I think our glorious leader would far rather be remembered for his achievements as the captain of South Africa than for the money he earned! KP, however, is a mercenary soul (as evidenced by his agitating to appear in the IPL), so may take some solace in earning more money, albeit without experiencing the career highs that Smith has. Incidentally, Tuesday, are you too young to remember the days when Australia fielded teams including Mark Taylor, David Boone, Merv Hughes and Shane Warne? All of whom tended towards chubbiness to a far greater degree than Smith does. Fortunately, their legacy will not be forgotten, as it looks like Shane Watson is going to continue the long line of tubby Aussie cricketers.

Tuesday, calling it mismanagement of young players is a bit harsh. The players choose money over international cricket, and if they're not likely to break into the SA team anytime soon, who can blame them? I notice that many Aussie-coached Poms have been picking up medals in these Olympics, to the point where Britain has won more golds than Australia thus far. Maybe you should stop 'mismanaging' your coaching staff?

Emerlander, you're right, it's not purely down to captaincy. I think Indian teams sometimes just lack a bit of mental strength, although it's amazing how they tend to raise their game when they feel that they have something to prove (as in Australia at the beginning of the year). Maybe a slightly less hectic schedule would help. I think that captaincy may be an issue that does affect India though; particularly as so many of the current team are previous captains. Any new captain is likely to be intimidated by that, and that could prevent him from really asserting himself. The 'Fab Four' and Kumble have been playing together for so many years that it's hard to see any of them really shaking things up.

Actually, I think Punter's a better captain than a lot of people on this forum give him credit for. The way he handled a young, relatively inexperienced attack (McGrath aside) at the last World Cup was nothing short of brilliant. He was also far more creative in his use of the powerplays than the other captains, and certainly out-thought Smith in both games between SA and Oz. He's obviously worked with some talented players down the years, but, for me, Australia remain a team greater than the sum of their parts, for which Punter deserves credit. India, to name one obvious example, have a team which, man for man, could probably match Australia in most departments. Yet they have never been able to maintain the same level of sustained dominance.

Tuesday, there's no doubt that the traditional, private schools in SA do produce a disproportionately large percentage of our various national teams. However, they have also been known to offer large bursaries and other incentives to promising players from government schools! For example, I doubt Herschelle Gibbs would have attended Bishops had he not been a fantastic sportsman. In South Africa the sporting divide is mainly along cultural and, sadly, racial lines rather than 'class', as in Britain. Black kids will tend to play soccer, white kids cricket, rugby and (more recently) hockey. Fortunately these lines are starting to become more blurred.

I agree with Arrogant on this one; cricket should be kept out of the Olympics (as should soccer, tennis and all the other sports where an Olympic gold does not constitute the pinnacle of achievement). There would also be logistical difficulties. Preparing a decent pitch in a non-cricketing country and playing an entire tournament on one pitch could also cause problems (even with T20 matches). And, let's face it, cricket hasn't exactly proved successful in expanding it's market down the years. With the exception of Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe, the test-playing nations are the same as they were 50 years ago. I just can't see cricket being much of a success as an Olympic sport, unfortunately.

Tuesday, the fact is that 99% of the SA population do not care about any of the Olympic sports outside of a 3 week period every four years! Thus a professional career in any sport outside the big 3 of cricket, rugby and football is extremely difficult. Even a guy like Roland Schoeman, who won 3 medals in Athens, has had well-documented financial problems due to a lack of sponsorship, etc. I'd imagine that being a professional swimmer in Australia is considerably less challenging...

Both the articles on Indian cricket are interesting, well done Tristan and JonHenry! The issues are probably linked though; India's heavy schedule would take a heavier toll on the older players, and Kumble also has to deal with the pressure of captaining India! India's lack of preparation has probably also cost them to a certain extent; they only played one warm-up game before the test series against Sri Lanka. Meanwhile, Australia will come to India well-rested (particularly if they skip the Champions Trophy) and with a point to prove. I've been looking forward to this series, but fear that India may be too exhausted to put up much of a fight.

Wow, an ancient Roman traditional dress has more medals than SA at the Olympics! I hang my head in shame (as should the Ed). As regards Monde Zondeki, I'd be interested to get his take on the state of SA domestic cricket. How badly has the movement of players to Kolpakistan affected the quality of the domestic game? And does he get disheartened that he hasn't had a run in the national team despite such a great season for the Cobras?

Interesting how little comment there's been on the forthcoming ODI and T20 matches between England and SA, particularly when one considers all the chirping that went on prior to the Test series. Just goes to show which form of the game cricket fans really care about... Anything less than a comprehensive series victory against a mediocre England team would represent an embarassment for SA, and I thus expect SA to win comfortably, beginning a long, unsuccessful captaincy for KP (I'm honestly struggling to see where his first series win is going to come from).

Tuesday, Australia's Olympic history is indeed impressive, however I'd wager a guess that they invest far more money in training athletes than most other countries (and certainly more than SA). It would be interesting to see some sort of Olympic medals table controlled for relative sporting investment! This, by the way, is why I continue to be so impressed by the Sri Lankan cricket team. Small, relatively poor country, but they have produced a disproportionate number of top class cricketers. I still think they're lacking a bit in the seam department, but otherwise they look a fantastic team!

Loving the way that Tuesday's trying to spin SA winning their first series in England since 1965 as a massive victory for KP! For me, it's been an impressive victory for a number of reasons. Our main strike bowler missed half the series and our best batsman was in fairly catastrophic form throughout. Furthermore, SA had to overcome a pumped-up England at Edgbaston (never an easy task), and seldom bowled with the accuracy and discipline that they are capable of. The fact that they were able to win with so many players off peak form suggests that this is the best SA team in quite some time. However, there'll be no place to hide against Australia, a team far more adept at taking advantage of weaknesses than England are. SA will have to raise their game, but I believe that this team is capable of doing so. Whether they actually will rise to the occassion is another matter though...

Prophet, not as often as I'd like (having to sit in an office and work cramps my style somewhat). A lot depends on how things are going; if runs are flowing or wickets are tumbling then I'll happily watch for hours on end, otherwise I tend to check occassionally. I'll admit that there have been times when I've been at matches where I've regretted not being able to do something else for a while (the Newlands test against the West Indies earlier this year, for example, when SA spent a couple of sessions scoring at under 2 an over - yes, Prince was batting!).

Looks like India have worked out that their best chance of winning this match is to pile on the runs on the first day before spin becomes a factor. Such a pity that Sri Lanka don't have Malinga available for this series; their pace attack seems rather ordinary without him, although Prasad looks a decent prospect.

I've never understood this whole, "if Boucher goes Kallis goes" thing. Boucher has NEVER said that he wouldn't play if Kallis isn't in the team, or vice versa. Boucher was, as I recall, suspended/fined by the always-touchy SA administrators for some fairly mild criticism of the way that the selectors handled the exclusion of Kallis from the T20 World Cup squad. Boucher's been dropped before, Kallis has played. They're good friends, but to paint them as a pair of prima-donnas who'll take their bat and ball home if their mate doesn't get picked is a bit unfair.

Ah well, KP being captain has certainly added some spice to proceedings! Lots of players with something to prove in this test - does Harmison still have what it takes? Can Bell successfully fill the no. 3 slot? Can Fred take wickets without sidescreen assistance? SA will also want to make it 3-0, and if the likes of Duminy and Zondeki get a chance (sadly doesn't look like it'll happen) they'll want to stake a claim to a place in the team. The pressure may be off, but I think this will be a good game.

Anyway, back to the cricket; I'd like to see Duminy and Zondeki get a run in this test. It would be a good chance for him to get some time in the middle ahead of the ODI series. Zondeki should come in for Ntini, who hasn't had a great series so far.

Arrogant, I agree to an extent. If a player isn't in the picture for his national team and completes a period of residency, then I don't have any problem with them representing another country. Tiaan Strauss, a former Springbok captain, did exactly that, winning the rugby world cup in 1999 with Australia (and knocking out SA on the way). He wasn't really in the picture for the SA team from 1995 onwards, and thus nobody begrudged him his right to play for another country (in fact he always got a great reception when he returned to newlands). KP wasn't even remotely in contention for the SA team (despite which he apparently visited Ali Bacher and demanded a guaranteed spot and a contract), and the fact that most South Africans dislike him has more to do with his subsequent comments about SA as well as his efforts to rebrand himself as English (the tattoo, etc).

Arrogant, the point I was making was that a situation where a country can effectively buy athletes or players is one that should be avoided. This situation certainly doesn't apply in cricket at the moment, but if the likes of Jacques Rudolph and Danish Kaneria were to turn out for England at some time in the future, it would set a very dangerous precedent.

I actually think that cricket's rules on elgibility are reasonable (especially now that the Kolpak loophole has been closed). Compare this to, say, athletics, swimming and various other Olympic sports where one only needs to be a citizen of a country to represent them, with no rules on residency. Hence one sees Kenyans competing on behalf of Denmark or Qatar, for example. As a South African, I don't begrudge KP's choice, merely the manner in which he has conducted himself and the comments he has made regarding the country of his birth. Strauss is about as South African as JRR Tolkein (ie. we can claim him, but only just). On a slightly different tack, one of the more amusing clashes of nationality occurred several years ago, when both the Australian and South African rugby teams were captained by Zambians (by birth, anyway).

Interesting to see Gibbs back in the team. Although I'd love to see him back at his best, I don't think he's done anything to deserve inclusion (especially ahead of McKenzie, for example).

I must agree with ArrogantOz, Vaughan truly was a fantastic captain. It's easy to forget just how good England were in 2004/2005, when the likes of Flintoff, Vaughan and Harmison were all at their peak. Under Vaughan England became, arguably, the best test team in the world (albeit for a short time). Injury and poor form may have rendered him powerless to stop their decline from those heights, but he deserves to be remembered for his numerous achievements as England captain. I also agree that KP is a potential PR disaster, though. But I'll be intrigued to see how the captaincy affects his play. Will he adopt a more circumspect approach when the situation demands it? Is he even capable of doing so successfully? If nothing else, it's added a bit of extra interest to the dead-rubber fourth test.

KP is the elephant in the room, and any other captain would lack credibility. Personally, I don't think it would be a bad move. If KP can start to view his success and England's success as one entity, it may prompt him to adopt a more responsible attitude to his batting. If, like Flintoff, he messes it up, then at least he would have had a chance at it and shouldn't cast a shadow over his successor.

Good start for England who'll be very happy to see the back of Prince. It'll be interesting to see what they do about the new ball. Morkel would probably prefer to face that rather than spin...

IF SA were to win this test, then I'd agree that it would be a good chance to let the likes of Zondeki and Duminy have a run at the Oval. But this test is evenly poised at present. SA have a small lead, but England will have gained a psychological boost from the closing stages of play yesterday. As Australia discovered in 2005, a pumped-up England are a match for anyone! It's going to be a very tense morning for both sets of players (and fans).

This morning's session is going to be critical - but this is why England can be a dangerous team. One inspired performance, even a relatively brief one, can convince them that they are world-beaters and raise the level of performance across the team.

Yep, Kallis is now (statistically at least) arguably the greatest all-rounder of all time! Huge achievement which has been largely overlooked (if one compares it to the fuss that was made of Murali/Warne passing the bowling record). Is he better than Sobers? Probably not, unless he develops into a tidy spin bowler in the next few years. Nevertheless, just to be considered at the same level is a fantastic accomplishment, and Jacques deserves all the accolades that come his way.

Tuesday, what makes you so sure of that? Especially given the recent ruling on Kolpak contracts not applying to labour, I'd say that there's still a decent chance of the likes of MacLaren turning out for SA. Of course, this depends on there being space for him in the team; at present that doesn't seem likely.

Got to say, been pleasantly surprised by Nel, although I probably shouldn't be given his recent form. The selectors obviously decided that he was the closest thing to a direct replacement for Steyn. I'd still like to see Zondeki get a chance, although it says a lot for the quality of the team that he can't get in despite having such a great domestic season. And Karma, no disrespect, but dropping Amla for Gibbs is crazy talk. Especially considering just how badly Gibbs has been playing recently. Immense talent, but I get the impression that his off-field misadventures are distracting him.

A question: If KP had referred his dismissal on the grounds of not having hit the ball, could the third umpire still give him out for lbw (presuming, of course, that he felt certain that the ball would have hit the stumps)?

A bit surprised that Nel's been chosen ahead of Zondeki, who would have added a bit more variety and movement to the attack. SA will have to bat last on a pitch that should be taking spin by that stage. This is going to be a real test of character for the SA team. Hopefully they realise that another great performance is required and won't have reverted to 'Lords mode'. I expect this one to be tight.

I suspect that the main reason Harmison was called up was so that the selectors and coach could have a closer look at him. As has often been stated, he has a poor record at Edgbaston, so he would have had to have been bowling exceptionally well to get a start. Expect him to play in the next test if SA continue to amass large totals.

England fans! Rest assured that us South Africans share your disappointment. We would have loved it if he'd played!

Interesting comment from Arjuna Ranatunga, that India's defeat was due to them treating test cricket like a T20 game! Are those IPL chickens coming home to roost?

Pom, I agree with that assessment. I find Hoggard's continued exclusion quite amazing, especially given his record against SA. But who would they leave out for Harmison? Surely Sidebottom will come back in to replace the unfortunate Pattinson, which will mean dropping one of the established bowlers. Parnesar and Freddie will surely play, so they'll either drop Anderson (which would be harsh) or Broad, which will further weaken the batting (although it would undoubtedly add wicket-taking potential to the attack). It's a tough call.

I very much doubt that Harmison will play in the next test. His record against SA is poor, and the post-Ashes 2005 tour of SA marked the beginning of his fall from top of the bowling rankings. Plus he's mentally fragile. During his short stint playing SA provincial cricket, he was once asked whether he'd overcome his famous first-ball wide in the 2007 Ashes. He immediately terminated the interview (that was the first question)! Expect a few non-too-subtle chirps from the non-strikers end should he open the bowling at Edgbaston...

Lol, I see my prediction of Bajjhi wasting all 3 of India's referrals on ambitious lbw appeals wasn't far off! India seem to be struggling with batting discipline though - it cost them against SA, and could cost them again in this match. Ironic as their coach was one of the most disciplined batsmen around - knew his strengths, played to them, and refused to go after anything else! Tendulkar and co will have to be at their best if they're going to save this game.

Note how Dave studiously avoids any mention of South Africa's record at Lords...

Well said Shahida. KP was just another cricketer with an overdeveloped sense of entitlement, and quotas provided him with a convenient excuse to overlook own failings. I've always suspected that he's extremely bitter that the likes Gibbs, Kallis or Smith were identified as potential international players from a young age, while his mediocrity was overlooked.

Well, from KP and England's point of view it was definitely the right decision! While I appreciate the sentiments expressed in this article, I don't see why we should sympathise with KP over batting lower down the order while in SA. If he felt that he had batting potential, surely he should have worked on it himself, rather than waiting until circumstances forced him to do so? As for the likes of Tulani Ngxoweni being selected ahead of him, there are many reasons why promising players at schools level don't progress at the more senior levels of the game - lack of money, desire, other opportunities, etc. But the main reason that KP is despised in SA is because of his arrogant attitude and disrespect to the country where he grew up.