Tag: South Africa

South Africa win by 211 runs

As good as South Africa were (and take nothing away from them, Dale Steyn in particular was outstanding) Pakistan left a bit to be desired with the bat. They had given themselves an opportunity by bowling South Africa out relatively cheaply, but utterly squandered it and looked generally clueless for good measure. They went into the series with only one warmup match and without playing a Test in seaming conditions for two years and it showed. England were rightly criticised for not having enough warmup time before they were whitewashed by Pakistan in the UAE a year ago and now Pakistan have made that exact same mistake. With the South African bowlers already on song and very dangerous, Pakistan barely had a chance.

South Africa actually had a chance to enforce the follow-on, which is saying a lot after they were bowled out for 253. I think Graeme Smith was correct to do so though; South Africa had a lot of momentum it was true, but the lead was still ‘only’ two hundred. It’s pretty common now for teams to not enforce the follow-on when the lead is under 250 and even though this was a special case with the scores so small, I think the reasoning still applies. It’s doubtful that Pakistan would have put South Africa under any pressure, but it wasn’t outside the realm of possibility and there was plenty of time for South Africa to simply bat Pakistan out of the match, which they did. It’s easy to see it as another example of Smith’s inherent negativity, and strictly speaking it is, but I think in this case it was justified negativity and certainly it did not hurt his side’s chances.

Pakistan have a two day match against a Western Province Invitational XI ahead of the second Test and they must use it to get some time in the middle for their batsmen. They need to at least get comfortable enough in the conditions to make South Africa work for their wickets in the next two Tests. Pakistan’s bowers can cause damage to the South African batting order, but at least right now their batsmen don’t look like being able to back them up.

The Test was also much hyped as Smith’s hundredth as captain. Technically that is true, but one of those hundred Tests was the farcical ‘ICC Super Test’ from 2005. There is no conceivable justification for that match counting as an official Test and many do not count it at all. Being named captain of that side especially is nothing to celebrate; any member of the XI could have done so for all the difference it would have made. It was worlds away from the considered selection of a national Test captain and should be completely discounted along with the rest of the statistics from that waste of time.

What is particularly annoying about all the misplaced hype is that Smith’s true hundredth Test as captain is the second Test and will go all but unnoticed. Even if one thinks that the Super Test should count, the second Test is still Smith’s hundredth time captaining his country which is a major achievement and should get a lot more recognition than it will. Unfortunately, Cricket South Africa have spoiled the celebrations by staging them too soon.

Women’s World Cup group permutations

The final round of group matches in the Women’s World Cup are tonight and especially in Group A there is a lot for which to play. Unfortunately, the matches are not being played simultaneously. I criticised the tournament format in my preview and this is another poor decision by the organisers. India and Sri Lanka will now have the benefit of knowing the result of the England v West Indies match before their ends and that should not happen.

Those matches are in the more interesting Group A. Sri Lanka’s shock win over England means that all the teams in the group are level on two points and the only difference at the moment is Net Run Rate. (And in a quirk of statistics, since every team have both bowled and batted exactly 100 overs the NRRs are just the run differentials for each team divided by 100.) The West Indies’ crushing win over Sri Lanka wiped out their heavy defeat to India and then some, putting them top of the table with a NRR of +1.04. They’re followed by India and England on +0.73 and +0.26 respectively and Sri Lanka still sit at the foot of the table on -2.03.

The practical upshot of this is that whichever two teams win tonight are guaranteed to go through and whichever of the two losers has the best NRR will join them in the Super Sixes. All four teams could theoretically go out with a loss and the other result going against them, but the danger is greater for England in Sri Lanka than it is for India and the West Indies. In fact, the only realistic way for Sri Lanka to progress is to beat India. Any loss and their NRR is so bad that they will go out. It’s not, therefore, quite a must-win match for England. But if England don’t win then they will be relying on India in the late match because if India lose they would have to do so by a lot to end up with a worse NRR than England. For the same reason, a win for the West Indies will probably make India safe. The most likely way for them to go out is to lose to Sri Lanka and have the West Indies lose to England by a reasonable margin, though if they lose very heavily to Sri Lanka (by enough to send their NRR under that of England) they could go out even with a West Indies win. It’s quite unlikely though. The West Indies are the safest team at the moment; they would need to lose heavily to England and have India narrowly beaten by Sri Lanka to go out.

The other interesting aspect of the last round of matches in Group A is the points carried forward. If England beat the West Indies and Sri Lanka go out then England will actually carry forward maximum points despite their early defeat. The only other team capable of doing so is Sri Lanka and that is quite unlikely as it would require the West Indies to be eliminated. There is no way for India to advance, however, without having lost to one of the other teams to go through and it is very unlikely that the West Indies could do so either. They would have to beat England narrowly and have India lose very heavily to Sri Lanka to send India out.

In Group B things are much simpler. Australia and New Zealand are already through and the winner of the antipodean clash will carry maximum points forward to the Super Sixes. On form, one would actually expect the White Ferns to win; they have dominated their group matches so far whilst Australia have had minor scares against both of their opponents. But Australia have had the better of the recent head-to-head matches, so it should be a very interesting match.

The other match in the group is probably the more important though; Pakistan and South Africa will play each other for the last spot in the Super Sixes. I said in my preview that I though South Africa would pull off a minor upset and I still think that will be the case, but there is not a lot from which to choose between the sides.

My guess is that we will end up seeing England, the West Indies, India and South Africa join Australia and New Zealand in the next round, but there are some good looking matches and it should be very interesting.

South Africa v Pakistan preview

Later today the first Test between South Africa and Pakistan gets underway in Johannesburg. It will be the first time Pakistan have played Test cricket in almost seven months, their last series being the 0-1 defeat away to Sri Lanka. The second Test of this series will also be notable as it will be Graeme Smith’s 100th Test as captain.

It’s hard to see past a probable South African victory. The Proteas aren’t unstoppable (they nearly came unstuck against Australia), but they are a good side and in good form after their thrashing of New Zealand. Their bowling attack is fully fit again and I think the Pakistan batsmen will really struggle with the pace and bounce. They don’t play a lot of Test cricket at the best of times and still less in conditions like they will find in South Africa. They haven’t helped themselves by playing only one warmup either. They should bat better than New Zealand did, but especially in the first Test I think they will struggle to be competitive. It’s possible that they will settle in as the series goes on, but such are the South African bowlers that it’s hard to see them really in a position of strength with the bat at any point.

With this in mind, Pakistan’s bowlers will need to keep South Africa from building big partnerships, because even one could put the match out of reach. Pakistan’s strength is their bowling and their seamers should be able to do some damage to the South African batting lineup. But we have seen many times from the Proteas that they can come back from a collapse and put themselves in a winning position. Pakistan do have the ability to bowl South Africa cheaply once or twice, but I don’t think they will be able to do so with the consistency they will need. I think they will need to really go for it in the first Test and hope to put some unease in the home camp.

Pakistan are not a terrible side by any means, but everything really has to go their way for them to win just a Test and even if South Africa slip up a bit I don’t see a way for Pakistan to win the series. There’s no way to account for the weather, but because the bowlers on both sides are good I don’t think there will be any draws either. My prediction is a 3-0 whitewash for South Africa; it is a bit harsh on Pakistan, but the conditions are against them and against as good a side as South Africa I think ‘competitive’ is about all Pakistan will do.

Women’s World Cup preview

The Women’s World Cup gets underway soon in India and it’s so close that the organisers have even deigned to finalise the fixtures. The hosts play the West Indies on Thursday to start the tournament and the following day will see the defending champions England play Sri Lanka. The final is set for 17 February.

The format for this tournament is the same as the one four years ago, which is disappointing because it really is a poor one. The tournament starts with two groups of four and the top three from each carry their points forward to a Super Six stage. The top two teams from the Super Six stage then play each other in the final whilst the third and fourth teams and fifth and sixth teams, instead of just keeping their places from the group, also have a playoff. I never like having two group stages and I really don’t like having the top two teams in a group play each other for the final. I accept the need for a final, but that means there needs to be either an extended set of knockouts or more than one group. If there is only one table then position in that table should determine where a particular team finishes. (I have a similar gripe about the rugby Premiership.)

It is difficult to have only eight teams play a decent length tournament (though there are other teams who could have been invited and thus eased this problem), but there are ways to construct the tournament better without making it absurdly short and even ways to construct it without making it absurdly long. The obvious solution would be to have the teams from the two groups play knockouts against each other. The various permutations of this can lead to a tournament of almost any length and one that would actually make some sense.

But the format is what it is and the ones that were used for the 2012 T20 World Cups or any of the last few Men’s World Cups would suggest that this problem isn’t about to get better. Group A is England’s group and they share it with India, the West Indies and Sri Lanka. Group B then contains Australia, Pakistan, South Africa and New Zealand.

I would expect England and India to compete for the top spot in Group A. England have the better record and are probably the better team, but India might just be favourites as they are at home. England had to work hard to beat India in the ODI series in England last summer and it won’t be easy now. But they should both get through the group comfortably; the only question is who will carry forward the more points. I would expect the last spot in the Super Six to go to the West Indies. They actually have the most wins in ODIs in the last two years with 13 (though a worse W/L ratio than England and Australia) and should not have a problem finishing ahead of Sri Lanka. I would imagine they would finish third, but playing at home a year ago they did beat India 2-1 in a three match series, so might push for second.

Group B looks like the weaker of the two groups and should see Australia dominate. They are an excellent side and their biggest opposition is probably New Zealand – a side against whom they have had great success recently. Pakistan do have a winning record recently and are in relatively familiar conditions, but their preparation was badly disrupted and they have not done well against stronger opposition. South Africa are probably favourites to be knocked out of Group B (certainly they are according to the seeding), but they’ve competed a bit more recently and I think they can get through at Pakistan’s expense. I’d be surprised if either challenge even New Zealand though; the White Ferns are a better side than their record indicates. (Playing Australia and England all the time isn’t a recipe for a lot of wins.)

New Zealand, India, South Africa and the West Indies will all have uphill battles to challenge for a spot in the final though; realistically one of them will have to at the very least beat England or Australia and even then would have to win most of their other matches. New Zealand and India are probably the two most likely contenders, but I expect them to play each other for third place as England and Australia meet in another final. Australia have generally had the better of these encounters recently, including grabbing the T20 World Cup almost out from under England’s nose. The two teams will meet in the Super Six stage as well (which will be true of whichever two teams end up in the final) so there will be a chance to assess them head-to-head during the tournament and in these situations the winner is often the side who make the better adjustments. Right now though, I would say Australia are favourites against any opposition in the final. They are playing very well and have a lot of depth and my guess is a second close defeat in a final for England.

Three small things

1) England won an ODI in India. They have not done so (or at least not done so against India, they obviously did win a few matches at the last World Cup) since the 2006 tour and even that was in a dead rubber win and their only one in the seven match series. I didn’t see most of it, but it was a close affair with both sides scoring over 300. It was also the first match of the new ODI fielding restrictions, so it’s hard to say if the bowlers really underperformed or if scores are going to be higher on average now. We’ll probably never find out though; it surely can’t be long before the ICC simply make every over a powerplay over in the name of increased ‘excitement’. England will be obviously pleased to win and go 1-0 up in the series, but it is especially important with their recent record in India to get that first win out of the way and I think it will give them an excellent confidence boost ahead of the next match.

2) South Africa are 325-4 after the first day of the second Test against New Zealand. At least in the second half of the day, which is the part I saw, New Zealand did not look particularly penetrative and they let South Africa get well ahead from it being about honours even halfway through the day. They didn’t help themselves in the field; there was one dropped catch (against Hashim Amla no less), a low chance missed at slip and a would-be caught behind given not out and then not reviewed. I expected South Africa would put up a good first innings score, but the Kiwis have made it too easy for them at least on the first day. The pitch was turning by stumps, so the fact that neither side have a good spinner might become important.

3) An ICC committee have made another suggestion about DRS, this time that it be left up to the home board. I like this idea and this is the most reasonable implementation apart from simply making it mandatory. It would be simply a part of the conditions for each country, much like the different brand of ball used or the different hours of play. Of course, India have already expressed a dislike of the idea which means that it will be blocked just like all the previous times this has been tried.

South Africa v New Zealand second Test preview

On Friday England’s first ODI against India starts two hours before the second South Africa v New Zealand Test. Even from an English standpoint it’s a bit tricky to know which one is more important. England have already played ten ODIs against India in the past 18 months and have five Tests coming up against New Zealand, so how the Kiwis try to fight back may give a hint of what England can expect starting in March. Plus, England’s recent record in ODIs in India means that the Test might be a closer contest.

The pitch in Port Elizabeth looks like it will make any comparison difficult, however. It has tended to be rather slow in the past and by all accounts it still is. It may actually be closer to the pitch on which England will be playing in Rajkot than the pitch on which they will play in Dunedin. It’s slow enough, in fact, that New Zealand are considering a second spinner for the match after dropping Chris Martin and there is a decent argument for doing so. South Africa actually don’t have a good record at the ground, they’ve not won a Test there this century, and it may be that a bit of extra turn will be their undoing. New Zealand are playing three seamers either way (though I suspect Colin Munro has likely been picked to shore up the batting as much as anything else) so a second spinner is probably a reasonable decision. Bruce Martin does not have great first-class statistics, but they aren’t appalling and I expect they came almost entirely on pitches more conducive to seam bowling.

South Africa don’t appear to be considering a second spinner, though given that said spinner would likely be Imran Tahir it isn’t a surprise. Robin Peterson hardly inspires fear, but he is the best option. Their only change will be the return of Rory Kleinveldt in place of the injured Vernon Philander. Whilst it is a good chance for them to try to develop their bowling in depth, it looks like a fairly big blow as Kleinveldt did not impress in the two Tests he got in Australia. South Africa do need him to step up though. Not so much for this particular Test, they can afford a bit of a let-up, but for the upcoming series against Pakistan. They look to be much tougher opposition and South Africa need to make sure they have someone to back up the main three quicks.

South Africa are still strong favourites in this Test, of course, but New Zealand do have a chance to come back well. They have not changed their batting from the last Test and they will need to perform rather better, but they are boosted by the fact that the pitch will give the South Africans less assistance this time and by the absence of Philander who did most of the damage in the 45 all out. I don’t expect them to win, but I do expect them to compete this time and perhaps push for a draw. I expect that South Africa will put up a fairly large total in the first innings (regardless of who wins the toss), so a lot will depend on how New Zealand’s batsmen can build on their second innings performance from Cape Town. I hope that they do bat better; I want to see a contest. But I suppose if it gets too one-sided I can always turn back over to the ODI…

South Africa win by an innings and 27 runs

In a way it is a bit difficult to know what to make of New Zealand’s performance in the Cape Town Test. On the one hand, it was clearly poor; they were bowled out for 45 in the first innings. But after that they actually fought back well and although there was never a chance to win the match they actually came rather closer than they ought to have to avoiding an innings defeat. The fact that they were bowled out so cheaply cannot be glossed over, but at the same time there are teams who would not have bothered to show up on the second day after being bowled out for 45 and then conceding 252-3. It’s also worth remembering that the Kiwis were up against a very good South African side who bowled Australia out for 47 on the same ground 14 months ago.

The 45 all out cannot be ignored, but I do think New Zealand would be well advised to put it out of their heads for now. It was perhaps not a freak occurrence, good bowling and poor batting will generally produce low score, but the magnitude was such that at least for now they should treat it as a one-off. I suspect that dwelling on it ahead of the next Test would be counter-productive. The bigger problem is that I don’t think they would have won the Test even without being bowled out so cheaply. The 275 they put up in the second innings was a decent effort in the circumstance, but it was effectively a first innings pitch and would still have represented a sizeable deficit had they made it in the first innings.

It is hard to say what New Zealand ought to do because they have the problem that South Africa are simply a better side and everyone knew that even coming into the series. The batting will be the obvious thing at which to look and it does need to be more disciplined (which has actually been true for some time), but it might be worth working on the bowling too. They were a bit slow to recognise the value of simply bowling line and length on that pitch (although some of that might be put down to shell-shock at what happened to the batting) and South Africa actually scored quite freely for much of the innings. The improvements on the second day meant that it wasn’t a bad bowling performance overall, but with the batting consistently suspect they can ill-afford to concede 250 runs in two sessions at any time. This is not to excuse the batting, but the problems with that are much deeper and probably cannot be fixed in between Tests. The bowling can improve though.

After being bowled out for 47 a year ago, Australia came back to win the next Test. Although New Zealand have tended to play rather better in the second Test of their recent series, Hobart and Colombo being the most notable examples, I doubt that they will manage to win in Port Elizabeth. They might, and hopefully will, make the Test interesting. But South Africa are rather better than Australia and Sri Lanka and I think they will simply be too good for the Kiwis. Even if Vernon Philander does not pull up fit for that Test I do not think that New Zealand have the batting to put up a competitive total and even if they bowl well I think South Africa will score too many for them. I had similar thoughts before Hobart and Colombo, however, and would love to be wrong again.

2012 XI

There are still three days to go in the year proper, but 2012 ended in a cricketing sense last night as Sri Lanka collapsed to a heavy innings defeat at the MCG. It’s an interesting year on which to look back; South Africa will certainly be the happiest as they returned to the number one spot in the Test rankings, but England finished on a high and Australia made the most of their very weak opposition for most of the year.

For my XI of the year I am assuming the Test is being played in South Africa as they are the number one ranked side. I have one spinner, therefore, and although all things being equal I prefer having five bowlers it is far more common to play four bowlers/six batsmen so I am using that balance.

Alastair Cook
Cook led all openers in 2012 with 1249 runs scored and was second in average at 48.03 runs per dismissal. He also hit four centuries, the most of any opener and the last one set a new English record for career centuries.

Graeme Smith*
Smith had the best average amongst openers in 2012 with 48.52 and passed fifty more often than any other opener, eight times. He gets the captaincy in this XI after leading his team to the number one Test ranking.

Hashim Amla
Amla bats at three after 1064 runs at an average over seventy this year. His high point was the unbeaten 311 he scored as South Africa piled on the runs at the Oval, but he was brilliant throughout.

Michael Clarke
Comfortably the lead run scorer in 2012, Clarke finished the year by setting an Australian record with 1595 runs scored in a calendar year. He hit five centuries, three of them doubles and one a triple. Two of those double tons were also against South Africa, so it was not a case of weak opposition either.

AB de Villiers
De Villiers is a bit of a surprise; he bookended the year with centuries in Cape Town and Perth but had none in between. But he did still contribute consistently and averaged almost 57 in the middle order with 815 runs, fourth highest amongst middle order batsmen.

Ross Taylor
Taylor might remember this year for the captaincy debacle, but before that he scored 819 runs at an average over 54 and three centuries for good measure. The last of those came in a memorable win at Colombo.

Matt Prior†
Prior was still the best overall wicket-keeper in 2012; he scored the most runs of any wicket-keeper and had the most dismissals, though in both cases he was helped by playing in rather more matches than all of his competitors. But he was the only one to excel with both bat and gloves.

Vernon Philander
It was another excellent year for Philander; he took 43 wickets in nine Tests at an average just over 21. He was at his best early in the year, but he still took an important five wickets in the last innings of the Lord’s Test to ensure a series win for South Africa.

Kemar Roach
Roach was far from the most heralded bowler this year, but he took 39 wickets in only seven Tests at an average of 22. His zenith was the five wickets he took in each innings against Australia at Port of Spain in April.

James Anderson
Statistically this will not go down as Anderson’s best year, but that hardly tells the full story. Nine of the 14 Tests in which he played this year were in subcontinent conditions and he still proved a threat, taking thirty wickets at under 27 apiece. His spells in Galle, Calcutta and Nagpur in particular were incredible.

Saeed Ajmal
It was a very tough call for the spinner’s place between Ajmal and Ragnara Herath. Herath was actually the lead wicket taker in 2012, but Ajmal took 39 wicket in only six Tests and of course baffled England at the start of the year. Herath going wicketless in the last Test of the year finally tipped the selection to Ajmal.

T20 World Cup Group 2 permutations

With the second round of matches in Group 2 of the T20 World Cup finished we can now look at the possible permutations in that group as well. As far as points go it is actually set up the same way as group one is, but the NRRs are different and actually produce a slightly simpler result.

First what’s already been confirmed: nothing. In theory anyway. In practice Australia are all but through to the semi-finals and are almost certain to top the group as well. Using the same formulae from yesterday, we get that Pakistan would need to win by around forty runs or with 5.2 overs to spare to catch Australia on NRR. That’s just to put Australia into the runners-up spot, however. For Australia to actually be knocked out, India would have to beat South Africa by just as much. It’s pretty safe to assume that Australia will top the group and very safe to assume they will at least advance.

That’s where the safety ends though, all three other teams have decent shots at getting the runners-up position. Pakistan’s match against Australia is first and as discussed above they have very little hope of catching Australia’s NRR. But they are not safe from the two sides below them; they are so close to India they are essentially in a dead heat and only a small amount above South Africa on NRR. This puts Pakistan in almost a must-win scenario. The only way they can advance with a loss is if South Africa then win and not by enough to go ahead of Pakistan on NRR. In practice that means that Pakistan would have to lose by only two or three runs or with only one ball to spare and South Africa could not win by more than four runs or with more than two balls to spare.

So Pakistan essentially have to win, but a victory is actually not enough to get them to safety. They are so close to India that if both sides win it will come down to which of them can do so by more. Although Pakistan are slightly ahead right now, they won’t necessarily come off better if both sides win by the same margin either. A low scoring win by, say, 15 runs counts for more than a higher scoring affair decided by the same margin (which makes sense as 15 runs represents a higher per cent of the total RR in a lower scoring affair) so the specific scores for both sides would come into play if they both won. The upshot is that Pakistan need to win by as much as they possibly can and then hope South Africa do them a favour and either win or lose by a smaller amount than Pakistan win.

South Africa may not be feeling too charitable in that situation, however, as a Pakistan will eliminate the Proteas. South Africa need Australia to win first and foremost, but if they get that they will have more than just a sniff of hope. An Australian win would actually make the South Africa v India match almost a winner-take-all affair. Certainly if India were to win after Australia won then both teams would go to the semi-finals. And if South Africa won after Australia won then probably both teams would go to the semi-finals. The caveat in the second case is that it would actually go down to NRR again between all three of South Africa, India and Pakistan. They are all three close enough together that South Africa’s victory would likely sent them above the other two. To go above India they would need to win by at least four runs or with two or more balls to spare. That would also automatically send them above Pakistan unless Pakistan lost off the final or penultimate ball or by only two or fewer runs. Neither of those are likely, but both are possible, so South Africa must make sure they read their NRR sheets better than they do their D/L sheets!

In summary:
-Australia are all but through.
-Pakistan need to win and then hope that either South Africa also win or that if India win it is by a smaller margin than Pakistan’s win.
-South Africa are out if Pakistan win, but otherwise can advance by beating India by more than four runs/two balls.
-India can advance with a win if Australia also win or by beating South Africa by more than Pakistan beat Australia. A very close defeat to South Africa will also probably be enough.