The South African declaration today, what did it actually show/prove?

[MenInG]

Still trying to understand.

Was it someway of staying not out or was it taking away from Australia the satisfaction of bowling out SA?

I am no stats expert but have their been other such declarations on the first day of a Test match?

 

[IAJ]

Maybe Du Plesis wanted to take 4-5 wickets and put preassure on he homeside?

 

[Abdullah719]

To take advantage of the pink ball under lights I suppose. Didn't pay off but might see similar declarations in future in D/N Tests.

 

[Convict]

It happens a lot in the day night shield games

 

[MenInG]

To take advantage of the pink ball under lights I suppose. Didn't pay off but might see similar declarations in future in D/N Tests.

Do we see Pakistan ever doing this? I mean who knows the last wicket could have got them another 100 runs?

 

[Chief Destroyer]

To take advantage of the conditions. You'd much rather bowl more overs at night than get 30 more runs and bowl midday under the sun.

 

[MMHS]

Still trying to understand.

Was it someway of staying not out or was it taking away from Australia the satisfaction of bowling out SA?

I am no stats expert but have their been other such declarations on the first day of a Test match?

Many, many, many in past - last I can recall is Clarke in IND. In Old days, when cricket was played on uncovered wickets, often Captains declared instantly after a rain break to use the "sticky dog". In County, this was very common to declare after 100 overs of Day 1 (105-110 overs/day was standard then) after the bonus points were settled (which was based at the score of 100 overs).

 

[MenInG]

Many, many, many in past - last I can recall is Clarke in IND. In Old days, when cricket was played on uncovered wickets, often Captains declared instantly after a rain break to use the "sticky dog". In County, this was very common to declare after 100 overs of Day 1 (105-110 overs/day was standard then) after the bonus points were settled (which was based at the score of 100 overs).

I am sorry but been following Test cricket since 1970s and I just do not recall a declaration on the 1st day of a Test match.

 

[Adijazz1706]

I am sorry but been following Test cricket since 1970s and I just do not recall a declaration on the 1st day of a Test match.

Clarke in India last time round, inti did it once. Can't remember any more right now.

 

[King Kong]

I am sorry but been following Test cricket since 1970s and I just do not recall a declaration on the 1st day of a Test match.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2013/engine/match/598813.html

 

[MMHS]

I am sorry but been following Test cricket since 1970s and I just do not recall a declaration on the 1st day of a Test match.

Clarke declared at 240/9 or so in 2013 at Hyderabad (I guess). I Think, Lloyd once declared 8 or 9 down to bowl 7 overs at Day end sometimes in 80s, but can't recall details. May be sorting 1st innings declaration for <300 scores can give a clue - but not necessarily it's at the end of Day 1, as interruptions might have taken the game to following days.

 

[MenInG]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2013/engine/match/598813.html

WOW!

Here is a comment from a friend of mine.

"If it was two tail enders then find, but FAF WAS STILL BATTING. Serve them right if they lose the test by 1 or 2 wickets. The extra 10-25 runs could make the difference. Ridiculous."

 

[Abdullah719]

Do we see Pakistan ever doing this? I mean who knows the last wicket could have got them another 100 runs?

We tend to be more conservative in general. Plus, the last wicket is likely to fall before the thought of declaration even crosses our minds....

 

[Abdullah719]

Interesting - seems like Faf also took Warner's unavailability into account.

South African captain Faf du Plessis says outsmarting Australia and David Warner with a sudden declaration was down to luck.

Du Plessis' shrewd move prevented Warner from opening the batting in Australia's innings late on Thursday's opening day of the third Test in Adelaide.

The Proteas skipper was 118 not out, and his side 9-259, when he chanced upon a conversation between umpires and Warner.

The Australian batsman had just returned to the field after a stint off for a period of time getting treatment on an injured shoulder.

Under cricket's rules, a player must be on the field for the same time they spent off it before being able to bowl or bat again - in Warner's case, he was caught short.

"I listened to the conversation he had with the umpires - one ear talking to the batter, one ear listening to him," du Plessis told reporters.

"And then I heard he had six minutes left before he could bat again so I thought 'let's have a crack'."

http://wwos.nine.com.au/2016/11/24/21/29/warner-prevented-from-opening-batting

 

[Sanzcool]

I don't think SA would have declared if they weren't 2-0 up

 

[Saurav]

Has it actually worked for anyone?

 

[moghul]

Was a bold decision, only a "mentally strong" captain with self belief could make. Was a perfect time to get couple of cheap wickets to put Aussies under pressure, particularly when a 20 year old debutant facing the best opening bowler in the world in dying moments of the day.

 

[Chrish]

Has it actually worked for anyone?

Has it ever been done before?

Anyways it's not a bad decision.. Only 10 overs left and bowling under lights there was a very good chance of getting couple of cheap wickets.

 

[Chrish]

And only reason he has done it is cause series is already won.. Doubt any captain would wager it if series was still alive.

 

[Saurav]

Has it ever been done before?

Anyways it's not a bad decision.. Only 10 overs left and bowling under lights there was a very good chance of getting couple of cheap wickets.

Clarke did it in India in 2013.Didnt get the wicket he wanted and we won by an innings

 

[soso_killer]

my thinking is that he probably wanted two/three quick wickets before the close of play ( Warner being the prized scalp).
I don't have enough knowledge about the pink ball or day night Test to argue otherwise. A lot has been said about a cluster of wickets falling during the last session. I'm not sure what conclusions or conclusive conclusions can be made based on a history of only 3 day/night Tests

 

[Junaids]

Still trying to understand.

Was it someway of staying not out or was it taking away from Australia the satisfaction of bowling out SA?

I am no stats expert but have their been other such declarations on the first day of a Test match?

He declared thirty minutes too late, the last hour of the final session has better visibility and batting conditions than the hour before.

The idea is that it's better to be 220-8 declared and then reduce the opposition to 45-4 than 259-9 declared followed by 15-0.

The problem is that skippers keep declaring too late!

 

[Junaids]

Still trying to understand.

Was it someway of staying not out or was it taking away from Australia the satisfaction of bowling out SA?

I am no stats expert but have their been other such declarations on the first day of a Test match?

BTW Pakistan needs to know that the sun sets an hour earlier at Brisbane.

If you bat first, you have to score fast and declare at 6-220 in 60 overs at the Dinner break. It's more a ground for Sharjeel and Babar Azam and even Umar Akmal.

The extra hour of darkness means that at Brisbane the final hour is quite easy to bat in. Plus December is often stormy at night anyway.

If you bat too slowly you risk being 220 all out to the new ball in around 85 overs, after which Warner would attack the next day.

 

[Junaids]

Still trying to understand.

Was it someway of staying not out or was it taking away from Australia the satisfaction of bowling out SA?

I am no stats expert but have their been other such declarations on the first day of a Test match?

WOW!

Here is a comment from a friend of mine.

"If it was two tail enders then find, but FAF WAS STILL BATTING. Serve them right if they lose the test by 1 or 2 wickets. The extra 10-25 runs could make the difference. Ridiculous."

Your friend is unfamiliar with Pink Ball cricket Down Under.

South Africa will lose now, because they declared too late to knock over the Aussie top order batsmen in twilight.

Both the slogging and the declaration came at least thirty - and arguably sixty - minutes too late. And then they bowled too short and wide.

 

[Amjid Javed]

I am sorry but been following Test cricket since 1970s and I just do not recall a declaration on the 1st day of a Test match.

Are you after something more sinister here?

 

[last_knight]

BTW Pakistan needs to know that the sun sets an hour earlier at Brisbane.

If you bat first, you have to score fast and declare at 6-220 in 60 overs at the Dinner break. It's more a ground for Sharjeel and Babar Azam and even Umar Akmal.

The extra hour of darkness means that at Brisbane the final hour is quite easy to bat in. Plus December is often stormy at night anyway.

If you bat too slowly you risk being 220 all out to the new ball in around 85 overs, after which Warner would attack the next day.

Pakistan don't have to explore these dynamics because it doesn't suit them.


Pak win the toss and will bowl first.
And if Aussies declare at 60 overs mark, we are used to see Pakistan batting starting from 2 down.

Even if Pakistan bat first, it's not rare to see their lower middle order out scoring top order.

And Misbah ul Haq 'The Captain' is a strange strange phenomenon so we can't apply normal SOPs here.

 

[Major]

Faf du plessis decision to declare was a poor decisio

Decisions like these shows how he is not a good captain.

Just to declare because to allow warner bat later is naive, and now look, his team had to pay for it.

There was one wicket left and he should had batted, where instead he declared to act cunning, but now he made a fool out of himself

 

[Abdullah719]

Decisions like these shows how he is not a good captain.

Just to declare because to allow warner bat later is naive, and now look, his team had to pay for it.

There was one wicket left and he should had batted, where instead he declared to act cunning, but now he made a fool out of himself

Match isn't over yet.

 

[Major]

Match isn't over yet.

Its not about match being over, even if sa wins, the decision was stupid.

And i cant believe posters here actually defend it and are trying to give a reason for it.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Decisions like these shows how he is not a good captain.

Just to declare because to allow warner bat later is naive, and now look, his team had to pay for it.

There was one wicket left and he should had batted, where instead he declared to act cunning, but now he made a fool out of himself

What an awful post. "NOT A GOOD CAPTAIN" Mate his captaincy has been the biggest reason they have won the series. What do you think would've happened. South Africa would've added a record 200 more for the last wicket? A wicket would've fallen soon anyway. It was an excellent decision and maybe he should've declared earlier. I guess some people are too used to the Misbah way of playing it safe even if it ends up costing you in the end. How did he make a fool out of himself? It was just good batting and credit should be given to Australia

 

[Abdullah719]

Its not about match being over, even if sa wins, the decision was stupid.

And i cant believe posters here actually defend it and are trying to give a reason for it.

That's somewhat subjective.

And you can't simply say he "isn't a good captain" for one decision, completely ignoring the rest of the series.

 

[Major]

That's somewhat subjective.

And you can't simply say he "isn't a good captain" for one decision, completely ignoring the rest of the series.

These one decisions are what makes a captain look bad.

And this wasnt some small decision, it was a major decision he took which he made himself look foolish

 

[Gilly]

Faf's declaration was neither here or there, it could have produced results or it could have been a waste of time. It wont play a major role in the match and was clearly an attempt to put pressure on the Aus team. Captains should always be looking for ways to swing a match and sometimes it will pay off and other times it wont produce the effect he is looking for. Dammed if you do and dammed if you don't scenarios mostly.

 

[Major]

Faf's declaration was neither here or there, it could have produced results or it could have been a waste of time. It wont play a major role in the match and was clearly an attempt to put pressure on the Aus team. Captains should always be looking for ways to swing a match and sometimes it will pay off and other times it wont produce the effect he is looking for. Dammed if you do and dammed if you don't scenarios mostly.

This is ridiculous.

No one could obviously predict how many runs would had ben scored, but the last wicket existed which meant it could had been utilized.

 

[Gilly]

This is ridiculous.

No one could obviously predict how many runs would had ben scored, but the last wicket existed which meant it could had been utilized.

And no one could have predicted if SA would have taken any Aus wickets. If SA had of picked up 2-3 Aus wickets before the close of play then it would have been a masterstroke. Faf took a punt that by declaring at that point it time could have put them in a good position if they took a couple of wickets.

He weighed up the possibility of scoring a few extra runs against getting a couple of cheap wickets, had he kept on batting then I'm sure there would be a lot of posters suggesting he missed an opportunity to put the Aus batting under pressure by declaring and having a few overs at them late in the day.

 

[Major]

And no one could have predicted if SA would have taken any Aus wickets. If SA had of picked up 2-3 Aus wickets before the close of play then it would have been a masterstroke. Faf took a punt that by declaring at that point it time could have put them in a good position if they took a couple of wickets.

He weighed up the possibility of scoring a few extra runs against getting a couple of cheap wickets, had he kept on batting then I'm sure there would be a lot of posters suggesting he missed an opportunity to put the Aus batting under pressure by declaring and having a few overs at them late in the day.

Again look at the score at declaration. 260ish. Thats not even a score to be declaring on, that so on day 1.

These theries of making them bat later in the day and all makes sense when you have a good lead and are on a different day instead of opening.

Besides faf himself admit that the decision Ito declare happened due to warner not being able to open. And while they got him out early, australia has crossed scores with a lead making faf look like a ridiculous captain

 

[aloo paratha]

I don't think it was a good idea declaring when they're only at 259. They were 9 down anyway and legit could've smashed the ball and maybe gotten 30 more runs. If he declared when they were at 300 or even more if they scored quicker then I would've been fine with it.

 

[Major]

Was a bold decision, only a "mentally strong" captain with self belief could make. Was a perfect time to get couple of cheap wickets to put Aussies under pressure, particularly when a 20 year old debutant facing the best opening bowler in the world in dying moments of the day.

I dont understand why you people jump around on such ridiculous. Decision soo ridiculous that people end up giving fancy namea like mentally strong or what not.

According to statistics this was one of the lowest score to declare an innings without any time being wasted.

 

[Major]

Your friend is unfamiliar with Pink Ball cricket Down Under.

South Africa will lose now, because they declared too late to knock over the Aussie top order batsmen in twilight.

Both the slogging and the declaration came at least thirty - and arguably sixty - minutes too late. And then they bowled too short and wide.

So south africa should had declared with a score of 150?

Because hey scoring runs isnt important, just putting the opposition under light pressure is more important?

 

[Junaids]

So south africa should had declared with a score of 150?

Because hey scoring runs isnt important, just putting the opposition under light pressure is more important?

No, at 68 overs at 220-8.

Then they could have bowled in twilight,in which they took three wickets the following evening.

 

[Dark Magician]

Decisions like these shows how he is not a good captain.

Just to declare because to allow warner bat later is naive, and now look, his team had to pay for it.

There was one wicket left and he should had batted, where instead he declared to act cunning, but now he made a fool out of himself

He's won a test series in Australia. What has your smart captain won for his country in Australia? Who's the bigger embarrassment now?

 

[James]

After SA being in danger of getting bowled out for under 100 and then to declare 250, as a kick in the teeth at the end of a long day I thought it was magnificent.

 

[Major]

And they end up losing. Faf is to be blame for this childish tactic.

the last partnership did get them 39 runs in last 6 overs. And faf could had taken more responsibility to bat.

 

[Dark Magician]

And they end up losing. Faf is to be blame for this childish tactic.

the last partnership did get them 39 runs in last 6 overs. And faf could had taken more responsibility to bat.

Your cricket knowledge is awful mate. If you don't like Faf say so but to cone here and hammer him on a decision that most people agree us neither here or there is kinda appalling.

 

[Major]

Your cricket knowledge is awful mate. If you don't like Faf say so but to cone here and hammer him on a decision that most people agree us neither here or there is kinda appalling.

his decision was one of the reason why they loss.

He had a chance to score runs, he gave it away because of some stupid warner crap.

Declaring with wickets in hands makes you look life a fool

 

[DRsohail]

very bad decision ,,,simple,,,

 

[Buffet]

These kind of decisions either look great or stupid. Faf captained the side very well and won series in Aus. Time to move on.

 

[Major]

These kind of decisions either look great or stupid. Faf captained the side very well and won series in Aus. Time to move on.

move on because we are afraid to admit that he did a stupid move.

never have been such moves proven to be great, and Micheal Clarke is the best example of it.