*Official* South Africa in New Zealand

[BlackCap_Fan]

I like the look of Papps. He looks good.

yeah,a slow yet steady start.

Flemings just been run out for 30,now the scores 44/1.

Marshall in.Hopefully he'll play as well as he did vs pakistan.

Nel's going at 6 an over,hes bowled 3 overs for 18.

 

[Kent]

Damn that Donkey!

When you largely stand between NZ's success or failure, please don't diagonally coast again!

Marshall is like playing a specialist fielder on an Eden Park dung heap like this. The suitably agricultural Styris looks a good bet by me for highest score, but it's really too sunny an afternoon to even be inside watching this.

ig:

 

[Tim]

Well, what a bizarre game.

I was sitting close to the sideline in the south stand & Fleming copped alot of abuse thats for sure.
There was enough to suggest that NZ can turn today's loss around but they'll need to score at least 250 each game to beat South Africa IMO.

 

[Tim]

Something HAS to be done about Eden Park though. I can't remember the last time Eden Park had a decent pitch.

Today's pitch was dreadful to say the least, and was a great example as to why NZ don't doctor their pitches to make them slow & low because as we saw, they can't bat on them.

 

[Isolator]

Once again that annoying habit of dropping vital catches crops up... most annoying, considering I had to wake up at 6 to watch this...

 

[Tim]

It was indeed a very average display in the field by NZ considering they usually set such high standards.

Two players you'd expect to take a catch every single time (Fleming & Marshall) dropped a regulation catch each & both of them were also accountable for some sloppy ground fielding.

 

[Langeveldt]

Why did SA leave it till so late to get all the required runs? Nearly left it too late....

And as for Peterson, this guy is a shocker, when will he ever take a wicket???

 

[Isolator]

I must have somehow missed Fleming's drop...who'd he drop?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

And as for Peterson, this guy is a shocker, when will he ever take a wicket???

Well he hasn't taken one for 6 ODIs. In that time he 26-0-138-0. Before that he bowled 22-0-89-4 in 3 ODIs.

Clearly substandard. He's a brilliant fielder though.

 

[Langeveldt]

I think most of those four wickets were against Bangladesh... Stand to be corrected though...

I cant believe someone as substandard (you said it yourself) as Peterson is playing for SA...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

The 4 came against Pakistan. He only has 7 wickets though, and at least 2 (possibly all 3) of them came against Bangaldesh.

 

[Tim]

There is no doubt that Peterson will be the target for some tap in this series.

 

[Langeveldt]

There is no doubt that Peterson will be the target for some tap in this series.

And the more he gets tap, the happier I am... Lara nearly smacked him back to provincial cricket...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

And the more he gets tap, the happier I am... Lara nearly smacked him back to provincial cricket...

But Lara has smacked better spinners many a time, so I don't think the selectors took that as anything more than 'hard luck'.

IMO Peterson didn't bowl as badly as to surrender 28 runs in that over, but Graeme Smith's captaincy was horrendous.

 

[Langeveldt]

But Lara has smacked better spinners many a time, so I don't think the selectors took that as anything more than 'hard luck'.

IMO Peterson didn't bowl as badly as to surrender 28 runs in that over, but Graeme Smith's captaincy was horrendous.

TBH i dont think Graeme has any faith in Peterson at all.. I think if he had his way, SA would have a completely fast attack until Nico returns to full fitness.. Graeme wont give Peterson a bowl because he isnt good enough, so he doesnt get any better, its a vicious cirle...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

TBH i dont think Graeme has any faith in Peterson at all.. I think if he had his way, SA would have a completely fast attack until Nico returns to full fitness.. Graeme wont give Peterson a bowl because he isnt good enough, so he doesnt get any better, its a vicious cirle...

But Graeme Smith refused to put anyone back on the boundary when Lara was obviously going after him. It was late in play and it was just plain stupid his man-management. In fact, he brought in a fielder in the middle of the over.

To me that doesn't show a lack of faith, that just shows poor captaincy and IMO Graeme Smith's name should go down with Peterson's for having surrendered the most runs in a Test over.

 

[Langeveldt]

But Graeme Smith refused to put anyone back on the boundary when Lara was obviously going after him. It was late in play and it was just plain stupid his man-management. In fact, he brought in a fielder in the middle of the over.

To me that doesn't show a lack of faith, that just shows poor captaincy and IMO Graeme Smith's name should go down with Peterson's for having surrendered the most runs in a Test over.

Well, SA had enough runs to play with, and I think Smith wanted Lara to have a go at Peterson, in the hope he would give his wicket away....

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Well, SA had enough runs to play with, and I think Smith wanted Lara to have a go at Peterson, in the hope he would give his wicket away....

I admire your attempts at defending Mr. Smith.

 

[Langeveldt]

I admire your attempts at defending Mr. Smith.

good...

I just think of it as positive captaincy... Lara could have swished at the fourth ball and been stumped, and Mr Smith would have been congratulated for being such an attacking and innovative captain...

Hindsight is a great thing...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I just think of it as positive captaincy... Lara could have swished at the fourth ball and been stumped, and Mr Smith would have been congratulated for being such an attacking and innovative captain...

Hindsight is a great thing...

Ah, it's a thin line between positive and positively stupid.

Mr. Smith would not have been congratulated for being 'an attacking and innovative captain'. He would have been labelled as lucky (almost as much as Mr. Peterson) and Lara would have been criticized for bad captaincy.