Graeme Smith's tactics

Interesting that Smith took Botha off when he was right on top of the batsmen. I definitely would have kept him going against Shakib, and would have had a short-leg, silly point and slip as he had bowled 4 overs, 1 for 11 before that. Even those figures were a little worse than they needed to be as Smith kept a long-off out throughout, allowing the Bangladesh batsman to occasionally nudge the ball down the ground without risk.

I see Smith as a similar type of captain to Strauss - pretty conservative - and I wonder if captaincy might be one of the factors that decides the winner of the World Cup on 2nd April. It made me smile when the commentators got all excited about Strauss keeping a short-leg in when Swann was bowling to Sarwan towards the end of the West Indies game, and the catch was taken there. Surely short-leg was a regulation position given that England had to take 10 wickets to win the match and they were running out of time?

46-5 off 19 as I type, and surely even in this topsy turvy World Cup, Bangladesh can't come back from here....

South Africa v India decider

While England have been retaining The Ashes a remarkable game was going on in South Africa where India came back from being thrashed in the 1st Test of the series, to take the second match and level the series between the top 2 sides in the world. Just one innings of over 40 from man-of-the-match VVS Laxman in the match tells the story of two supposedly strong batting sides struggling. The series is now on a knife-edge and will make brilliant viewing.

It's a pity that captain's only speak about the UDRS when they suffer poor decisions, but that's better than nothing I suppose, with Graeme Smith asking for it to be used in all series after one highly questionable and one terrible umpiring decision helped India wrap up the match.

Incidentally, the fourth of New Zealand's ducks at the top of the order was Ross Taylor who was given out LBW to a ball going over the top of the stumps....

A very special half century

I couldn't let the amazing achievement of Tendulkar getting to 50 Test centuries to go unmarked on Cricket Burble....sadly I didn't see the innings though. Amazing for someone to stay at the top of the international game for so long - this gallery shows just how young he was (and looked) when he started scoring international hundreds. Although Graeme Smith appears to be surprised that he exposed the tail on the 5th morning, I think we can safely say that even the great Tendulkar wasn't going to be able to save the game from the overnight position.

Tendulkar would of course have preferred to reach his milestone and get a win, but it doesn't take anything away from his personal incredible feat - a truly amazing display of skill and longevity.

Books damage South African unity

If I was an England administrator I would be looking at the wording of central contracts in an attempt to stop books coming out while players or coaches are involved with the national team, unless they are approved by the ECB. And ideally that requirement to get ECB approval would exist a couple of years past when they end their contract.

South Africa seem to be suffering from two books that are imminent or out already. Mickey Arthur is suggesting that when Makhaya Ntini was dropped from the ODI team he immediately claimed racism and had to be reinstated. And Herschelle Gibbs is claiming that Graeme Smith has too much hold over the national team and that they live a debauched lifestyle of womanizing and boozing. Not ideal!

Bangladesh selectors determined to create problems for their team

The Bangladesh selectors have once again made life difficult for their team by inconsistent decision making. Shakib needed to stay as skipper rather than another change to Mortaza and they need to think in the same way South Africa did when Graeme Smith was appointed captain young and then stuck with.

Graeme Smith right to consider win only

South Africa's huge win over India by an innings also included a declaration by Graeme Smith when Hashim Amla was on 253 not out. It seems there has been some consternation in South Africa over the timing of the declaration as Smith holds the record for runs in one innings by a South African at 277 and some have suggested he declared to stop Amla getting past his mark.

I just can't see it - he's all about winning and they won. He wanted to have a chance to bowl at India on the second evening and I don't thing any captain in the world would have played it differently. As they won, no one in South Africa should have any quibbles....

Few thoughts on the Newlands Test

1) How is Daryl Harper still employed as an international umpire?

2) Noted in a previous post, AB De Villiers is no saint when it comes to cheating.

3) Graeme Smith declared too late. Surprisingly, not a lot has been said of the timing of his declaration, which I find odd, as England were never going to chase anything above 350 runs and with an extra 20 or so overs, Smith would have had a third new ball at his bowlers' disposal.

4) Of the fifth bowler options available for England at Cape Town, why is Trott being chosen ahead of Pietersen, who I feel should bowl more, and Bell,who isn't a bad medium pacer but seems to be forgotten amongst the part-time bowler options?

Not so sporting Strauss

Much was made of Strauss recalling Angelo Matthews when England played Sri Lanka, but it seems he's less keen on sportsmanship against South Africa. Smith has cramp and, as it's an injury that he didn't bring into the game, the current laws suggest he should get a runner. I remember in the past Aussie Dave burbling about the fact that he didn't believe that runners should be allowed for cramp but, while there is a strong argument supporting that view, that isn't how most international teams play it.

So it was particularly stange to see Strauss decline the runner for Smith, and even more so when I understand (I'm not watching so relying on texts from those with Sky!!) Owais Shah, England's worst fielder, mysteriously left the field for a few overs as things got tight towards the end of the South Africa innings.

Oooh er....

Listening to Mike Atherton talk about the South African openers, Graeme Smith and Jacques Kallis, he said during the rain break earlier "they're both big men, in more ways than one".

What could he have been referring to?

South Africa will win

Yes, they completely demolished England last night, but that's not why they will win. I spot a similarity to when England won the 2003 Rugby World Cup! Back then Clive Woodward raised the issue of dummy runners blocking potential tacklers from a position of strength, knowing that little things like that could be crucial.

Yesterday, Graeme Smith questioned the way that Stuart Broad points and gestures as he runs into bowl. It's not a big thing, and South Africa absolutely thrashed England anyway, but these little things could cause distraction come the knock out stages, so Smith wants clarification. That's why South Africa should win - they have the best team and the right mentality this time (having said that of course, Twenty20 has a huge capacity for upsets as you don't have to be the best team to win a one-off short game as has been discussed on Cricket Burble many times before!).

Personally, I'd prefer it if Broad concentrated on firing in yorkers....

South African Changes

I just thought I'd add to a previous post regarding the South African changes. I too am surprised McKenzie was dropped, especially given that Smith will be out. Having dropped him, however, I would not have opened with Prince. Why not bring de Villiers up to open (he's done it before) or move Amla and Kallis up one slot each. As for Morkel, he is undoubtedly talented, but his performances in the last two tests certainly warranted him being dropped. He has just been so lethargic. His bowling has lacked energy, he is a poor mover in the field, and he seems to disengage his brain whenever he picks up a bat.

South Africa reverse captaincy decision

Just 24 hours after I posted about Ashwell Prince coming from outside the starting XI to captain South Africa in the next Test because of Graeme Smith's injury, it seems the board over in SA have changed their minds. They now want Jaques Kallis to captain the side.

I can't think of any possible justification for this - either it was a massive mistake originally, or it was a massive mistake subsequently....it seems that South Africa have the same board problems as we have in England! It would be interesting to know what triggered the change of mind - perhaps there was a media outcry in South Africa?

Ruthless South African selection

My gut feel is that South Africa are being overly ruthless in dropping McKenzie and Morkel following their loss in the first two Tests against Australia. Morkel is young and looked really talented when the Saffers were over here last year. But in particular I'm not sure I like the tactic of using Prince as a makeshift opener alongside a debutant in Khan. Yes, McKenzie did a great job of converting from the middle order to open the batting, but that doesn't mean that everybody can.

McKenzie averages 24.2 in the series away to Australia that South Africa won. The reason that I feel a little sorry for him is that in a series that lasts only 3 games you only get 6 innings and one hundred in that time wouldn't be a bad success rate. In the 2nd Test, McKenzie was going well on 59 not out when South Africa won the game, depriving him of the chance to complete what might have been his big innings of the tour.

In the return series in South Africa McKenzie averaged 25.5 in the first two Tests which doesn't make him the worst South Africa batsman, with Amla narrowly less than that. But if England dropped players after such a brief run of poor form then Bell, for example, would have been discarded after the 2005 Ashes. The South African selectors seem to have felt that they were rightfully the best country in the world and, riled at not making this a reality, have reacted like a school kid would when they didn't get their own way. Courtney Walsh used to say that the West Indies loved touring England because if they won the first couple of matches they found themselves playing the England 2nd XI by the end of the series and I fear the South African selection has a whiff of that. Presumably Morkel will pretty rapidly come back into the squad, but McKenzie will struggle given his age - doubly so as Graeme Smith has openly talked about that and said it will be tough for him.

So when Smith is fit again, it will be interesting to see who gets the other opening slot - it's only a minor selection point but two left-handers is not preferable to a right and left combination. If one or both of the new openers do well then it will be seen as a great decision, but it's high risk and knee jerk - those sort of decisions rarely come off. If they wanted to boost the batting, I would have considered using AB de Villiers as keeper and dropping Boucher. Considered it....and then rejected it, realising that just because South Africa lost it doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't their best team playing.

One last point of note in the South African situation is that Prince comes back into the side as captain. I wonder how many times that has happened? Somehow I doubt we'll see the same from England if Strauss gets injured, no matter how much people like me might want to see Vaughan's captaincy skills at work again.

Muddled tactics from Bangladesh

Once again South Africa are slaying the Bangladesh bowling attack. Following the 400+ opening stand that Smith and MacKenzie put on in 2007, this time it was Smith and Amla who took the score to 299-1 at the end of a rain-reduced first day.

Of course Mohammed Ashraful, the Bangladesh captain, can do nothing about the lack of talent at his disposal but he and Jamie Siddons, the coach, can at least work out the most appropriate tactics for the match. And in this case that didn't mean winning the toss and fielding first.

If you assess Bangladesh and South Africa man for man, the only possible area that Bangladesh have an advantage is their spinner. Shakib Al-Hassan is only 21 and averages 37 with the ball in his 8 Tests to date, but he's coming off a confidence boosting 7 wickets in an innings in his last series v New Zealand. And judging by the way he was turning the ball square on the first day, he can tweak it a bit (he should have had Smith stumped if the keeper hadn't been done by the huge turn in the same way as Smith was).

So what Ashraful should have done was bat and allow his most likely match winner last use of the pitch in the 4th innings if the batsman could take things to a 4th innings. Only one of the most seam friendly wickets ever or the strangest of thinking could lead any sane person to an alternative conclusion.

South Africa rue "one" loss

Interesting to hear Graeme Smith's thoughts after South Africa went out: "It's very disappointing knowing you've lost only one game in the tournament and you're out... That does seem a little bit weird."

Following on from my previous post about how Kemp was plumb LBW on 6 in the game against New Zealand, and then went on to win the game for them, I'm pleased. It was luck that saw you through against New Zealand Mr Smith - you should have lost two but for poor umpiring, and you deserve to go out while New Zealand deserve to go through.

South Africa also reviewing performance

I ranted a little about the number of people involved in the Schofield report that the ECB are putting together to review the performance in the national side of the last 4 years. South Africa appear to go about things differently, preferring a meeting of their top cricket administrators today to discuss how the team has done over the last year.

Let's hope there isn't an over-reaction that halts South Africa's recent successful progress. In the past season South Africa won 19 ODIs and lost 7, and in the Test arena they won series against India and Pakistan. Judging from South African reports, coach Mickey Arthur looks safe, as does team captain, Graeme Smith, despite some concerns about the fact that Smith "wields too much power".

The South African team have no more natural talent than England or New Zealand but are making the most of what they have to the extent that they went into the World Cup as the number 1 ranked team in the world, a tag they understandably struggled to live up to. It would be a great shame if they take a backward step today after the meeting, by changing the structure they have in place, but it looks as it they might do. Convener of selectors Haroon Lorgat is likely to be replaced according to some reports.