Smith and McKenzie take South Africa halfway to salvation
I was at the cricket yesterday: the fourth day of the South Africa test, with my friends Hugh and Pete, and three large bags of food. I myself prefer to theme my match-day picnic if I can, but South Africa presents a much stiffer challenge than India or the West Indies in that regard. I did at least manage a chilled bottle of Cape Rosé, though, you'll be pleased to know, and some sharon fruit. But enough of this nonsense! I'm not trying to be the Matthew Fort or Silverbrow of these webpages but to have a short go at being Neville Cardus, John Arlott or C.L.R. James.
The first three days of this match were a breeze for England: put in to bat, they piled on a total of 593, Ian Bell falling agonisingly short of a double hundred, caught and bowled on 199, after England's brutally thrilling batsman Kevin Pietersen had himself gone past 150. And on Saturday England's bowlers skittled their opponents out for 247 and enforced the follow-on. So we arrived yesterday morning hoping to see England win; or at least to see them take six or seven wickets and set things up for a straightforward win on the Monday.
Graeme Smith and Neil McKenzie had different ideas, though. The South African openers got off to a slow, but pretty solid, start, Smith at times looking troubled by Monty Panesar, and neither man playing many strokes - but you could hardly blame them. The only chance for South Africa to save this game was a long, patient rearguard action, surviving and batting through the day and most of Monday. That's exactly what Smith and McKenzie set out to do. For many in the crowd, this made for a very boring day. How much more fun to watch the wickets tumble! What bad luck, not to see higher-scoring play! I'm not as knowledgeable about cricket as I'd like to be (I find it hard even to remember what I saw at a test match last year) but I am enough of a nerd not to need superficial entertainment. This was an absorbing day in which character came to the fore as South Africa fought their way back into this series.
By three o'clock it looked as though McKenzie and Smith, whose early uncertainty against Panesar had been forgotten, were unshiftable. Smith's determination in particular is impressive - his two double hundreds in England a few years back when he was new as captain showed that - and here again he showed tremendous mental strength. Yes, he was helped by a good, slow and flat wicket from which England's batsmen had profited heavily, and by the fact that England's relatively mild bowling attack had not enough fire (at least till tea) to strike any sparks on it. But this was also about will. Smith and McKenzie willed themselves to hundreds, and this game towards a (for South Africa, triumphant) draw.
Smith's concentration wavered after he passed his century: he fell to the "relaxed hundreds" phenomenon whereby the mental relief that follows successfully passing that milestone leads to a slight slackening of nerve. First he edged Kevin Pietersen's spin into the gloves of Tim Ambrose - who fluffed the catch. But not long later James Anderson with the new ball tempted him to a rash attempt at something like a pull, a lazy thrash to the onside that Smith badly mishit and skied towards cover where Pietersen took reponsibility for holding the catch. An admirable if unspectacular captain's innings was at an end.
The last hour had more in the way of thrills: Anderson was much more hostile with the new ball, bombarding the new batsman Amla with a series of bouncers. The run rate picked up, too, once McKenzie had achieved his own century. But this was not really a day for thills. It was one of those days when great sport goes beyond such things and shows you that drama comes in many forms. South Africa look, now, quite likely to save this match.
If you want to read others' take on the day, read David Hopps at the Guardian Sport blog, Derek Pringle's report for the Telegraph or Mike Atherton's report for the Times.
Have your say - join the discussion