I'm not going to engage with you if you're going to resort to these sort of acidic and insulting comments. You are so far off the mark it's laughable. My view has nothing to do with adulation or worshiping of any description.

I simply applaud good leadership and excellent performances in sport and I try not to play personalities. When it's the other way around, I'll comment accordingly.

Your hatred of Clarke is obvious and it's there for all of us to see. The truth is that you're carrying on like a sore loser - take a good look in the mirror.

Well done on even bothering to respond. I wouldn't have.

Needless to say, one who calls Clarke a "soft whimpish sort" after Clarke was 92 not out and facing the sort of barrage he got from Morkel is showing where their comprehension skills are at.

Needless to say, one who calls Clarke a "soft whimpish sort" after Clarke was 92 not out and facing the sort of barrage he got from Morkel is showing where their comprehension skills are at.

It was a really gutsy knock from Michael (judging on from what I did see and from the subsequent reports) Even his harshest critics should be giving credit where it's due.

Edited March 3, 201411 yr by Macca

Yep, Alex deserves a good go at it. We've asked him to bat in a tough spot for a newcomer and that needs to be taken into account when we're appraising him. He's shown a bit and his shots through point and cover have looked classy.

Agree with the rest of your post. Siddle will play Test cricket again ... he has dropped a yard in pace but he should be able to get that back with all the help the modern day sportsperson can get these days. In many ways he's an ideal 3rd seamer and opportunities will come his way again (especially with the rate of injuries to our fast bowlers that's been happening in last few years)

Watto at no.6 ... I like it. It effectively means that if the selectors want to look at an Henriques, Mitch Marsh or maybe even a Maxwell, the replacement for Watson subsequently just slips into the same batting spot (or thereabouts)

We're in a great position to push for victory with Steyn out. I thought that the South Africans might have had the upper hand going into this Test but we've come out and won the 1st day quite convincingly. So far, so good.

yep all good macca.

we desperately need another bat in the team.

smith needs another 15/20 innings to be classed as a test batsmen,[leading for a long time ]

but i hope doolan cuts the mustard as we have a weak batting order with a very slim future at this stage,so a no3 may keep us in the game along with smith for the next 6 years.

I'm not going to engage with you if you're going to resort to these sort of acidic and insulting comments. You are so far off the mark it's laughable. My view has nothing to do with adulation or worshiping of any description.

I simply applaud good leadership and excellent performances in sport and I try not to play personalities. When it's the other way around, I'll comment accordingly.

Your hatred of Clarke is obvious and it's there for all of us to see. The truth is that you're carrying on like a sore loser - take a good look in the mirror.

I don't hate clark at all. I want him to do well.

but I want him to stop looking down on traditional Aussie ways. he's too good for those ways. because of his upbringing & driven by his insecurities. from his youth.

its his elitist thinking that makes people feel uneasy about his ways. thats why he's unpopular.

I have no personal feelings about him. I don't like the way the Australian captain represents the Australian test team...

& I have no personal issue with you Macca, except you do seem to idolise national leaders, & defend them to the hilt. they are nothing more than Just people. like all of us.

Edited March 2, 201411 yr by dee-luded

I don't hate clark at all. I want him to do well.

but I want him to stop looking down on traditional Aussie ways. he's too good for those ways. because of his upbringing & driven by his insecurities. from his youth.

its his elitist thinking that makes people feel uneasy about his ways. thats why he's unpopular.

I have no personal feelings about him. I don't like the way the Australian captain represents the Australian test team...

& I have no personal issue with you Macca, except you do seem to idolise national leaders, & defend them to the hilt. they are nothing more than Just people. like all of us.

:wacko: .

yep all good macca.

we desperately need another bat in the team.

smith needs another 15/20 innings to be classed as a test batsmen,[leading for a long time ]

but i hope doolan cuts the mustard as we have a weak batting order with a very slim future at this stage,so a no3 may keep us in the game along with smith for the next 6 years.

If we take the view that there isn't a player who has had a line ruled through their name, we do have a number of alternatives (batsmen) moving forward. Khawaja, Hughes, Henriques, Maxwell or Marsh may get more chances (it's pleasing to see that Maxwell is going to play County cricket this season)

In shield ranks there are any number of batsmen who have got a bit of potential (none seem to busting down the door but that possibility does remain)

The selectors will need to replace Rogers sooner or later but Chris may go on for a few more years yet. With improved training methods and what not, professional sportspeople are continuing on past their traditional age of retirement. The bowling ranks are looking good with Starc, Cummins and a few others waiting in the wings. Muirhead, Boyce and Ahmed are plying their wares with their leg spin and all 3 show a bit of promise.

I don't hate clark at all. I want him to do well.

but I want him to stop looking down on traditional Aussie ways. he's too good for those ways. because of his upbringing & driven by his insecurities. from his youth.

its his elitist thinking that makes people feel uneasy about his ways. thats why he's unpopular.

I have no personal feelings about him. I don't like the way the Australian captain represents the Australian test team...

& I have no personal issue with you Macca, except you do seem to idolise national leaders, & defend them to the hilt. they are nothing more than Just people. like all of us.

According to your logic, anyone who thinks that Clarke is a good skipper is somehow thrown into the category of "Idolising National Leaders" It's just utter nonsense.

I've no interest in arguing this out any further - there's no point. Don't quote me again - on any matter.

Edited March 3, 201411 yr by Macca

An excellent session with the skipper getting his 27th test century and remaining not out at lunch. Smith a bit stuff to miss out on the ton but we're well on the way to a 500+ score and we have the capacity to punish a Steynless attack.

I've been overseas for a month, which put me in the South African time-zone, allowing me to follow this series whilst awake (win), but taking me away from regular internet, preventing me from discussing it on Demonland (loss).

FWIW, thought we were superb in the first Test, batting well to negate their (admittedly sub-par) bowling and then bowling pretty well. Second Test was to be expected, at some stage they were going to get it right and someone other than AB was always going to make runs.

Selection-wise I didn't think we made the right choices for this Test. Watson had to come in, we lacked the fifth bowling option in Port Elizabeth, but IMO it should have been Doolan to go, not Marsh. To put such a huge level of faith into Marsh to bring him into the side for the first Test, and for him to make a fantastic 100, but then to be dropped one bad Test later, makes no sense to me. Why invest so heavily in him only to ditch him at his first failure? It's insane that a century-maker and borderline man-of-the-match in one Test can be dropped merely two innings later. As for his pair, though his first innings dismissal was awful, he got beaten in the second innings by a pretty damn good ball. He also wasn't the only batsman to fail, and it's not like Doolan's 5 off 40-odd was any better than Marsh's duck.

The worse decision, and the one much more likely to impact the side, though, was dropping Siddle for Pattinson. For one, that's not like-for-like. Siddle and Bird are more similar, and Pattinson is more like Harris. If they wanted to bring in Pattinson, Harris should have been dropped (he's not bowling well at the moment anyway, he's wasting the new ball). If they wanted to drop Siddle, they should have brought in Bird. Now we have three new ball bowlers, and no longer-spell old ball bowler. Siddle wasn't taking a lot of wickets but he was still bowling well enough to hold up an end. Pattinson hasn't played first class cricket since Lord's, this Test is not the place to be re-starting his career. I'm genuinely worried about taking 20 wickets with this attack.

Fantastic batting by Warner, Clarke and Smith, with Watson looking good so far and potentially helping us speed up towards 500. But the real test is going to come when we need to get Amla, du Plessis, de Villiers and Duminy out, twice.

I don't hate clark at all. I want him to do well.

but I want him to stop looking down on traditional Aussie ways. he's too good for those ways. because of his upbringing & driven by his insecurities. from his youth.

its his elitist thinking that makes people feel uneasy about his ways. thats why he's unpopular.

I have no personal feelings about him. I don't like the way the Australian captain represents the Australian test team...

& I have no personal issue with you Macca, except you do seem to idolise national leaders, & defend them to the hilt. they are nothing more than Just people. like all of us.

You'd do well to cease posting your views about Clarke. They are nonsensical at best, and downright insulting at worst.

I reckon Marsh was the victim of the unwritten rule of last in, first out. Lehmann mentioned that the batting order in this particular Test was the originally preferred order for the 1st Test (Watson obviously didn't play in the 1st Test so that put paid to those plans)

Remembering that Doolan seemed to be next in line for a spot (he was put on standby for the 5th Ashes Test in Sydney) I might have kept Marsh as well but I can understand the selectors thinking. I also remember reading somewhere that they were going to try and give Doolan a decent run at it. We can at least say that a new player has been given a decent chance.

The reasoning behind Siddle being dropped was that he'd dropped his pace (once again, according to Lehmann) However, I reckon he dropped a yard of pace quite some time ago. He's still managed to fill the 3rd seamers role more than adequately so it could be that Pattinson's training form got him over the line. Lets hope Patto does bowl well as we're almost certainly going to need him to.

Meanwhile, Clarke is now 149 not out. He sure knows how to convert 3 figures into something a lot bigger. A great knock - memorable, in fact.

Edited March 2, 201411 yr by Macca

I reckon Marsh was the victim of the unwritten rule of last in, first out. Lehmann mentioned that the batting order in this particular Test was the originally preferred order for the 1st Test (Watson obviously didn't play in the 1st Test so that put paid to those plans)

Remembering that Doolan seemed to be next in line for a spot (he was put on standby for the 5th Ashes Test in Sydney) I might have kept Marsh as well but I can understand the selectors thinking. I also remember reading somewhere that they were going to try and give Doolan a decent run at it. We can at least say that a new player has been given a decent chance.

The reasoning behind Siddle being dropped was that he'd dropped his pace (once again, according to Lehmann) However, I reckon he dropped a yard of pace quite some time ago. He's still managed to fill the 3rd seamers role more than adequately so it could be that Pattinson's training form got him over the line. Lets hope Patto does bowl well as we're almost certainly going to need him to.

Meanwhile, Clarke is now 149 not out. He sure knows how to convert 3 figures into something a lot bigger. A great knock - memorable, in fact.

That's probably the case Macca, that Doolan was meant to be in before Marsh was. I don't agree with it, though Marsh did himself no favours with his pair (6 ducks from his last 11 innings, what an unbelievable record). I'd have kept Marsh before Doolan, but so be it.

I'm with you, Siddle dropped that pace a while back. I don't buy that as a fair reason. Harris should have gone before Sids IMO.

Fantastic from Clarke (and Smith, too). Raining now though, with our score on 7/494. When play resumes after tea, Clarke may decide to declare and start bowling. We need 20 wickets in just over 3 days, we can't bat forever. If we bat on, surely they just hit out for a bit (Harris and Pattinson can both smoke the ball decently enough, and of course Clarke's still there).

I've been overseas for a month, which put me in the South African time-zone, allowing me to follow this series whilst awake (win), but taking me away from regular internet, preventing me from discussing it on Demonland (loss).

FWIW, thought we were superb in the first Test, batting well to negate their (admittedly sub-par) bowling and then bowling pretty well. Second Test was to be expected, at some stage they were going to get it right and someone other than AB was always going to make runs.

Selection-wise I didn't think we made the right choices for this Test. Watson had to come in, we lacked the fifth bowling option in Port Elizabeth, but IMO it should have been Doolan to go, not Marsh. To put such a huge level of faith into Marsh to bring him into the side for the first Test, and for him to make a fantastic 100, but then to be dropped one bad Test later, makes no sense to me. Why invest so heavily in him only to ditch him at his first failure? It's insane that a century-maker and borderline man-of-the-match in one Test can be dropped merely two innings later. As for his pair, though his first innings dismissal was awful, he got beaten in the second innings by a pretty damn good ball. He also wasn't the only batsman to fail, and it's not like Doolan's 5 off 40-odd was any better than Marsh's duck.

The worse decision, and the one much more likely to impact the side, though, was dropping Siddle for Pattinson. For one, that's not like-for-like. Siddle and Bird are more similar, and Pattinson is more like Harris. If they wanted to bring in Pattinson, Harris should have been dropped (he's not bowling well at the moment anyway, he's wasting the new ball). If they wanted to drop Siddle, they should have brought in Bird. Now we have three new ball bowlers, and no longer-spell old ball bowler. Siddle wasn't taking a lot of wickets but he was still bowling well enough to hold up an end. Pattinson hasn't played first class cricket since Lord's, this Test is not the place to be re-starting his career. I'm genuinely worried about taking 20 wickets with this attack.

Fantastic batting by Warner, Clarke and Smith, with Watson looking good so far and potentially helping us speed up towards 500. But the real test is going to come when we need to get Amla, du Plessis, de Villiers and Duminy out, twice.

You'd do well to cease posting your views about Clarke. They are nonsensical at best, and downright insulting at worst.

Ii agree with you re selection.

I have no qualms art all about what i said about clark.

I haven't liked the way he has represented the Aussies, in his role as captain. he skippers well re positional changes.

and so many of us have felt embarrassed by him as skipper along the way.

he's starting to get a bit better, with a long way still to go.

this innings he's faced a barrage at the body, its about time he had to face the chin music, instead of batting amongst the spinners down the order.

so, with clark its embarrassment all round.... thats why he's just so popular I guess. that he needs media help to ramp up his popularity. almost as popular as Hird. just sayin

Terrible, terrible post. Just... Wow. Terrible.

Ii agree with you re selection.

I have no qualms art all about what i said about clark.

I haven't liked the way he has represented the Aussies, in his role as captain. he skippers well re positional changes.

and so many of us have felt embarrassed by him as skipper along the way.

he's starting to get a bit better, with a long way still to go.

this innings he's faced a barrage at the body, its about time he had to face the chin music, instead of batting amongst the spinners down the order.

so, with clark its embarrassment all round.... thats why he's just so popular I guess. that he needs media help to ramp up his popularity. almost as popular as Hird. just sayin

Your ridiculous arguments on Clarke have all the intellectual rigour and honesty of person who argues "I'm not a racist but...".

It's ironic that you claim embarrassment of others when it appears a fundamental characteristic amongst others that you seem to lack in spades.

If had even a modicum of facts and some basic research you would have seen the countless times that Clarke has come to the crease after an early collapse and saved the day under pressure.

And no wonder you have a focus on Hird...delusional, dishonest and totally bereft of the facts.

Needless to say, one who calls Clarke a "soft whimpish sort" after Clarke was 92 not out and facing the sort of barrage he got from Morkel is showing where their comprehension skills are at.

A barrage of hits to the body, medical treatment overnight for the bruises, and not out 161.

The very antithesis of 'soft and wimpish'.

first time ive ever seen this.small advantage to the aussies.

starts to rain and the players rush off the field.

normally worldwide the staff run on the oval,before the players even have left and cover the wicket from rain.

not in capetown,after 5 minutes of rain they finally get the first cover on amid a howling gale,it gets blown off numerous times as i sit and watch rain drops continue to hit the pitch and give it somne new life.especially when it starts to sweat under the covers.

definately small advantage to the team bowling today.

first time ive ever seen this.small advantage to the aussies.

starts to rain and the players rush off the field.

normally worldwide the staff run on the oval,before the players even have left and cover the wicket from rain.

not in capetown,after 5 minutes of rain they finally get the first cover on amid a howling gale,it gets blown off numerous times as i sit and watch rain drops continue to hit the pitch and give it somne new life.especially when it starts to sweat under the covers.

definately small advantage to the team bowling today.

That's probably helpful to us, given we're 7/494 after two days on this pitch.

If there was 5 minutes of rain on the pitch and the rain was heavy, I hope the pitch sweats overnight under the covers.

I expect the Australians to bowl from the start of the day.

It's big effort to get 20 wickets in three days on a good batting strip.

If there was 5 minutes of rain on the pitch and the rain was heavy, I hope the pitch sweats overnight under the covers.

I expect the Australians to bowl from the start of the day.

It's big effort to get 20 wickets in three days on a good batting strip.

thats what i was alluding to.

was amazed that clarke and harris actually left the field immediatley .

thought they would have stood thier ground until the umpire told them to get off.

chappelli would have done this ,firing up the pitch.

Smith gone very early again. Opposition captains just can't catch a break at the moment in the face of Harris and Johnson. I'd like to see them destroy Smith mentally like they did to Cook - it looks as though it may have already happened. He's faced 77 balls for the series.

Patto has bowled some good deliveries but not enough dot balls. He's just starting back again of course so he gets a bit of grace. Still looks a good batting wicket - 3 wickets per session today and we can push for victory on the last 2 days (both the last 2 days have been extended by at least half an hour*)

*Another half an hour can also be added to the end of each day if insufficient overs have been bowled - makes for a possible 2 x 7 hour days of actual play.

There's another one - Johnno!

Edited March 3, 201411 yr by Macca

Patto has bowled some good deliveries but not enough dot balls. He's just starting back again of course so he gets a bit of grace. Still looks a good batting wicket - 3 wickets per session today and we can push for victory on the last 2 days (both the last 2 days have been extended by at least half an hour*)

*Another half an hour can also be added to the end of each day if insufficient overs have been bowled - makes for a possible 2 x 7 hour days of actual play.

There's another one - Johnno!

3/111 with the two guns at the crease, De Villiers and Amla are the keys.

3/111 with the two guns at the crease, De Villiers and Amla are the keys.

Great bowling from Harris. Might have had 2 in that over!

Both Harris and Patto are getting a bit of reverse swing by the looks of it.

4 wickets before lunch - excellent result.

Edited March 3, 201411 yr by Macca

Well done on even bothering to respond. I wouldn't have.

Needless to say, one who calls Clarke a "soft whimpish sort" after Clarke was 92 not out and facing the sort of barrage he got from Morkel is showing where their comprehension skills are at.

He's finally showed up under full provocation, to stand up & be counted; its about time after all these years.

this was a gutsy knock, even if sometimes he turned his head sside on instead of watching the pill.

but congratulations on a fine captains knock, one that should, after Warners fine lead, set us up for a win from here.

now its up to mitch & patto.

According to your logic, anyone who thinks that Clarke is a good skipper is somehow thrown into the category of "Idolising National Leaders" It's just utter nonsense.

I've no interest in arguing this out any further - there's no point. Don't quote me again - on any matter.

No. they're your words. and your logic.

he's partway to a good skipper. he runs the onfield like good oil. especially now in the past 10 - 12 months since boof came onboard.

but his history speaks for itself with trouble with other past players in the sheds, and after the days play. thats is a part of his record.

imo he now is leaning from boof, but he'll never be a really relaxed character from what I see. However, he is now getting on better with the players, & the team is functioning again, & Winning.

he's gettin better at the skipper areas he was weak at.

this is KEY to the redevelopment of this team. & I go so far as to say that if he didn't improve his ability to get along with the other players, then he would shortly have retired from injury.

Now we are a force in world test cricket again.

And look at the timing of Warne'y coming onboard this week.... for the next short version game, whilst still playing this last test match of this series. before we take on the Africaans in one day. I wonder if Warney has already had some mojo rub off on the team so far.

Edited March 3, 201411 yr by dee-luded

Go away and bother someone else with your inane ramblings.