troll3y
Active Member
Did anyone else stay up to watch that Test? My internet is 'average' at the best of times, and was seemingly running on fumes through all of last night -- Cricinfo and Twitter wouldn't even work simultaneously. Those infuriating Match Point embedded videos really drive me up the wall when it slows both browser and internet connection down to a crawl. Unable to stream even radio coverage, I was glued to Cricinfo text commentary.
It's easy to have a go at South Africa and Graeme Smith for not chasing the target in the last four overs, but it would have been a big ask to rely on a one-legged Morne Morkel and a 11.25-averaged Imran Tahir to even survive, let alone hit the winning runs. Sixty percent of Imran Tahir's innings, apparently, lasted less than ten balls. Philander and Steyn were the last line of defence and simply couldn't afford to be dismissed.
That said, there were a few pretty innocuous balls (as described by text) being bowled in those last overs off which easy runs could have been scored. With only 16 off 24 required, you'd take some of those runs, surely? If there were more Tests in the series, wouldn't they have taken the risk? We can ask many 'what ifs'. Many armchair captains were quick to criticise, but I'm not going to attack the strength of the captain who once batted with a broken left hand and dodgy right elbow to save a Test. (I'm blurrily and partially reliving that incredible innings now.)
I hope that drama really advertises the quality and importance of the next and final Test. India unexpectedly won the first four days before being brilliantly outdone by a resurgent South Africa on day five. Both teams have shown their strengths, and the second Test is shaping up to be gladiatorial.
It's easy to have a go at South Africa and Graeme Smith for not chasing the target in the last four overs, but it would have been a big ask to rely on a one-legged Morne Morkel and a 11.25-averaged Imran Tahir to even survive, let alone hit the winning runs. Sixty percent of Imran Tahir's innings, apparently, lasted less than ten balls. Philander and Steyn were the last line of defence and simply couldn't afford to be dismissed.
That said, there were a few pretty innocuous balls (as described by text) being bowled in those last overs off which easy runs could have been scored. With only 16 off 24 required, you'd take some of those runs, surely? If there were more Tests in the series, wouldn't they have taken the risk? We can ask many 'what ifs'. Many armchair captains were quick to criticise, but I'm not going to attack the strength of the captain who once batted with a broken left hand and dodgy right elbow to save a Test. (I'm blurrily and partially reliving that incredible innings now.)
I hope that drama really advertises the quality and importance of the next and final Test. India unexpectedly won the first four days before being brilliantly outdone by a resurgent South Africa on day five. Both teams have shown their strengths, and the second Test is shaping up to be gladiatorial.