Unless you play for Miami, then you don't even have to do that...another team just looks at a player wrong and they're called for a foul! edit: the Miami players are the ones that are fouled...not fouling.

The logistics of basketball are simple...put a ball into a net.

South Africa vs Australia 2nd Test:South Africa won the toss & decided to bat first


South Africa:
1:Graeme Smith
2:Dean Elgar
3:Hashim Amla
4:Faf Du Plessis
5:AB De Villiers
6:Quinton De Kock-Test Debut
7:JP Duminy
8:Wayne Parnell
9:Vernon Philander
10:Dale Steyn
11:Morne Morkel


Australia:
1:Chris Rogers
2:David Warner
3:Alex Doolan
4:Shaun Marsh
5:Michael Clarke
6:Steve Smith
7:Brad Haddin
8:Mitchell Johnson
9:Peter Siddle
10:Ryan Harris
11:Nathan Lyon

South Africa vs Australia 2nd Test:Stumps Day 1


South Africa 5/214 (Elgar 83,Du Plessis 55,De Villiers 51no,Lyon 2/47)

South Africa vs Australia 2nd Test;Stumps Day 2


South Africa 423(JB Duminy 123,AB De Villiers 116,Nathan Lyon 5/130)


Australia 4/112(David Warner 65no,Nathan Lyon 12no,Wayne Parnell 2/19)

South Africa vs Australia 2nd Test:Stumps Day 3


South Africa 423

Australia 246(David Warner 70,Morne Morkel 3/64)

South Africa 4/192 (Hashim Amla 93no,Mitchell Johnson 2/48)

South Africa leads by 369 runs

Cricket is my Favorite game!

South Africa vs Australia 2nd test:South Africa won by 231 runs

Series is level at 1-1

South Africa 423 (JP Duminy 123,AB De Villiers 116,Nathan Lyon 5/130)

Australia 246 (David Warner 70,Morne Morkel 3/64)

South Africa 5/270dec (Hashim Amla 127no,Mitchell Johnson 2/51)

Australia 216 (Chris Rogers 107no,Dale Steyn 4/55)

Congrats to South Africa!

Last 9 Oz batsmen contributed 22 runs in total.... Not quite a record (according to CricInfo) but surely high up in the pantheon of Aussie batting collapses!

What team did worse than 22?

In 1902 in Edgbaston, the Aussie numbers 3 to 11 only made 13!! The 22 yesterday at Port Elizabeth was the Australian second worst ever (and obviously the worst versus South Africa)

In that 1902 test, one opener, Victor Trumper, made 18 out of an innings total of 36. In those days, the wickets were left uncovered so perhaps the wicket was wet after overnight rain. A wet turf wicket is almost impossible to bat on.

Stats courtesy of CricInfo.

Also, on the last tour of South Africa, an Australian team that contained a lot of the same players as this one were 9-21 before Nathan Lyon and Peter Siddle took the score to 47 all out!

I watched up until tea, and then went to bed thinking that it should be a good watch tonight, especially as Aust was 1-141. I got up this morning and looked at the scorecard, the last 9 batsmen's scores looked like a phone number!

Blame me, if you like. The collapse started as soon as I started watching the match!

Mike, is the 13 the worst by any squad?

Trying to find this information, Dave. Will post here as soon as I know!

Cricket is (almost) as obsessed with stats as baseball... although we haven't gone to the full extent of all the categories in Sabermetrics.

btw, I originally thought this term was something to do with Bret Saberhagen :-) Don't know where I got that idea.

In 1924, South Africa were dismissed for 30 in their first innings by England at Edgbaston (Birmingham). Numbers 3-11 contributed 12. This was in response to England's 438. They did over ten times better in their second dig, scoring 390 - but still lost by an innings.

That was not the 'worst' effort though. In 1899, the South African 3-11 batsmen only made 11 between them - again against England but this time at Cape Town during their second innings. The innings score was 35. Those were different times as the English captain, Lord Hawke, batted at 11 (making 3 and 1) and did not bowl at any time in his 5 test matches. A 'gentleman captain'.

I think they are the two lowest. Sri Lanka came close in 1990, when numbers 4-11 made just 8 runs against India, but Asanka Gurusinha made 52 at number 3.

Can anyone else find lower than these in Tests? I'm sure there's much worse in first class cricket!

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner! -

New Zealand v England, 2nd Test at Eden Park, Auckland, 1955 -

NZ 2nd Innings -

New Zealand 2nd innings R M B 4s 6s SR
B Sutcliffe b Wardle 11 47 0 0
JG Leggat c Hutton b Tyson 1 8 0 0
MB Poore b Tyson 0 8 0 0
JR Reid b Statham 1 10 0 0
SN McGregor c May b Appleyard 1 31 0 0
GO Rabone* lbw b Statham 7 53 0 0
HB Cave c Graveney b Appleyard 5 17 0 0
AR MacGibbon lbw b Appleyard 0 2 0 0
IA Colquhoun† c Graveney b Appleyard 0 1 1 0 0 0.00
AM Moir not out 0 14 0 0
JA Hayes b Statham 0 1 0 0
Extras 0

Total (all out; 27 overs) 26 (0.96 runs per over)
Fall of wickets 1-6 (Leggat), 2-8 (Poore), 3-9 (Reid), 4-14 (Sutcliffe), 5-14 (McGregor), 6-22 (Cave), 7-22 (MacGibbon), 8-22 (Colquhoun), 9-26 (Rabone), 10-26 (Hayes)

Bowling O M R W Econ
FH Tyson 7 2 10 2 1.42
JB Statham 9 3 9 3 1.00
R Appleyard 6 3 7 4 1.16
JH Wardle 5 5 0 1 0.00

(courtesy of ESPN CricInfo)

The NZ innings against England in 1955 is the lowest ever Test innings total, but the last nine batsmen seem to have contributed 14 of the 26 runs, so they didn't do quite as badly as the South Africans at Cape Town in 1899.

Any chance to bag the Kiwis.....

South Africa vs Australia 3rd Test:Australia won the toss & decided to bat first


South Africa
1:Graeme Smith
2:Alviro Petersen
3:Dean Elgar
4:Hashim Amla
5:AB De Villiers
6:Faf Du Plessis
7:JP Duminy
8:Kyle Abbott
9:Vernon Philander
10:Dale Steyn
11:Morne Morkel


Australia:
1:David Warner
2:Chris Rogers
3:Alex Doolan
4:Michael Clarke
5:Steve Smith
6:Shane Watson
7:Brad Haddin
8:Mitchell Johnson
9:Ryan Harris
10:James Pattinson
11:Nathan Lyon

South Africa vs Australia:Stumps Day 1


Australia 3/331(David Warner 135,Michael Clarke 92no,Steve Smith 50no,JP Duminy 1/37)

It's already tough for Australia to win. Losing more than a session to rain means that, best scenario with an overnight declaration, they need to bowl SA out twice in 3 days, which is a tough ask with guys like de Villiers and Amla in the team. A draw is already looking the most likely result, and I guess the Australians would accept that gracefully, given where they were 9 months ago.

Looks like they've already bowled them out once. Is it possible Australia will get to 494 or more and declare again?