zorax
likes this
disappointed no one has liked this yet tbh
disappointed no one has liked this yet tbh
SA have beaten all of those teams soundly in the past year so your logic is baffling at best. If the tournament was in the subcontinent, all of those teams maybe favored but in England, SA should have done much better than they did (Also note - no one is dissing Bangladesh but just because they are the second best team in Asia, it doesn’t make them a top 4 team in the world particularly outside of Asia)Actually it took less than half my brain and simply eyes to watch South Africa games to understand that they would end up near the bottom. Only team I would’ve counted lower would’ve been Lanka. Why do ppl keep dissing Bangladesh when they finished above SL, Pak at the Asia cup? SA has a terrible time getting their squad right. Again you simply name players, but many of them weren’t in the greatest of form. Rabada has been disappointing and Tahir unlucky. You can shift the goal posts all you want but this wasn’t a choke job Mr. burns....this was simply world cricket releasing their hounds on a hapless squad.
Re-read your post and you will realize that not have you proven my point but have also contradicted yourself badly.SA have beaten all of those teams soundly in the past year so your logic is baffling at best. If the tournament was in the subcontinent, all of those teams maybe favored but in England, SA should have done much better than they did (Also note - no one is dissing Bangladesh but just because they are the second best team in Asia, it doesn’t make them a top 4 team in the world particularly outside of Asia)
There is simply no excuse for why QDK and Faf haven’t scored a ton this World Cup. Zero. Both walked into this tournament with a pile of runs under their belt. To simply put their individual performances down to a “poor team” is ludicrous considering that NZ has made it though to the semis on the back of one batsman and Bangladesh have done admirably on the back of maybe 2.
Amla is more excusable but Amla has never scored a ton in a World Cup against a side that wasn’t a minnow which is an embarrassing record for a player of his class. This was his last real chance to change that and yes, it is in the twilight of his career but I’ve seen plenty of other great players who showed up in big tournaments even when they were past their best.
Miller has been dicked around for years so it’s hard to really rate him in this tournament. Could he have done better? Absolutely. But I doubt even he knows his exact role in the side.
The other batters are filler players who were meant to bat around these 4 with possible exception of Van Der Dussen who can be excused given he was thrust with holding the batting order together in his first World Cup.
So you can call that shitshow whatever you want. You can tell me that SA never had the quality to win the World Cup and that they have been a middling side recently, which I agree with. But it doesn’t explain why individual players couldn’t score runs when it mattered. If their best players averaged 50+ and Rabada took 15 wickets@25 but SA were eliminated, i’d be more than happy to concede that they played to their abilities and lost. But that’s clearly not what happened, it took a collective performance of playing like jokers to get in the position that they are currently on the table. But I’m sure glad you called it.
Woah, how'd he manage that? Genuinely can't remember anything Faf's done all tournament. Russie was their best batsman imo, pity he didn't get to fill his boots against SL and Afghanistan.Faf has 287 runs at an average of 57 striking at 85 with three half centuries this tournament. I wouldn't say he's exactly failed. Had a very similar tournament to Steve Smith actually - he's been good without really excelling. If you can call an average of 57 merely "good". It's Amla and De Kock who have underperformed. It's been a tournament for the openers and South Africa's openers haven't delivered.
Precisely. I didn't quite enjoy replying but eh you summed it up. Thank you.Without reading that wall of text and you can't blame for not doing so, the entire dispute can be summarised thusly:
TEC says underperforming is choking. WG says there was no choking since SA didn't lose from any winning positions. Purely semantic issue.
He scored 62 off 53 against Bangladesh and got 96 not out against Sri Lanka, which have helped his stats look good. He did score runs in the other matches but his strike rate in those was below 80, which was part of the problem for South Africa as he either ate up too much time thereby preventing a defendable score from being posted, or it left the remaining batsmen too much to do when chasing.Woah, how'd he manage that? Genuinely can't remember anything Faf's done all tournament.
LOL I read the post on my phone and for some reason I can't dish out likes on there. Either way, there you go!Give me a like you frugal ****
FWIW, I'm more with Wrongun's definition, a choke to me has always been bottling it from a winning or close-but-even position. If SA had come into the tournament with lofty aspirations, you could have argued their entire World Cup has been a choked, but people weren't even tipping them for the semis for the most part, so the tag doesn't apply imoWithout reading that wall of text and you can't blame for not doing so, the entire dispute can be summarised thusly:
TEC says underperforming is choking. WG says there was no choking since SA didn't lose from any winning positions. Purely semantic issue.
His last two games were brilliant. O/c they were basically dead rubbers....Woah, how'd he manage that? Genuinely can't remember anything Faf's done all tournament. Russie was their best batsman imo, pity he didn't get to fill his boots against SL and Afghanistan.