SA seek to shed the chokers’ tag

Kiwis bolstered by Vettori’s return against Proteas.


Afp March 24, 2011

DHAKA:


South Africa will start as firm favourites to win their quarter-final against New Zealand –provided they can overcome their trademark knock-out blues.


In five previous tournaments, the Proteas have crashed out in ways that left their fans dumb-founded. They can hardly be blamed for the semi-final loss in 1992 – a crazy rain-rule left them needing 21 runs off one ball. South Africa went into the quarter-finals in 1996 unbeaten in the league, only to find Brian Lara smash a century to cause a 19-run defeat in Karachi.

In 1999, a disastrous run-out involving Lance Kluesner and Allan Donald when just one run was needed to win resulted in a tie, allowing Australia to scrape through to the final on superior net run-rate. A comedy of errors followed at Durban in 2003 as Mark Boucher defended the final ball when South Africa needed one more run to win the rain-affected match against Sri Lanka.

South Africa surrendered once more in the 2007 semi-final against Australia when they were shot out for 149 in 43.5 overs to allow Australia an easy win.

Graeme Smith’s men have been one of the most dominant sides in the tournament, topping their group. But the six-run loss to England chasing 172 was another example of their brain freeze, even though the demons were exorcised by surpassing India’s 296.

Smith was delighted to ram the ‘chokers’ word down the throats of his critics after the India win. “I’m happy that our guys challenged the perception,” said the captain.

South Africa know New Zealand are no pushovers. The Kiwis will be boosted by the return of captain Daniel Vettori, who missed the last two matches with a knee injury.

“I should be okay to get through batting and bowling, it is just the running around that is hampering me a little bit,” said Vettori.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 24th, 2011.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ