Re: SA should have lost the entire series 2-1


jlichterm@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

chessplayer wrote:
jlichterm@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

chessplayer wrote:
Bob Dubery wrote:

chessplayer wrote:
Its not just this series that I am talking about. Certainly this series
should have been lost at worst 1-2 by SA but even 1-1 could have been
achieved had SA just had a little more luck.

I am saying that the entire combination of both the series could also
have resulted in a 2-1 loss for SA.

Actually a 3-1 would also have looked quite fair and at worse a 3-0
loss. (for both series combined).

Certainly losing 5-0 has made the situation look far worse than it
should have been.

I'm not sure I agree. Or perhaps I part agree but think Australia were
still worth the 5-0 anyway.

I think that the score line does not reflect the actual gap in playing
ability. That gap is smaller than the results indicate.

But Australia are more passionate, play with more purpose and made by
far the most of the lucky breaks and the opportunities when they came
along.

I don't believe this is a problem with the current SA side, I think
it's been a problem for SA for quite a while now. Think of the tour
that Cronje led to England. SA engineered several good positions for
themselves but mostly failed to drive the advantage home. England had
really two opportunities in the same series but took them both with
both hands and ended up taking the series 2-1. In the three matches in
Australia SA were actually ahead in all 3 at round about half-way but
could never finish the job.

Bad luck also played a part in those two series. Versus England I
believe Atherton was out caught behind but not given so by the umpire.
At that stage had he been given out I believe SA would have won that
match and either won (or at least drawn ) the series. That incident led
Donald to go beserk and he bowled some really fiery and hostile stuff
to Atherton. Unfortunately another edge came and this time Boucher
muffed it up.

True on Athers, but I think the Boucher point was Bob's point. RSA had
the chance to take the opportunity, but didnt.

Exactly my point. One was a bad umpiring decision which hurt SA. To
compound matters Boucher did not take the catch when the opportunity
arose. A catch he would have probably taken 9 times out of ten or even
a higher percentage than that. Bad luck and SA suffered as a
consequence of it. Yes, one incident was due to their own fault but
England luckily benefitted from it. The other was a bad umpiring
mistake that possibly cost SA that match and a chance to not only draw
but win the series. I believe that incident happened when the series
was tied 1-1. If SA had won that match they would have led the series
2-1 and gone for a draw in the last match. By not getting victory and
the scoreline still reading 1-1, SA went for a win and lost the last
match. In that sense that decision was crucial not just for that match
but for the consequence of the entire series.

I was living in England during that series and watched most of it, and
it wasnt quite how you describe it. RSA were 1-0 up after winning the
second Test at Lords. In the third test, RSA were all over England,
but could not get out Robert Croft in the second innings. England
managed to save the Test with one wicket remaining and England's two
innings combined totalling RSA's one innings, so that if a wicket had
fallen RSA would have needed 1 run to win. The problem was, RSA were
out of time - even if a wicket had fallen, the game would have been
over and the match drawn because they were passed the time for close of
play. That 3rd Test was where RSA lost the series.

England won the 4th Test with the Atherton umpiring error and Boucher
dropped catch, but England were chasing 250 odd. RSA then lost the
last Test badly, slumping to 27/5 in their last innings (in large part
due to poor umpiring again, this time for Javed Akhtar). From there
tho, RSA got very close to a win anyway.

I was writing all this purely on memory. I did not refer to any
scorecard etc. So, it was the fourth which they lost when they could
have won it if the umpire had given Atherton out. Then SA would have
had an unbeatable lead going into the fifth and final test. That in
effect makes my statement even more correct. They could have won that
fourth test (but for that umpiring decision) and won the series there
and then 2-0 and the fifth test would have become meaningless. However,
they lost that test match and had to win the last test which they
didn't and lost the series 2-1. So, if SA had a little luck they could
have won the series 2-1 instead of losing it 2-1 and might have even
won the third test giving them the series 3-1. At worst it should have
been tied 2-2. Instead they end up losing it 2-1.

Against Australia in the third test match Donald was
injured and Pollock bowled superbly carrying the burden of leading the
attack. Mark Waugh should have been given out hit wicket but luckily
for Australia and unluckily for SA was not given out and Australia
managed to draw that match or the series would have been tied 1-1.

Look, I am an RSA fan, but I recall seeing the Mark Waugh incident,
reading the rules at the time, and concluding that he was not out.

Yes, you may be right. However, I have seen worse decisions given. One
just gets the feeling that luck favored Australia. Of course there is
also the saying that you make your own luck.

Or the better you are, the luckier you get.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SA should have lost the entire series 2-1
    ... should have been lost at worst 1-2 by SA but even 1-1 could have been ... that Cronje led to England. ... Bad luck also played a part in those two series. ... RSA were 1-0 up after winning the ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
  • Re: T20I World Cup Format
    ... double elimination! ... WI were eliminated after their first two games; ... Aus lost to RSA, then beat Ban, then lost to SL to drop out after 4 ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
  • Re: T20I World Cup Format
    ... double elimination! ... WI were eliminated after their first two games; ... Aus lost to RSA, then beat Ban, then lost to SL to drop out after 4 ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
  • Re: Coincidences with Numbers and Names....Then and Now...A
    ... My son says he gets lost very easily, yet had no problems in England. ... His Australian wife had problems in England but has an excellent sense ... ability to read maps and imagine what a place may look like; ...
    (soc.genealogy.britain)
  • Re: Like I said... [R]
    ... the FA and Carling Cup. ... your statement that Manchester United weren't the best team in England ... lost them the league. ...
    (rec.sport.soccer)
Loading