Ken Borland

As cricket lovers we often talk about the old days and how our heroes of yesteryear would have fared in modern-day cricket, especially the new white-ball formats which have changed the face of the game.

The more nerdy of us love compiling teams that would never take the field but oh, how we wish they could have. One of the sides that is often discussed is the best T20 XI made up of players who never had the opportunity to play the shortest format of the game. In other words, all cricketers before 2003.

One of my selections would be Chris Wilkins, the former Natal, Eastern Province, Border and Derbyshire batsman who sadly passed away at the start of the week, to open the batting. Members of the younger generation need not feel like total dorks if they have never heard of the man, because he never played for South Africa. But he did command immense respect from his peers and many of them I have spoken to agree that one of the 1966 SA Cricket Annual Cricketers of the Year would make their XI for players who never had the opportunity to play T20.

Opening the batting in limited-overs cricket these days is all about being able to hit boundaries against the new ball by playing orthodox cricket strokes, and Wilkins was a master of that. There is many a former provincial fast bowler who is still bearing the scars of being belted over the covers or straight back over his head to the boundary in the first over of the innings, whether in first-class cricket or limited-overs, by Wilkins.

An average in the mid-30s is not exceptional by today’s standards, but a word of warning to those wanting to cast aspersions on the quality of cricket back then. Because it was three-day cricket, most of the pitches were pretty green and result-friendly, and it was probably the greatest era of South African fast bowling in terms of depth – the likes of Vince van der Bijl, Mike Procter, Garth le Roux, Clive Rice, Eddie Barlow, Rupert Hanley, Kenny Watson and Stephen Jefferies et al were all at the peak of their powers. Back then, only a handful of batsmen would ever average more than 40.

Wilkins was held in high enough esteem to be chosen for the Rest of the World XI that toured England in 1970, making an impact with a swashbuckling 73-minute century, the fastest of the season, against the T.N. Pearce XI at Scarborough.

As well as Wilkins, is not the thought of Graeme Pollock, Barry Richards, Procter and Adrian Kuiper playing T20 cricket a mouthwatering one? Lance Klusener is not eligible for this fantasy XI because he played 53 domestic T20 games, but there would not be a more sought after player in any of the world leagues if ‘Zulu’ were in his prime now.

All those wonderful fast bowlers would have been great to see in T20 as well, but, in these days of spinners being a strike bowler in white-ball cricket, there is not too much by way of South African slow bowlers to choose from. Leg-spinner Denys Hobson would probably have been the Imran Tahir of his day, although the Western Province star would probably have been a better Test bowler.

There are many international bowlers from the 1970s and 80s who are extremely thankful that there was not a T20 format back then during the heyday of the West Indies … bowling to Viv Richards would certainly not have been for the fainthearted.

There is a T20 tournament on the go at the moment in Abu Dhabi, with South Africa’s champions, the Titans, taking part. It seems to be very much a made-for-TV event, judging by a great paucity of spectators in a grandiose stadium. A triumph for the Titans would be nice, but hardly memorable given the gimmicky feel of the event and tiny boundaries that really make it into a slogging contest.

What is clear, however, is that South Africa has a great deal of top-class talent and it was a bittersweet feeling to see Colin Ingram and Kyle Abbott starring for a team from Afghanistan of all places.

There was nothing logical about the Springboks’ epic victory over the All Blacks in Wellington last weekend: their recent form and that of their opponents certainly didn’t suggest it and neither did South Africa’s miserable record at The Cake Tin, where they had lost all six previous matches against New Zealand. The match statistics were thoroughly dominated by the home side, who outscored the Boks by six tries to five.

And, unusually when I get to watch the Springboks in a non-working capacity, there wasn’t a beer or a braai in sight when I settled down to watch the TV broadcast. That’s because I was watching in a shopping mall (not maul) of all places.

The occasion was one of those “events” that marketing people are so fond of, but this one was memorable, not just because the long nine-year wait for a Springbok win in New Zealand came to an end. I remember thinking, shortly before those excruciating final minutes when the world’s best referee, Nigel Owens, lost his composure as much as anyone, that this had been one of my most enjoyable Springboks-on-TV viewing experiences ever.

I know this next bit will be met with as much disbelief in some quarters as the revelation that I did not have a beer the entire match, but I was also the only White person at the gathering.

In terms of the demographics of the country, it is logical that last weekend’s Fine Leg Productions event with the Gwijo Squad and Touch Rugby Sundays shows what the future of rugby in this country will be like. And what a bright future it is judging by the sheer passion on display, the knowledgeable comments and the tremendous spirit that led to a wonderful atmosphere, even when many of us were cursing Owens under our breath.

I have watched rugby in many establishments in the supposed rugby heartland and felt way less comfortable in a testosterone-fuelled atmosphere and way less impressed by the knowledge of the game that was on display. Several women attended the Fine Leg Productions event and seemed totally at home.

And imagine how much harder it is for these rugby-loving Black fans to feel comfortable in some of our stadiums? This was one of the issues raised after the match in the discussion that was held and it is also central to the creation of the Gwijo Squad.

They are a group of rugby-mad Springbok followers who are transforming the stadium vibe by singing and chanting vernacular war cries and their efforts to inculcate a more inclusive culture have been mirrored at Springbok level. It has been hard for Black Springboks to feel totally comfortable in that environment, to feel that they can bring their own culture into the team, but that has all changed with the appointment of Siya Kolisi as captain. Now we see the team singing traditional songs before and after the game and it is wonderful to behold this new, all-South African culture taking hold.

With so much focus now on the economics of our rugby – the viability of our professional structures and how we are struggling to compete with overseas teams because of the weakness of the rand – it is definitely necessary for the sport to be open to as many communities as possible. In order for that to really take off, those communities have to feel wanted and truly part of South African rugby.

A term like “rugby development” is perhaps not the best word to use because it implies creating an interest that is not already there. Contrary to what All Blacks coach Steve Hansen may believe, judging by the extracts of his book published this week, rugby has also been a Black sport for more than a century.

Perhaps the Gwijo Squad can arrange to take Hansen, when he is here in the first week of October, on a little tour of the Eastern Cape, where Black clubs are more than a hundred years old and rugby poles are seen in the rural areas far more often than soccer goals.

https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/the-citizen-gauteng/20180922/282720522881060

As we have seen so often in rugby, making changes to long-standing rules of the game almost invariably brings unexpected consequences and there has been a lot of talk recently about doing away with one of cricket’s most famous traditions, a move which I believe will boomerang badly on the sport.

South African captain Faf du Plessis was the latest to bring up doing away with the toss, although his beliefs lost some credibility because they came straight after the Proteas had been mauled in their two Tests in Sri Lanka.

Various high-profile Australians have also backed the ending of the toss, but again, these comments were mostly made after they had lost the Ashes in England.

Proponents of the eradication of the toss propose that the visiting team just gets to choose whether they want to bat or bowl, thereby supposedly removing home advantage, which the anti-toss advocates say has become a major problem in world cricket.

Happily, a couple of months ago the ICC Cricket Committee discussed doing away with the toss and decided that it was an integral part of the game and should be spared.

No doubt they had a better grasp of the actual facts surrounding the issue. Home ground advantage has always played a role in cricket, as it does in just about every sport, but winning or losing the toss actually does not have a major effect.

In this decade, the team winning the toss still only wins 43.78% of Test matches, so it is not a massive advantage. There is a slight benefit because only 35.13% of teams that lose the toss go on to win the match. Historically, Australia are the only side that wins more than 50% of the Tests in which they have won the toss, and even then it’s just 50.49%, only slightly higher than their overall success rate of 47.16%.

I believe giving the visiting team total control over what they do first would have a major bearing on the game, which is where the unintended consequences come in, especially in countries like India or New Zealand.

It’s fair to say the weather is out of the control of the people who prepare the pitches in those countries and they can only do so much to negate the effect of overhead conditions. Doing away with the toss would grossly undermine teams like India and New Zealand – in the heat of the sub-continent, dry, dusty, deteriorating pitches are almost inevitable and India would be batting second every time; conversely, New Zealand is usually pretty damp and overcast and the Black Caps would find themselves sent in to bat every time.

It would happen often in England as well that the home team would automatically have to bat at the most difficult time and it could also affect the Proteas at home.

What it boils down to is the ICC actually using the mechanisms they already have in place to ensure fair conditions – they already have rules in the playing conditions when it comes to unfair pitches and they just need to enforce them more diligently, especially when it comes to the sub-continent and even some South African green mambas.

The perception that away teams are struggling does have some basis in fact. In this decade, the visiting team has lost 51.75% of Tests, up from 46.40% in the 2000s. It is interesting, though, that the away team has been winning Tests in the last 20 years at pretty much the same rate as they have been doing through the history of the game.

It is, of course, the number of away draws that has dropped significantly in recent times; down from 47.31% of Tests in the 1960s to just 20.76% in this decade. That is obviously a positive but it also points to the rise of T20 cricket and batsmen being able to hit the ball but not defend against the turning, seaming or swinging delivery.

The problem is not the toss, it’s modern-day batsmen being ill-prepared for foreign conditions, and sometimes the ICC allows the home union to get away with cheap shots in terms of pitch preparation.

Bulls coach John Mitchell’s comments this week about how he is going to set about changing the entire model of how the franchise recruits and develops players reinforces the belief that South African rugby as a whole needs to take ownership of the fact that we are extremely wasteful when it comes to our talent.

The fact that we have so much rugby talent in this country is both a blessing and a curse. The downside of being so well-endowed with athletes is that very little attention is paid to putting systems in place that will get the best out of young players.

One gets the feeling that the current approach of our franchises’ recruitment officers is to just try and buy up as much talent as possible at Craven Week, let nature run its course and hope one or two of them turn into stars.

Contrast this with a country like Australia where rugby union has a small portion of the talent ‘pie’ and whatever players they have, they have to fully invest in them and maximise their potential. Jake White used to joke that if prop Bill Young, who played 46 times for Australia, had to pitch up at Stellenbosch University they would have sent him to the third XV straight away. But the point was that Young was ‘made’ into a solid Test front-ranker, whereas in South Africa he probably would have just disappeared.

By focusing on quantity and not quality, and by just worrying about who is going to play in the provincial U19 and U21 sides rather than developing the actual skills of the players, South Africa have come to the point where their SuperRugby squads are made up of many players who are not good enough to play in the competition, according to Mitchell, a former All Blacks coach.

Rugby in this country needs to stop being so insular and needs to be open to world trends, including those in other sports.

Even I, who usually uses watching football as a sleeping pill, have been impressed by many aspects of the Soccer World Cup and have been thinking how these could translate into the world of rugby union.

By staging a brilliant counter-attack to beat Japan at the death, Belgium produced a magnificent passage of play that was reminiscent of some of the superb tries scored by the All Blacks in recent years.

Any sports lover would have been impressed by Romelu Lukaku’s brilliant running off the ball and his dummy that set up Belgium’s winner; the lesson for rugby players was that often you can have more impact through what you do without the ball than with it.

And the image of football fans as being hooligans has been challenged by the splendid Japanese and Senegalese fans, who embody all that is good about sport, and they even cleaned up afterwards!

I have also been watching hockey this week and their new interpretations surrounding the use of the aerial ball or overhead might provide some help to rugby lawmakers currently grappling with the ball-in-the-air issues that are bedevilling their game.

Hockey have simplified the whole issue by basically saying whoever is under the ball has all the rights and cannot be played until they have the ball under control. Perhaps if the defender under the ball in rugby had similar protection it would limit kicks to being into space only and would eliminate all the aerial contests that are proving so difficult to control.

https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/the-citizen-kzn/20180707/282282436055423