Feb 2, 2013 -- 5:45AM, kingmax wrote:
na they will declare overnight... think they will want 400 still
We'll see. Going to be interesting. I still think FO was more sensible mind.
Feb 2, 2013 -- 5:47AM, kingmax wrote:
even 120 all out would be fun
Feb 2, 2013 -- 5:55AM, kingmax wrote:
i know it sounds stupid, but i think by SA batting they bring the draw into play... hard to score on... day 5 washout... leaves pak 1 /12 days to bat it out
they do. Hence why I'm convinced they will go hard today and declare before close.
Feb 2, 2013 -- 6:54AM, rob_dylan wrote:
What does that mean nigel?
Read the F**king rules!
Feb 2, 2013 -- 6:59AM, rob_dylan wrote:
I thought I had nigel.
Feb 2, 2013 -- 7:01AM, rob_dylan wrote:
I would love to blame someone, but i have only myself to blame.
indeed. Been there mate. Annoying. But as you say part of the game.
Feb 2, 2013 -- 2:34PM, nicky27 wrote:
still not sure why smith didn't enforce ,I know you might say he wants his bowlers fresh ,but they only bowled 29 overs , by enforcing the follow on, it takes any issue of when to declare out of the equation and also means you might not even need to bat again
A few ideas :
1) Sponsors, crowd and TV want as much Cricket as possible
2) Gives his lads a chance at batting
3) He was hoping to get a ton in his 100th TM
4) If PAK somehow managed to get > 300 in the innings SA would have some pressure
5) PAK batting half way through the day tomorrow after being out in the field for 50 overs will be tough for them.
All these in total however wouldn't have been enough if I were Graeme Smith. Knowing what you need to get in the 2nd innings is a far more powerful position to be in.
Feb 2, 2013 -- 2:52PM, nicky27 wrote:
indeed nigel ...that is if you need to bat a second time at all
Exactly! The way they were bowling it would seem quite unlikely. Any thoughts on why PAK are still in double figures and not > 100? Risk of SA declaring soon? Highest ever total on this pitch is 311!
Feb 3, 2013 -- 3:19AM, tonyf wrote:
as expected, I said 480-500, read above
eh? Amla didn't get the ton!
Feb 3, 2013 -- 3:52AM, tonyf wrote:
true, but the rest was spot on, some way from 550 and the guy who said 600
they declared early because of the chance of rain.
Feb 3, 2013 -- 3:54AM, tonyf wrote:
not much point posting my views as just seem to get negative comments, so bye, find me on twitter if you want
hardly negative. Posts need challenging
Feb 3, 2013 -- 4:13AM, tonyf wrote:
well of course they declared because of rain, that was the point, challenge posts if you want but think first
yes, the point being the forecast is worse today than y'day when the declaration views were posted.
Feb 3, 2013 -- 4:22AM, tonyf wrote:
Have it your own way
I'm not saying I'm right - just putting out other viewpoints.
Feb 3, 2013 -- 9:31AM, Footiefan111 wrote:
is day 5 a washout
no, forecast has since improved
Feb 3, 2013 -- 12:56PM, lee_arama wrote:
Weather forcast - "Chance of rain: 91%" That's Monday.Tuesday: "Chance of rain: 79%"
Should be 100% - there's going to be some rain both days - question is how much and what delay it puts on the game?
Being able to move the breaks and finish late helps.