Brilliant innings from Amla. Unless something dramatic happens, I think he should be man of the match - as spectacular as Stokes innings was.
English cricket 2015 - NZ, The Ashes, Pak and SA
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Also, these things.
I was optimistic at the beginning that it would turn eventually but this is looking highly unlikely now. Looking a good example of the sort of pitch that really damages the idea of test cricket.
Two big wickets, England still in it. Give them two and a half sessions to chase 300, anything can happen.
I was about to say how stupid this plan to De Kock was and then he goes and smashes one done square legs throat. 
Into the tail now.
Into the tail now.
Question - Do warnings for running on the danger zone count for the entire match or are they just for the particular innings?
Just for the innings I believe. Same with beamers.
Yeah think that's the case. The bbc live feed also just wrote...
"We think that's his second transgression - one more and he's not allowed to bowl again in this innings. "
At the risk of him going on to score a double ton:
Does anyone really rate Temba Bavuma?
Does anyone really rate Temba Bavuma?
The cynic in me suggests he's there to fulfil the black african quota requirements.
Same.
I heard something similar a few days ago. Is that really a thing? Thought it was a joke.
I don't know if thats cynical or not. The transformation policy is an open secret.
When you consider that Temba is, I believe, the first pure black batsman to play for South Africa since re-intergration its little surprise that its there.
Still, I think because Rabada is playing in this test they don't need Temba to be playing.
Last edited:
It is and can get a bit awkward at times. I do wonder if Duminy would really have had so many opportunities were it not for the system.
Still - If skin colour is a requirement I fancy there are better options when it comes 'non-white' batsmen that South Africa could choose than Bavuma is looking at present.
I believe they need four non whites in a test 11. From those non whites, at least one black african. In 2014, the Springboks played the All Blacks in Joburg and black African, Oupa Mohoje, selected at loose forward was dubbed the ''quota player'' in the build up and played pretty well dispelling any pre conceived notions about his selection. I hope for Bavuma's sake he does something similar.
No doubting that, i feel it's served its time in Cricket and Rugby.
Hmm... In light of this discussion, I can't help but wonder if it was something along these lines that Ben Stokes just said to him that was deemed sufficiently inappropriate that the umpires felt the need to tell Cook to reign him in.
That's the biggest load of crap ever. Please don't tell me players like Petersen, Duminy, Prince, Ntini, Philander, Rabada etc. initially just got selected to fill a quota. Players should be selected on merit, not based on skin colour.
Hope they don't have a racial quota in football...
Hope they don't have a racial quota in football...
I'd like to say, firstly, I think racial quotas are always self defeating and I'm not a fan, but I don't think thats true for cricket at all.
As I said above, according to Sky the other day Temba Bavuma is the first black person to play for South Africa as a batsman since re-intergration and of all of those that have played (its a single figure number 7 or 9 I can't remember) only Ntini has had a significant impact on the world stage.
For a county where the Black African community numbers over 70% to be drawing players predominately from the 20% of White and 'Coloured' people is not only un-reprsentative but hugely self defeating for South African cricket not to access those people.
That said, I think a lack of opportunity is only half the problem. Gary Kirsten was talking on Sky about his project to build nets in poorer townships and made it clear that his opinion was that there was a failure to expose the Black African community to cricket, even when someone good was discovered they tended to get a cricket scholarship to one of the elite schools in South Africa thats always provided the backbone to the South African cricket team meaning that theres no real infrastructure to develop talent outside of those institutions.
Well that kind of sums up the problem doesn't it? Only two of those (Rabada and Ntini) would be classified as 'black' under the South African definitions. Yet that demographic makes up about 3/4 of the country.
Ashwell Prince prickles at the suggestion, but most would argue that he was a quota player. Of course, he then absolutely justified his selection but thats the point of the quota, really. It's not a case of picking absolute scrubs, its making sure that those that are good enough aren't getting overlooked because of the colour of their skin. I'd argue the better way to go about it is to ensure that people of colour get as good an opportunity as white South Africans, but I'd be amazed if CSA wasn't trying to do that as well.
Last edited:
That's the biggest load of crap ever. Please don't tell me players like Petersen, Duminy, Prince, Ntini, Philander, Rabada etc. initially just got selected to fill a quota. Players should be selected on merit, not based on skin colour.
Hope they don't have a racial quota in football...
The quota was there for a good reason. Whether it's still necessary or not is another question entirely.
@NinjaFletch Potentially an argument that the system should be more about black South Africans and less about non-whites?
Yeah, thats the way it will go without doubt.
They recently changed the (officially acknowledged) policy in domestic cricket:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/754051.html
I think at the minute the quota is a reflection there is just not enough black talent in South African domestic cricket and they can't address the problems of representation in the Test team without affecting the quality of the side. That Bavuma is apparently the best bat going around the circuit sums that up (although he's played beautifully since we all started calling him a quota player).
That does seem sensible.
Also, yes, you were entirely right when pointing out the inevitability that the moment you questioned his ability he would be destined to find form.
10 dropped catches
Claiming credit for that century.
Imagine how well they'd be doing if they hadn't been forced to pick this lad to fill a quota
First innings lead, get in lads.
We shall see how well he does when he's not facing knackered bowlers on a flat pitch but it was a very good innings and rather well timed to make us look stupid.
We shall see how well he does when he's not facing knackered bowlers on a flat pitch but it was a very good innings and rather well timed to make us look stupid.
And not to mention against a team that could catch a ball.
Nah Stokes was man of the match. On a shit pitch, I don't rate any innings with a strike rate lower than 50 - maybe 60.
That's the reason I do rate it so highly... Well, not exactly but the amount of deliveries he took up at a time his side were trying to draw the game.
Anyone think we'll lose this? 
Probably the wrong time to say this, but I think Stokes is over-rated as a batsman and is batting higher than he should be
It's probably fair, Bairstow should definitely bat above him but Stokes seems to thrive with responsibility so I don't really mind. He's no worse than Flintoff batting wise IMO.
Agree entirely with the bolded. Though mildly concerned it could hinder Bairstow's progress being at seven.
Think he has the potential to be a lot better than Flintoff, with the bat. That said, so did Flintoff...
What do you mean by over-rated? That you don't think he's any good or just that he's batting too high?
Think he's already a better bat than Flintoff tbh.
I think he's a decent batsman who will end up averaging low 30s.
I do not see him as an entertainer with staying power like Gilchrist, Warner, Sehwag etc which is what I'm seeing in the media from the likes of Dobell, Vaughan..
I think he should bat no higher than 7.
Nah. I honestly can't think anyones watched his hundred in Perth and thinks he's a 'decent' batsman.
He's ridiculously talented and his problem so far is inconsistency, and just as likely to do something utterly daft as he is brilliant but his average is already 33 and I can only see it going up. I think he'll end his career with a batting average in the mid to low 40s and a bowling average a touch over 30.
I think he'll comfortably surpass Flintoff, as I said earlier he's a better bat already, which puts him in a pretty elite club for English allrounders.
That said, I agree that, right now, he's batting too high. But it seems to bother him batting outside of the top 6 and it doesn't Bairstow or Moeen so it doesn't really matter.