da betway： Was it tough
Neil Manthorp29-Apr-2001Was it tough? Was it competitive?Yes, the recently concluded Cable & Wireless Test series between theWest Indies and South Africa certainly was.Nobody should forget how hard the first and second Tests were inGuyana and Trinidad, and the final-day embarrassment for the home sidein Barbados was not indicative of the competition for the precedingfour-and-a-half days.It is difficult to talk of the positives for the home side in defeatwithout sounding condescending, so I will limit myself to facts. ShaunPollock and the other senior players in the South African team haveseldom, if ever, played in harder Test matches than they did in thefirst four of this series.Australia are rightly regarded as the best team in the world becauseof their head-to-head record against South Africa, but Shaun Pollock’scurrent team are the more consistent, home and away. Australia’s lastthree 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 haveproduced a draw and two wins. South Africa are the hardest team tobeat.Never have three successive Tests gone to the end of the fifth day forthem, let alone five. There were times, notably in Guyana andTrinidad, when the match and series could have swung decisively awayfrom the favourites (South Africa) and, but for several obviousdeficiencies, they would have done. More of that later.It is not only my right as a visitor but my duty to step aside fromthe debate surrounding Carl Hooper’s suitability as captain. May Isimply say he was very, very good until that rotten decision inBarbados to give Pollock a single from the moment he was joined byAllan Donald for the ninth wicket.Fortunately, I said it on radio immediately, so I can say it againnow. It was negative and defeatist. Although I predicted a 50-standbefore they had scored a run, I did not expect them to add 132. Howcan you allow a man as talented as Pollock and a tail-ender asnotoriously stubborn as Donald to play themselves in?Otherwise Hooper had an outstanding series. His body languagebrilliantly camouflaged the desperate moments and when communicatingwith his bowlers and senior lieutenants he clearly had something tosay, other than Come on boys, keep going.I don’t know how the Windies management structure works, but Hooper’sresearch 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 toplay Marlon Samuels at No.3. Over a century of Test cricket historyprovides so much to learn from, yet we ignore it. I differ from thosethat say Brian Lara should have batted at first-drop. If Dwight Yorketruly believes he will be most effective for Trinidad and Tobago atleft back, then play him there – as long as he is doing well for theteam. 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 greatestdetermination not to be. With the unpleasant possibility of hindsightbeing my best ally, remember how he looked and played at No.5 atSabina Park.Ramnaresh Sarwan and Samuels are terrific cricketers and they willboth play 50-plus Tests for the West Indies – if they are handled withcare. Need I remind Caribbean supporters that Jacques Kallis startedhis Test career as a non-bowling number seven who averaged 7.5 in hisfirst ten Tests. If players are good enough, give them enough time toprove it.Pollock, like Hooper, enjoyed a good series as captain but an evenbetter one as a player. A second century batting at number nine makeshim 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 deputiesto hold at least one rein while he is in the heat of battle. A strikebowler needs to let the steam off.Four of the five performers of the series are straightforward CourtneyWalsh, Ridley Jacobs, Daryll Cullinan and Pollock. Brian Lara’s talentand historical record suggest he underperformed, as did Hooper.Dinanath Ramnarine’s lack of patience and Mervyn Dillon’s lapses inconcentration, at least one ball an over, cost them excellent series.Kallis, on the other hand, demonstrated what extraordinary talent hehas. Three sour umpiring decisions spoiled his batting record yet hetook 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 throughoutthe series and winning on his home ground. But he may be tired ofbatsmen taking 30 quick singles to him during a Test and only he knowshow hard it is to get up in the morning and start all over again. Forgoodness sake, respect his decision. Only he knows when the time isright.The holes in the West Indies team are threefold: an adaptable openerable to consolidate and accelerate, not just one or the other; adependable fast bowler (or two, now) and most crucially of all, amedium-pace or fast-bowling allrounder. Before arriving on my firstCaribbean tour, I was under the impression that cricket was dying inthis 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 beaccused of bias, let me say Caribbean cricket is fortunate to haveCable & Wireless as its major sponsor. They are dedicated and longterm. Seldom do the visiting media enjoy the level of professionalservice 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 SouthAfricans tend to attract a great deal of attention when visitingpredominantly non-white countries (like our own!) but your curiosityhas been almost exclusively friendly and my memories will be amongstmy greatest.