Why Did Ramdin Field First?

[quote author=boquiesse link=topic=94601.msg606292#msg606292 date=1418934752]
Well I don't expect miracles either but there seems to be little difference between this bowling performance and what happened 10 years ago at Centurion?

So that begs the question of what progress has been made in 10 years and the answer is none at all.

Anyway I will wait and see how the batsmen (except Shiv) perform.
[/quote]

why are we talking about progress relative to west indies performance over ten years ::confused::

wat happen... allyuh have a problem with seeing wats before allyuh eyes ::confused:: ::confused::

properly wat allyuh want to talk about is decline continuin.  dat would be right, proper and accurate talk...not progress or lack of it

Well it's played well fuddas is done, Johnson will try 2 bowlers hurt the rest can't bowl
I think perfect time to send couple of second stringers


If smith makes 100 runs in this series

[quote author=The Captain link=topic=94601.msg606432#msg606432 date=1418958322]

If smith makes 100 runs in this series
[/quote]Series total?

From a South African viewpoint it looks like you guys are underestimating your team rather badly. 71/0 is a good start. By the time we reached 71 we'd already lost three wickets.

21.4
Philander to Devon, loud appeal for caught behind, turned down and Amla asks for review.

It was right on middle stump as Smith pulled awkwardly, ABD took a diving catch to his right.

Looks like the ball got some of the thigh pad or trousers from Smith's left leg, doesn't look like bat.

There's something on the Snicko, but not when the ball is close to the bat.

Oh, he's been given OUT, the SA players rejoice, Smith is surprised but he has to go back.

No clue how that was out, looks like a poor decision  >
 

That decision was rather puzzling. None of the commentators thought it was out.

Vernon has wasted both our reviews though, so it won't happen again in this innings. Not unless the West Indies bat past 80 overs anyway.

[quote author=Gina145 link=topic=94601.msg606450#msg606450 date=1418981497]
From a South African viewpoint it looks like you guys are underestimating your team rather badly. 71/0 is a good start. By the time we reached 71 we'd already lost three wickets.
[/quote]

Where WI is concerned that means nothing.

Back in 1999 in New Zealand WI openers posted 276 before the first wicket fell. WI were then bowled out for 365 and went on to lose that test.

And that side had both BC Lara and S Chanderpaul.

[quote author=Gina145 link=topic=94601.msg606464#msg606464 date=1418992423]
Not unless the West Indies bat past 80 overs anyway.
[/quote]

hahaha : good one 

Quote:Ramdin's captaincy will be criticised as whatever he does will be undermined by his bowlers poor performances!

why wud he be questioned?
so far the only wrogn thing he did was to send the Saffies in.  that is runnin' with no place to hide.  stand by doing the right thing regardless.  that's right.  he calculates whats the best decision to make all things considered and stand right there... battle away
he shud be fine once he be the man he shud be in the circumstance.  dont run!

[quote author=mapoui link=topic=94601.msg606543#msg606543 date=1419014261]
why wud he be questioned?
so far the only wrogn thing he did was to send the Saffies in.  that is runnin' with no place to hide.  stand by doing the right thing regardless.  that's right.  he calculates whats the best decision to make all things considered and stand right there... battle away
he shud be fine once he be the man he shud be in the circumstance.  dont run!
[/quote]

Ha ha ha!

Had I been Captain I would have done the same thing to take advantage of the overhead condition even if I were the top team!

In the three days of this match, the first morning did the most but Ramdin's bowlers did not produce!

I was, however, surprised Roach did not open!

Do you know what that was all about?