Du Plessis fifty hauls South Africa to 335



After being involved in a drop off Kagiso Rabada, Hardik Pandya made amends with an athletic catch in the outfield

Innings: South Africa 335 (Markram 94, Amla 82, du Plessis 63, Ashwin 4-113, Ishant 3-46) v India
Live scorecard and ball-by-ball details

A half-century from Faf du Plessis extended South Africa’s first-innings total to 335 as India picked up the last four wickets for 66 runs on the second morning in Centurion. A rash of missed chances frustrated India somewhat during a 42-run eighth-wicket stand between du Plessis and Kagiso Rabada, but they created enough chances in an improved bowling performance for the let-offs to not cost them too much.

Ishant Sharma dismissed Rabada and du Plessis to finish with impressive figures of 3 for 46 in 22 overs. The innings ended 11 minutes from lunch when Morne Morkel lofted R Ashwin straight to deep cover to give him his fourth wicket. It left just enough time in the session for India to face one over.

Starting from Hashim Amla’s run-out dismissal late on the first evening, South Africa lost their last seven wickets for 89 runs.

As a collective, India’s fast bowlers were far more consistent on the second morning than they were at any point on day one. Ishant and Jasprit Bumrah only conceded 12 runs in the first eight overs of the day before Mohammed Shami came on to bowl. Shami found the rhythm that had deserted him all through Saturday, hitting the seam on a tight line close to off stump and finding movement off the deck, mostly away from the right-hander. One such delivery gave India their first breakthrough of the morning, Keshav Maharaj nicking behind to give Shami his 100th Test wicket.

More to follow…

Source link

Products You May Like

Articles You May Like

Neymar gets in on the scoring, puts PSG up by four
Anthony Mundine KOs Browne in WBO bout
I was just dogged enough – Ashwin
Australian Open – Venus Williams looked the part, but there was no magic
Formula 1 gossip: FIA president Todt wants new rules on costs

Leave a Reply