**Official** West Indies in South Africa Thread

[garage flower]

Managed to stay awake for the whole day's play today after stopping up most of the night watching the Aussies get creamed again.

Obviously the continued genius of BCL was the highlight, but the lack of quality from the supporting cast has again been worryingly apparent in this test.

If Lawson and Taylor aren't fit for the home tests, the bowling could be a real problem. As it stands, I would go for Mohammed, Dillon, Collymore and one of Lawson/Taylor/Edwards (in that order).

As far as the batting's concerned, as much as I like the bloke I do hope that Ganga is now 3 knocks away from the end of his test career. If Devon Smith has a decent domestic season, he should be recalled to partner Gayle and if Hinds can't make runs in the middle order we need to try someone new. Ganga has had more than enough opportunities and continues to exhibit the same failings innings after innings. Hopefully, a few players will chuck their names in the hat when the Carib Cup kicks off next week.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

one of Lawson/Taylor/Edwards (in that order).

How did a fit Edwards drop down the pecking order behind two injured bowlers? Lawson and Taylor haven't played cricket for some time and you'd pick them on name? I'd say that they would have to perform well enough in the Carib Beer Cup to displace Edwards rather than Edwards having to displace them.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I cant help thinking though, that if Lara didnt have such good hands or an amazing eye, he would be an awful batsman.. His technique is nowhere.. Still he seems to throw the textbook right out the window

:O

What?? Lara has superb technique!

He moves across well and gets behind the ball and plays textbook defensive strokes. Add that to his vintage cover drives, straight drives, pulls and flicks.

He's technically sound. Yes he has a good eye and quick hands, but that only adds to his game. What a ridiculous statement. Is Richard getting to you Rich?

 

[luckyeddie]

Ordinary decision at best. Might have missed. Chris should certainly have stuck to his natural game though.

Pad up, get your just desserts. End of story. Game over. Back to the pavilion.

Batsmen, you have a bat - if it's close, use it (or at least pretend to). Do not rely on an umpire to get you out of jail because YOU have misjudged the line of the ball.

 

[garage flower]

How did a fit Edwards drop down the pecking order behind two injured bowlers? Lawson and Taylor haven't played cricket for some time and you'd pick them on name? I'd say that they would have to perform well enough in the Carib Beer Cup to displace Edwards rather than Edwards having to displace them.

Not on name. On test performances in Lawson's case and ability in Taylor's. Edwards bowls too many bad balls. The essence of test cricket is building pressure. When Edwards is playing it's very difficult to build pressure. Having said all that, there's a reasonable case for sticking with Fidel - at least ahead of Taylor - so I'd be happy enough.

 

[garage flower]

Pad up, get your just desserts. End of story. Game over. Back to the pavilion.

Batsmen, you have a bat - if it's close, use it (or at least pretend to). Do not rely on an umpire to get you out of jail because YOU have misjudged the line of the ball.

Yes, that's all very interesting luckyeddie. Fact is, it might have missed off stump and so shouldn't have been given out.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Not on name. On test performances in Lawson's case and ability in Taylor's. Edwards bowls too many bad balls. The essence of test cricket is building pressure. When Edwards is playing it's very difficult to build pressure. Having said all that, there's a reasonable case for sticking with Fidel - at least ahead of Taylor - so I'd be happy enough.

So if Lawson takes 10 wickets in 8 games at 45-50 apiece in the Carib Beer Cup, you'd pick him ahead of Edwards on Test performances? Keep in mind that Lawson is returning from injury and rehabilitation of his action. I fear that he will be but a shadow of the player he was.

 

[iamdavid]

I could mention the mighty Brett Lee here but I won't:P

Since when have I said Brett Lee should be in the Australian test side :P

 

[garage flower]

So if Lawson takes 10 wickets in 8 games at 45-50 apiece in the Carib Beer Cup, you'd pick him ahead of Edwards on Test performances? Keep in mind that Lawson is returning from injury and rehabilitation of his action. I fear that he will be but a shadow of the player he was.

Untypically pessimistic Mr M. Sounds like he had a decent - if very brief - spell in one of Jamaica's warm up games.

Obviously, I wouldn't want to pick anyone, except the handful of established world class performers, if they were badly out of form.

 

[luckyeddie]

Yes, that's all very interesting luckyeddie. Fact is, it might have missed off stump and so shouldn't have been given out.

ANY ball might miss the stumps - Hawkeye only ever shows the actual course up to the point of impact then the software extrapolates. Conversely, some of those which are indicated at 'going over' might well hit the stumps.

Do you notice that the predicted track is ALWAYS a straight line? It hasn't even got gravity and air resistance factored in. How often do you see a ball deviate (swing) after it has pitched? Sometimes, it even swings in the opposite direction after pitching, sometimes late, sometimes early - usually when the ball has decelerated and the seam is at a particular angle - but not always.

It's a judgment call on the part of the umpire - and they will always try to give the batsman the benefit of the doubt when there is any (in their opinion). The 'padding up' decision cannot be judged in the same light as a 'normal' leg-before because the batsman does not have to be struck in line, consequently there is far more guesswork involved.

This gives us a bit of a problem, doesn't it? If we go by your feelings in this instance (which I thought was pretty darned close) and make it a general interpretation, no batsman would ever be given out leg-before while padding up.

Now, you have the benefit of hindsight having viewed a dozen replays (all of which indicated that there might well have been contact with the off bail) - the umpire went with a gut feeling which was largely supported by the technology - what you describe as 'ordinary'.

So, there you have it. Just a little more leaning towards the batsman's favour when a stroke is played, a little leaning towards the bowler when there is no stroke.

 

[Adamc]

It can be painful watching Fidel Edwards bowl at times, but it's always worth it as he is capable of producing some brilliant deliveries, such as the one which got Graeme Smith (left a ball 10cm outside off only to see it take out his off-stump.)
Still, it was one of only three highlights of the day for the West Indies, the other two being the dismissal of Rudolph for 0 and the rain. Lara's promise of not being whitewashed may yet be fulfilled as early as tomorrow evening.

 

[garage flower]

ANY ball might miss the stumps - Hawkeye only ever shows the actual course up to the point of impact then the software extrapolates. Conversely, some of those which are indicated at 'going over' might well hit the stumps.

Do you notice that the predicted track is ALWAYS a straight line? It hasn't even got gravity and air resistance factored in. How often do you see a ball deviate (swing) after it has pitched? Sometimes, it even swings in the opposite direction after pitching, sometimes late, sometimes early - usually when the ball has decelerated and the seam is at a particular angle - but not always.

It's a judgment call on the part of the umpire - and they will always try to give the batsman the benefit of the doubt when there is any (in their opinion). The 'padding up' decision cannot be judged in the same light as a 'normal' leg-before because the batsman does not have to be struck in line, consequently there is far more guesswork involved.

This gives us a bit of a problem, doesn't it? If we go by your feelings in this instance (which I thought was pretty darned close) and make it a general interpretation, no batsman would ever be given out leg-before while padding up.

Now, you have the benefit of hindsight having viewed a dozen replays (all of which indicated that there might well have been contact with the off bail) - the umpire went with a gut feeling which was largely supported by the technology - what you describe as 'ordinary'.

So, there you have it. Just a little more leaning towards the batsman's favour when a stroke is played, a little leaning towards the bowler when there is no stroke.

I wasn't really basing my opinion on the evidence of Hawkeye. Watching it live I thought there was a fair chance of it missing off. I think the umpire should also have spotted the fact that there was a fair chance of it missing off and given not out.

Shaken into action by this reprieve, I'm sure Chris would have gone onto a maiden triple hundred off about 220 balls. Possibly.

 

[luckyeddie]

I wasn't really basing my opinion on the evidence of Hawkeye. Watching it live I thought there was a fair chance of it missing off. I think the umpire should also have spotted the fact that there was a fair chance of it missing off and given not out.

Shaken into action by this reprieve, I'm sure Chris would have gone onto a maiden triple hundred off about 220 balls. Possibly.

Fair comments - but I thought at first glance that it was plumb, and was extremely surprised to see that Hawkeye indicated just the bail.

Still, my eyes are old and busted.

 

[Tom Halsey]

:O

What?? Lara has superb technique!

He moves across well and gets behind the ball and plays textbook defensive strokes. Add that to his vintage cover drives, straight drives, pulls and flicks.

He's technically sound. Yes he has a good eye and quick hands, but that only adds to his game. What a ridiculous statement. Is Richard getting to you Rich?

I would have to disagree. But he has such a brilliant eye it doesn't matter.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I would have to disagree. But he has such a brilliant eye it doesn't matter.

Explain. Lara does not get right behind the ball with a straight batted defensive stroke? He does not execute the cover drive as well as it can be? Yes, his technique is unorthodox but that doesn't mean it's poor. If you can point out the faults in it then so be it, but I doubt you can.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Now, maybe the pitch was playing tricks, and he wasn't ure whether it was going to spit and jump. But as soon as he played the shot, he was jumping around and backing away on the first day of the last test, when WI fell to 50/5. The bat was generally a long way from his body. However, in the current test, when the pitch wasn't playing tricks, his technique has been generally fine.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Now, maybe the pitch was playing tricks, and he wasn't ure whether it was going to spit and jump. But as soon as he played the shot, he was jumping around and backing away on the first day of the last test, when WI fell to 50/5. The bat was generally a long way from his body. However, in the current test, when the pitch wasn't playing tricks, his technique has been generally fine.

I remember that innings and the reason Lara played so well was because he got behind the line. He's done so all series. Yes, the ball beats the bat occasionally, but it does with everyone. Once again, I think many people mistake unorthodox technique for poor technique. Lara of old used to play away from his body all the time, but in the last year and some he's really matured and his technique at this point in time I think is spotless... except v the yorker, but that's due his high bat-lift.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

It's notable the stupidity with which Smith didn't declare earlier. South Africa batted way too long IMO. Fifth day pitch... WI batting minus Chanders... 4+runs per over...

 

[luckyeddie]

It's notable the stupidity with which Smith didn't declare earlier. South Africa batted way too long IMO. Fifth day pitch... WI batting minus Chanders... 4+runs per over...

I tried not to openly accuse anyone of crass stupidity in the match report, but I came close regarding the way that South Africa went about their task.... and then there was the West Indian fielding.


I thought the headline "Bizarre goings-on at Newlands" said it all.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

and then there was the West Indian fielding.

I didn't see the vast majority of play, so I can't comment on this.