Third Test: England v South Africa, The Oval, July 27-31

[Arthur Crabtree]

TRJ to start in the morning I hope. I get the impression that reverting to A&B as a reflex at all times becomes a self fulfilling prophesy.

[westoelad]

For years I've been saying Toby deserves a chance. You little ripper you.

Get ready....you'll hear this once....

What a knock from Ben in those conditions. For once he justified the hype.[/quote

Has SP's account been hacked?

It was a fine innings in testing conditions but doesn't compare with his maiden 100 at Perth. That was a real proof of character.

[b]Nah, Australia were already on the victory lap and couldn't give a toss
This however was a top knock on a pitch which did things, where the situation required, and against some good bowling. He nullified philander early, which was impressive.

Really! Aussies relaxing against the Poms at home?
The crowd would lynch them.

[Arthur Crabtree]

First double barelled wicket taker for England (men) since 1910. Courtesy of Vic Marks.

[Arthur Crabtree]

R.Jones is this year's Angus Fraser?

[Arthur Crabtree]

Superb ball from Broad!

[Durhamfootman]

indeed it was

and they will go AB in the morning

[bigfluffylemon]

As such, I'm predicting something akin to the 2015 Ashes - a close series in terms of the result, but wildly seesawing results in the actual test matches, as one side's bowling attack or other gets on a roll and the other side collapses.

BFL in fact. Getting my English-in-Australia posters confused.

Thanks for the recognition AC. I was going to quote this back at myself:

This afternoon should be good for batting, so hopefully England can hang around to get the best conditions, rather than South Africa.

Just goes to show, sometimes you call 'em, sometimes you couldn't be more wrong.

The day couldn't have gone much better for England, apart from Cook missing out on his ton. Well done to Stokes and TRJ - Stokes showed some maturity here. I see even sussex couldn't fault it (hats off sussex!)

It just goes to show how little the follow-on is enforced these days that when considering what total England might try and set South Africa and when they might declare, the follow-on didn't even occur to me as an option. It does look as if Saturday is going to help the bowlers again, and then brighten up from Sunday, so maybe enforcing the follow-on wouldn't be such a bad idea. On the other hand, if Big Vern is out for Saturday as well, England might want to take the opportunity to bat on without him in South Africa's ranks (I've said it before and I'll say it again - in circumstances of genuine injury, not allowing the 12th man to bat or bowl is stupid). Of course, if Big Vern does come back and bats, he's good enough that with Bavuma at the other end, the follow-on probably won't be an option anyway.

Of course, if any team can lose from this position it's England.

[The Professor]

I don't think the follow on will be enforced. One benefit of not following on is giving Jennings and Westley a chance to have another go from a more confident position.

[bigfluffylemon]

I don't think the follow on will be enforced. One benefit of not following on is giving Jennings and Westley a chance to have another go from a more confident position.

Good point, but given the weather forecast, top order batting is likely to remain tricky on Saturday. Less so if Philander can't bowl, of course.

[Dr Cricket]

Still surprised the myth of overhead conditions affecting the ball still remains.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Curious the reputation (or lack of) of Big Vern. Since WWI (different game before then) he has the 10th best average of any bowler with 100 wickets. And the best of any SA, just ahead of the Superhuman Steyn. I look at the players either side of the player under review in the stats to get some perspective on a player's value and Vern is flanked by McG and Donald. And Philander is just ahead of Hadlee.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=bowling

Sometimes your view of a player is unbalanced by how they do against the side you watch the most. Vernon is only in his sixth Test v England, and has 22 wickets. But they are at 21, the best of any SA bowler since I started watching cricket in 1977. Steyn averages 31 yet is viewed as a demon, so maybe that factor isn't strong. But maybe too few games and probably not many SA wins.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=bowling

Maybe it's the lack of theatre in his bowling that means he doesn't get noticed at much.But in stats v England since 77, he is flanked by McG and Alderman, and the latter wasn't an X-factor bowler but has a bigger reputation among ENgland followers than Big Vern (admittedly he took 100 Ashes wickets). These are bowling verages against England since 1977, minimum 20 wickets.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=bowling

[Arthur Crabtree]

Who knew Roger Harper averaged under 18 against England! Who ever thought, oh no, they're taking Holding/Roberts/Ambrose/Bishop/Garner/etc off and bringing on Roger Harper?

[Arthur Crabtree]

Bavuma survives a drop by Stokes off Broad.

Quiet start.

[bigfluffylemon]

Curious the reputation (or lack of) of Big Vern. Since WWI (different game before then) he has the 10th best average of any bowler with 100 wickets. And the best of any SA, just ahead of the Superhuman Steyn. I look at the players either side of the player under review in the stats to get some perspective on a player's value and Vern is flanked by McG and Donald. And Philander is just ahead of Hadlee.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=bowling

What lack of? I'd rate him as SA's best bowler, easily. Very, very dangerous.

Was about to respond disparagingly to bhaves' comment, then I did a bit of googling and realised that he's right. The evidence for the ball actually swinging more when it's humid is very thin on the ground. It mostly seems to be human psychology/confirmation bias at work (and perhaps is harder to bat because the light is poorer. It certainly was yesterday).

What's really interesting is that this is such accepted wisdom in the cricket community that I never thought to question it until just now. Astonishing that there could be so little actual evidence for something held to be common knowledge. Thanks bhaves.

For those interested, see:
http://theconversation.com/why-we-think ... esnt-46587
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-18262145

[Aidan11]

No wickets in the first 50 minutes.

This is the tail we can't bowl out.