South Africa v New Zealand, 1st Test, Cape Town, 3rd day January 4, 2013

South Africa's confusing review

Plays of the day from the third day of the first Test between South Africa and New Zealand in Cape Town
  shares 13

Non-review of the day

When Robin Peterson got one to spin past Dean Brownlie's outside edge, it could easily have gone on to hit his stumps, but it didn't. Instead the ball just passed him and was collected by AB de Villiers. Bizarrely, though, a bail had fallen off and South Africa sniffed something. The umpires decided to review it, and it was revealed that all that had transpired was that de Villiers had taken the bails off with his gloves while Brownlie was well back in his crease. He would not have been out even if de Villiers had broken the stumps with the ball, but it must have been another heart-in-the-mouth moment for the centurion.

Breakthrough of the day

South Africa's attack was being accused of lacking intensity and ideas, and of continuing to play the "terrible cricket," Alviro Petersen referred to on the second day. But at the arrival of the new ball, they had a plan. Graeme Smith put a fielder at deep point to wait for Brownlie's cut: a shot he had relied on throughout his innings and played well along the ground. With the extra bounce, Brownlie could not keep it down and picked out the fielder to end New Zealand's stiff resistance.

Stance of the day

At lunch, Trent Boult was spotted heading to the nets for a few throw-downs ahead of his time at the crease. Hopefully, he was not practicing what he displayed for the first delivery he faced. A fired-up Dale Steyn dished up a short ball which many lower-order batsmen would have tried to get out of the way from. Boult walked across his stumps towards the ball and ended up almost taking it on the shoulder.

Wicket of the day

Chris Martin is considered a walking wicket, and this time he managed to be dismissed without facing a ball. Martin decided to take on Dale Steyn's arm, and turned for a second run after Boult had managed to get bat on ball. Martin was sent back but could not return in time and Steyn's throw was easily collected by de Villiers, who issued last rites. It could be one of Martin's more ignominious ducks in one of New Zealand's more embarrassing defeats.

Firdose Moonda is ESPNcricinfo's South Africa correspondent

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY on | January 4, 2013, 16:09 GMT

    While it is not pretty to watch, minnows (and low ranked teams) must play regularly against the higher ranked teams. This is the only way for them to improve. You don't get better by playing only those with a similiar ability. While NZ will probably never dominate world cricket, they will eventually get through this and become reasonably competitive again. Every team suffers a slump in form from time to time, every nation has conflict between players and the selectors/management/boardroom from time to time. So don't beat yourself up too much NZ. I'm a Saffer and while I'm enjoying our current status at number one, I know we'll eventually be toppled by someone else. Being number one is actually overrated (unless you dominate for a decade like AUS & WI) - I'd prefer to just be consistently ranked in the top three and always be competitve in every game/series we play.

  • POSTED BY ROXSPORT on | January 5, 2013, 14:12 GMT

    To all the Kiwi bashers --- What NZ really need now is a home series against India & they will be back among the runs, wickets & of course, winning ways. Those in the do for NZ Cricket must work urgently towards such a series.......!!!!!

  • POSTED BY gothetaniwha on | January 4, 2013, 23:59 GMT

    Hey English Cricket hopefully by the time Eng get to NZ we should have a couple more Saffers in the team Cachopa , Wagner Munro , Watling and a couple of Aussies Ronchi, Browlie ,Hmm we are starting to develop players like England - Import them, hey can we have our NZ born player back if u don't bring him out . can't think of his name , (our English boys yer right )

  • POSTED BY teviz1 on | January 4, 2013, 22:54 GMT

    We'll be right once the coach and captain departs.

  • POSTED BY on | January 4, 2013, 21:24 GMT

    Anyone else remember 1999 (I think), when NZ beat England to consign them to last place in the test rankings? I do EnglishCricket.

  • POSTED BY SurlyCynic on | January 4, 2013, 18:05 GMT

    richardror: Of course using one match as an example is 'silly', but it's worth doing when 'EnglishCricket' uses one match to claim that NZ shouldn't be playing test cricket and are unworthy of facing England! Quite staggering after what happened in the UAE and at the Oval last year.

  • POSTED BY on | January 4, 2013, 17:28 GMT

    Whilst I'm English through and through, Englishcricket, that view is insulting to the heritage and history of NZ cricket. The Kiwis are a mess at the moment, & can't afford to have 2 of their best unavailable. How that coach is still in a job is beyond me, particularly when John Wright was in the job previously. World cricket needs NZ to be competitive, which it still can be at home. England will win but they should do in NZ because conditions aren't as alien for them as anyone else. also, I have great respect & sympathy for Ross Taylor but he should still be available to play. Turning down chances of playing for your country can only lead to regret

  • POSTED BY Flashdakota on | January 4, 2013, 17:14 GMT

    @englishcricket Mate, I'd keep my mouth shut if I were you. You have a very short memory.

  • POSTED BY richardror on | January 4, 2013, 16:57 GMT

    @SurlyCynic - using one match as an example is silly, in my opinion. England (like South Africa) have been consistently top three for the last two or three years. Everyone has poor matches, however New Zealand don't seem to be having many good performances as of late. I do believe New Zealand should continue playing test cricket, which of course they will. Hopefully some youngsters will come through and a new era for New Zealand will begin.

  • POSTED BY Kirstenfan on | January 4, 2013, 16:03 GMT

    That's such a confused headline - it's not South Africa's confusing review, as South Africa didn't review it...hard to understand your writing sometimes / often

  • POSTED BY on | January 4, 2013, 16:09 GMT

    While it is not pretty to watch, minnows (and low ranked teams) must play regularly against the higher ranked teams. This is the only way for them to improve. You don't get better by playing only those with a similiar ability. While NZ will probably never dominate world cricket, they will eventually get through this and become reasonably competitive again. Every team suffers a slump in form from time to time, every nation has conflict between players and the selectors/management/boardroom from time to time. So don't beat yourself up too much NZ. I'm a Saffer and while I'm enjoying our current status at number one, I know we'll eventually be toppled by someone else. Being number one is actually overrated (unless you dominate for a decade like AUS & WI) - I'd prefer to just be consistently ranked in the top three and always be competitve in every game/series we play.

  • POSTED BY ROXSPORT on | January 5, 2013, 14:12 GMT

    To all the Kiwi bashers --- What NZ really need now is a home series against India & they will be back among the runs, wickets & of course, winning ways. Those in the do for NZ Cricket must work urgently towards such a series.......!!!!!

  • POSTED BY gothetaniwha on | January 4, 2013, 23:59 GMT

    Hey English Cricket hopefully by the time Eng get to NZ we should have a couple more Saffers in the team Cachopa , Wagner Munro , Watling and a couple of Aussies Ronchi, Browlie ,Hmm we are starting to develop players like England - Import them, hey can we have our NZ born player back if u don't bring him out . can't think of his name , (our English boys yer right )

  • POSTED BY teviz1 on | January 4, 2013, 22:54 GMT

    We'll be right once the coach and captain departs.

  • POSTED BY on | January 4, 2013, 21:24 GMT

    Anyone else remember 1999 (I think), when NZ beat England to consign them to last place in the test rankings? I do EnglishCricket.

  • POSTED BY SurlyCynic on | January 4, 2013, 18:05 GMT

    richardror: Of course using one match as an example is 'silly', but it's worth doing when 'EnglishCricket' uses one match to claim that NZ shouldn't be playing test cricket and are unworthy of facing England! Quite staggering after what happened in the UAE and at the Oval last year.

  • POSTED BY on | January 4, 2013, 17:28 GMT

    Whilst I'm English through and through, Englishcricket, that view is insulting to the heritage and history of NZ cricket. The Kiwis are a mess at the moment, & can't afford to have 2 of their best unavailable. How that coach is still in a job is beyond me, particularly when John Wright was in the job previously. World cricket needs NZ to be competitive, which it still can be at home. England will win but they should do in NZ because conditions aren't as alien for them as anyone else. also, I have great respect & sympathy for Ross Taylor but he should still be available to play. Turning down chances of playing for your country can only lead to regret

  • POSTED BY Flashdakota on | January 4, 2013, 17:14 GMT

    @englishcricket Mate, I'd keep my mouth shut if I were you. You have a very short memory.

  • POSTED BY richardror on | January 4, 2013, 16:57 GMT

    @SurlyCynic - using one match as an example is silly, in my opinion. England (like South Africa) have been consistently top three for the last two or three years. Everyone has poor matches, however New Zealand don't seem to be having many good performances as of late. I do believe New Zealand should continue playing test cricket, which of course they will. Hopefully some youngsters will come through and a new era for New Zealand will begin.

  • POSTED BY Kirstenfan on | January 4, 2013, 16:03 GMT

    That's such a confused headline - it's not South Africa's confusing review, as South Africa didn't review it...hard to understand your writing sometimes / often

  • POSTED BY SurlyCynic on | January 4, 2013, 15:40 GMT

    EnglishCricket: At least NZ made us lose 8 wickets before declaring our first innings, unlike England at the Oval where we only lost two in the test.

  • POSTED BY Rajasekar_P on | January 4, 2013, 14:41 GMT

    I think New zealanders are not interested in cricket. What a tough competition is it? Where is Taylor, Vettori, Ryder

  • POSTED BY EnglishCricket on | January 4, 2013, 14:25 GMT

    Teams like New Zealand shouldn't be playing against such opposition if those the top 8 teams can't take it to the 4th day. Can't believe our English boys will be facing them home and away straight, should give many of our new guys a chance and I can still guarantee we will still win. New Zealand are a minnow who wins once in a blue moon just look at the stats of the past 2 years in either ODIs or Tests.

  • POSTED BY EnglishCricket on | January 4, 2013, 14:25 GMT

    Teams like New Zealand shouldn't be playing against such opposition if those the top 8 teams can't take it to the 4th day. Can't believe our English boys will be facing them home and away straight, should give many of our new guys a chance and I can still guarantee we will still win. New Zealand are a minnow who wins once in a blue moon just look at the stats of the past 2 years in either ODIs or Tests.

  • POSTED BY Rajasekar_P on | January 4, 2013, 14:41 GMT

    I think New zealanders are not interested in cricket. What a tough competition is it? Where is Taylor, Vettori, Ryder

  • POSTED BY SurlyCynic on | January 4, 2013, 15:40 GMT

    EnglishCricket: At least NZ made us lose 8 wickets before declaring our first innings, unlike England at the Oval where we only lost two in the test.

  • POSTED BY Kirstenfan on | January 4, 2013, 16:03 GMT

    That's such a confused headline - it's not South Africa's confusing review, as South Africa didn't review it...hard to understand your writing sometimes / often

  • POSTED BY richardror on | January 4, 2013, 16:57 GMT

    @SurlyCynic - using one match as an example is silly, in my opinion. England (like South Africa) have been consistently top three for the last two or three years. Everyone has poor matches, however New Zealand don't seem to be having many good performances as of late. I do believe New Zealand should continue playing test cricket, which of course they will. Hopefully some youngsters will come through and a new era for New Zealand will begin.

  • POSTED BY Flashdakota on | January 4, 2013, 17:14 GMT

    @englishcricket Mate, I'd keep my mouth shut if I were you. You have a very short memory.

  • POSTED BY on | January 4, 2013, 17:28 GMT

    Whilst I'm English through and through, Englishcricket, that view is insulting to the heritage and history of NZ cricket. The Kiwis are a mess at the moment, & can't afford to have 2 of their best unavailable. How that coach is still in a job is beyond me, particularly when John Wright was in the job previously. World cricket needs NZ to be competitive, which it still can be at home. England will win but they should do in NZ because conditions aren't as alien for them as anyone else. also, I have great respect & sympathy for Ross Taylor but he should still be available to play. Turning down chances of playing for your country can only lead to regret

  • POSTED BY SurlyCynic on | January 4, 2013, 18:05 GMT

    richardror: Of course using one match as an example is 'silly', but it's worth doing when 'EnglishCricket' uses one match to claim that NZ shouldn't be playing test cricket and are unworthy of facing England! Quite staggering after what happened in the UAE and at the Oval last year.

  • POSTED BY on | January 4, 2013, 21:24 GMT

    Anyone else remember 1999 (I think), when NZ beat England to consign them to last place in the test rankings? I do EnglishCricket.

  • POSTED BY teviz1 on | January 4, 2013, 22:54 GMT

    We'll be right once the coach and captain departs.