1st Test: South Africa v India at Johannesburg Dec 18-22, 2013

[Red Bear]

Yeah, that was a shit end.

Difference between a good and a great side really. Saffa's are comfortably the best side in world cricket at the moment but a great side would happily risk losing and back themselves to win in the situation they were. not just get that close to a world record chase and back away from the challenge.

Much respect for being able to bat time like that, something we can only dream of. But piss poor end

 

[BunniesMan]

If they were all out for 300 they'd be copping less criticism than they are for getting 450 and surviving 136 overs.

Why is noone getting stuck into the Indians? They are the ones who had a 458 run lead and plenty of time and still couldn't win.

 

[umina panther]

Typical cowardly Saffas

 

[JW]

Why is noone getting stuck into the Indians? They are the ones who had a 458 run lead and plenty of time and still couldn't win.

Because we already know that India are poo away from home. Any competitive performance is merely an abberation.

 

[Dutchy]

Gutless.

 

[vvvrulz]

Why is noone getting stuck into the Indians? They are the ones who had a 458 run lead and plenty of time and still couldn't win.

They did well to even get themselves into a winning position. India will take more positives out of this draw than SA will.

I think its hilarious that Smith is accusing India of not having enough desire to win.

 

[Mr Spock!]

With the Saffers coming here, if Clarke gets the chance to declare his second innings like the English, he might want 550+.

Anything under that would be a definite possibility for the Saffers to chase down.

 

[Mr Spock!]

Yeah, that was a shit end.

Difference between a good and a great side really. Saffa's are comfortably the best side in world cricket at the moment but a great side would happily risk losing and back themselves to win in the situation they were. not just get that close to a world record chase and back away from the challenge.

Much respect for being able to bat time like that, something we can only dream of. But piss poor end

South Africa is traditionally conservative. At least in tests. Have been since readmittance.

 

[Mr Spock!]

For a team that has 2 of the best opening bowlers, arguably the best wk batsman, allrounder, no 3 and one of the best openers, they haven't been that dominant a side.

 

[lockyno1]

Don't see that big a deal. It was sensible to have a go until AB/Faf got out. Then close up shop after that. If you asked every single bloke in SA before the 5th day...'would you take a draw'..bet you everyone would have said yes. Yes they got closer, so what? They got a good result, they were outplayed for 4 days...

 

[Iafeta]

They did well to even get themselves into a winning position. India will take more positives out of this draw than SA will.

I think its hilarious that Smith is accusing India of not having enough desire to win.

Sadly bunnies man is right. India had what 4, 5 sessions to complete the win and failed. India winning was the obvious bet for the bookies. Anything other was a long shot.

As far as one comment goes about SA being a good not great team, check their record. Individual players and team. They are a million miles ahead of all other teams. They are the only team who would have got within Kingdom cum.

 

[Iafeta]

Don't see that big a deal. It was sensible to have a go until AB/Faf got out. Then close up shop after that. If you asked every single bloke in SA before the 5th day...'would you take a draw'..bet you everyone would have said yes. Yes they got closer, so what? They got a good result, they were outplayed for 4 days...

Spot on. Unbelievable circle jerking going on for what was an amazing result.

 

[vvvrulz]

Don't see that big a deal. It was sensible to have a go until AB/Faf got out. Then close up shop after that. If you asked every single bloke in SA before the 5th day...'would you take a draw'..bet you everyone would have said yes. Yes they got closer, so what? They got a good result, they were outplayed for 4 days...

Again the point is being missed here.

Yes it was a great achievement to bat out the day, yes if you "asked someone they would have taken the draw", yes AB/Faf were brilliant and deserve a lot of praise. I'm not bagging the overall achievement, its this incident alone I am talking about.

It does not hide the simple fact that they needed an extremely gettable 16 off 18 balls and refused to take it. Forget everything that happened until that point and look at that situation in isolation. All they had to do was tap the ball around and take their singles, and it would have been perhaps 10 needed of the last over. With three wickets in hand it shouldn't have been a problem.

A hungrier team would have pounced on that chance and taken the win, it was a negative and weak decision. You can't just say "so what" at throwing away a golden chance of sealing a record win.

 

[Red Bear]

Yes but if you asked them, at 16 runs to win with three overs to bat and three wickets in hand, what would be your preferred option, it should in any situation be to win.

The equation had changed by the end of the day. To get so close and baulk is just rubbish cricket IMO

 

[lockyno1]

Yes but if you asked them, at 16 runs to win with three overs to bat and three wickets in hand, what would be your preferred option, it should in any situation be to win.

The equation had changed by the end of the day. To get so close and baulk is just rubbish cricket IMO

Yes and what happens if philander got out? Morkel and Tahir are both bunnies

 

[vvvrulz]

Yes and what happens if philander got out? Morkel and Tahir are both bunnies

Lose all three of them in three overs? And that too without Philander & Steyn not having to take that much risk? It was just singles and 1-2 boundaries and they were home. This was the Indian attack remember who barely took wickets all day, Faf gifted his one.

Why refuse singles? They could have at least taken 6 runs off the next two overs instead of the two maidens. The field wasn't attacking in usual Dhoni style.

Take it down to 10 required in the last over without losing a wicket, then attempt a risky shot or two. What's wrong with that? Heck Steyn actually slammed the last ball for six.

 

[lockyno1]

Lose all three of them in three overs? And that too without Philander & Steyn not having to take that much risk? It was just singles and 1-2 boundaries and they were home. This was the Indian attack remember who barely took wickets all day, Faf gifted his one.

Why refuse singles? They could have at least taken 6 runs off the next two overs instead of the two maidens. The field wasn't attacking in usual Dhoni style.

Take it down to 10 required in the last over without losing a wicket, then attempt a risky shot or two. What's wrong with that? Heck Steyn actually slammed the last ball for six.

The way Morkel and Tahir bat...it wouldn't have been out of the ordinary for them to go within 3 overs. Was smart to at least get in a situation where you can't lose. Take the draw, move on to Durban.

 

[BunniesMan]

It was one thing not to take outlandish risks 3 overs out. But what possibly reason was there to not take singles?

 

[vvvrulz]

The way Morkel and Tahir bat...it wouldn't have been out of the ordinary for them to go within 3 overs. Was smart to at least get in a situation where you can't lose. Take the draw, move on to Durban.

Three overs sure... don't do anything stupid.

But as BM just said, why turn down singles? That was just geniused and killed off any shot of taking the win the last over.

 

[RHCP]

At least take the singles until the last four balls if you're that horribly mortified of your tail enders having to last >1 ball.

India wouldn't have been able to recover from a loss like that. SA could have sewn up the series then and there.