The Corridor

Recent Posts

PLEASE NOTE The Corridor is moving grounds at the moment. This is the old site, and comments have been disabled. Check back tomorrow and we should be safely ensconced at our new home


‘We are good enough to handle the pressure’

By Will 5 years ago, at the end of December Leave a comment on this post

‘We are good enough to handle the pressure’

Just what is Ray on about this time?

“There’s no such thing as a flat wicket, just as there’s no such thing as an easy catch.”

“It takes a lot more to get this South African side down”

“We see 250 runs in 80 overs for one wicket as a positive.”

“The way Kallis is playing, he can chase the target [150-400] himself.”

“I think Strauss’s youth adds value to the package”

Ray Jennings, ladies and gentlemen…

Tags: , , |

5 Responses to “‘We are good enough to handle the pressure’”

  • Dave F wrote:
    December 29th, 2004 at 10.27 am

    Yeah, vintage Jet Jennings. The thing is he seems to be able to take a motley crew like Easterns, made up of castoffs and also-rans from other provinces and turn em into winners. So he isn’t just mouth. It is widely believed that the season Easterns won the provincial chmpionship, his quickies were on a bonus for hitting batsmen on the head. One victim of the incentive scheme was the Rt Hon A Donald, sconed by Andre “Psycho” Nel. This caused quite an uproar.

    At least you can’t accuse Ray of betraying a lack of confidence in his team …

  • Will wrote:
    December 29th, 2004 at 10.31 am

    Hi Dave - good to get a South African’s perspective. I heard about Jenning’s incentive he gave to Nel - didn’t he break down in tears when he managed to hit “White Lightening” Donald? Sure I read something to that effect. I really don’t feel Jennings is the right man for SA Cricket at the moment - his aggression seems at odds to what they need, which is encouragement. I mean - last night he publicly admonished Boje’s tactics!

  • Dave F wrote:
    December 30th, 2004 at 9.00 am

    The funny thing is the players swear by him. He’s like one of those strict dads who has you walking on air when he gives you a pat on the back now and again. They also love him because he gets up the authorities’ nose, which they don’t dare do. As you know, it is very hard to make cricketers follow any sort of game plan: they are a bit like two-year-olds and need to be told over and over again. Ray gives them the fear, which works wonders with the memory. I must admit they were definitely suffering ADD the day the English openers went berserk. They came out and bowled properly yesterday, but by then it was a bit too late.

    I think we may lose now. Confidence has been low for some time. The UCB bears a lot of the blame for interfering and buggering about with selections. I hate losing to the Poms. I’m off to see the Newlands test next week, so I hope we do get the draw here.

    Nice title for a b log, BTW.

  • Will wrote:
    December 30th, 2004 at 10.21 am

    My concern with SA is their resiliance - they seem to have lost that never-say-die attitude. In Cronje’s era, they used to turn around Tests much as England has done in this one. Under Smith, they’re excellent when they have a sniff but they very quickly go back on the defensive if the sense it’s going away from them.

    So, no suprise Dave, you hate losing to the poms! How do you rate them, as a SA supporter?

  • Dave F wrote:
    January 2nd, 2005 at 9.43 pm

    I am not as sure as the pundits that they are definitely worth the No 2 spot. Their 2004 victories are mostly over W Indies and New Zealand. Not world beaters. When we were rated No 2, everyone said we had to do it against the Aussies, India, etc: compete against the toughest. And it wasn’t long before we slipped. Our failure to win 3-1 in England, when we gave it back to them at the Oval after forging a winning position, had a devastating effect on morale. I want to see how England respond if we win this test going away, as we might. 450 is going to make life very difficult. This is all a longwinded way of saying I reserve judgment on England for now: the log is meaningless because it includes Bangladesh and Zim, not to mention the now rollover WI.

    I will say England have a very good bowling attack, an excellent allrounder and a few strong batters. And they have a lot more fight these days. Our batters are clearly very low on confidence. Rudolph was unrecognisable today (Jan 2), inevitably succumbing to the inside edge. What gives? Dunno.


    • « Sessions won Test 2 Eng v SA | Main | Who last beat Australia in a Test match? »