Communication failure cost SA the match

When Klusener did come in, he once again almost won the match for his country with two fours and a six, but I believe South Africa lost it in the end because they panicked, not because of any tactical blunder. That and the lack of communication between Klusener and Allan Donald shaped theeventual outcome of the match.

With four balls to go and one run to get, Steve Waugh brought the field in, which is as it should be, but at this point, there was absolutely no discussion between the batsmen. They should have decided which single to go for instead of running blindly for everything. I can only say that it was pressure which created this mistake on their part; after all, it is easy for us to judge, but no one can imagine the kind of pressure such matches generate.

Now, the South Africans have got to regroup on the journey back home, and what a long journey it is going to be. They are going to relive every moment of the match and the agony must be gut wrenching. After all, the rivalry between these two great teams is something like the one between Pakistan and India. They have played 39 matches so far, with 19 wins apiece and a tie. It can8217;t get any closer than that.

For all that, South Africa will be thinking back to the World Series tournament, when Australia literally pinched the trophyfrom them. History repeated itself at Edgbaston as Australia once again got out of jail. They must feel as though they are dreaming. Throughout the match, it was impossible to predict a winner, and I spoke to a number of people who8217;ve been watching cricket for years who all said they had seen nothing like it before.

In the midst of all this, spare a thought for Herschelle Gibbs, who must be blaming himself bitterly for the catch he dropped off Steve Waugh8217;s bat at Headingley. I think there is a valuable lesson here for the youngster, and that is never to take anything for granted.

Coming back to Edgbaston, I know most people will blame Donald 8212; in a knee-jerk reaction 8212; for not taking the life-or-death single. However, I feel he didn8217;t run because of the mix-up which immediately preceded this ball. If you will recall, Donald barely escaped being run out as he set off even as Darren Lehmann was gathering the ball to throw it in, while Klusener wasn8217;t interested at all. So when Klusener drove the ballstraight down the pitch and called for the single, Donald had his eyes on Michael Bevan, the fielder. In any case, when the ball is driven straight, there is always a chance that the bowler may go across and retrieve it, so Donald may have been right to have his eye on the ball. In the end, I think both batsmen are equally to blame for not having talked things out.

South Africa8217;s exit was also a result of their inability to play attacking spinners. Their domestic tournaments do not produce this breed and whenever they are faced with the likes of Saqlain, Mushtaq Ahmed and Warne, they tend to withdraw into a shell.

As for the tag of chokers8217; that they seem to have earned for themselves, I think it was a ploy devised by Steve Waugh to apply pressure on them. After all, they have played in more finals than any other team, and they are bound to lose some. Calling them chokers on that basis is a little unfair, because they have the best record against most teams.

As for Australia, they should be concernedat the fact that not enough players are playing well, with Lehmann, Gilchrist and Reiffel being specially disappointing, and the team is relying too heavily on the Waugh twins and Warne. Against Pakistan at Lord8217;s, Warne will not pose much of a threat, because first, the Lord8217;s pitch is not really conducive to spin and second, the Pakistanis are some of the best players of spin in the world. Glenn McGrath will be the danger man for Australia, and if Pakistan play him well, they should win. For all that, my money is firmly in my pocket!

Gameplan Syndication