Was it tough
Neil Manthorp29-Apr-2001Was it tough? Was it competitive?Yes, the recently concluded Cable & Wireless Test series between the
West Indies and South Africa certainly was.Nobody should forget how hard the first and second Tests were in
Guyana and Trinidad, and the final-day embarrassment for the home side
in Barbados was not indicative of the competition for the preceding
four-and-a-half days.It is difficult to talk of the positives for the home side in defeat
without sounding condescending, so I will limit myself to facts. Shaun
Pollock and the other senior players in the South African team have
seldom, if ever, played in harder Test matches than they did in the
first four of this series.Australia are rightly regarded as the best team in the world because
of their head-to-head record against South Africa, but Shaun Pollock’s
current team are the more consistent, home and away. Australia’s last
three tours to Sri Lanka, West Indies and India have produced a loss,
a draw and a loss. South Africa’s tours to the same countries have
produced a draw and two wins. South Africa are the hardest team to
beat.Never have three successive Tests gone to the end of the fifth day for
them, let alone five. There were times, notably in Guyana and
Trinidad, when the match and series could have swung decisively away
from the favourites (South Africa) and, but for several obvious
deficiencies, they would have done. More of that later.It is not only my right as a visitor but my duty to step aside from
the debate surrounding Carl Hooper’s suitability as captain. May I
simply say he was very, very good until that rotten decision in
Barbados to give Pollock a single from the moment he was joined by
Allan Donald for the ninth wicket.Fortunately, I said it on radio immediately, so I can say it again
now. It was negative and defeatist. Although I predicted a 50-stand
before they had scored a run, I did not expect them to add 132. How
can you allow a man as talented as Pollock and a tail-ender as
notoriously stubborn as Donald to play themselves in?Otherwise Hooper had an outstanding series. His body language
brilliantly camouflaged the desperate moments and when communicating
with his bowlers and senior lieutenants he clearly had something to
say, other than Come on boys, keep going.I don’t know how the Windies management structure works, but Hooper’s
research and homework looked excellent so I suspect that Roger Harper
(coach) and others should be applauded including my friend, Garfield
(Smith), the computer analyst.Hooper’s error in Barbados was irrelevant compared to the decision to
play Marlon Samuels at No.3. Over a century of Test cricket history
provides so much to learn from, yet we ignore it. I differ from those
that say Brian Lara should have batted at first-drop. If Dwight Yorke
truly believes he will be most effective for Trinidad and Tobago at
left back, then play him there – as long as he is doing well for the
team. Don’t allow your greatest players to be distracted.But to play two 20-year-olds in the top five was a poor gamble.
Samuels was cramped, suffocated and intimidated despite his greatest
determination not to be. With the unpleasant possibility of hindsight
being my best ally, remember how he looked and played at No.5 at
Sabina Park.Ramnaresh Sarwan and Samuels are terrific cricketers and they will
both play 50-plus Tests for the West Indies – if they are handled with
care. Need I remind Caribbean supporters that Jacques Kallis started
his Test career as a non-bowling number seven who averaged 7.5 in his
first ten Tests. If players are good enough, give them enough time to
prove it.Pollock, like Hooper, enjoyed a good series as captain but an even
better one as a player. A second century batting at number nine makes
him unique in the game but his patience as a bowler was outstanding.
Maybe less so as a leader, but then he has made plans for his deputies
to hold at least one rein while he is in the heat of battle. A strike
bowler needs to let the steam off.Four of the five performers of the series are straightforward Courtney
Walsh, Ridley Jacobs, Daryll Cullinan and Pollock. Brian Lara’s talent
and historical record suggest he underperformed, as did Hooper.
Dinanath Ramnarine’s lack of patience and Mervyn Dillon’s lapses in
concentration, at least one ball an over, cost them excellent series.Kallis, on the other hand, demonstrated what extraordinary talent he
has. Three sour umpiring decisions spoiled his batting record yet he
took 20 wickets and bore the new-ball burden when Donald was injured.On the subject of Walsh, would it not be fair to leave him alone now?
He finished his career on a tremendous high, taking wickets throughout
the series and winning on his home ground. But he may be tired of
batsmen taking 30 quick singles to him during a Test and only he knows
how hard it is to get up in the morning and start all over again. For
goodness sake, respect his decision. Only he knows when the time is
right.The holes in the West Indies team are threefold: an adaptable opener
able to consolidate and accelerate, not just one or the other; a
dependable fast bowler (or two, now) and most crucially of all, a
medium-pace or fast-bowling allrounder. Before arriving on my first
Caribbean tour, I was under the impression that cricket was dying in
this region. I will leave much the wiser. Cricket is more widely alive
(here) than in South Africa; truly.Penultimately, as I am not being paid for this article and cannot be
accused of bias, let me say Caribbean cricket is fortunate to have
Cable & Wireless as its major sponsor. They are dedicated and longterm. Seldom do the visiting media enjoy the level of professional
service and hospitality we have encountered here.Finally, to the people of the five countries we have visited so far,
may I say it has been my most enjoyable tour (out of 26). White South
Africans tend to attract a great deal of attention when visiting
predominantly non-white countries (like our own!) but your curiosity
has been almost exclusively friendly and my memories will be amongst
my greatest.
