Cricket BallSouth Africa and the West Indies battled each other in the 3rd and last 5-Day Cricket Test at Newlands, Cape Town. The Test ran from 2 to 6 January 2015.

The 2nd Test in Port Elizabeth was a bit of a disapointment, with wet weather spoiling the Test and forcing a draw. Better weather was expected and delivered in Cape Town for the 3rd Test.

Play started on schedule on Day 1, at 10:30 SA Time (08:30 GMT).

The score cards were updated at regular intervals, here on Rugby-Talk.com.

The West Indies won the toss and elected to bat.

The first West Indies wicket fell with their score on 30. At Lunch on Day 1 the West Indies were on 80 / 2 after 27 overs and at Stumps on Day 1 the West Indies were 276 / 6, after the day’s 90 overs.

The Proteas wrapped up the West Indies tail relatively quickly on Day 2 (within 9.5 overs), with the West Indies all out for 329 after 99.5 overs. The Proteas started batting and lost the wicket of Dean Elgar at 48 / 1. At Tea on Day 2 the Proteas were 135 / 2, after 42 overs. With the Proteas on 227 / 3, rain interrupted play… which should lead to Stumps – Day 2.

On Day 3 the Proteas resumed batting and lost the wicket of Hashim Amla on 63, with the Proteas on 254 / 4. Proteas were on 313 / 5 at Lunch – Day 3, still 16 runs behind. AB de Villiers easily reached his TON after Lunch on Day 3 and eventually perished on 148 as he tried to hit it out of the park. Proteas lead by 92 at the Innings break, having scored 421 All Out.

The West Indies 2nd Innings started off well for them and after the first 10.5 overs they were on 23 / 0 before Morné Morkel struck, making it 23 / 1 after 11 overs. The 2nd wicket fell shortly afterwards, on 27. The West Indies soldiered on and were 88 / 2 at Stumps – Day 3.

Morning Day 4… it is raining and the outfield is soaked. Prospects of play did not look good for the rest of Day 4. Play eventually resumed at 15:00 on Day 4. The West Indies hung in for most of the afternoon, till the wickets started falling rather fast, losing the last 7 wickets for just 33 runs. West Indies All Out for 215 in their 2nd Innings, a lead of 123. This leaves the Proteas needing 124 for the win, with a Day and a few overs remaining in the Test. Alviro Petersen falls without troubling the scorecard, with the Proteas on 9 / 1 after 2.3 Overs, as Stumps was called on Day 4.

The Proteas needed 115 runs for the win on Day 5 of the Test and lost the wicket of Faf du Plessis with the score on 51 / 2, leaving 73 runs to win. South Africa won the Test before Lunch on the final Day, a win by 8 wickets.

 

West Indies:

First Innings – 329 All Out (99.5 Overs)
Second Innings – 215 All Out (79.5 Overs)

 

South Africa:

First Innings – 421 All Out (122.4 Overs)
Second Innings – 124 / 2 (37.4 Overs)


South Africa won by 8 wickets

Sir Vivian Richards Trophy – 3rd Test
Test no. 2154 | 2014 / 2015 season
Played at Newlands, Cape Town
2,3,4,5,6 January 2015 (5-day match)
West Indies 1st innings R M B 4s 6s SR
KC Brathwaite c Elgar b Steyn 7 58 35 1 0 20.00
DS Smith b Harmer 47 119 86 8 0 54.65
LR Johnson lbw b Harmer 54 109 84 9 0 64.28
MN Samuels c du Plessis b van Zyl 43 106 70 6 0 61.42
S Chanderpaul st †de Villiers b Harmer 9 72 48 1 0 18.75
J Blackwood lbw b Steyn 56 168 113 6 0 49.55
D Ramdin*† c & b Steyn 53 113 103 6 0 51.45
JO Holder c van Zyl b Steyn 23 52 34 4 0 67.64
JE Taylor c Steyn b Morkel 13 17 12 1 0 108.33
SJ Benn c Bavuma b Morkel 5 19 11 1 0 45.45
ST Gabriel not out 4 15 5 1 0 80.00
Extras (lb 5, w 8, nb 2) 15
Total (all out; 99.5 overs; 424 mins) 329 (3.29 runs per over)

Fall of wickets:  1-30 (Brathwaite, 13.2 ov), 2-80 (Smith, 26.6 ov), 3-131 (Johnson, 38.3 ov), 4-162 (Samuels, 51.1 ov), 5-172 (Chanderpaul, 56.1 ov), 6-266 (Ramdin, 85.2 ov), 7-299 (Blackwood, 94.1 ov), 8-316 (Holder, 96.3 ov), 9-319 (Taylor, 97.1 ov), 10-329 (Benn, 99.5 ov)

Bowling O M R W Econ 0s 4s 6s
DW Steyn 25 6 78 4 3.12 119 9 0 (3w)
VD Philander 19 2 73 0 3.84 83 12 0 (1nb)
M Morkel 19.5 1 83 2 4.18 81 12 0 (1nb, 1w)
SR Harmer 26 5 71 3 2.73 120 10 0
S van Zyl 8 2 13 1 1.62 38 1 0
D Elgar 2 0 6 0 3.00 7 0 0
South Africa 1st innings R M B 4s 6s SR
AN Petersen run out (Blackwood) 42 130 85 3 1 49.41
D Elgar lbw b Holder 8 58 30 1 0 26.66
F du Plessis st †Ramdin b Benn 68 150 122 8 0 55.73
HM Amla* c †Ramdin b Holder 63 189 150 7 0 42.00
AB de Villiers† c Gabriel b Samuels 148 323 194 15 1 76.28
T Bavuma b Gabriel 15 53 41 2 0 36.58
S van Zyl lbw b Samuels 33 91 63 3 0 52.38
VD Philander run out (Holder/Benn) 0 8 7 0 0 0.00
SR Harmer lbw b Taylor 10 37 48 2 0 20.83
DW Steyn run out (Johnson) 0 6 1 0 0 0.00
M Morkel not out 4 11 5 0 0 80.00
Extras (lb 7, w 13, nb 10) 30
Total (all out; 122.4 overs; 521 mins) 421 (3.43 runs per over)

Fall of wickets:  1-48 (Elgar, 11.5 ov), 2-104 (Petersen, 27.1 ov), 3-157 (du Plessis, 49.1 ov), 4-254 (Amla, 75.1 ov), 5-288 (Bavuma, 86.5 ov), 6-384 (van Zyl, 108.2 ov), 7-385 (Philander, 109.4 ov), 8-404 (Harmer, 119.5 ov), 9-408 (Steyn, 120.4 ov), 10-421 (de Villiers, 122.4 ov)

Bowling O M R W Econ 0s 4s 6s
JE Taylor 20 2 80 1 4.00 83 9 0 (1nb, 1w)
ST Gabriel 17 2 64 1 3.76 70 3 0 (7nb, 3w)
JO Holder 24 4 87 2 3.62 107 12 0 (2nb, 1w)
MN Samuels 16.4 0 68 2 4.08 68 8 1
SJ Benn 45 9 115 1 2.55 202 9 1
West Indies 2nd innings R M B 4s 6s SR
KC Brathwaite b Harmer 16 64 45 1 0 35.55
DS Smith c †de Villiers b Morkel 7 50 36 1 0 19.44
LR Johnson c Amla b Morkel 44 112 76 6 0 57.89
MN Samuels c Elgar b Harmer 74 225 150 9 2 49.33
S Chanderpaul run out (Bavuma) 50 203 113 5 0 44.24
J Blackwood b Steyn 13 35 26 2 0 50.00
D Ramdin*† c Harmer b Steyn 0 5 1 0 0 0.00
JO Holder c Amla b Harmer 2 16 16 0 0 12.50
JE Taylor c Elgar b Harmer 0 3 2 0 0 0.00
SJ Benn c †de Villiers b Steyn 0 5 4 0 0 0.00
ST Gabriel not out 2 9 10 0 0 20.00
Extras (b 4, lb 3) 7
Total (all out; 79.5 overs; 355 mins) 215 (2.69 runs per over)

Fall of wickets:  1-23 (Smith, 10.6 ov), 2-27 (Brathwaite, 13.5 ov), 3-95 (Johnson, 36.5 ov), 4-182 (Samuels, 64.5 ov), 5-202 (Blackwood, 71.6 ov), 6-204 (Ramdin, 73.1 ov), 7-213 (Holder, 76.3 ov), 8-213 (Taylor, 76.5 ov), 9-213 (Benn, 77.4 ov), 10-215 (Chanderpaul, 79.5 ov)

Bowling O M R W Econ 0s 4s 6s
DW Steyn 23.5 3 75 3 3.14 110 11 0
VD Philander 16 4 27 0 1.68 81 1 0
M Morkel 14 7 18 2 1.28 74 2 0
SR Harmer 24 7 82 4 3.41 106 9 2
S van Zyl 2 0 6 0 3.00 9 1 0
South Africa 2nd innings (target: 124 runs) R M B 4s 6s SR
D Elgar not out 60 103 7 1 58.25
AN Petersen b Benn 0 10 7 0 0 0.00
F du Plessis c Blackwood b Benn 14 77 69 2 0 20.28
HM Amla* not out 38 49 6 0 77.55
Extras (b 8, lb 2, nb 2) 12
Total (2 wickets; 37.4 overs) 124 (3.29 runs per over)

Did not bat:  AB de Villiers†, T Bavuma, S van Zyl, VD Philander, DW Steyn, M Morkel, SR Harmer


Fall of wickets:  1-9 (Petersen, 2.3 ov), 2-51 (du Plessis, 22.5 ov)

Bowling O M R W Econ 0s 4s 6s
JE Taylor 7 3 20 0 2.85 34 3 0
MN Samuels 3.4 0 24 0 6.54 11 4 0
SJ Benn 17 8 24 2 1.41 89 1 1
JO Holder 5 0 19 0 3.80 23 3 0
ST Gabriel 5 1 27 0 5.40 20 4 0 (2nb)

Match details


Toss – West Indies, who chose to bat
Test debut – SR Harmer (South Africa)
Player of the match – tba
Umpires – Aleem Dar (Pakistan) and PR Reiffel (Australia)
TV umpire – BF Bowden (New Zealand)
Match referee – RS Madugalle (Sri Lanka)
Reserve umpire – JD Cloete

Close of play

  • day 1 – West Indies 1st innings 276/6 (J Blackwood 45*, JO Holder 5*, 90 ov)
  • day 2 – South Africa 1st innings 227/3 (HM Amla 55*, AB de Villiers 32*, 68.3 ov)
  • day 3 – West Indies 2nd innings 88/2 (LR Johnson 37*, MN Samuels 26*, 34 ov)
  • day 4 – South Africa 2nd innings 9/1 (D Elgar 5*, 2.3 ov)

Match Notes – Day 5


  • South Africa: 50 runs in 21.5 overs (131 balls), Extras 5
  • Drinks: South Africa – 51/2 in 22.5 overs (D Elgar 32)
  • Over 29.4: Review by West Indies (Bowling), Umpire – PR Reiffel, Batsman – HM Amla (Struck down)
  • D Elgar: 50 off 86 balls (6 x 4, 1 x 6)
  • South Africa: 100 runs in 34.6 overs (212 balls), Extras 12
  • 3rd Wicket: 50 runs in 78 balls (D Elgar 22, HM Amla 24, Ex 7)

445 Responses to Cricket: South Africa vs West Indies – 3rd 5-Day Test (2 January – 6 January 2015)

  • 391

    @ MacroBlom:
    #384: I know we’re not gonna play two spinners together except maybe for the fact that Duminy will bowl a few as well.

    #387: More importantly for me is the fact that Robbie P has taken 10 wickets at an average of 27 and an economy rate of 4.8 IN Aus and NZ.

    We lose out on someone with a proven track record IN the two countries where the CWC is being held awa someone with previous experience of playing in the tournament.

  • 392

    @ MacroBlom:
    6/8 in the local derbies. (all 4 at home & 2 away)
    3/4 against the visiting teams at home.
    2/4 on tour.

    That’s 11/16.

  • 393

    Very interesting to read the following in an interview that Ashwell Prince gave:

    SJ: You were a middle-order batsman, but in that Test against Australia in 2009, you were made to open. You were given the captaincy, but you didn’t have the option of where you can bat in the order.

    AP: How do you know all these things? You got the story spot on! I had a strange message from the convenor of selectors at that time, Mike Procter. He said, “I have got good news and bad news. The good news is that we want you to play and captain the team. But the bad news is that you have to open the batting.” I called him back and said, I am obviously happy to be back in the team and delighted you guys are considering me to be captain again, because I had once stood in as captain before on a previous tour [in Colombo] when [Graeme] Smith was injured. But if you are making me the captain, I am batting at No. 5, because that is where I had batted and had the most success in my career. If you are telling me that I have to open the batting and I can’t bat at No. 5, then you have to find a different captain.

    I was only prepared to be captain on my terms, which I think is fair enough. I don’t think any other Test captain in the world would be told, “You have to open the batting.”

  • 394

    I guess with the attack by those “filthy muslims” high ranking politicians and royals implicated in child prostitution will be yesterdays news. 🙄

  • 395

    @ MacroBlom:
    Hi Pal.Feck them.May their promised 72
    virgins all be male.

  • 396

    @ ryecatcher:
    I was being ironic, it is just weird that every country in the western world about these “filthy cowards”, it just feels so hmmm orchestrated. All it served was to contribute to more hate towards muslims. and less fear from terrorists. It will only bolster the right wing agenda.

  • 397

    @ ryecatcher:
    Hey Rye,

    Hope you are enjoying the new “Spicey” RT on this thread.

    Amla must be the new opening batsman for the Proteas. At least until one of the other new guys get more confidence.
    There is no other player in the squad with the same concentration and application – not by a country mile.
    To put someone like Stiaan v Zyl or Q de Kock in that position is madness.

  • 398

    @ MacroBlom:
    9/11 Al Quaeda,hamas,
    All christians and Jews must be killed.
    Ironic indeed.

  • 399

    @ ryecatcher:
    But that is a debate for another day.
    When said by non muslims it is hate
    speech,which is infra dig on this site.
    Regards.Rye

  • 400

    @ Charo:
    whoever it is will play in bangladesh, one of the safe havens of top order batsmen in recent years. Will be a relatively “easy” transition.

    @ ryecatcher:
    The Attack today had nothing to do with Christians though?

  • 401

    @ ryecatcher:
    True that, this is a rugby/cricket/youtube music website.

  • 402

    @ MacroBlom:
    Lets not fight pal.Even “ironically”.
    You raised the subject.
    Regards.Rye

  • 403

    @ ryecatcher:
    nothing worth fighting over 😉

    As a shark would you feel happy with bissie as captain?

  • 404

    @ MacroBlom:
    Hell no my friend.His game has deteriorated(in almost exact proportion
    to (censored)since being made captain.
    Keep well and kind regards(and apologies for agression)
    Kind regards.Rye

  • 405

    @ ryecatcher:
    Lambie has all of the required
    attributes.Regards.Rye

  • 406

    397 @ Charo:
    What New “Spicey” R-T?

    Rugby-Talk is what it’s always been, no change or shift in attitude!

    The rules here are simple: No religion, no insulting family members or jibes about family members, no politics, no racism, no trolling and generally… have respect.

    Some of the comments about the unfortunate French incident today came close to crossing the forbidden line (I have to give some leeway though), but I was not in attendance at the time… and will tollerate no bullshit.

    I will draw the line, I will decide… that’s the way it has been and where it will be. My discretion on these matters has served Rugby-Talk well over the years!

    Goontie already got a warning today and no matter who it is, whether it’s Oompie Rye, MacroBull or you or whomever, I will not let anybody overstep the line.

    Pity that a tragedy in France illicits responses geared towards certain groupings… it’s not on at all!

    So, a general warning to everybody… please toe the line, people, stay at the party… that is what works here on Rugby-Talk.com!

    There’s often a fine line between political / religious opinion and grossly offending someone or some group – so, the general rule of thumb is to stay on the safe side. I’m not discouraging debate or being too strict, we have purposely averted the Voldy-type bullshit by simply implimenting simple and easy to follow rules, which basically only comes down to sensitivity and general decent behaviour – no more, no less.

    We live in a diverse country and in a diverse world…. and we tollerate, respect and encourage THAT here on Rugby-Talk!

    The FIFO rule applies… Fit In or Foertsek Off.

  • 407

    406 Hello pal.Your rebuke,however mild,refers.
    A careful reading by you of what was
    said will reveal that I did not initiate
    the debate.
    I am perfectly entitled to respond to criticism of Western civilisation.
    Insofar as insults are concerned,it is
    common cause that suicide bombers
    expect to be rewarded with 72 virgins.
    You cannot on the one hand refer to
    somebody as a tail gunner and then reproach other people for their comments which you have incorrectly
    deemed as insults.
    And BTW 9/11,SSCole and countless
    other despicable acts did happen.
    Once again this is common cause.
    Is it politics to mention them,or must one be silent and pretend that these
    incidents did not not happen?
    I believe that you are wrong.I do not see any insults,only facts in my article.
    In any event,I mentioned to Macro Blom that we should not enter into
    the realms of hate speech,and we
    ended our discussion fairly cordially.
    I also find it a bit rich that you can
    refer to somebody as a “tail gunner”
    with impunity and virtually in the same breath condemn insulting comments.
    Rudi,It is your site,which I usually enjoy.If you disapprove of my standing up to you,then let the dice fall where they may.
    Kind regards.Rye

  • 408

    Rudi 407 There is a distinction between
    terrorism and politics.
    Regards.Rye

  • 409

    Insofar as GBS makes up the rules, which up until now have worked well, there are very large grey areas that Rye rightly points out.

    It is a fact that we live in a world where the western world accepts and tolerates the nuances of faith based groups from the east, but where that same tolerance and acceptance is not reciprocated.

    I see big sh1t comng in certain parts of the world where the type of incident that happened in Paris yesterday serves only to give European thugs the reasons needed to start kicking the f*ck out of young (and perhaps innocent) Moslems on the streets of cities like London, Paris, Vienna and Dresden. (To say nothing of cities in former Soviet block countries)

    As sports lovers, for us to stick our heads in the sand and hope that it will go away is just plain stupid.

    In SA there is “freedom of religion”, perhaps it’s time for “freedom FROM religion”.

    Enough said.

  • 410

    ryecatcher wrote:

    There is a distinction between
    terrorism and politics.

    Unfortunately the one perpetuates the other, and at some time in a terrorists lifecycle, there is every chance that he will become a politician.

    Those of us that have lived in SA for longer than 25 years must certainly recognise this as fact?

  • 411

    “… In following him, I follow but myself;
    Heaven is my judge, not I for love and duty,
    But seeming so, for my peculiar end:
    For when my outward action doth demonstrate
    The native act and figure of my heart
    In compliment extern, ’tis not long after
    But I will wear my heart upon my sleeve
    For daws to peck at: I am not what I am.”

  • 412

    @ grootblousmile:
    My post was more in frustration with world media, Charlie Hebdo (the magazines’ offices that were attacked by the alleged Muslims) makes such a loaded “statement” on free speech to portray Mohammad… The same magazine where one of the satirists was fired for satirizing Jews and was labeled as anti Semitic.

    Now the entire world is up in arms like it is a fashion statement about this “Attack on free speech”.

    I just see through the hypocritical bullshit.

  • 413

    Alas, Ill put this discussion to rest.

  • 414

    413 @ MacroBlom:
    Whilst this particular forum may not “allow” for debate of this nature to take place, (and indeed whether or not is the “right” place to do so is in itself debateable), surely it is imperative that debates such as that between yourself and others here on RT on the matter MUST take place?

    Maybe just not here.

  • 415

    @ Angostura:
    Hello Ango.From this day forth I shall be known as Iago.”Je suis ce que je suis”

    Regards Rye

  • 416

    @ grootblousmile:
    406
    Hi GBS, actually I was referring to the good banter over our CWC side when I said it was “spicey”.
    I type slowly on a small tablet so my post only appeared after the Paris terror attack was mentioned.

  • 417

    ryecatcher wrote:

    Je suis ce que je suis

    As are all of us,

    Woe betide those of us that bow down to political correctness and swallow the cr@p that is force fed to us on a daily basis.

  • 418

    @ Scrumdown:
    Well I get where GBS is coming from, yes this is part of our daily lives and in our general thoughts, we are also more free to open our opinion on these kind of formats, and in this political debate we have been pretty civil and with decorum, but it wont always be like that. It is better not to have GBS come in and say what is allowed and what isnt, forcing his own bias on to some of us.

    There are other forums, very few though are strictly moderated to adhere with civility and decorum.

  • 419

    @ MacroBlom:
    Hello friend.I,ll put the question to you.What do you think of Lambie as
    captain.?
    Regards
    Rye

  • 420

    Charo wrote:

    @ grootblousmile:
    406
    Hi GBS, actually I was referring to the good banter over our CWC side when I said it was “spicey”.
    I type slowly on a small tablet so my post only appeared after the Paris terror attack was mentioned.

    cant you get a bigger tablet.

Users Online

Total 52 users including 0 member, 52 guests, 0 bot online

Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm