Arthur Crabtree wrote:Can't find historic rankings (I've seen them before) but my recollection is SA were ranked second. They were never anything other than a tough side to beat until fairly recently
Arthur Crabtree wrote:England are the context in this thread and winning some of these series was quite novel. They had only just beaten the WI in a series for the first time in decades. Winning in Pakistan and SL ended long barren runs there. And soon after they were to win in the WI and SA and win the Ashes. All ending long runs without victory. These were fine achievements. Not caving in to SA after being pummeled at the start of the series (to the point that Gough chucked it in) and going behind twice feels of a piece with these improvements. Fletcher's second side wasn't quite there yet, but parts of this series and their ability to fight when up against it were big signifiers for what was to come.
Arthur Crabtree wrote:They didn't only have Lara in the batting (who beat the Test innings record in 04) they had Chanderpaul. And Gayle and Sarwan were handy. Jacobs was ok. I quite liked all of their pace attack in the 2004 series, Edwards/Best/Collins/Collymore. I know their Test stats aren't good but they were challenging at that time, and Edwards was fearsome. Collymore was pretty skilful. I'm not trying to say WI were good, even less a successful side. But they weren't usually pre-beaten. They would compete, but too often capitulate when things started to go against them. Later on, they were beaten before they even started away from home. At home they would have the occasional success.
My next pick will be from that series in 04. Tough to choose.
Arthur Crabtree wrote:Can't find historic rankings (I've seen them before) but my recollection is SA were ranked second. They were never anything other than a tough side to beat until fairly recently.
I didn't think WI were terrible back then either and England did well to beat them! Especially in WI where WI were often on top.
These are SA stats during three years with this series in the middle. They're er, magnificent numbers.
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engin ... pe=batting
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engin ... pe=bowling
Durhamfootman wrote:there's a top 5 there that would be as good as anything in the world at the time, backed up by a couple of bowlers with 30+ batting averages. The bowling itself, however, demonstrably looks a seamer short. If Steyn had been around a little earlier, SA might have been a truly great team in that period
Durhamfootman wrote:there's a top 5 there that would be as good as anything in the world at the time, backed up by a couple of bowlers with 30+ batting averages. The bowling itself, however, demonstrably looks a seamer short. If Steyn had been around a little earlier, SA might have been a truly great team in that period
Return to International Cricket
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 80 guests