***Official*** South Africa v West Indies

[Pratters]

Likely teams according to cricinfo >

West Indies (probable) 1 Chris Gayle, 2 Wavell Hinds, 3 Ramnaresh Sarwan, 4 Brian Lara, 5 Shivnarine Chanderpaul (capt), 6 Dwayne Bravo, 7 Narsingh Deonarine, 8 Courtney Browne (wk), 9 Tino Best, 10 Daren Powell, 11 Fidel Edwards.


South Africa (probable) 1 Graeme Smith (capt), 2 AB de Villiers, 3 Boeta Dippenaar, 4 Jacques Kallis, 5 Herschelle Gibbs, 6 Ashwell Prince, 7 Mark Boucher (wk), 8 Nicky Boje, 9 Shaun Pollock, 10 Andre Nel, 11 Makhaya Ntini.

The West Indies bowling attack looks very raw, inexperienced and is a result of the constant changing they have done in the last couple of years. The batting has a solid look to it around Brian Lara.

The South African team has a bowling attack which will likely be stregthened by the return of Pollock.

Cant wait for some live cricket on t.v.

 

[Adamc]

South Africa batting. Pollock, but no Nel. Edwards out as well, Dwight Washington making his debut.

 

[tooextracool]

Even Sampras had his nemesis in the Clay court and Richard Krajicek. Smith is no where as great as a Sampras but when great players can have a problem certainly good players may have it too.

The two series vs England Smth failed after a good start. Shane Warne failed in his earlier series versus India in India. No one started calling him NOT great.

Smith has a lot of cricket ahead of him. One technical problem he faced in his career should not be made so huge the way you are doing it.

how many good bowling attacks has smith succeeded against?
he failed in pakistan against shoaib and shabbir
failed against england both times they had any sort of formidable attack.
is yet to do anything of significance against australia.
to say that its equivalent to sampras' record to krajicek is wholly ludicrous. if sampras had a poor record against agassi, becker, edberg, ivanisevic, courier and all the other greats of the 90s, then maybe you might actually have a claim.
until smith proves that he can score against the very best, theres no way he can be classified as anywhere above ordinary.

 

[Pratters]

School boy like bowling by West Indies on a pitch offering nothing. This is one of the weakest attacks I have seen the West Indies augur up.

Why are the likes of Dillon, Collins out of the squad? Certainly they could do better than this.

 

[The Baconator]

Isn't Collins injured? But I don't know about DIllon.

 

[Adamc]

Collins is indeed injured, Dillon played against South Africa last year, took 4/359 in three Tests, and hasn't played since.

 

[Pratters]

how many good bowling attacks has smith succeeded against?
he failed in pakistan against shoaib and shabbir
failed against england both times they had any sort of formidable attack.
is yet to do anything of significance against australia.
to say that its equivalent to sampras' record to krajicek is wholly ludicrous. if sampras had a poor record against agassi, becker, edberg, ivanisevic, courier and all the other greats of the 90s, then maybe you might actually have a claim.
until smith proves that he can score against the very best, theres no way he can be classified as anywhere above ordinary.

umm every international cricketer plays a lot of weaker attacks these days. Smith is no different having played so many tests vs Windies, a few versus Zimbabwe. On ocassions when you make runs, it will be on flat tracks too. You can only make runs in tracks you are batting on and attacks you are facing.

Versus Pakistan in South Africa. A line up which was average but thats pretty much how most attacks are these days.

http://www.cricinfo.com/link_to_dat...N_RSA/SCORECARDS/PAK_RSA_T2_02-06JAN2003.html

Smith made runs in Sri Lanka versus a good Sri Lankan attack too showing he has good skills in the subcontinent conditions as well. In the last two test versus West Indies in this current series Smith has managed a century each. A very weak attack. But how many of the other South African batsmen managed the same achievment?

Smith has had two poor series vs England if you discount the huge runs made due to what people believe is crap bowling. Too harsh on a young player to discount it all on this facor alone of not making runs against quality attacks when he has made runs most of the time in his career.

 

[marc71178]

The two series vs England Smth failed after a good start.

No, he had 2 games with tripe bowling and has failed since then, even to the extent of having to drop down the order.

There was no good start in that second series.

 

[Pratters]

No, he had 2 games with tripe bowling and has failed since then, even to the extent of having to drop down the order.

So the start of the two games Smith had was not a good one despite making a 200?

 

[marc71178]

You said good start to the 2 Series - he clearly did not.

 

[Pratters]

You said good start to the 2 Series - he clearly did not.

I meant two series taken combined.

Cheers.

 

[tooextracool]

umm every international cricketer plays a lot of weaker attacks these days. Smith is no different having played so many tests vs Windies, a few versus Zimbabwe. On ocassions when you make runs, it will be on flat tracks too. You can only make runs in tracks you are batting on and attacks you are facing.

and hes faces the good attacks too, yet ironically whenever he has hes come up short.

Smith made runs in Sri Lanka versus a good Sri Lankan attack too showing he has good skills in the subcontinent conditions as well. In the last two test versus West Indies in this current series Smith has managed a century each. A very weak attack. But how many of the other South African batsmen managed the same achievment?

again thats largely irrelevant. poor bowlers are incapable of exposing his weakness the good bowlers could. its simply ludicrous that people say that smith is a better player than kirsten even though he cant score a run against england and failed against australia, yet flintoff isnt even proven because he hasnt done well against australia.
as far as smith playing well in Sl is concnerned, did you watch that series at all? SL were playing without murali, who forms about 80% of their bowling attack.

Smith has had two poor series vs England if you discount the huge runs made due to what people believe is crap bowling. Too harsh on a young player to discount it all on this facor alone of not making runs against quality attacks when he has made runs most of the time in his career.

no its ridiculous to claim that hes already better than kirsten, when he hasnt done anything of significance all his career.

 

[Pratters]

and hes faces the good attacks too, yet ironically whenever he has hes come up short.

I repeat - the only good attack he has come short against is England

he hasnt done well against australia.

In the two tests he played vs Australia he scored a 68 and a 42. I wont say he just CANT play versus Australia

SL were playing without murali, who forms about 80% of their bowling attack.

And yet the same Smith played well versus Murali in South Africa.

no its ridiculous to claim that hes already better than kirsten, when he hasnt done anything of significance all his career.

I can feel Smith is better than Kirsten when I see him score runs more consistetly against opposition and has enough talent and time to improve himself to remain a force in test cricket for quite a while.

P.S. Further on this should be taken to the Smith vs Kirsten thread

 

[BoyBrumby]

South Africa batting. Pollock, but no Nel. Edwards out as well, Dwight Washington making his debut.

Is he injured? God knows, I'm not his biggest fan, but he's been about the best bowler in the series.

 

[Pratters]

Is he injured? God knows, I'm not his biggest fan, but he's been about the best bowler in the series.

Cozier is discussing exactly the same thing specualting about how injured he is.

 

[Pratters]

School boy cricket again by the West Indies

 

[tooextracool]

I repeat - the only good attack he has come short against is England

err australia, and pakistan(With shoaib and shabbir).

In the two tests he played vs Australia he scored a 68 and a 42. I wont say he just CANT play versus Australia

yet his average stands 28.50, which is nearly half his career average.

And yet the same Smith played well versus Murali in South Africa.

average of 29.33

I can feel Smith is better than Kirsten when I see him score runs more consistetly against opposition and has enough talent and time to improve himself to remain a force in test cricket for quite a while.

consistently?
you mean consistently against poor bowling attacks.
i refuse to see how you can consider someone who hasnt proven himself against any quality pace attack to be an all time great and better than someone who did.

 

[Pratters]

err australia, and pakistan(With shoaib and shabbir).

Didnt I show the inning he made runs with Waqar, Saqlain Md. Zahid and Sami

yet his average stands 28.50, which is nearly half his career average.

I never said he had a great series. Just showed by the 42 and 68 he can bat vs them.

average of 29.33

Even IF that were to be true in the Srl in RSa series, he had a big score showing he can make runs vs them.

 

[tooextracool]

Didnt I show the inning he made runs with Waqar, Saqlain Md. Zahid and Sami

yes and all those bowlers were either rubbish or past their prime. he failed when he got 2 formidable bowlers in shabbir and akthar in pakistan.

I never said he had a great series. Just showed by the 42 and 68 he can bat vs them.

so what?
fact is his average is very low when he faces quality sides, hence if all he did was play quality sides, he wouldnt even make the SA test side.
atherton has 77, 57*, 57 and 51 against glenn mcgrath. does that mean that he wasnt his bunny?

Even IF that were to be true in the Srl in RSa series, he had a big score showing he can make runs vs them.

this big score thing is getting ludicrous. the point is that you look at his overall average against quality sides, which is very poor. you'd be lucky to make the side if you were averaging in the high 20s.
any player can play the odd good inning, even the worst of them can score the odd 50. even mark ealham of all players scored a 50 against australia. does that in anyway mean that he could bat?

 

[Pratters]

yes and all those bowlers were either rubbish or past their prime. he failed when he got 2 formidable bowlers in shabbir and akthar in pakistan.

He has made runs in other instances against quality pacers. You make it sound as if he is incapable of playing fast bowling of any good quality.