Proteas set lowest total ever against India

Admittedly this is a track tailor made for India's spinners. But our batting is so inept. If AB fails all is lost in this team. Amla  and Faf are suddenly lost. Duminy got some runs, but in truth should have been caught by Kohli early in his knock.
The only good thing in the test so far is Morkel bowled with lots of venom on a painfully slow wicket. This chap has been marginalized in the Steyn era....often not getting the new ball. With coaching and support he could have been Steyn's equal.

Agree Moz. Only, he is a little to erratic to be a new ball man. He is certainly one of the most dangerous in world cricket, but if that first over goes wrong it tends to set the tone for a tough start, which often determines the innings. That was one of Steyn's strengths, generally being on the money from ball one. That's probably why he's generally been used as first change. I think Morkel has all the training/coaching he could have but with those long levers one will never be as accurate as a shorter man. Also, the higher the release the less swing. The Proteas never struggle for seam bowlers. Though there was a time, when Langeveld(spelling) was the best we had and that was in my view a moment when we really struggled for good steamers. Marchant, Abbot, Morris and the new spinner all look like they can carry the torch. What annoys me is this new reliance on different teams for different formats. You end up getting into situations where an opening test batter will not play international cricket for 6-7 months. Not because he's been dropped. But because that's the space between tests sometimes. Just ask Alviro Peterson.

 "I think Morkel has all the training/coaching he could have but with those long levers one will never be as accurate as a shorter man(Garner and Ambose were around Morkels's height...so too was Walsh). Also, the higher the release the less swing."(Why is there a need for Morkel to be a swing bowler?) Again I point out West Indian greats who didn't swing the ball but were prolific wicket takers. And no, I've always believed that Morne was never pointed in the right direction, in him we had our very own Joel Garner...if only someone had......

 
See what I mean, Denny?

There's nothing about this team or SA cricket that we can be proud of. It's gone to s h i t.

They're an embarrassment.

No way I'd waste my time watching them.

 We suddenly had to replace Smith, Kallis, Prince and even Peterson...not to mention Boucher. Tough ask in India, especially with their flat teacks...AND we hadn't played proper test or first class cricket prior to the tour...still India had to prepare 3 day wickets to beat us. No shame I say. Yes, they could have done way better and the planning was poor, but disgraceful? I beg to differ.

 They were indeed prolific Denny. Ambrose is my favorite pace bowler of all time. The more teeth one saw in that smile the bigger kak you were in next ball. Pity the Windies are such shadows of their former selves now. On a side note, i played for a West Indian expat team in South London and i'll never forget those times. Great guys with great spirit and always but always smiling. I was the token whitey

And no, Morkel does not have to swing as much. As we know, his strength is good length balls climbing steeply. Chin music, as it were.

I don't know too much about the setup at international level, but if we look at the bowling coaches as well as players Morkel could have drawn knowledge from since he's been an international. It' a pretty decent list. He has literally had the best in the world at his disposal and i fail to see how he would have blundered the opportunity. Of course, it takes just one excellent bit of advice to turn from excellent into a great. Maybe he never got this. I fully accept that. I'm sure Mitchel Johnson could expand on this phenomenon a tad more.

Though Morkel, well he might, for example be just as accurate as Steyn, but because the ball is released from much higher, his length has to be a lot more accurate than Steyn's.

As an opening bat, and i'm sure you know, the nicest thing to be able to do is leave as many balls as possible early on. It settles you, and forces the bowler to bowl at you. Then, if you don't have much swing and are having to bowl at off stump as opposed to outside it, you have less chance of getting edges. Now the batter plays down the line after having been able to leave a few balls, and this settles him further.

There you have the reason why Steyn has been such a menace in the past. He had hooping outswing, and could err slightly on length while aiming at off and the ball deviates towards first slip. He forces you to play, because if you don't you'll be the monkey who left a straight one With Morkel, they can rather easily leave the ball on length and there is not much to worry about in terms of swing.

This is also why they hunted so well as a pair in the past. Two totally different styles. One of them constantly asking questions while the other(Morkel) gives you a glimmer of hope and then deceives you with very steep bounce...and pace.

I'm not taking anything away from Morne and this is just my opinion. He is, when revved up enough, probably one of the best in the world and i can't begin to imagine facing him. But in terms of new ball bowlers, the pecking order is Swing, Seam, Pace&Bounce. Hence we have gone with Steyn, Philander and then Morkel.

Question for ya...how do you rate the new boys? In order between Morris, Marchant and Abbot? Gotta say, i'm feeling very positive about them.

Yet another side note. Why on earth teams don't simply revert to one day mode when they are chasing 200 or less in the first innings i have no idea. There is no way on earth, had the Proteas looked at their innings as a 50 over that they'd have been bowled for 79. How often do we see that happen? A low score followed by an overcautious chase resulting in an even lower score.

That's the one thing that is still missing for me.You watch a test and the guys score at 5 an over and it's called fast. Yet in 50 over games teams rattle off 7 an over. T20, even more and very often for the loss of only a few wickets. Test thinking is still way to conservative and this is why i back the pink ball...because dew at night will cause batting to be easier and run chases to be much more interesting. It will partly cancel out the nightmare of batting last which i have always seen as really unfair.

*the above is, as usual, pure speculation, done by a man who should be working and not talking bollocks on here*

 Plum, there is a huge difference between a ODI track and one for tests...and a difference in the ball used...and the field placings...so no, you are barking up the wrong tree.
PS, the cherry used in India for this series are way different from balls used in the past. India used everything possible in their favour...good on them, but I do hope we have the balls to return the favour when they come to our shores in the future. 

 DdDraad. The track is different. But a very aggressive approach is still massively possible. The pitch very rarely has telling cracks on the second and third days. And even once big cracks have appeared, and even if you are playing cautiously, you still have to trust the pitch and play through the line. I believe it's way more about mindset than physics. Just my opinion.

Field placings. Well, those are largely dictated by how the batting team is approaching the game.

I didn't watch this test and dunno anything about the ball used? Do tell.

 Plum without complicating matters and I must be honest, I haven't read all of your response but this is what I would have done with Morne were I his coach......and Joel Garner is the perfect example. First I would have kept him releasing the ball at a dizzy height to take advantage of his height but the rising ball would vary from a rib tickler to a jaw breaker. To do this all he needed was to  change his length. That's enough to put the batsmen in two minds as well as forcing him to play off the back foot but as a change up, Morne needed to develop a toe cruncher(Yorker). So with his natural rising delivery forcing back foot play the unexpected toe cruncher forces the batsmen onto the front foot. Just like Steyn causes confusion with swing Morne would have caused exactly the same but from a different approach. With his speed and lift adding a third dimension to his armory he could easily have been an all-time great.

I like the idea that the ICB should do away with the toss at tests and replace it with the rule that the touring captain makes the call of who will bat first. That will stop countries to prepare pitches which favours their bowlers/batsmen. 

 Precisely denny...your points on length are excellent. We had the modern Adcock/Heine combination and decided to ignore Heine. Nobody said SA cricket is very astute.

Denny, Morne already does most of this. You can bet he knows exactly what his strengths and weaknesses are. The toe-cruncher you are talking about, again, supremely difficult at that pace and from that height and less likely to succeed without swing. You get it right and you got him trouble, you get it wrong and because it's coming from that height you get seriously punished. This then releases all the pressure and nullifies all those effort balls you used to try and set him up. In the modern game, it is not the chin high bouncer that causes the big worry anymore. Guys, especially when facing very tall bowlers just leave on length. Facing Morkel, anything that's a good length, you can leave because it's going over. It's the ball you think might hit the top of the stumps...that then hits you in the chest or squirts off the bat somewhere behind square. Exactly the same as the corridor of uncertainty outside off, just in this case it's length based. That's what he's about. Remember how Mitch Johnson tore through us and also England two years back. He was doing exactly that...only perfectly. Pity he figured it out so late in his career. It's almost impossible to set yourself against. Garner was from a totally different era. Guys didn't wear helmets, bats were thinner, pitches were much less trustworthy and pulling in front of square was a shot only managed by the very very best. Ambrose and those guys retired at the beginning of the age of pitch over-preperation. For a guy bowling the same to have the same effect as them these days...he'd regularly have to be hitting 160kms. But ok, let's assume you get to tell Morne exactly how to bowl an opening spell with a new ball. Your two balls you mentioned were the head high bouncer and the yorker. There is no way on earth can tell him to try more than one yorker an over. But cool, let's assume he'll attempt two for you. You now have four other balls...and where does he bowl those? Head high bouncers? Probably not right. You are going to want both the bouncer and the yorker to be surprise balls. So what is his stock ball? The very ball you see Morne bowling all the time. On a good length and rising, steeply rising. It's his strength. So really, aside from the yorker, he is already doing exactly as you are saying he should. Think of all the cricket you have watched in the past. Which are the guys that took wickets with yorkers? Waqar Younis, Wasim Akram and more recently Malinga. Malinga...there we go ;) Why do you think the yorker is his most effective ball? Because his point of release is the lowest of any bowler on the international circuit. Granted his bowling action is freakish. But all the best exponents of the yorker are generally bowlers with big swing. Morne doesn't have this. I'm not saying that Morne can't bowl yorkers, just that it's very difficult and also very risky. He is much more likely to take wickets playing to his strength rather than to his weakness. If he attempts the yorker more often, he'll just end up going for more runs and take the occasional wicket. If I were his coach and i was adamantly sure something should change. I'd recon he should focus more on an up and down seam. Particularly on the off-cutter part of this skill. His height and pace naturally put guys on the back foot without him having to aim at their heads. Which is good because he doesn't have to risk being cut or pulled. Then, without changing his length too much and he can even slow it up just a touch, he bowls the off cutter as his surprise ball. LBW and Bowled become serious risk for the batsman while Morne only risks a single down to fine leg or a punch/block to mid-on. He does actually already do a version of this when he goes around the wicket to left handers, going in on the natural angle...but it would be much more effective if he didnt have to change sides and bowl to lefties to achieve this. Freddy Flintoff was masterful in this regard. Unplayable even, when he got it right. Also a tall and strong bowler. I recon this would be Morne's best chance of improving. Check out some Freddy Flintoff tribute vids and you'll see what I mean. Another mofo long post...yeay :)

Watched a few videos of Waqar Younis back in the day earlier. Absolute monster that guy was. Also Shane Bond. Crying shame we never got to see him have a long unhindered career.