Jump to content

S/Africa v England


Ovis aries

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, MK said:

I thought Mark Footitt had come down with a bad case of cramps but can't find the article now. Starting to think i made it up. 

Now he's gone to Surrey he will come down with a bad case of craps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

214 all out - Dean Elgar carried his bat, ending up stranded on 118* at the non-striker's end as Finn blew the tail away at the other end.

Elgar is the 50th batsman to achieve this feat in the history of test cricket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, froggg said:

It's incredible that he is only the 50th to achieve it:o

Not really - it requires you being in while 10 wickets fall at the other end. If it was always 50:50 as to who was going to be out next (which of course it isn't), then it would happen only once every 1024 tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ovis aries said:

Why the ****, when we have just lost Root does ******* Stokes come in and start playing reverse sweeps,all he should be doing is playing himself in, and giving the strike to Taylor, he has just brought SA back into the game.

Really? Without Steyn? No way.

Since England's lead went beyond 270 or so, South Africa have been behind the 8-ball. Not a snowball's chance in hell that they would get anywhere near winning this. England have scored at nearly 4 an over this morning, which is way quicker than anything we have seen in the first 3 days - another hour of the same and basically they will have bought themselves an extra half a session to bowl the opposition out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, eddie said:

Really? Without Steyn? No way.

Since England's lead went beyond 270 or so, South Africa have been behind the 8-ball. Not a snowball's chance in hell that they would get anywhere near winning this. England have scored at nearly 4 an over this morning, which is way quicker than anything we have seen in the first 3 days - another hour of the same and basically they will have bought themselves an extra half a session to bowl the opposition out.

You are talking after the effect again, If we had lost another quick wicket at the time who knows?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ovis aries said:

You are talking after the effect again, If we had lost another quick wicket at the time who knows?.

You can forget the negative approach of old - it was a calculated risk and one which has proved to be worth taking, seeing as though the collapse didn't happen.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...