• the venkatapathy raju archive

  • the cricket sadists’ quarterly

    2nd issue out now. Now, go, buy, read, love.
  • ashes 2009 when freddie became jesus

  • listen to jrod on

    Allow 10 seconds for buffering
  • jrod bats with

    Hawk Bespoke Bats

  • CWB on twitter

    Powered by Twitter Tools

  • wanna use the balls?


    cricketwithballs.com by Jrod
    is licensed
    Creative Commons License
    Creative Commons
  • the compulsive ball polisher

    ©hinaman of

    Logo - The Silly Point

  • cricket without boundaries

  • online

  • admin

Probably not.

But I had this post written ages ago about how I thought South Africa looked a little off the boil at the moment, and since they hadn’t played test cricket in almost 12 months and their one day and 2020 form was just ordinary, England could take this series pretty easily.

Since then England has been hell bent on playing four bowlers and whatever Ian Bell is.

Going on their form in the UK, England needs five bowlers just because two of them go missing at any one time.

It makes me think that South Africa should win.

Until you look at the fact for the first time since, well forever, South Africa are going into a match with four bowlers.

Neither team seems to like doing it, but due to injuries, retirements and Luke Wright, this is where we find ourselves.

I still think England will win, but before I was using a educated hunch, now I just feel like I should pick one of the teams.

This series could be the Ashes redux, so you should buy my book so you know what is coming.

Retweet

Tagged as: , ,

9 Comments

  1. Dustbinner  •  Dec 16, 2009 @08:28

    I don’t think I can bear Ashes redux – if England win this test series, I think I will have to leave the country.
    Dustbinner´s last blog ..On the fourth day of Christmas Ricky Ponting gave to me …

  2. Sunny  •  Dec 16, 2009 @09:53

    so if england beat the saffers, india will be deserving no. 1?

  3. poopsie  •  Dec 16, 2009 @10:31

    The bowling of both teams looks ridiculously ordinary. If England win the headline may tragically read – “Collingwood with the ball made the difference”. If the Saffers win it will because Prince bored the opposition/spectators/commentators/online community to death.

  4. Appreciating Critic  •  Dec 16, 2009 @10:55

    Well its Bell, Peterson, Strauss and Collingwood against Amla, Duminy, Kallis and AB.
    Hmm easy as ABC….its the englishmen who’ll be in the well.

  5. jrod  •  Dec 16, 2009 @12:07

    Sunny, for sure. That will mean South Africa have lost two series on the trot at home.

  6. The Gaz Man  •  Dec 16, 2009 @14:17

    Whoa whoa whoa Sunny, like the Australians who never believed they were worthy until winning in India after dominating for a few years, your boys need to win in RSA and Oz before laying claims to any “real” No 1. The batting line up is one of the best ever, but the bowling, like the rest of the world, struggles to be any better than mediocre on unhelpful wickets

  7. Sunny  •  Dec 16, 2009 @20:52

    yeah i agree that victories in oz and rsa are a must and it will happen. the bowling lineup is fine with the exception of a real spinner. its not like the other teams can serve up greentops and expect india to fold over. there is every bit of chance it could bite back.

    but the logic i was going by was that if england manage to beat both aust and saffers, and india has beaten eng home and way, logically india sits on the top. i mean whoever loses to england cannot seriously lay claim to being the best!

  8. alex  •  Dec 16, 2009 @23:11

    I second that. England will beat SA as SA do not feel confident on their bowlers can take 20 wickets.

  9. alex  •  Dec 16, 2009 @23:13

    SA peaked when they beat weak aussie team that got hammered in India. Now SA is in decline. I think the bowling of SA seems weak!.

    Batting is ok. Kallis and duminy can bat all day for 20 runs.:p