Actually I was thinking of Cicero for posting this
just before RSA go ahead and lose that very pair of batsmen. It was uncanny.
-
Yes, I have seen it happen that a batting pair will turn down a second run to get someone on strike.
-
No
-
I doubt it, although I have seen fielders not bother to run in to collect a stroke so that there is an easy single to be taken…
Why yes, I’m avoiding watching the game just at the moment 
:mad: :mad:
Usually it happens, yes. This is called “stealing the strike.”
Nope, even if the batsmen cross.
Never seen it happen, although I’m sure in very exceptional situations (say if the last batsman is at the other end and the good batsman hits a ball to the boundary) it might have happened before.
Q1: If they’re thinking straight, yes.
Q2: No - a boundary is a boundary.
Q3: If they’re thinking straight, yes.
The situation you describe is a recognised tactical problem. The senior batsman has the job of “farming the strike” - making sure that he faces the majority of the balls bowled. In essence, this consists of not hitting, or turning down, singles for the first 4 balls of an over, without letting too many dot balls (i.e. non-scoring deliveries) mount up. Taking a single on the fifth or ideally sixth ball of an over is phase 2. If the lesser batsman finds himself in there is an incentive to either get a single early in the over, or failing that block out a whole over. (Or try to blast boundaries, which will be riskier).
Similarly the fielding side will respond to this: offering easy singles to the recognised batsman while keeping men back on the boundary, just to get him off strike. Then they close in for the last couple of balls to stop the single. Conversely, they’re usually quite happy to let a bowler try to smack boundaries, because 9 times out of 10 he won’t do it more than twice but they will move the men in the field up to stop singles.
An hour ago, there was no way on Og’s green earth that SA could lose the match.
If SA lose, they deserve the tag of Chokers. It should be placed on the team kit. If they win from here, well then they are champion material.
South Africa is choking like dogs.
F*ck you, and I agree completely… 
Come on Daniel Vettori lead these guys home. I suggested years ago that we bribe him to become an Aussie and surprisingly everyone agreed.
New Zealand are now favourites for this game. And I am starting to think Sri Lanka or Pakistan in the final. I just can’t warm to India.
I’ve still got Sri Lanka to win this whole thing. They’re the most balanced side left in the competition. I think their bats would have the measure of the Indian bowling attack and their bowlers would have the measure of the Pakistan batting attack.
ETA: 8 down now.
I should have put a $20 down on Sri Lanka when I was in Vegas last month…yes, I actually found a casino that was taking bets on the CWC. I can just about foresee the winner of India-Pakistan being totally spent. And I can see Murali taking the last wicket with his last ball in international cricket.
Yeah that is why sport is better than real life - stuff like that actually happens.
Goodbye $50. I will stick to horses from now on.
Never back anything that can talk back to you.
Wow, that is a battering at this stage of the competition.
Considering RSA pedigree coming into this, that might be more severe than the walloping the Windies got. We knew they were suspect.
Well done to the Kiwis. A good honest team. Semi Finals for the 6th time.
RSA; well what can I say that has not been said on so many nights over the last 20 years.
Losing by 49 runs from a position of 108-2 is a shocking result for South Africa.
Good luck to NZ - apparently Vettori set some excellent fields and they bowled to a tight plan. There are, of course, two teams in every match - and NZ jumped all over SA when they got the chance.
But still 108-2 with 26 overs to play and only 222 to get? Horrible, horrible result.
My original prediction was that slow and steady would win the day, it did! Just not the team I thought would deliver it though.
Full marks to NZ though. They were a bit shy of par but there was no panic, they applied consistent pressure and let SA make their own mistakes. The TMS feed reckons that a lot of those wickets were given away rather than being forced out.
I shall have to catch the highlights later, then…roll on England! come on the glory boys, come on Straussy, Come on Trotty! come on…whoever is still left.
Right, but aren’t the problems that Sri Lanka will have more trouble with the Indian batting and the Pakistani bowling? Or am I misunderstanding?
I don’t think Sri Lanka will struggle too badly with India’s batting, even with its depth, given the quality of their bowling attack.
Mendis currently has the best econ rate of all the regular bowlers in the tournament (at least as far as I can tell from my limited messing with Statsguru). Malinga is more expensive but is averaging 18 for the tournament, so is taking wickets. Murali is Murali. The Sri Lankan bit part bowlers are having good tournaments. As a result, I think that Sri Lanka should be able to set a high total that these bowlers can defend - or chase whatever these bowlers give them, as given their quality, it is likely to be gettable.
Similarly, I don’t think Pakistan have the bowling to knock over the Sri Lankan batsmen cheaply - looking at the stats, SL have a number of batsmen who have performed better than Pakistan’s over the course of the tournament. So then it becomes a question of whether the SL bowling can prevent a breakout performance from the Pakistani batsmen, as, notwithstanding Afridi’s tournament with ball in hand, I see their bats being able to get the required runs.