South Africa has to stop playing cricket

Well, if a team cannot chase down a meager total of just 172, one can no doubt question its credibility in international cricket and especially in the mega event such as the world cup. South Africa have been in the news for all the bad reasons since they made it to the international arena in the 1992 world cup. Since then, bad luck have struck them thrice in that decade and since then, the South Africans have made fools out of themselves and nothing else. South Africa were an unbeatable team in the 1992, 1996 and 1999 world cups under Hansie Cronje.

But since then, they have just been an ordinary team similar to say India, England or New Zealand. They have no one else but themselves to blame for their debacle in 2003 world cup when they were given an over short in the inaugural match against West Indies, when they were unable to defend a 300+ total with an asking rate of over six an over (even after the D-L method was applied) and finally when they needed a run and the batsman simply ducked the ball thinking he could do it in the next delivery against Sri Lanka which ended in a tie.

Now, in the match against England yesterday, South Africa did well to restrict them to less than 175 with some Imran Tahir having a ball with four wickets to his credit. Not even in dreams would the South African captain-Graeme Smith would have thought that his team would be at the losing side when at one stage the South African scoreboard read 124-4 at the end of the 32^nd over needing 49 runs from 108 deliveries with needless to say 6 wickets in hand. Since then, all the South African batsmen could manage was to lose wickets in quick intervals and see that their team lose the match.

I just cannot figure out what exactly happened to South Africa or what sort of magic did England do to get back into the game to come out victorious from nowhere. One can give some consideration to match fixing for, such cases rarely happen and that too for South Africa against England-who are not rated among favorite teams to beat the Proteas. With most of the betters having their say on South Africa, betting rookies can make merry with South Africa losing the game to England. There might be many similar matches like this but, no one comes close to winning and all of a sudden make a U-turn. Only fixers can have their say.

South Africa requires improvement

Yesterday, the most experienced South African cricketer-Jacques Kallis asks for some improvement from the South African players who could all do is to take home a consolation win in their recently concluded one day series against India after winning the third and inconsequential match at Ahmedabad by 90 runs. This was against an under powered team India which didn't have the likes of Sachin Tendulkar, Virender Sehwag, Harbhajan Singh and Zaheer Khan, which South Africa made use of to the fullest extent at Ahmedabad. A victory was more than less guaranteed for South Africa than expected. This was without Graeme Smith to head RSA.

However, even though the series against India be sidelined, South Africa have hardly anything to justify by its side in one day cricket. The last time South Africa won a one day series was in January last year against Australia (excluding all the under rated teams like Zimbabwe which is fresher than the one under discussion) . That was also an under rated performance which saw the Proteas gasping for a 3-2 finish in the 5 matches that it played. Prior to that, South Africa had defeated Australia in Australia by a margin 4-1 in the former part of the Commonwealth Bank series.

Since then, South Africa has hardly played any international one day series in 2009. And, whenever South Africa played an international one day series, it was found crashing unpredictably. South Africa couldn't even make it to the semi finals of the ICC Champions Trophy after losing to Sri Lanka and England, at a time when everyone thought it would be South Africa to emerge at the top of it group. South Africa gave no fight to either Sri Lanka or England against which it lost in a one sided manner. All the aforementioned developments happening when South Africa hosted the ICC Champions trophy.

And then, South Africa played their next one day series after the ICC Champions trophy only after a gap of 2 months when it faced England. But, the result was no different for South Africa. For, South Africa yet again lost the five match series to England unexpectedly by a margin 1-2 with the remaining matches being washed out. This was followed by the recently concluded one day series against India, the result of which is needless to be highlighted specially whatsoever. Despite being a strong outfit, South Africa's run in ODI cricket is fairly below par compared to the expectations that it draws from the cricketing world.

Which glory days is Richardson speaking about?

Well the latest news that we hear is that Ottis Gibson has taken over as the coach of the present West Indies team after his successful campaign with the England team that made Australia lose the Ashes in 2009. It is difficult for anyone to make the opposition lose a series, which should not be confused with a team winning a series. It was Australia who lost the Ashes in 2009 rather than England winning the same. Anyways, coming to the fact the Gibson has taken over as the new West Indian coach, one comes across with phrases "glory days in WI cricket".

Which is the glory days that Gibson or Richie Richardson is talking about? Is it the era of the West Indies cricket in the mid 70s that went on to the whole of 80s and early 90s to a little extent as well? Or is it the one after fellow players like Ambrose, Walsh & Bishop announced their retirement from international cricket? Or is it the era after Brian Lara bid adieu to all forms of cricket that Gibson refers to as glory days? Anyways, it is clear that Gibson is referring to the era when the West Indies team won the world cup in 1975 and 1979 after which they couldn't even make it to the semis if not for WC 1996 and PC 1983.

Anyways, with Gibson taking over as the coach of the current West Indies team, Gibson not only has a great risk of returning the favor that the West Indies team has been gifted by other teams that include even Bangladesh and Zimbabwe but also the task of seeing that he himself doesn't prove of his inefficiency as a coach. It would be fantastic to see the West Indies gaining the lost glory atleast a little bit if not completely. Once in while, even the West Indies come up with surprises like they won the ICC Champions Trophy in 2004 beating England by 2 wickets.

West Indies is the only team so far to have beaten England in the finals of a mega event twice in England after they beat the same in the finals of the Prudential cup 1979. If Gibson's role as a coach is given a deeper look at, if not for the Ashes win in September 2009, he cannot boast of anything bigger. England came close to losing to Australia in the Ashes that were drawn. Then, in the recently concluded test series against South Africa, England came close to losing on 2 occasions. Since 2007, England's major victories apart from the Ashes was against New Zealand only. This well supports Gibson's role as a coach for a team that need not be taught how to lose.

Something strange and unusual

This is with reference to the argument by the England coach Andy Flower citing that Smith was given a life when the batsman was on 15 then, which had to be given out. If the England coach's words are to be believed, the South African captain Graeme Smith had a knick before the ball went on the find the keeper's gloves. But, this was not to be the case as far as the onfield umpires were concerned. Smith stayed on the crease, probably not knowing what had happened waiting for the umpires decision which finally went in his favor. And so was the decision of the third umpire.

Smith eventually went on to score 105, which was his 20^th hundred in test cricket if statistics are to be believed. But, one thing hardly anyone can understand is that how could Andy Flower or Andrew Strauss hear the knick which neither was heard by the onfield umpires nor by the third umpire, who has the power to see the replays repeatedly? Of course, there has been situations where the third umpire has been partial to one side, when Andrew Symonds was given not out despite videos suggesting that his foot was above the ground in the famous Sydney test 2008.

But, the present case under consideration is a different one. That test played at Sydney was a controversial one where 8 decisions from the umpire had gone wrong, out of which one decision was given by the Australian captain Ricky Ponting (when he raised his finger to declare Ganguly out for a ball caught off a bounce) and the other by the third umpire as mentioned above. However, in the same test, Ricky Ponting was given out which replays suggest was not the case. But, this issue should not have been blown out of proportion by either Strauss or Flower.

If one has to go by Strauss' words, there should be such an issue popping up in every match almost when, there can be atleast one case of a no ball being declared a legal delivery and viceversa. And, this I bet would be witnessed by every test match wherein atleast one leg before decision turns out to be a wrong one. But, none of these decisions make news whatsoever. And, even if Strauss words are true to an extent, there was nothing to go in for a complaint to be lodged. No one in the crowds had heard a noise and so was the batsman. But still.....no complaints. And, how does Andy Flower say that the TV umpire had turned down the volume low before replaying the ball? Was Daryl Harper a dumbo by any means?

Why did RSA include Tahir?

Well the latest news ahead of the fourth test match between South Africa and England was that South Africa has decided to drop the Pakistani born South African cricketer - Imran Tahir after claiming that Tahir is ineligible to make it to the South African squad. The decision was taken soon hours after the player was selected for the upcoming fourth test against England along with another player in Parnell by the South African convener of selector - Mike Procter. Much has been discussed about the issue wherein a report also says that his selection and subsequent omission from the squad is an embarrassment.

There was no reason absolutely for the inclusion of Imran Tahir which not only relates to his nationality but also for his experience in international cricket and more so in test cricket and that too at this stage of the tournament where a win is quintessential for South Africa to remain alive in the series whatsoever. And, it would have been a risk for someone like Tahir to have made it to the squad which no one can forgive for that matter. This is not the time for anyone to give chance for a new comer to play test cricket.

Added to this, his nationality also plays an equal role which not only raises legal issues related to whether Imran Tahir can be considered a citizen of South Africa or not, but also his potential to make it decent if not big in South African pitches. If at all Tahir is to be believed to be a decent player of test cricket, his experience would always point to that in Pakistani pitches, where he was a citizen until recently when he got married to a local South African girl. Tahir has not even featured in the domestic cricket of South Africa though statistics suggest that he has played for the Karachi Dolphins.

Tahir's first class cricket contains only one half century in 106 games that he has played till now and only one six in 20 T20 games that he has played so far. On the otherhand, he has been found to have a decent run in bowling department where he has 32 five wicket hauls. But, the most interesting factor about Tahir is that he is aged 30 and cropping him up to be a star one day would be just waste of resources and nothing else. Had something been possible in Tahir's cricketing life, it should have been cricket for Pakistan which didn't happen. So, one can imagine what would happen in case he is given a chance for RSA.

Did RSA wait for Procter's words

Well hardly anyone would have anticipated that South Africa would so badly lose the second test at Durban where the margin of victory was more than an innings. But, that is the case with the South African players who at times make fools out of themselves. Sometimes it is the bad luck that keeps them away from the title and during other times, it is their foolish approach to the game. And, neither of these were the case when they lost the Durban test to England. Now, after the loss to England, the South African convener of selectors-Procter comes out asking the players to show fight.

Were the South African players waiting for Procter to come out and motivate the players by using such words? The world has seen the result the South Africans have got whenever they showed in some or more fight be it against any opposition. Regarding this, nothing more needs to be said whatsoever. The more recent one was in the first test between the two countries - South Africa and England where South Africa could get 9 of the English batsman out only to see the game end in a draw and the man of the match being awarded to the England batsman Graeme Swann.

Whatever, that should not have been the way the South African players were expected to fare especially against England who are not at all rated as favorites by any strong test playing nation. And with South Africa being the home country, such a defeat is not at all acceptable. South Africa are also the team that is placed in the second position in the latest ICC test rankings behind only India at present. They are one of the two nations in the cricketing world to have been ahead of Australia, which is a pride in itself. They are the only team to have defeated Australia in Australia in the decade.

However, they lost to the same Australia in the return series that shortened the enjoyment that South Africa had to just 2 months. Likewise, England will be enjoying their Ashes victory for atleast 2 years and India for four years until the next Border-Gavaskar trophy kicks in. South African team will always be remembered as the one which was waiting for a signal from the dressing room in the match against Sri Lanka in the league stages of the world cup 2003 which was the one which would decide whether South Africa would advance to the super sixes or not. Finally, may be the decision from the dressing room was to drop the idea of continuing their WC campaign. So was the situation in this series against England.

England - The Most Unpredictable of All

Well last night,it was fascinating to see team England not only defeat the Proteas but also take complete control of the game. This was not just another game that is won by a team in the last moment nor was it that sort of game which was one sided by the so called strong team dominating its opposition. One would have hardly expected England to win the fourth one day international at Port Elizabeth against South Africa especially when they were facing the Proteas in their own den and not to forget the thrashing they received at the same hand a couple of days ago.

Moreover England have not been the team to beat for any decent opposition. The only team that can be expected to be at the receiving end of England are minnows like Banglandesh, Zimbabwe and the West Indies. And England beating South Africa is really a wonder. Nevermind that England have whitewashed South Africa in the 5 match one day series played in April 2008 of the Natwest trophy. Also the way they regained the Ashes earlier this year (when another 5-0 whitewash for England was thought to be on the cards) is still fresh in the minds of the cricket fans.

It should be a dream come true for England to have dismissed South Africa for just 119 and in just 36 odd overs and in addition to have achieved the target in just 31.2 overs. Thanks to some great bowling by James Anderson who neither lies in the ranks of any great bowler like Glenn McGrath, Dale Styen and others. Neither was Steve Harmison rated among top bowlers of the world for their match saving and match winning efforts whatsoever. All for the lone reason that they belong to the England squad whose team rating is top only when counted from the bottom.

Only four of the South African batsmen could cross the double digit mark out of which one person scored a half century. Just a couple of months ago, England lost 6 out of the 7 games played against Australia after their Ashes victory. Sitll, England were there for a surprise when they beat Sri Lanka and South Africa to enter into the semi finals of the ICC Champions trophy when hardly anyone expected that from them. What happened to England in the semi finals against Australia is secondary. And one victory for team England is followed by a series of heavy losses like it happened in the 7 match ODI series against Oz and the other instance being thier 5-0 loss to India last November.

Keeping these facts in mind, England can well be considered as the most unpredictable team in the world fpr no oje knows what is going to happen when England plays.