**Official** Zimbabwe in South Africa Thread

[Magrat Garlick]

Plus Dippenaar, I suppose. Does anyone know what Amla's domestic form has been like this season? Given that in the Cape Town test he was sawn off by a shocking leg before decision in the 1st inings and got out having a swing in the 2nd, he's effectively been written off after one poor test at Durban. Not that it's my problem, but it seems harsh..

770 runs @ 38.50 (all FC)
691 runs @ 53.15 (domestic + NZ A tour matches)
435 runs @ 39.54 (only domestic)

Basically, he looks to have all self-confidence shattered with his international start - he hasn't had a 50+ score since he left for India. Before the call-up he had an impressive row of 115, 4, 141, 106, 31*, 18, 115, 72, 42.

 

[Chubb]

i think Zander de Bruyn is a good pick. He did well in India, didn't he?

I havent posted for a while due to a complete PC meltdown at home. This is from the school IT rooms.

 

[Richard]

Zander has to be about the most harshly treated guy for a while.
How the hell Ashwell Prince got selected ahead of him for The First Test I'll never know, and how he got dropped after The First Test against us I'll never know, either.

 

[Richard]

770 runs @ 38.50 (all FC)
691 runs @ 53.15 (domestic + NZ A tour matches)
435 runs @ 39.54 (only domestic)

Basically, he looks to have all self-confidence shattered with his international start - he hasn't had a 50+ score since he left for India. Before the call-up he had an impressive row of 115, 4, 141, 106, 31*, 18, 115, 72, 42.

And de Bruyn has done the exact opposite - he's just carried-on getting the big scores since he's been dropped.
And still, they prefer Ashwell Prince, who's been found-out in Test-cricket donkeys-years ago...

 

[Richard]

How can you say it is infinitely more likely he won't?

He's a better bet than someone who lets the danger man play himself in without worrying about the run rate getting out of hand.

No, he's not - because at least the danger-man then has to play himself in, rather than smashing his way to 20 or 30.

 

[Richard]

What are the alternatives?

An order of

1.Smith
2.De Villiers
3.Rudolph
4.Kallis
5.Gibbs
6.Kemp

is far better than one with Hashim Amla in

Look even better if it had Zander in there...

 

[Richard]

Couldn't argue with the top 5. But leaving aside the Amla discussion for a minute, do you really reckon Kemp is a test number 6?

I certainly think there are worse players.
What it'd be easy to miss if the only time you've ever seen him bat is those England ODIs is the fact that he's actually pretty good technically.
I don't think, really, that he's good enough to be a specialist-batsman in Test-cricket, but then again - Klusener's pretty much played as one sometimes.
I just hope Kemp can "do a Klusener" with his bowling. For the last 2 years Kemp's bowling has been a joke, and he used to be really, really good - a genuine contender for a spot as a specialist bowler.
I'd prefer see McKenzie or de Bruyn as a specialist-bat.

 

[Richard]

Aye. Whether Kemp is a Test number six or not, if he's the best pick available (its him vs Amla vs Prince isn't it?)

There are so many better players around than these 3 it's untrue.

 

[marc71178]

No, he's not - because at least the danger-man then has to play himself in, rather than smashing his way to 20 or 30.

Oh, so it's better he can play himself in without any trouble then is it?

Why exactly is that better for the fielding team than him going for his shots immediately when the team HAD to take the wickets?

 

[Gangster]

Wow, I'd love to see Sehwag bat against this Zimbabwe bowling attack.

 

[Richard]

Oh, so it's better he can play himself in without any trouble then is it?

Why exactly is that better for the fielding team than him going for his shots immediately when the team HAD to take the wickets?

Err - him going for silly shots (which can happen to him if he's not keeping the board ticking) maybe?
Rather than getting easy balls to slam around.

 

[Richard]

Wow, I'd love to see Sehwag bat against this Zimbabwe bowling attack.

I wouldn't.
I'd love to see no Test-match-quality line-up batting against them.
It's just a massacre.

 

[marc71178]

Err - him going for silly shots (which can happen to him if he's not keeping the board ticking) maybe?
Rather than getting easy balls to slam around.

Since when has any batsman had to go for silly shots against "The almighty" Prosper?

No point when they can ease through the middle overs at 4 an over without any realistic threat to their wicket.

At least a bowler who has taken wickets in the past has a chance of getting the man out, which is a key part of the game in any form.

 

[Richard]

And there's a chance of Prosper getting them out, too.
There isn't much chance of Mpofu or someone like him getting anyone out, either.

 

[marc71178]

And there's a chance of Prosper getting them out, too.

Based on what?

His tremendous previous record, what is it a wicket every 5 or 6 games?!

Some of the bowlers actually take wickets at a far more regular pace, and when a side has to bowl the opposition out to win they're much more useful.

 

[Richard]

A bit more useful.
They go from totally useless (which Utseya just about is in terms of taking wickets) to a little bit better than totally useless (which all the rest are).

 

[chris.hinton]

Is this Series over Yet? what a waste of time

 

[Richard]

Should be over after about 5 sessions of the next Test.

 

[Zinzan]

Zim weren't so bad back in 1999....What a difference aye.

In 99 they had...

G Flower
A Flower
Streak
Strang
Goodwin
Campbell

all more than useful players.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Again nobody can stop Kallis doing his favourite pastime - bullying crap teams to bloat his averages. At the moment he has clocked up the most overs of any bowler in this series. Compare this to against England where he'd bowled less than half as many overs as Pollock or Ntini, even Steyn had bowled more overs in his 3 matches.