The moment the WC semi was lost

Ball 40.3....Elliott is metres out of his ground as Rossouw gathers quickly and under arms the ball. De Kock is at the stumps and has glanced to his right to see where the runner was. The ball comes in about a foot to the right of the stumps off a bounce about five feet in front of de Kock.

De Kock totally misses the ball which goes under his gloves. The commenatator trying to be nice says "the ball skidded on the wet surface" . But it was well up off the deck and with an under arm throw why not expect a lowish bounce?

It was poor. High school level stuff.  If we cant expect our wicket keepers to gather in ball like that we can't win WCs.

As the commentator said in the next sentence "if de Kock had caught that he was gone". And that was Elliott. With him gone our chances would have been very, very good. Why we can't just look these things in the eye and admit what really happened beats me....but we have the same two posters trying to spin the incident. So I'm setting the record straight.

No I am not blaming one name. I'm not even blaming any name, least of all de Kock who was so obviously overawed by the situation and shouldn't have been there. Rossouw's other poor throw to de Villiers was a loser. Behardien was set to repair the de Kock damage, but Duminy lost his bearings. Steyn bowled a truly pathetic last over. Duminy's over that went for 12 just as we were getting a grip on things and the fact that de Villiers had to take over, didn't help.

But the fact remains if de Kock performed his duties....simple catching of the ball and breaking of the wicket......we would likely be in the WC final. You two groupies are so pathetically dishonest, such classical examples of loser mentality, that you can't even admit that.

"It was unexpected from two brilliant fielders. Then, in the 40th over with 27 required from 16 balls, Elliott tried to complete an impossible two and should have be dismissed for 66. De Kock, standing up to the stumps, failed to collect an accurate throw from Rossouw to fritter another chance" 

From Criclife.com

I watched that de Kock miss again last night and not only was the ball skidding in, de Kock was hampered by standing behind the stumps, where he should have been. He had to lean over the stumps and try take a ball that was skidding through......it re-enforced the stupidity in even questioning or blaming de Kock for that miss.

To say he cracked under the pressure is insulting

Moz yet again you get it totally wrong   

I agree with both Moz and Owen on De Kock.

I put all the blame on Behardien regarding that dropped catch. There are a few close-up photos of this incident and it is clear that his eyes were closed when he made contact with the ball. That is an easy way to drop a ball. His contact with Duminy occurred after he missed the catch and the ball has already landed on his leg. 

de Kock will be one of those players that bats 5 or 6 in tests and opens in ODI's.

He was back in form during that Sri Lankan knock......was not beaten against NZ.....given our run rate was a little down given how well Boult and Southee were bowling......de Kock premeditated that charge down the wicket with a view to playing an attacking shot......it did not come off.

De Kock bungled the throw Dave. We have Aussie's throwing down wickets side on....and here you are making excuses for a wicket keeper who can't even catch the ball.

But honestly I always thought chaps like you and Moronic wanted to win. I realize all you want is to watch youngsters frolicking in the sun. Total loser think.

 Here is a professional assessment of de Kock's keeping......this was just bound to happen. So we play this kid and exit the CWC

Miss and run

De Kock had an unhappy night. In the pressure-filled final over, the New Zealand batsmen were running for everything, including when they missed the ball. Twice they snuck through for a bye when De Kock missed the stumps. On the second occasion not only did De Kock miss, but the bowler Dale Steyn did the same with his throw at the non-striker's end. The mistake brought Elliott on strike who hit the match winning six on the following ball"

De Kock does his job, we play Oz on Sunday. And that's the truth.

Moz the only loser on here is you.......for if you are anti a player you just fucking lie about what actually happened......had the throw been a good one, de Kock would have taken it with ease.....it was misdirected and low, with him positioned behind the stumps, with stumps in front of him, he had no choice but to stretch and hope for the best - FACT.......your pathetic little article says nothing.

We lost the semi not because of de Kock, we lost because Steyn and Philander let us down with the ball......try waking up to this very fact.......for its obvious to all. 

de Kock's failure was his batting, much like it was Amla's.........Steyn and Philander failed with the ball......and there was some poor fielding that added to the stuff up. You keep banging on about the de Kock miss, what about AB's huh, what about the JP and Berhardien? But you are stupid enough to blame de Kock alone, much like that pathetic take on JJ losing us the AB's test in his best test for the Boks......that had to be the biggest load of shit I have ever read, closely followed by this load of rubbish.

But the main culprits for the loss were Steyn and Philander and that is a FACT. You really have no idea do you?

No he got to the wicket in plenty of time.....looked up the wicket to see where the runner was......then missed the ball.

Why did he miss the ball? Because he was standing very upright for an underarm, bouncing throw. He never got down to the ball or properly behind it. School boy mistake.

It is true Steyn was poor and Amla was poor. But there was no selection controversy about those players.

There were controversies about only Philander and de Kock. And it's ironical that de Kock had the opportunity, despite all that had gone before, to settle things. Sadly he couldn't perfo rm the basic role of a wicket keeper.

Um you cant get down to a ball when you are standing behind the stumps, they happened to be in the way, helloooooo

Had the ball been directed straight at the stumps and bounced up nicely he would have effected the run out with ease.

What happened was that de Kock was behind the stumps as he should have been, the throw was under arm and misdirected to the right. Given the wet conditions, it skidded through........with de Kock hampered by the stumps and the ball being off target to the right and not bouncing, he had no option but to react as he did with a sweeping action of the arms and hope for the best. Those that play the game would be familiar with  these circumstances.......you of course are completely oblivious to this very art and in the process expose your ignorance of the finer arts of the game.

You are once again completely off the mark as you so often are.

Basic role of a wicket keeper.....judging by your comments you don't have the faintest clue what that is 

So a wicket keeper can't get down behind the stumps....gee, I guess they don't stand up and crouch to spin bowling.

Dave this is another JJ moment.....and laughable defence of a favourite who let us down, as I predicted in both cases. 

How do you get down low if the stumps are in front of you and you are leaning over them trying to collect a misdirected throw that keeps low. Geez Moz have you ever played the game?

As for JJ, well you will have us believe that he was the only one who missed Barrett.......much like your take on de Kock.......a load of utter rubbish 

You don't have to lean over the stumps to take a throw wide of the stumps. This is perhaps the most unusual excuse you have ever produced Dave. He never got down to the ball....missed it.....game over.

Um, hellooooo.....its the keepers job to be behind the stumps in receipt of the ball.........he would have expected a well directed throw bouncing up at the level of the stumps......it was anything but.

So Moz, where should de Kock have been standing as a keeper?

He could not get down to the ball as the stumps were in the way.

Wow....a cricket education is in need here 

Pakie you don't have a bloody clue, firstly a keeper will always react to any ball heading behind the stumps, its called a reaction.....bloody hell you and Moz have clearly NEVER played the game.......and secondly what exactly does the last 2 photo's show?

Sweet stuff all......what a pathetic attempt at making a pointless point.

Pathetically weak and devoid of the facts or evidence to disprove my take on exactly what happened