England vs South Africa 2012

[GautiMaan]

What happened to the Bresnan effect?English writers:hysterical:

[Dhoni_fan]

Bresan said that England would be a better team without KP, a bit of a silly statement when talking about a legend of the game, in reality though England are better without Bresnan!

[1983-2011]

Tim Bresnan dropped and plays county on the same day Tim Bresnan was dropped from England's lineup today as you know but instead of being a water boy and just chilling in the dressing room, he traveled 200miles up north to play for his county on the same day:hatsoff: http://www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2012/engine/current/match/542607.html

[Ultimate_Game]

Tim Bresnan was dropped from England's lineup today as you know but instead of being a water boy and just chilling in the dressing room, he traveled 200miles up north to play for his county on the same day:hatsoff: http://www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2012/engine/current/match/542607.html

Hats off to ECB :hatsoff: They made sure that their top players don't sit idle and get some match practice if they are not in the playing XI Here we had Rohit riding the bench for a few months and when he got a chance to play he was totally out of sorts due to lack of match practice.

[ravishingravi]

England must ask tough questions "Just as summer inexorably turns into autumn, so England's grip on the No.1 Test status is ebbing away as surely as night follows day. Like a desperate man losing their grip on a cliff face, England will, at some stage on Monday, fall from their perch. As Bob Dylan put it, it's not dark yet, but it's getting there. Few England supporters would dispute that South Africa have been the better side in this series. They would accept, too, that England, for all their improvements over recent years, have failed to justify their lofty ranking since defeating India about 12 months ago. What seemed, at the time, like the start of a journey, might have turned out to be the end. A record that may well read six losses from 11 Tests this year by the end of Monday tells its own story. It is a story which leaves England with some awkward questions to answer. Firstly, they need to look at why their catching, so impressive when they won the Ashes, has become so fallible. They have dropped nine catches in this series, including chances that might - such as the reprieve of Hashim Amla at the Oval and Alviro Petersen in Leeds - have defined matches. In South Africa's second innings here, England dropped Amla on 2, AB de Villiers on 8 and Jacques Rudolph on 6. It is hard enough to beat South Africa without allowing their middle order an extra innings each. At present this is a question for which England have no answer. They are not lacking in hard work and good intention but, perhaps, lack the personnel to build an effective slip cordon. It may be that, if they conclude that their slip catching is costing them games - and there is increasing evidence that it is - they need to look at their team selection and ensure they are better covered in such respect. Stuart Broad's reputation has also declined during this series. Despite one good spell at Leeds, he has been bowling with reduced pace and effectiveness throughout and can no longer be presumed an automatic selection. While the greater potential of his batting might be presumed to see him preferred to Graham Onions, Broad's batting average in this series - 8.25 - hardly justifies that. The bowling average of 39.72 is hardly encouraging, either. That is not to say Broad should be dropped. He is only 26 and may well come to be regarded in time as one of England's finest seamers. But England really do need to question - and correct - his loss of pace and hostility with the ball and his loss of form with the bat. He is too good to be allowed go to waste. But perhaps the most awkward question concerns Andrew Strauss. No-one disputes that Strauss is a fine man with an excellent career behind him. But there are legitimate questions about his future. He has a highest score of 37 and an average of just 17.83 in this series. More to the point, he has hardly looked likely to score runs. Some of his tactical decisions - such as dropping Graeme Swann at Headingley and the leg-side approach to bowling at Graeme Smith - have been muddled and, by the close of play on Monday, it is likely that he will have presided over one series victory in four. The harsh might also suggest that a more sophisticated captain might have nullified any issues between Kevin Pietersen and the rest of the team before they reached the stage they have. They have been brewing for some time. It is true that it is not long since Strauss scored runs against West Indies. And they were not the easy runs some suggest. As Kemar Roach proved to Jonny Bairstow, the West Indian attack is not to be under-rated. But the fact remains that the South African attack is a class above and, if England really aspire to return to the top ranking, they need a man at the top of the order who can see off the new ball with more certainty that Strauss offers at present. The lack of alternatives for his position is a concern, but Jonathan Trott, Nick Compton, Michael Carberry and, perhaps, Joe Root are all possibilities. England's success has been built - partly, anyway - on the principle of continuity of selection. But there is a line between a settled environment and a cosy environment and it remains to be seen if Andy Flower, for all his excellence in the role of England coach, can regenerate this side in the way that Sir Alex Ferguson has a series of Manchester United sides. Perhaps this series may prove something of a watershed. The emergence of Steven Finn and Jonny Bairstow offers substantial encouragement for the future. Both are young and both will endure some pot-holes on their journey, but they have shown they are men with a future at this level. Finn has claimed eight wickets in this match, bowling with a pace and hostility that would trouble any side. He concedes more runs per over than England would like in an ideal world, but the key is that he takes wickets. It is a skill that outweighs all negatives. He has time to work on his consistency. "I wouldn't say I chase wickets," Finn said after play. "I'm a young bowler. I'm not going to get it right every time. That's part of being a young bowler. Everyone experiences that when they're growing up. I'm only 23-years-old. I'm still learning a lot about the way I bowl. I don't run up thinking 'wickets, wickets, wickets' every ball. It's not the way I've been taught to operate and it's not the way the team operates. I went at four-an-over in the first innings, but came back in the second innings and went for less than three-an-over and felt I bowled well." Finn insisted that England could still win the game on the last day. But to score another 330 in 90 overs against this attack would be an awesome achievement. But perhaps the most damning statistic is this: England have never successfully chased more than 332 to win a Test in a history that started in 1876-77. "As a team over recent years we have enjoyed breaking records and defying people's beliefs against us," Finn said somewhat implausibly. "We really do believe in the dressing room that we can win this game. The older ball does a lot less than the new ball and tomorrow we'll be playing against a ball 15 overs old. When the ball is softer there is no uneven bounce and when the ball is old and the sun is out, it's a very good wicket to bat on. It's going to be important to build partnerships and get our foot in the door. Then, later in the day, maybe we can smash through it and when the game." Maybe. In truth England need a miracle of Biblical proportions to win this game and retain their No.1 ranking. And it is hard to see how even a plague of locusts can help them now. " http://www.espncricinfo.com/england-v-south-africa-2012/content/current/story/578365.html I think there is nothing out of ordinary for No.1 side to lose odd series or games. But when they get battered like India was or England has been, you need to ask some tough questions

[ShebbySB]

So we're better no.1 than England.Now they're the worst no.1 test team of all time:hehe:

[Duty281]

So we're better no.1 than England.Now they're the worst no.1 test team of all time:hehe:

Nope South Africa are, they held No.1 for only 4 months from August 2009-November 2009.

[MechEng]

And the players will say - "It's not in the syllabus." :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[carnish]

And the players will say - "It's not in the syllabus."

Maybe .. But I guess the future with new players wont be the same.. I'm foreseeing a bad home season for India this season.

[Clarke]

So we're better no.1 than England.Now they're the worst no.1 test team of all time:hehe:

Not at all, India have been the worst #1, i read a lot of unbiased neutral fans say that.

[ganeshran]

India's decline from number 1 was the sharpest but we showed good consistency for a couple of years after becoming the top ranked side. England however never looked like a number 1 side after thrashing us at home. 3-0 to Pakistsan, 1-1 to Lanka, decent series against Windies and this one.

[deathmonger]

Not at all' date=' India have been the worst #1, i read a lot of unbiased neutral fans say that.[/quote'] 1. EVERYONE is biased against India. 2. Check stats. India's reign as No 1: India in Bangladesh: 2-0 SA in India: 1-1 India in SL: 1-1 Aus in Ind: 2-0 NZ in Ind: 1-0 Ind in SA: 1-1 Ind in WI: 1-0 Ind in England: 0-4 Excluding the Bang series: Matches: W:7 L:7 D:6 Series: W:3 L:1 D:3 England's reign as No 1: England in UAE: 0-3 England in SL: 1-1 Wi in England: 2-0 SA in England: 0-2 Matches: W:3 L:6 D:2 Series: W:1 L:2 D:1

[Pagalpanti]

India's decline from number 1 was the sharpest but we showed good consistency for a couple of years after becoming the top ranked side. England however never looked like a number 1 side after thrashing us at home. 3-0 to Pakistsan, 1-1 to Lanka, decent series against Windies and this one.

England and Australia got loads of free rating points vs Us. The team that turned up both times wasn't even motivated to fight let alone win.

[Spiderguy252]

Haha George Dobell, why on earth should the fifth greatest cricket team of all time ask questions of themselves huh?

[King Khan]

India whitewash was a shock for everyone, but SA will dethorn England was expected before series. After this hype over #1 wont sustain in media much as its not about England/India anymore. More about 'test vs t20' comming next. Well for now IPL window is much tougher question for them.

[ganeshran]

Poor preparation means South Africa are short changing the English public This article written after the first day of the 1st test takes the cake.. :giggle:

Although there were two mitigating factors for South Africa, this shortfall in preparation by touring teams - and especially those touring England - has become a tiresome trend which is damaging Test cricket. When tourists set off on the wrong foot, even without trainers, people lose interest. The first mitigating factor was the Oval pitch: it is a good one for England, and Graeme Swann, but not good for a Test match. It is suspiciously dry for such a non-summer, but above all it is too slow for the sparks to fly, which is what the average spectator had paid the best part of a hundred pounds to see from the world's two best pace attacks. The second is that the South Africans missed Mark Boucher so much that they were as placid as the pitch. His replacement AB de Villiers caught the ball well, as cleanly as Boucher, but he never orchestrated, never yapped at England's batsmen or South Africa's bowlers or their fielders, as Boucher incessantly does. And South Africa's fielders never threw the ball back at De Villiers if they could avoid it, in order to save his hands and spare his energies for batting. A fielding side that don't throw the ball regularly to their wicketkeeper, for whatever reason, looks emasculated. Still, the fundamental fact about the opening day was that the South Africans went into this series short of a gallop. Two warm-up games - one of them certain to be rain-abbreviated - cannot be enough to adjust overseas players to England's distinctive pitches, and different manufacture of ball, and idiosyncratic overhead conditions (the polite term for constant cold and cloud). Extras tell the tale of the tourists' rustiness, of bowlers over-stepping the popping crease and straying on to the batsmen's pads too often: 30 extras in all, well over 10 per cent of England's total. Touring teams used to spend the whole of May playing county matches before the Test series started in June. Sports science has found a lot of ways of reducing the time needed for preparation, but there is still no substitute for some actual match-play. This problem has financial roots. If England tour Hotnsweatyland and play two warm-up matches, x Tests and y one-dayers, then Hotnsweatyland get two warm-ups free when they come to England - and have to pay the costs out of their own pocket if they want any more. Administrators, in general, consult their coaches and players about future tour schedules with blue-moon regularity. They just keep the money in their pockets and publicly say that players don't want to be away from home for long nowadays. So for Alastair Cook, scoring his 20th Test hundred was just another day at the office. Who could have been more reassuring when Andrew Strauss was dismissed in the opening over, which has happened before in major series, like Australia in 2010-11, after a build-up that has been particularly distracting for the captain? But you have to admit that Cook was helped by South Africa being off the boil. Dale Steyn, ranked the world's number one, was all rust and no rhythm in his opening spell and didn't steam in until three o'clock. Not surprising considering that he had 34 overs in which to warm up on this tour, and before that hadn't bowled anything longer than four-over spells since March. For a touring team going into a five-Test series, there might be some justification in being undercooked, because they don't want to peak too soon. For a team going into a three-Test series, and failing to peak until they are 1-0 down, there is none at all. Should the International Cricket Council, to preserve the integrity of Test cricket, legislate that every touring team should play three first-class matches before a Test series? Such a build-up would advertise their arrival in the country, whet appetites, increase ticket sales, and ensure that both sides are ready at the start. But India wouldn't like that. Their idea of acclimatising to English conditions last year was one three-dayer against Somerset. And what India doesn't want...So to stop Test cricket being degraded as it is, the only way is to hit administrators where it hurts: for a litigious spectator to look at the cost of his ticket, and at the upper hand that England have after day one because of the tourists' poor start, and reckon that the touring country's administrators have defrauded him, or her.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/england/9413487/Poor-preparation-means-that-South-Africa-and-other-touring-sides-are-short-changing-the-English-paying-public.html

[Precambrian]

Scyld berry.s senile . No wonder he was fired by wisden

[Ultimate_Game]

:hysterical: Dobbell said English team was "one of greatest teams of all times" and then this :cantstop: How deluded are these idiots :haha:

[jairamesh]

I am telling you this was just the tip of the iceberg, was pure clap trap coming out of these so called expert's mouth after Eng-India series. It was not only limited to Tests, but extended to ODIs.

[Precambrian]

I am telling you this was just the tip of the iceberg, was pure clap trap coming out of these so called expert's mouth after Eng-India series. It was not only limited to Tests, but extended to ODIs.

They ran an entire article on smith.s dismissal trying to sweep swann .... with implication that smith was feeling the pinch, Wonder what they had to say about Strauss dismissal then