Ken Borland

South Africa’s bombshell decision to pull out of their ODIs in Australia next January, thereby harming their chances of qualifying automatically for the World Cup, have exposed not only the adverse financial situation CSA find themselves in, but also their obsession and the massive gamble they are taking in trying to get a T20 franchise league off the ground.

By forfeiting three ODIs against Australia, the Proteas will miss out on a possible 30 points that could have lifted them from their lowly current position of 11^th on the World Cup Super League qualifying table into the top eight and an automatic place in the showpiece 50-over tournament.

The reason CSA have given for taking such a drastic step is that their new T20 franchise league they are launching next January is their priority and they feel they have to have their Proteas available for the new tournament.

Not many people realise, but it was South Africa who first played T20 cricket at a senior, interprovincial level. Back in 2002, SuperSport and Discovery combined for a knockout 20-over tournament featuring Western Province, Northerns and KZN, and one other invited team, that sent the winners on a trip to an exotic destination as a prize.

South Africa were also amongst the first to stage a formal domestic T20 tournament, in 2004 as part of the switch to the franchise system.

While T20 was not initially taken very seriously at international level, after South Africa hosted the first T20 World Cup in 2007, the format’s popularity quickly spread through all levels of the cricketing world.

India won that inaugural World Cup, beating Pakistan in a thrilling final at the Wanderers, and the most cricket-mad country in the world’s love affair with T20 began. The Indian Premier League, the most lucrative of all cricket events, began in 2008.

The 2009 IPL was hosted by South Africa due to security concerns surrounding India’s general election. And that is when the adverse effects T20 has had on the running of cricket in this country began to rear their ugly head.

For CSA, T20 has been a bit like The One Ring in J.R.R. Tolkien’s classic, The Lord of the Rings. The ring forged by the dark lord Sauron has the ability to provide great power, but it also corrupts even the most well-intentioned.

Following their hosting of the IPL, CSA became embroiled in the Bonus Scandal that cost CEO Gerald Majola and several high-ranking administrators their jobs.

The T20 Global League, the brainchild of Haroon Lorgat, who succeeded Majola as CSA’s chief executive, was meant to get off the ground in 2017 and then in 2018, but it was embroiled in controversy over broadcast rights. Lorgat was fired by the Cricket Capturers who then plunged CSA into its biggest ever crisis, and the reason why the organisation was, six months ago, apparently a year away from Day Zero – when they could no longer pay the players.

The engineers of that ‘coup’ then launched the Mzansi Super League, which was played in 2018 and 2019 but was never financially sustainable because the broadcast rights – where most of the income should be derived – were given to the SABC for free.

And now CSA have a new Precious. There is another T20 domestic franchise league on the table, waiting to be launched. Whether this will be another poisoned chalice or a belated success story remains to be seen.

On the positive side, what toppled the previous attempts – the lack of broadcast income – has been resolved by SuperSport coming on board and being a 30% stakeholder in the event.

As far as the Proteas are concerned, there is disappointment that they won’t be playing the ODIs in Australia and they are upset over the 30 qualifying points lost. But unlike last October when CSA made a unilateral decision that the players must take a knee for Black Lives Matter, this time the team were consulted and they understand the financial priorities at play.

Apart from having all our own stars involved, big-name overseas players such as Jos Buttler and Liam Livingstone are being courted to play in the league. But it’s not as if there’s no competition for their signatures: The Big Bash League starts in Australia in December and the Emirates Cricket Board are launching their own new T20 league in January 2023 as well.

CSA are reportedly allowing each of the six teams in their league a U.S.$1.5 million salary bill, but the UAE are apparently going to match that and their players will only have to pay 2% tax, compared to the 15% withholding tax in South Africa.

CSA have three main income streams: broadcast rights, sponsorships and ICC disbursements.

While not qualifying for the 50-over World Cup would mean missing out on a substantial amount of U.S. dollars, broadcast rights only really bring in the millions CSA require when they host one of the Big Three, especially India.

And, thanks to the aforementioned CSA ‘coup’ in 2018, sponsors have also largely fled the coop.

So one can understand CSA’s desperation to find some way to keep the lights on at their Melrose Estate offices. And by extension the 15 provinces, which cost CSA R250 million a year to look after.

More countries are likely to pull out of bilateral commitments, and even risk their participation in ICC events, because of cricket’s skewed financial model.

It is time the International Cricket Council, as the mother body of the game, took serious steps to look after all their children and not just India, England and Australia. A failure to ensure a level playing field will lead to the demise of international cricket.

South Africa’s movement towards becoming a complete team ahead of next year’s World Cup was halted in Pretoria on Saturday, with atrocious conditions throwing up an unexpected stumbling block which saw their pack exposed by Argentina.

In the end, the Springboks scraped home 13-6 in their opening Rugby Championship fixture, but they spent the final minutes desperately defending their line as Argentina went after a late goal to level the scores.

Torrential rain and hail began falling during the anthems and kept up for the first half. Although conditions eased after the break, there was still steady rain throughout and the pitch was sodden. So there was no chance of the expansive style of play the Springboks are trying to develop, and they even struggled to get their more typical forward-dominated driving game going as the Pumas pack presented a brick wall of defiance.

Springbok captain Jean de Villiers, who has grown up in Cape Town, where winter storms blowing up from the Antarctic are common, described the conditions as “probably the worst I have ever played in”.

“The ball was so wet and so difficult to handle, you couldn’t play at all,” he said, before describing a comical situation in which Pumas flyhalf Nicolas Sanchez tried to kick off, but the ball refused to bounce up off the waterlogged surface.

“The All Blacks kick more and we now run the ball more, we wanted to play exciting rugby today, but we have to be able to play this sort of game as well. There will be more games like this, especially at the World Cup, and I’m not totally happy that we didn’t get a better platform up front,” coach Heyneke Meyer said.

“But even an arm-wrestle was difficult in these conditions, it was so wet that you just couldn’t get going. The rain made it a 50/50 game and 70% of Argentina’s team play in Europe and are more used to conditions like that. They have big, strong forwards and they like a slower game, because their tactics are more about contesting for the ball than continuity.”

The Pumas, despite their epic performance, were sad after the game because they saw it as a missed opportunity to register their first ever win over South Africa.

“We have had very few opportunities to win against the Springboks and we think that was one that we let pass. South Africa have a very good line-up and it’s maybe only today that they did not have their top game. So we are not happy, today was an opportunity to beat them,” Argentina coach Daniel Hourcade said.

The Pumas successfully dominated the Springboks in both the scrums and lineouts to deny them any solid first-phase ball, but referee John Lacey often penalised them at the scrums to give the under-pressure home side a reprieve.

“We complicated their lineout and we’ve worked very hard on our scrum and I think you could see that on the pitch. We consider that we were very good at the scrums, but we were penalised,” captain Agustin Creevy said with more than a hint of frustration.

The late withdrawal of Willem Alberts with a hamstring strain was part of the Springboks’ problems as it meant they were forced to play two openside flanks with Marcell Coetzee coming in for the enforcer in the Springbok pack. The wet ball also meant they focused their lineout throws on the front, where Argentina contested superbly.

Man of the match Francois Louw, the Springbok number six, admitted that his team could have adapted better to the conditions.

“We didn’t execute as well as we should have in the scrums and lineouts. It was a bit loose underfoot for the scrums and lineouts are always difficult in those conditions because you simplify your options and that gives them the chance to effectively compete.

“Those conditions require an immediate mindshift, you’ve got to tighten up and kick more, and our execution of that could have been sharper. We want to continue improving towards the World Cup so that we are on top of our game every time, in any place,” Louw said.