5th ODI: South Africa vs Australia @ Johannesburg, Sunday 12th March

[Renegade]

Time to get on sportodds and plonk $50 on a Sth Africa win.

The milkybars are on me.

 

[Smokey_22]

My mate rang me at 11 and said the saffas were at some outrageous price, and he put 20 bucks on - 'just in case of D/L or some ****"

He's now laughing really hard.


On the game, all I can say is that the Wanderers must be the most favourable batting pitch i've seen since the 500 declared days at my grandma's backyard.

Outsiders would see the scoreboard and realise that it is the pitch rather than particular players being the dominating factor.

 

[Nightwolf]

Martins fielding cost us a few valuable runs too. Soft as butter. Send him home and tell Hodge to pack his bags...

 

[johnnyhoward]

Anybody know what the bookies' prices were after Australia's innings? Knowing Australian bookies, they probably closed off betting altogether, just assuming that we were over the line (as I did ). If not, I suspect they probably had Australia $1.01 or something.

Just heard on SEN that SAF were around 50/1 at the TAB, meaning they would have been 200/1 or so on Betfair.

Agree with Jim Jess' post with regards to Punter's speech, he didn't sound upset, he sounded amazed and appreciative to be involved in one of the greatest games of cricket of all time.

 

[davidgoes4wce]

Half time odds: Australia 1.01 South Africa 110

I would have definetly lumped on Australia for sure, but luckily I was at work.


But I had a friend who told me who put 7k on Aussies at a ridiculous 1.02, crazy. He is crying today

 

[johnnyhoward]

Re: Cricket Odds

At the innings break someone posted the bets were Aus $1.01 and SA were $26. I thought: "If I could, why not put $10 on SA, it's only $10 and SA won't win anyway."

haha.

$26, you're getting ripped off mate. They were something like 150/1 - 200/1 on Betfair

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Re: Why was Hogg dropped in the first place?

I'm guessing it was b/c the pitches didn't really suit the spinners. Note that Peterson didn't play in the last 2 games either.

Yeah but Telemacus performed! Lewis Lost us the game! Huge, difefrence! And we are replacinga good player with a absolute hack!

 

[MrAaron]

Re: Cricket Odds

At the start of the Sth African Innings they were $51 and the Aussies were $1.01

 

[johnnyhoward]

Re: Half time odds: Australia 1.01 South Africa 110

F**king idiot...Should have told him to put $7k on the Saffers instead...

 

[MrAaron]

Re: Half time odds: Australia 1.01 South Africa 110

where were these odds displayed cos from what I heards the Sth Africans were only $51

 

[davidgoes4wce]

Re: Half time odds: Australia 1.01 South Africa 110

betfair odds........www.betfair.com (they do in terms of AUD dollars )

 

[WhyAlwaysMe]

Re: Half time odds: Australia 1.01 South Africa 110

If I put 10K on Aus I would demand Ponting and Lewis to pay me my money back.

 

[Hotel 6]

Re: Half time odds: Australia 1.01 South Africa 110

If the Aussies were $1.02 there is no way that Sth Africa would be $110. That just does not make sense. $1.02 Aussies means that Sth Africa would have been $25.00 at best. It is the way the % of punting works. For example you never see both teams at $2.00 in a head to head contest. Some places offer as little as $1.85 while some offer as good as $1.91. The take should be somewhere around 10%

 

[davidgoes4wce]

Re: Half time odds: Australia 1.01 South Africa 110

betfair dont do margins........its up to the punter himself to pick the odds they want, or the bookmakers to set the margins they want.......

if your a punter and you want 50.00 on SA, you can ask for it..........the bookies can sell it to you at 100.00 if they want. Basically to keep it simple the punter will look for the best price available, the bookmaker will look to sell at the lowest price available. If both agree, it is a matched bet.

Thats why you see on Centrebet they set odds of 1.91 v 1.91 (for a line betting game). Whereas on betfair you might see 1.99 v 2.00 (for a line betting game). Its all about no margins, and maxmimum betting odds.

 

[johnnyhoward]

Re: Half time odds: Australia 1.01 South Africa 110

If the Aussies were $1.02 there is no way that Sth Africa would be $110. That just does not make sense. $1.02 Aussies means that Sth Africa would have been $25.00 at best. It is the way the % of punting works. For example you never see both teams at $2.00 in a head to head contest. Some places offer as little as $1.85 while some offer as good as $1.91. The take should be somewhere around 10%

See this is why you stay the ******** away from TABs.

Betfair's book % is often less than 101%, often around 100.2-100.6%.

Thats why you see on Centrebet they set odds of 1.91 v 1.91 (for a line betting game). Whereas on betfair you might see 1.99 v 2.00 (for a line betting game). Its all about no margins, and maxmimum betting odds.

And of course the beauty of that is, in a footy game you can lay a team for 1.97, meaning you're effectively getting odds better than evens.

 

[vosstheboss]

this game deserved a draw well by both teams but SA won

 

[DKA]

Have just spent the last half-hour or so reading through this thread, and if ever you want some ammo against a group of BigFooty posters for being complete nitwits, this is the thread to bookmark. Human nature at its most dire (Take particular note of the work of the likes of Drummond ... it's priceless).

The first three or four hundred posts are saturated with pitiful gloating over an opposition country whose bowlers were clearly outclassed by the best batting attack in world cricket, garnished with personal sledges against various South African players. (It was a bit like listening to the Adelaide radio commentary on Friday night's game - apparently the premiership's in the bag over there!)

Yet in the first 30 pages, no mention of the flatness the wicket was made ... none at all. Until the Proteas starting clocking up some runs of their own, that is. In fact, it was at about Post#430 where the "road" references first began to appear. Then they starting rolling out a bit like an opening bowler - thick and fast.

Not long after this, they (the posters) began turning on their own team. The Aussie players went from roosters to feather dusters within about forty minutes in real time. Ponting's brilliant innings was suddenly a distant memory, and poor Mick Lewis had his epitaph already pencilled for him.

In the end it was just a shambles of cursing, threatening, self-recrimination and dribble ... hardly befitting of one of the most classic contests of all time. Hell, a couple of blokes are even trotting out the "match fixed" chestnut ... as if they remain in denial that their team are neither beatable nor resilient to the lure of dirty cash.

Thankfully and ironically, however, it was Ricky Pontng who saved the day for me. Congratulations on a fine post-match speech Rickster ... acknowledging the magnitude of the game without being dragged into any mud-slinging or bitter recriminations, enjoying the moment for what it was - a freak of cricketing nature - and displaying the sort of sportmanship that has been sadly lacking in more than one of our cricket leaders of the last few decades.

Punter has won new respect in my mind ... maybe a few posters here could take a leaf of humility and sportsmanship out of his book.

Best post of all time.

I particularly enjoyed it when the aussie posters start turning on their own players just because they are losing, it's highly amusing and great entertainment.

 

[DKA]

Without doubt, we'll we the joke of the cricketing world. Break the world record by 30+ runs, and don't win the match. Unexcusable, it's a joke.

One of the funniest jokes of all time.

 

[davey_magik]

I am in shock after witnessing that.

I thought I would never ever see Ponting bat as well as he did in the WC at the Wanderers three years ago, but he surpassed that today in a display that i wont forget in a hurry.

He wasn't joking when he said Smith had given them ammunition.

Anyone reckon that Warne was wrong to call Smith a fool?

If you talk the talk you have to walk the walk. Smith cant, it is simple as that.

Awesome Aussies.

I think he can .

 

[davey_magik]

I want these morons to stick around when we win. Thanks.

So, hows the egg going ?

 

[DKA]

So, hows the egg going ?

Will that be Scrambled, or Sunny Side Up?

 

[weevil]

You just can’t beat:

If SAf win, I will buy 3 Carlton memberships

 

[bmwofoz]

This Scorecard is amazing.


ODI # 2349
Australia in South Africa, 2005-06, 5th One-Day International
South Africa v Australia
New Wanderers Stadium, Johannesburg
12 March 2006 (50-over match)

Result: South Africa won by 1 wicket
Series: South Africa wins the 5-ODI series 3-2

Toss: Australia
Umpires: Aleem Dar (Pak) and BG Jerling
TV Umpire: KH Hurter
Match Referee: BC Broad (Eng)
Man of the Match: HH Gibbs and RT Ponting
Player of the Series: SM Pollock (SA)


Australia innings (50 overs maximum) R M B 4 6
+AC Gilchrist c Hall b Telemachus 55 68 44 9 0
SM Katich c Telemachus b Ntini 79 138 90 9 1
*RT Ponting c Dippenaar b Telemachus 164 154 105 13 9
MEK Hussey c Ntini b Hall 81 75 51 9 3
A Symonds not out 27 23 13 3 1
B Lee not out 9 13 7 0 0
Extras (lb 4, w 5, nb 10) 19
Total (4 wickets, 50 overs, 234 mins) 434

DNB: DR Martyn, MJ Clarke, NW Bracken, SR Clark, ML Lewis.

FoW: 1-97 (Gilchrist, 15.2 ov), 2-216 (Katich, 30.3 ov),
3-374 (Hussey, 46.1 ov), 4-407 (Ponting, 47.4 ov).

Bowling O M R W
Ntini 9 0 80 1 (1w)
Hall 10 0 80 1 (2nb)
van der Wath 10 0 76 0 (1nb, 1w)
Telemachus 10 1 87 2 (7nb, 3w)
Smith 4 0 29 0
Kallis 6 0 70 0
Kemp 1 0 8 0

South Africa innings (target: 435 runs from 50 overs) R M B 4 6
*GC Smith c Hussey b Clarke 90 100 55 13 2
HH Dippenaar b Bracken 1 6 7 0 0
HH Gibbs c Lee b Symonds 175 142 111 21 7
AB de Villiers c Clarke b Bracken 14 43 20 1 0
JH Kallis c & b Symonds 20 22 21 1 0
+MV Boucher not out 50 79 43 4 0
JM Kemp c Martyn b Bracken 13 20 17 0 0
JJ van der Wath c Ponting b Bracken 35 20 18 1 3
R Telemachus c Hussey b Bracken 12 10 6 2 0
AJ Hall c Clarke b Lee 7 9 4 1 0
M Ntini not out 1 3 1 0 0
Extras (b 4, lb 8, w 4, nb 4) 20
Total (9 wickets, 49.5 overs, 228 mins) 438

FoW: 1-3 (Dippenaar, 1.2 ov), 2-190 (Smith, 22.1 ov),
3-284 (de Villiers, 30.5 ov), 4-299 (Gibbs, 31.5 ov),
5-327 (Kallis, 37.4 ov), 6-355 (Kemp, 42.1 ov),
7-399 (van der Wath, 46.3 ov), 8-423 (Telemachus, 48.2 ov),
9-433 (Hall, 49.3 ov).

Bowling O M R W
Lee 7.5 0 68 1 (3nb, 1w)
Bracken 10 0 67 5
Clark 6 0 54 0
Lewis 10 0 113 0 (1nb, 1w)
Symonds 9 0 75 2
Clarke 7 0 49 1

Australia full substitute: GB Hogg (unused).

South Africa full substitute: RJ Peterson (unused).

 

[lones37]

If you think you guys were laughing hard in here last night, i am hysterical atm and will be for a while to come.....

Smith has been proved right at this stage, now we wait for the tests...

BTW, i like the look of the Aussie side of the future.......ensures i will be laughing for a long while me thinks after the Ashes series...

 

[eddiesmith]

If you think you guys were laughing hard in here last night, i am hysterical atm and will be for a while to come.....

Smith has been proved right at this stage, now we wait for the tests...

BTW, i like the look of the Aussie side of the future.......ensures i will be laughing for a long while me thinks after the Ashes series...

The Ashes will be the funniest of them all

The unlosable series is lost, that will be great