Strategies to win in SA

[Goatman]

Having noticed the growing thread on winning the ahes, I thought I'd start one about th SA series. This is more imminent, little less important and - to my mind - more relevent. Not only it is the upcomign series but the performance both in terms of individuals and the team will deeply inform selection, tactics and performance in the ashes series that is breeding such speculation.

Now, I have my ideas about SA but before I go off on one - what are the tactics we need to dominate?

Do we shore up the batting, or back 5 bowlers to shift 'em cheap?

Are we better off grinding or growling?

[Rachael]

Are we really in a position to call that at this stage?

Strikes me that we should be aiming to get a solid start.... and to feel our way into the series: doesn't matter about winning the first match or two... just matters that we are in a position to win the series by the time we enter the latter stages of the tour.

SA wil have played Test cricket more recently than England.. wil be on home soil.. in conditions they like.. and at the height of their domestic season. The England boys will have been playing in nets or playing meaningless ODI games in Zimbabwe.

Guess who's likely to be better prepared and clearer on their form...

I'd start the first game with Bell in for Jones / Anderson and aim to not get beaten.. and then look to shaking things up a bit if that Test indicates we need to... but I doubt that will happen: I see Vaughan demonstrating his usual, cavalier approach.. wading in with all guns blazing.. and probably getting us into a position where we have to try and take the series from 1-0 down.

Just seems to be the way of Vaughan right now: gung ho.

[Lee Johnson]

Why do we need 7 batsmen plus Jones? You have this ida that the only way we can compete is to grind out long nutritional sessions! Have you seen the S African Attack? They have one quality bowler in Pollock who we will have to batttle with but the others are there for the taking. Why boost there confidence and go into our shells and get out playing defensivley? We have an oppertunity to hit the ground runing and continue the form of the summer and end the series as a contest after the second game.

I cant see the point of edging your way into the series, none of the Great teams would ever approach the game like that. Get on the front foot from the word go and apply pressure. Our recent wins have come from possitive cricket so why change the tactic now?

You have a Geoff Boycott mindset.

[Goatman]

As SA themselves have discovered in IND, if you don't try and win then the opposition are able to simply go all-out on the offensive, as they - in turn - cannot lose.

Sometimees, you may get away with it as SA did in the first test, though that largely has to be put down to the injury to one of IND's front line bowlers (Pathan, who was absent) and the fact that the IND team as a whole seem to be just going through the motions*.

At other times, things do not go your way and you get swept aside, as happened to SA in the second test. What positives can SA take from that series then? None that I can see. Perhaps they can claim that on a flattish track against bowlers who are underperforming they are capable of killing a game. Woopy-do. They are able to occupy the crease, but not able to turn that occupation into pressure. If things do not go 100% to plan, they have shot thier bolt. They are sunk. So what the hell do they do when a bowler hits his straps and starts ripping them up like cleenex at a snot party? Reading Smiths comments after Harbhajan did just that to them in the second innings of the second test, it seems that you go home and cry into your handkerchief.

The most important part of a test is the first session - it sets the tone. The most important test in a series is the first for the same reason. The most important session in a series is therefore the very first. If we go in all coy and let Ntini, or Smith, or Gibbs, or Kallis get thier tails up we won't "break ourselves into the series gradually". We'll concede the whole damn shooting match.



* Where has thier appetite gone? They have such talent as an outfit, but are not delivering.

[Milo]

Bell's not in the squad. The team must have the same format as the last 8 months. If we cannot compete with it - then we certainly won't compete with the extra batsmen.

The key to this series is how we bowl. We will not consistently make 450 with the bat, our batting line up is not as good as most people reckon - we therefore must bowl out of our skins. I am still not sure about the quality of our attack, I do expect SA to score plenty of runs at home, it really is time for Flintoff, Hoggard, Giles and Harmison to show me they are as good as Ernest claims. Thsi is why five bowlers is a must.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

WHo's the 5th bowler ? Theres an awful lot of agreement on the fact one would be handy but who's it going to be ? Anderson and Jones seem far from convincing - and vaughan almost refuses to bowl anderson.

So (in by best Kilroy voice) Milo, whats the answer ?

[Milo]

Well that's a personal thing - a debate we had on here a month ago (Jones v Anderson). Personally, I choose Jones on SA pitches (and pretty much due to the fact I think Anderson is rank). Whoever it is - it must be one of them. When Giles gets caned (because he's not playing against a team of West Indian left handers who can't apply themselves when required), we will need the extra option.

[Goatman]

As this isn't going anywhere fast, I thought I may as well put some more cards in the table.

On the number of bowlers front, I am with Milo. I am concerned that we may miss out on an opportunity to take another step up through over-caution but Harmison, Flintoff and Giles are yet to show they can stay at the top of the pile. We can't bank on them as we could do if they were Pollock, or Kumble.

I don't agree that an additional batsman would be of no benefit however. AUS, SA and IND have all shown how valuable deep orders can be. Indeed, the durability and competativeness of the SA team is often ascribed to the fact that the last 5 wickets make more runs than the first. Why should we not benefit from the same? makes no sense to me.

On the bowling staff front, I have felt from the first that Hoggard - who I rate highly - is a test class/style change seamer. Not a new-baller. Our new ball bowlers (and this will get far more important if we go in one bowler down) need to be genunely wicket taking strike bowlers of the Harmison variety, or they need to be immaculate seamers of the McGrath variety. We have a space that someone needs to fill. On his arrival in international cricket, Jimmy Anderson looked ideal. Almost every aspect of his game - from the shape of his action to the speed of his rise - was reminiscent of McGrath. What a right royal pain in the **** that he's entered some kind of suspended animation. Until he gets his game sorted, or until we find another, Hoggard (who really is our 5th bowler in many ways - we just lack a second, if you catch my drift! ) will have to take the shiny new cherry.

In the context of the SA series the choice can only be between Anderson and Jones. Anderson has shown the greatest promise of becoming our missing "2nd" bowler, and won't develop if he doesn't play. His selection could therefore be viewed as an investment - short term loss for long term gain. Jones has shown his ability to bowl in the sort of conditions we will be playing in - which are analogous to WI where he did tolerably well - indeed taking a well deserved 5-fer.

I would take Jones.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

I'd go with jones on SA tracks unless the conditions suited swing then I'd take collingwood

No sniggering, those are the sort of matches where the likes of pollock will have a field day, so an extra bat will be handy. That fact he can sometimes make the most of the conditions with the ball maybe handy too.

[Goatman]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

I'd go with jones on SA tracks unless the conditions suited swing then I'd take collingwood

No sniggering, those are the sort of matches where the likes of pollock will have a field day, so an extra bat will be handy. That fact he can sometimes make the most of the conditions with the ball maybe handy too.

I just can't see Colly making it in tests. He can only get selection as a specialist bat, as his bowling is not sufficient for him to take an allrounder role in which he is looked to to take the ball for a decent number of overs in all conditions. And his batting is not as good as Bells, Keys, Butchers, Pietersens.....

Cracking fielder though, so that is to his benefit.