, BCCI must think of visiting Eden Gardens less frequently - and that is the biggest disservice this guy could do for whom he professes to serve.

 

[silentstriker]

Due to politics, BCCI rarely visits Eden Gardens anyway. The fact is, 7 out of the last 9 Tests have had results. Let's see the track first.

 

[akilana]

What was Tendulkar averaging against them at home? It was poor as well. Form temporary class perma etc.

was I questioning their class? Dravid is a class batsman but I don't think Laxman is with his 45 average..
SA is their bogey team and it's hard to say with any certainty that they would have saved India..

 

[akilana]

Tendulkar had a poor record against SA too at home and he got a 100.
You cant write off players based on past record, especially if they have 10000 runs behind them.

and you can't say with any certainty that they would have done any better than the two that played the match. You can have billion runs behind your name but can get out to the first ball. It was easier for Sachin to get that hundred after the match was lost.

 

[social]

and you can't say with any certainty that they would have done any better than the two that played the match. You can have billion runs behind your name but can get out to the first ball. It was easier for Sachin to get that hundred after the match was lost.

Agree with everything bar the last sentence