Sid Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Just an enigma what happens to these players while chasing or in pressure/knockout matches.Shocking part is this choke factor has transcended generations of south african cricketers & there seems to be a dark tunnel ahead.:cantstop:
Shivaji bhonsle Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Pakistani bowlers did well against them. I won't take any credit away from their bowlers.
Trundler27 Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Credit to the pakistan team for finally having the guts to play a wicket keeper who can take catches. These akmal brothers to them are just like the sharma's to our team. Somehow they are always in the playing 11 and screwing up the entire side despite there being better options available. On topic though, South Africa have clearly shown that they are NOT favorites to win the trophy as most people were pegging them initially.... All I read in the lead up to this WC was that Aus, SAF, and NZ were the big favs.... So far, I only like NZ from among the 3 original favorites. SAF just doesn't seem to have the mental resolve to win these types of high pressure matches/situations. So 1 such situation is enough to knock them out and that is what usually happens.
Crookbond Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 67/1 after 9 and then slumped to 100/6 ' date='that is a choke!! And yes they were cruising and were in a winning position[/quote'] Collapse is not a choke. There have been many such collapses in the tournament. The canonical example of the choke is the CT 2002 semi final vs India. That is a choke - another example of choke is Sri Lanka vs Pakistan where Abdul Razzaq took 4-5 wickets to end up as a tie despite SL requiring some 30 runs from 40+ balls with 6 wickets to spare.
Crookbond Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Under the lights boss, under the lights. The pitch gets even more juiced up after rains. The white ball does more under lights irrespective of the pitch.
flamy Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Played with 7 batsmans still couldnt chase 232 :hehe: Exactly. Totally bungled it with 4 bowlers. 5th bowler was leaky. And 7th batsmen did nothing.
CSK Fan Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Pakistani bowlers did well against them. I won't take any credit away from their bowlers. Did you even watch the match? Many of those wickets were atrocious shots, Complete blind slogging. Example Steyn, AB, rossau, etc
Precambrian Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 The white ball does more under lights irrespective of the pitch. but the effect is in varying degrees. In the subcontinent, teams prefer to bat second under the lights due to dew factor, don't they?
Precambrian Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 Did you even watch the match? Many of those wickets were atrocious shots' date=' Complete blind slogging. Example Steyn, AB, rossau, etc[/quote'] Exactly. They went to their shells - first signs of pressure, and made Wahab Riaz look like McGrath.
Crookbond Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 but the effect is in varying degrees. In the subcontinent' date=' teams prefer to bat second under the lights due to dew factor, don't they?[/quote'] There was no dew here.
adi B Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 Collapse is not a choke. There have been many such collapses in the tournament. The canonical example of the choke is the CT 2002 semi final vs India. That is a choke - another example of choke is Sri Lanka vs Pakistan where Abdul Razzaq took 4-5 wickets to end up as a tie despite SL requiring some 30 runs from 40+ balls with 6 wickets to spare. By this logic(I don't disagree) we'll find only handful of instances then .99 wc sf was not a choke
Crookbond Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 By this logic(I don't disagree) we'll find only handful of instances then .99 wc sf was not a choke That is true - there are ONLY handful of instances where SA has choked. In fact, India have regularly choked till the mid 2000s. I can't even believe the number of games we lost were we comfortably required some 2 digit runs of similar balls with 6-7 wickets in hand (while chasing) and lost. Here's one example - http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64743.html 61 runs to win of 60 balls, 7 wickets in hand. India goes from 211-3 to 219-6 The next ODI game at Mumbai, same story - http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64744.html 65 runs to win of 80+balls, India goes from 191-3 to 224-7 I also remember this game where New Zealand choked against India in the famous desert storm Tendulkar series. NZ required 41 runs from 67 balls with 6 wickets in hand. NZ went from 170-4 to 190-9 with Agarkar picking up 4 wickets (MoM). This game was ODI debut of Harbhajan Singh btw. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/65768.html
Precambrian Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 There was no dew here. :(( All the more reason to bat first machan.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now