South Africa v England: pre-series

[Maranello]

Can the Proteas do it?

After a better then expected outing in India, what can SA fans expect against the visiting English? Is an honourable draw SA's best hope (similar to the last time England hosted the South Africans) or can SA go one better and win the series?

Answers on a postcard, or in this thread...

Originally Posted by cricinfo

South Africa are in reasonable shape heading into the home series against England. "The team has gone forward in a lot of aspects," he concluded, "and provided the selectors make good decisions for the series against England, we should be very competitive."

Upwards on the learning curve: full article

[Zainub]

Would be fair to say they have made some progress and look a better side mentally and on paper then they did after having lost in Sri Lanka.

[vosser]

Developements have again shifted and altered the course of perspective on this series with the announcement of the South African squad to play in the First Test at Port Elizabeth.

Firstly, Mark Boucher and Herschelle Gibbs not being selected after being left out for differeing reasons for the Indian Tour seems like yet another bold statement from the selectors (Omar Henry convener having just been stepped down) when all who saw him could clearly see that Tsolekile was way out of his depth with both bat and gloves and although Gibbs is not in the best of form surely he has proved his worth over the years and at a time when SA need stability from senior players it seems like a strange time to experiment.

Selection has again thrown new players into the melting pot. D Steyn a fiery quick and AB de Villiers a run scoring opening bat and wicketkeeper with great promise. Both these players are only 21 and have just broken into the senior arena. Dale Steyn (26 wickets at an ave of 29 in 7 FC matches) and AB de Villiers (1246 runs at an ave of 44.5 in 16 FC Matches, HS 151 and 33ct and 1st, 437 runs at an ave of 43.7 in 12 List A games). Both these players deserve call ups but whether I would call up De Villiers in place of Gibbs is another question.

The make up of the squad confuses me slightly in that with Gibbs out and Hall not a opener on South African tracks they will have to use de Villiers with Smith to open, that now means that we have two keepers playing, surely than Tsolekile must make way for a specialist or extra allrounder. But then why name him in the squad, de Villiers is at least his equal with the gloves. I dont see any benefit in playing them both when it means losing 1 of Hall de Bruyn or Dippenaar.

To me Port Elizabeth is going to produce a dry, flat and dead wicket with runs aplenty. It will be by far the least threatening of the Test wickets and bowlers will have to toil hard for their rewards with a spinner a certainty not an option. Which means Boje will play (if he passes his fitness test, otherwise I would imagine Robin Petersen will be called up on his home ground). Steyn in the squad means going with 2 specialist seamers in himself and Ntini, Pollock and 3 of Hall, de Bruin, Dippenaar, Amla and Tsolekile (my choice being the first three and giving De Villiers the gloves).

The selection of the SA A team poses some interesting questions as well. It keeps alive hopes of a Mark Boucher return personally I think it's time to move on and AB de Villiers seems the right man to take up the mantle. The rest of the side being made up of familiar names all tried over the past couple of seasons with varying success. Mosdt of these unable to perform up to more than an average level when given the chance. No room for Gibbs, no specialist spinner yet again.

I still think we are left with more questions than answers but I can safely say we seem to be moving in the right direction

[Zainub]

"I'm gonna turn on the heat, make him or break him ... no soft option."
South Africa's coach Ray Jennings on Jacques Kallis

Now, what exactly is Jennings suppose to imply here - Kallis has been in majestic form with the bat, and his bowling too hasn't been all that bad - not sure I approve of this school master like approach of SA's new coach, Kallis has been around for a while, is a respected figure at the highest level, I'm not sure he'll be too pleased knowing his coach is willing to "break him" if the need arises. I don't understand this, some one please explain

[Maranello]

Nor do I.

Anyway, how can he say "make him" ? Kallis made it as a Test cricketer many years ago, and has since then been one of the premier batsmen and the best all-rounder in world cricket...for a good few seasons now! He is not some 21 year old who has nothing under his belt.

[Occasional Fan]

I know nothing about Jennings, other than the things I've read in the papers over the last three or four weeks. Seems to me that he is one of those odd people who actually wants to be seen as professionally unpleasant. The trouble is that all the people I've ever come across who wanted to be seen that way (and I have worked with a few over the last 20 years or so) actually are unpleasant. His job as coach is presumably to get the best possible performances out of his people. Public humiliation seldom works in the long run. I have no time for this management style, and no time for those who practise it. So, Zainub, sorry: that's not an explanation, but in fact I simply don't have one.

[Zainub]

I haven't come across many people OF who have aproved of Jennings's style. I'm just hoping he doesn't go over board with the whole thing and drop Kallis after a failure or two in the England series, I know it's going to be an advanatage for England, but its going to weaken SA to the extent I wouldn't like - world cricket needs a strong South Africa side. What it doesn't need though is Jennings threatening some of the best players in the world they need to step up the gas a bit when they are already doing great.

I'm actually very annoyed at this statement, and now have come to the conclusion that it wouldn't be an overstatement to say it's a disrespect to Kallis. Totally ridiculous.

[Occasional Fan]

RSA certainly seem to have some personnel problems at the moment: the public spat surrounding team selection certainly doesn't help them, and England would be mugs not to make of that whatever capital they can.

I see from today's Guardian that the UCB also managed to send a confidential e-mail intended for Jennings to half the world's press yesterday, in which the Board requested Jennings to be "boring and as insipid as possible" in his media communications. Presumably that was because he was not being insipid enough in his comments so far - i.e. the Board was unhappy with some of his more pointed comments about players and selectors.

The RSA players will hopefully be professional enough to rise above this and give England a good series (and lose it!), but they really shouldn't have to be worrying about this sort of nonsense when their cricket at the moment is worrying enough.

[Zainub]

Shocking really that even after that advice from the UCBSA Jenning had the guts to come out and say he'd make/break Kallis.
As you say hopefully this wouldn't affect Kallis too much, he has a reputation of being a team man, I hope England win, but I'd like it to be a really close series, like the one in 1998, without that sort of umpiring obviously.

[Occasional Fan]

I'm not so shocked. Regardless of what you think of the man, I can understand pretty well the idea that he might have just deliberately disregarded the instruction because his confidential mail had been published. That's certainly thumbing his nose at the UCB (and it might be counter-productive in terms of his relationship with Kallis and the players, so I don't condone it on those grounds), but I can understand to some extent why he might have felt like saying something impolite to the Board: this comment might have been one way of doing it. Immature, but sometimes grown men do behave like young boys, I'm afraid.