SA Footy

daysofourlives wrote:SA are home, Markram to make a ton, 5 down.

No-one likes a smartarse.

Well played.

Well done to SA. As much as you Aussies may hate it, this is a good result for cricket. We need test cricket thriving in SA or it will just the big 3 before you know it.

batmanbegins wrote:Well done to SA. As much as you Aussies may hate it, this is a good result for cricket. We need test cricket thriving in SA or it will just the big 3 before you know it.

I honestly don’t think things will change much. Yeah the Saffers got us in a one off test but that will be the last time they make a final for several years and I doubt they finish top 4 in the next WTC rankings. I’d be putting my money on India v Australia again for the next final

Congrats to South Africa. Kicked our arses.

Who would’ve thought picking horribly out-of-form top order batsmen for the biggest away test of the year would be a bad idea.

Interesting format to decide who is the best test team for a 2 year period. One off test (don't agree with that) Played on a neutral venue (fair enough) using a duke ball that both teams do not use at home (strange decision).

MW wrote:Interesting format to decide who is the best test team for a 2 year period. One off test (don't agree with that) Played on a neutral venue (fair enough) using a duke ball that both teams do not use at home (strange decision).

Fair enough, but it’s the same for both teams.

dedja wrote:

MW wrote:Interesting format to decide who is the best test team for a 2 year period. One off test (don't agree with that) Played on a neutral venue (fair enough) using a duke ball that both teams do not use at home (strange decision).

Fair enough, but it’s the same for both teams.

absolutely, no issue there. would be a better format to actually have a test series to decide the best test team though.

MW wrote:

dedja wrote:

MW wrote:Interesting format to decide who is the best test team for a 2 year period. One off test (don't agree with that) Played on a neutral venue (fair enough) using a duke ball that both teams do not use at home (strange decision).

Fair enough, but it’s the same for both teams.

absolutely, no issue there. would be a better format to actually have a test series to decide the best test team though.

Don’t disagree.

MW wrote:Interesting format to decide who is the best test team for a 2 year period. One off test (don't agree with that) Played on a neutral venue (fair enough) using a duke ball that both teams do not use at home (strange decision).

Best of one or best of 17, the better team should win. I would rather us lose rewarding youth with baggy greens than accepting mediocrity by altering batting positions.

We have no excuses after a comfortable first innings lead.

Hopefully Smith sits out in the West Indies and whoever replaces him succeeds enough to push Marnus out when Smith returns.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

MW wrote:Interesting format to decide who is the best test team for a 2 year period. One off test (don't agree with that) Played on a neutral venue (fair enough) using a duke ball that both teams do not use at home (strange decision).

Best of one or best of 17, the better team should win. I would rather us lose rewarding youth with baggy greens than accepting mediocrity by altering batting positions.

We have no excuses after a comfortable first innings lead.

Hopefully Smith sits out in the West Indies and whoever replaces him succeeds enough to push Marnus out when Smith returns.

Hearing Smith will now only be out for the opening match in the Windies

Picking marnus as opener was a howler. Actually picking him altogether was a howler

MW wrote:

dedja wrote:

MW wrote:Interesting format to decide who is the best test team for a 2 year period. One off test (don't agree with that) Played on a neutral venue (fair enough) using a duke ball that both teams do not use at home (strange decision).

Fair enough, but it’s the same for both teams.

absolutely, no issue there. would be a better format to actually have a test series to decide the best test team though.

MW
I concur
A one off test- not a series means the SA win is in my opinion ''slightly'' inconclusive
Test cricket is about winning series
The whole qualifying round robin is decided on series results to match 2 teams in a Grand Final

This Grand Final win and a SA title is OK - but it does not feel right for the MW rationality

Might be better having all teams in England every 2 years in a round robin tournament over a period of time
OR
Maybe a top 4 system like we used to have in football
OR
Top 2 over a 3 test series

Take nothing away from the Southdutchafricans win over the Van Diemens in the showdown
To be behind most of the test and win was a very very good win

Footnote
I base my opinion on what i thought pre match
NOT
As Captain Hindsight

Stats from the final-
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/bavu ... le-1490154

The one off test final isn't all that bad.

Adds pressure to the occasion and pressure is one of the big elements of test cricket. We didnt deal with it in the 3rd innings, SAF did in the last innings when 280 was still a defendable score.