Solid and unspectacular from both teams so far.
If NZ can be around 170-ish with wickets in hand and 10 overs to go they may well post something for SA to think about.
But will the wicket start misbehaving for their bowlers? they will certainly hope so but no real evidence so far (at least as far as I can glean from the text updates)
Tyler gone, two new batsmen at the crease, if SA can tighten the screws now rather than relax, it could be alright…
P.S. alright for us 
P.P.S 164/5 after 40 overs; 4.1/over
Hmmm, they would’ve like to kept those two intact but they do have strong batting in the tail.
I reckon 240 is on here, (including a couple of 20+ overs at the end just to perk the crowd up)
188/6 with Oram coming in 4 overs to go. NZ look 50 runs light to my mind. 250 odd may be defensible but anything less looks a hard ask.
I agree with Lisiate. Strangely though, RSA have looked a bit thin batting in this tournament. I wonder why Boucher isn’t there.
if RSA bin it from here, they will have choked like dogs.
New Zealand scrabble 221/8. Surely the Cricinfo commentator can’t be right to say NZ is the only team not to be bowled out by SA this World Cup?
It is true, that may be suggestive of a stable pitch. In which case this is gettable and NZ are 30 short of par.
Yup - it’s true…
West Indies 222 (47.3 ov)
Netherlands 120 (34.5 ov)
England 171 (45.4 ov)
India 296 (48.4 ov)
Ireland 141 (33.2 ov)
Bangladesh 78 (28 ov)
New Zealand 221/8 (50 ov)
Sweet, NZ has 50 more than England’s winning score - game on!
mla has to go out and buy a lotto ticket. He couldn’t do that again if he tried.
He was their form batsman as well.
South Africa need to avoid choking and they will win.
New Zealand’s dual spin attack has worked well for the first 5 overs. Alan Donald must be proud of his charges.
Harsh call from cricinfo: “11 South Africans on one side. Allan Donald on the other. Not sure who will choke first.”
Finely balanced here. A couple of quick wickets and it all changes.
RSA may be in some trouble here. After this pair, the batting is pretty lower end of all rounder. (Lower end in batting skill).
oooo! another one gone.
A lot on the shoulders of ABDV here. At this score NZ were only 2 down. I don’t think overs will come into it so the pressure is purely on the batsmen to keep safe, the runs will come.
No clear favourite but I think NZ may be slightly ahead.
Ah! as I was typing ABDV goes, NZ in the driving seat
And once again, RSA are trying to demonstrate why their cricketing haka consists of two hands to their own throats, followed by the Heimlich Maneuver.
… and the Commentater’s Curse award goes to…
probably me as I am now confidently predicting a NZ victory.
Cue - rearguard action from the plucky RSA tail enders.
I know that this thread is for discussing the Cricket WC, so I hope you all don’t mind my questions. But I figure visitors in this thread are most likely to be able to answer them.
Here’s a strategy question:
Suppose a team is chasing a large run total and have a high RRR to win. Also, unfortunately, they’ve lost most of their best batters and only have one good batter left. The remainder of the lineup is all bowlers who are marginal or terrible with the bat. The good batter is swinging for the fences unleashing 4’s and 6’s in a desperate attempt to score runs. On the 6th ball of the over, he hits a ball that can easily be 2 runs. In practice, would the batters stop running after getting just 1 run? I would think that this makes sense, since he’ll then be batting again starting the next over. If they scored the 2 runs, the poor batter would be batting when the next over starts.
Question 2: Same example, but the 6th ball of the over is hit for a 4 or 6. Does the batting team have the option of just taking 1 run, in order to have the next over start with the good batter.
Question 3: If the answer to Question 2 is “no”, then does the fielding team ever intentionally allow the 6th ball of the over to roll past a boundary in order to avoid having the good batter leadoff the next over?