New Year's Test - SCG

[PaarlBok]

So we end up sort with 10 balls to go. Congrats to the Aussies with this win. You surely deserve this one and the end to a great series that show 5 day tests still ROCKS!. :thumb

After this hope Greame Smith get the MOTS because he had been great in this one.

 

[RugbyReg]

Damn that was gutsy by Smith. Fantastic stuff.

Beautiful ball by Johnson. Happy for him after that shocking over he balled when Smith first game in.

Gotta be bye bye Haydos after that dropped catch too.

 

[barbarian]

Great game- a titanic effort from both sides. Australia probably deserved the win in the end, but certainly no-one can walk away dissapointed with their effort. Except Hayden.

Great series, can't wait for the return clash. We will have Stuart Clark!! Hopefully...

 

[formeropenside]

I thought the Aussies were a bit soft on Smith at the end: I would have been all short balls at his throat from Johnson and Siddle with everyone in close.

Still, it worked out in the end. Ponting is still a dud captain though.

 

[Pfitzy]

Fuck oath - why the hell bring on Hauritz at the end when Clarke is a better spin option? Then again, why select Hauritz at all :

 

[Pfitzy]

It will be interesting to see if, by some miracle, we win the return series in South Africa, what the papers will say...

 

[Scotty]

I must say that apart from Amla I was dissapointed with the South African batting performance on the last day. He was the only one that looked like he could attack and get the Australians on the back foot. The remainder all went out not to lose the game, rather than trying to win it. The South African commentator on ABC spoke about it being very important for the south african team to win 2-0 rather than 2-1 as it would seem a more comprehensive victory. To me, they had the opportunity to win 3-0, which, while extremely unlikely was still possible. They needed 376 at a rate of 3.3ish to win, and we can't forget that Australia declared at 257, which they acheived at a rate of 3.8, only losing 4 wickets (one of which was just due to slogging at the end).

There weren't that many demons in this pitch, and I believe as soon as you try to play for a draw when the game is still in balance you deserve to win, and normally do. I feel they would have drawn if the game was still in balance halfway through they day due to positive play, instead they were a long way behind the run rate required, and a draw on Oz win were the only possibilities by then.

They could have played positively, even slightly risky, with the reward being another come from behind win against Australia and probably some mental demons being placed in the Aussies heads. Reward - 3-0 win with Aussie doubts creeping in for the return series. Risk 2-1 win while going for a win, which happened anyway. Now the Aussies are thinking 'they tried to play for a draw from a winable situation, and still didn't manage to get there'. I feel this will give the Australians, particularly young bowling team a big leg up for the return series.

 

[PaarlBok]

Also agree Scot. Myself thought they would have come out positive and try and make the runs. Problem was they lost Maccie, Amla and Kallis quick and that sort of put them back which I can understand batting without Smith and Morkel already early gone. That leave you basically with only JP, Boucher & AB as specialized batsman with still a huge amount of runs to get. Well they lost JP and Boucher also quick BUT they the tail did pretty well to fight back in the end.

Altho they lost this one I still think the Proteas earned a lot of respect. Was pretty nice to see al the players in good spirits after a tough series and long may this continue.

The SA leg of test will be touch on your youngsters. At least our lot will know what picthes to prepare this side. They need to be plum as hell.

 

[Scotty]

On paper, your side is much better, particularly with the form slumps to Hussey and Hayden, so you must be raging favourties for the return tests. I think a combined side would look something like:

1. Smith (c)
2. Katich
3. Ponting
4. Kallis
5. Amla or DeVilliers or Duminy
6. Clark
7. Haddin or Boucher
8. Johnson
9. Harris
10. Steyn
11. Ntini or Siddle

 

[Pfitzy]

Jeezus Neil McKenzie is a dud. The man bats like Geoff Boycott and you'd think with those powers of concentration he could bore the opposition bowlers to death.

I'd take Siddle over Ntini. Ntini didn't look nearly as threatening as he has in the past and opponents are just generally wise to his tactic of bowling wide. You could see Katich moving before the ball is even released, knowing what he's likely to get depending on how far Ntini is from the stumps.

When Siddle was allowed to bowl at the pegs he succeeded more often than not. Just a shame Ponting didn't back him enough I guess...

 

[PaarlBok]

My combine team:
1. Smith (c)
2. Katich
3. Kallis
4. Amla
5. Ponting
6. Clark
7. AB de Villiers (wickey)
8. Johnson
9. Harris
10 Siddle
11. Steyn

Like to see Morkel in there. Know he wasnt at the best of form but he sure give something special with his height. AB de Villers is just as good a wickey to either Boucher or your guy.

 

[Scotty]

Good solution by having AB as wicket keeper. That is one sensational team.

Do you agree with some south african commentators that I have heard saying that AB is the next wickey after Boucher retires? I think it might be a bit of a mistake to have him there in test match cricket, but agree that he should/could do it for the one day game.

 

[PaarlBok]

Look like Mickey Mouse has already see him in future replacing Kallis in 4, so he wont future as a wickey BUT I know he is a good one. He wont be able to bat 4 and keep.