SA vs Eng, 1st Test: Match wrap Print E-mail
Category: Match Wraps
Written by Luke Tagg   
Although the first Test between South Africa and England ended in a stalemate after five soul searching days, the home side has a slight advantage going into the second Test at Durban.

They scored more runs, took more wickets, scored two centuries to nil and were fighting to win it, as opposed to England who were trying not to lose it.

The fact that it was a draw, however, tells you all is not well with either side.

I gave the South African players a total of 59/110 in my SA Player Ratings and England's players got 49/110 in the England Player Ratings, a difference I think is fair considering the evidence.

The biggest problem for each side was their lack of balance and bowlers, two concepts which are inextricably linked.

Each side had a wicket-taking spinner and both will guard theirs with kid gloves. Between them Graeme Swann and Paul Harris took 12/375, which was excellent considering the relative lack of turn as the match progressed.

The problem was the seamers. Only Friedel de Wet impressed, and only late in the match. He was headed for a pretty anonymous debut before his magic spell late on Day 5.

None of England's frontline seamers could average under 34, which is never going to win you a Test match. For South Africa, Morne Morkel averaged 35.33 and Makhaya Ntini 59.50, neither of which is acceptable.

South Africa has an excuse in the form of injuries to Dale Steyn and Jacques Kallis, but even so they're still lacking variety.

I think it was a mistake to let Wayne Parnell go back to domestic cricket - his left arm angles would have given South Africa far greater variety to work with.

Three right-handers of similar pace - none of whom are specialist swingers of the ball - was far too one-dimensional for my liking. The Ntini selection was inevitable and the selectors probably felt they couldn't have two of the three seamers on debut in such a crucial game.

You can't argue they made the wrong decision with Friedel de Wet, however, so in some ways it was an inevitable casting.

I would change it for the second Test. There are a number of variables at play, not least of which Steyn and Kallis, but supposing both are fit this is the side I would pick:

1. Graeme Smith
2. Ashwell Prince
3. Hashim Amla
4. Jacques Kallis
5. AB de Villiers
6. JP Duminy
7. Mark Boucher (wk)
8. Paul Harris
9. Wayne Parnell
10. Dale Steyn
11. Friedel de Wet

My thinking is as follows:

There's nothing wrong with the top order - nobody appears to be desperately out of touch. Where one fails another will fire, Aussie-style. It's a formidable line-up.

Harris is a no-brainer as is Steyn, who could well be the big difference between these two sides when all is said and done. He's by far the best bowler on either side.

Steyn has to replace somebody, preferably one of the new ball bowlers. I think Makhaya Ntini has lost his edge and he would feel my reluctant axe.

Friedel de Wet gets to keep his place in my world, although I'm sure in the real world it will be he who has to make way for Steyn. I can't see the selectors ditching Ntini. He pretty much has to ditch himself.

I've kept Friedel over Makhaya not just because he was more incisive but because he showed - in his very first game - that he has the ability to take clutches of wickets in a hostile, accurate spell, which Mak hasn't done for a while now.

He suffered some first game nerves but I like what I see already. He topped 151.6 km/h at his quickest, which is right up there with Steyn speed.

Parnell makes my side because of his variation. I can understand if the selectors stick with Morkel - his raw potential is astonishing (his fastest ball was 151.3) and if he gets it together he could do a lot of damage.

But let's face it - when has Morkel ever really done that? He certainly contributed against Australia, but was comprehensively outshone by Steyn. He'll get you a wicket or two, but I want more than that. I want repeatedly hostile spells which are accurate and telling, and he has too few of those.

He is a variation when used with Steyn - the latter tends to skid on and swing, while Morkel gets good lift off seemingly innocuous lengths that gets batsmen in a hurry-up smart quick.

I wouldn't be too disappointed if Morkel retained his place. I think it was a tough pitch to bowl on and I have a sneaking suspicion a green mamba awaits us in Durbs. He and Steyn could be a handful.

Nonetheless, I still think Parnell is a better variation and a heap of talent waiting to explode. He's untested in the Test arena but showed he has the mental fortitude to destroy Australia in the shorter versions, and I don't believe he'd disappoint.

I still feel a bowler light with my side, but that's just the nerves talking. The side that took South Africa to the top of the Test rankings was composed of six specialist batsmen, a wicketkeeper and four specialist bowlers, one of them a spinner. And Jakes. And a bit of Duminy.

England also require some radical changes.

Firstly, Alastair Cook should never have been on this tour. But England can't axe him as they've already promised him all four Tests. Bummer.

Andrew Strauss, Jonathan Trott, Kevin Pietersen and Paul Collingwood are all fine and but a century away, but Ian Bell is the proverbial fly in the ointment. And not in a good way.

England have precious few batsmen in reserve, however. In fact, they only have one: Luke Wright. Who I would immediately draft into the team, especially considering his ability to turn his arm over and rest the frontliners.

Graeme Swann retains his place and gets some free cocaine for a job well done, which means neither Adil Rashid nor James Tredwell is likely to play in the series, unless we come across a serious dustbowl somewhere and England decides on two spinners.

But James Anderson, Graham Onions and Stuart Broad were nowhere near effective enough in the first Test and someone needs to get the chop.

You can't cut Jimmy 'cos he leads the attack and is still England's best bowler. and to let Broad go would once again upset the balance of the side, despite his poor performance at Centurion.

Once again England are thin on options, but at least with the bowling there is one clear cut winner: Ryan Sidebottom. The only other paceman in the squad is the untested and unheard of Mark Davies.

I was surprised that Graham Onions got the nod over Sidebottom at Centurion, but Sidebottom is a must for Durban - his ability to swing the ball was sorely missed in Centurion and would be a serious asset in Durban.

My revamped, slightly enforced England side would thus look like this:

1. Andrew Strauss
2. Jonathan Trott
3. Alastair Cook
4. Kevin Pietersen
5. Paul Collingwood
6. Luke Wright
7. Matt Prior
8. Stuart Broad
9. Graeme Swann
10. James Anderson
11. Ryan Sidebottom

Note my big move at the top of the order: swapping Cook and Trott in the order. My theory is that Cook will find it easier to play a slightly older ball on the move, as it should have less swing and bounce than the new ball.

And considering the opening partnership of Strauss and Trott, Cook may only find himself coming in after many, many overs.

England need a solid opening partnership which produces big opening stands. Cook is ensuring that doesn't happen, but if Trott and Strauss got it together you could be looking at records.

Neither is easy to get out and they have a left/right angle to work with, which is better than two lefties. I believe Trott has the technique and the temperament to open the batting, and it would give Cook time to work himself into form.

Stuart Broad needs to pull his socks up to retain that place. Fortunately for him there's precious little on the reserves bench, and the good news for him is that when on form he's a top player who takes wickets and makes runs.

If he can do that - and if Prior can offer a contribution with the bat - that batting order looks well solid. With runs from the top order it looks positively menacing, considering how well the tail played in Centurion.

There's at least 20 new bowlers in that list as well. From zero options to a plethora.

Firing on all cylinders, Sidebottom, Anderson and Broad are different enough to give the batsmen plenty to think about. Swann is on song for the slow option, and you've got back-up in the form of Collingwood and Wright.

Much better.

I'll do a proper preview for the second Test later in the week, but these first few thoughts are based on what I witnessed in Centurion. Options will change as injuries are either defied or retained, but in summary I believe that neither team had the right combinations and as a result neither team won the match.

Blame the selectors, baby. Talentless ho-bags.
Share
Tags:
 

Add comment

Note: you can skip this entire process - including using the spam protecting Captcha image - by registering. The details of registered members are automatically filled in and there is no security image to deal with. Just a thought.

 


Security code
Refresh

Hot Right Now

Most Popular

Latest Entries

Latest Sledges

I Support

Random Quotes

Some say he was born in the middle of Nowhere and raised by feral wolves in a parallel universe. Others claim he appeared out of the mist one day drenched in gore and holding a bloodstained axe, his eyes beset by madness. One man swears he last saw Gray sleeping in a boxcar going by, on the unirail between Williston and Calvinia.

From: Alistair Gray: the Man, the Myth, the Mystery


Popular Taggs

Live Cricket Commentary

Live coverage of English cricket, from the Test Match Sofa.

Cricket Webring

Equator - a cricket webring

Prev

List

Next

hosted by The "Silly Point"

Feed Me Cricket link

Barmy Army

We have 76 guests online