Ken Borland

The ICC do have a structure in place whereby the match referee rates the pitch for all international games, but Proteas captain Dean Elgar made sure his feelings were known about the Gabba snakepit as he said after South Africa’s six-wicket defeat in the first Test against Australia in Brisbane that it was not suitable for Test cricket.

Former West Indies captain Richie Richardson, the match referee on duty for the series, can rate the Gabba pitch as being ‘poor’ or ‘unfit’, which would lead to the International Cricket Council (ICC) requesting an explanation from Cricket Australia and possibly taking further action.

The general consensus on Sunday was that the grassy Brisbane pitch was very poor, with excessive sideways movement and inconsistent bounce, much of it steep from a good length. The Test was the second shortest since the Second World War and only the second two-day Test in Australia ever.

“For me, that’s not what Test cricket should look like. I would ask ‘Was it a good advert for the format?’ To have 34 wickets in two days means it was pretty one-sided towards the bowlers,” Elgar said after Australia had struggled to 35 for four to win, having bundled the Proteas out for just 99 earlier in the day.

“I’m a purist of this format and you want to see it go four or five days. But it was not a good Test pitch, there was some seriously steep bounce even with the old ball.

“When KG Rabada got Travis Head caught down the leg-side and Anrich Nortje was sending short ones over everyone’s heads, I asked the umpire when do they consider it dangerous? I didn’t get a reply, maybe they thought I was taking the mickey.

“The divots had a big role to play in the sideways movement, the up-and-down bounce, much of it steep. It was interesting to see how quickly the wicket started divoting,” Elgar said.

While the terrible pitch has taken some of the attention away from another poor batting performance by the Proteas, that is sure to come back under the microscope as the crucial second Test starting in Melbourne on Boxing Day gets closer. As captain of the good ship Proteas, Elgar needs to be shouting “Ahoy! There are rocky times ahead!”

But he, perhaps cleverly, pointed to the pitch as being the root of their problems.

“We need to be honest and realistic about what happened, we were absolutely jaffered out and they bowled properly,” Elgar said. “We were confident coming in to the game, we had practised bloody well. “We will now have some extra days to tap into our mental spaces. The biggest danger is to withdraw and not deal with what happened.

“I don’t see how hitting more balls is going to make us become better cricketers, we all know our games pretty well. It was just one of those games where we failed.

“Personally, I’m still confident going into the next Test, and you still want to give your batsmen confidence and positivity,” Elgar said.

The great Bruce Springsteen sings about the bittersweet feelings of joy and dismay when returning to one’s roots in his 1985 hit My Home Town and Springbok assistant coach Mzwandile Stick was probably experiencing similar mixed emotions in Gqeberha (Port Elizabeth) on Friday.

Stick is back in his birthplace with the Springbok team preparing for their Rugby Championship opener against Argentina at the Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium on Saturday, but the build-up to the big Test match, with the home team fresh off their stirring win over the British and Irish Lions, is strangely muted. Simply because of the Covid restrictions under which sport is now played.

“To be honest, I’ve been a bit down this week because it’s the first time I’ve come to PE and not even been able to visit my family. We know how passionate supporters are here, they are big Springbok supporters. This is a very special place for me and a packed stadium on Saturday would have been nice.

“We are all very passionate about the Eastern Cape, they gave me my platform, I am who I am because of this place. And we know there is a lot of potential here and we just have to make sure we keep on looking after it. Otherwise there has not been much difference in our preparation for Argentina, we are sticking to our routine and the process has not changed,” Stick, a former IRB Sevens World Series winning captain, said on Friday.

In terms of preparation for Saturday’s Test, the new 50/22 trial law that allows a team to throw into the lineout if they kick from their own half indirectly into touch in the opposition 22, is not something they have really had time to incorporate into their game-plan.

“It was only brought in this week so we won’t be changing much. But with all the kickers in our team it does give us opportunities. Frans Steyn, for example, has a massive boot that maybe we can use. But it does not change our plan much,” Stick said.

Speaking of Steyn, the backline coach said it will be important on Saturday for the likes of the double World Cup winner and fellow seniors Elton Jantjies, Jesse Kriel and Cobus Reinach to share their experience with a new-look back three.

“The key has been getting a balance in the backline. There are guys who have been there for a while – Cobus, Elton, Frans and Jesse – they are experienced and we know they have done it before. But the back three have worked very hard. We know what Sbu Nkosi can do, he has a bit of x-factor; Aphelele Fassi is a youngster who has played well for the Sharks and had a couple of very good touches against Georgia; and Damian Willemse is starting to mature in his game, he does the basics very well.

“One of our goals is building strong depth, whenever we get the opportunity we will give some guys the chance to recover and others the chance to play. It’s going to be tough against the strongest Argentina team but I have no doubt they are up to the challenge,” Stick said.

The second week of the Social Justice and Nation-Building Hearings has taken place at Cricket South Africa’s Melrose offices and, with former players giving evidence this week, it is clear that many feelings of discrimination arose from selection matters.

Selection in cricket is always a controversial and complex matter because of how many variables are involved in the game. It’s a bit like rugby in that you often don’t just choose your 11 or 15 best individual players. It’s about combinations and, in cricket especially, the balance of the team is so crucial.

And that balance has to be fit for purpose for whatever the conditions on the day or the opposition.

Adding to this already delicate mix is the fact that interfering with selection is official CSA policy; as Roger Telemachus testified this week, he had to be pulled from a 2007 World Cup match because there were no Black Africans in the XI.

The fact that it was Makhaya Ntini who was ‘forced’ into the team is interesting. The Mdingi Express was not only a vital beacon for transformation, but also a guaranteed selection for the vast majority of his career simply because of how great a fast bowler he was. But by 2007, especially on the low and slow pitches of the Caribbean, his white-ball form was declining.

Telemachus, a more skilful bowler in terms of slower balls, yorkers and other variations, was probably the better bet at that stage. Shaun Pollock, around about the same time, had to face similar pain as coach Mickey Arthur called time on his Test career because of his declining pace.

These are the sort of cricketing, rather than discriminatory, reasons that should definitely be considered by the SJN commission. As excellent a job as ombudsman Advocate Dumisa Ntsebenza and his two colleagues are doing, I do wish they had been given a cricketing expert to assist them – someone like Geoff Toyana.

The SJN’s shortcomings in this regard were shown when Ntsebeza asked Aaron Phangiso why Imran Tahir didn’t just stand down and give him a chance. Imagine Kagiso Rabada being asked to sit out and give Lutho Sipamla a go?

Phangiso was disgracefully treated in terms of selection in the 2015 World Cup, of that I have no doubt. For him to not play a single match was far more in need of intervention than the ill-fated make-up of the semifinal team. To not even play this quality left-arm spinner, known as ‘The Banker’ by his highly successful Highveld Lions team, against Ireland and the United Arab Emirates was appalling. The latter game was played on the isle of New Zealand, where the UAE were never going to stretch the Proteas. If South Africa felt Phangiso’s inclusion was somehow going to risk defeat, he should never have been in the World Cup squad in the first place.

But was this discrimination? The coach at the time – Russell Domingo – is Black, and so is the then-CEO, Haroon Lorgat, who had oversight over selection, with a majority Black board breathing down his neck.

I get the feeling from the many comments I have seen about former players ‘deserving’ better or ‘why weren’t they given more opportunity’, that many people don’t understand the nature of high-performance sport. Its about the best taking on the best. Of course in this country, with its history of oppression, there are mechanisms required to level the playing fields.

But no-one is entitled to be chosen, high performance sport is not about giving everyone a chance. It was also my dream to play first-class cricket, but I wasn’t good enough, end of story.

To see a former player with a batting average of 19.24 and strike-rate of 51 after 72 innings across the formats pose as a victim of a lack of opportunity is sad. He also said CSA is full of white bosses, which is totally at odds with the actual situation in a boardroom that has been majority Black for a long time.

I fully support Ntsebeza in this vital initiative to try and fix our cricket. But he is going to need the Wisdom of Solomon and some real cricket experts to do that.

It’s hard to describe for non-sports lovers what A World Without Sport is like, but I guess an office without coffee or a party without any music could mimic the same feelings of emptiness and loss myself and millions of others are feeling right now in these times of Covid-19.

It is, of course, a small, hopefully shortlived price to pay for our health and ensuring that society itself does not break down. As one government minister put it, every life saved now is a potential sports fan in the future.

But it is hard not to feel sad that, as summer fades into autumn, there will be no more bat on ball, no nervewracking SuperRugby clashes, no more peaceful hours on the couch watching the best golfers in the world strut their stuff on beautiful courses. The hockey astroturfs, usually so full of joie de vivre on the weekends, are quiet. There is no more gloating from Liverpool fans on social media, or the angst of long-suffering Arsenal supporters.

Sport provides a thrill, a shot of inspiration watching real-life superheroes overcoming the odds and, for many people, gives them a reason to slog through the week and make it to the weekend. As if to rub it in, the weather in Johannesburg has been glorious the last couple of days, sunny and warm, perfect for a day at the Wanderers or SuperSport Park.

But when the governing bodies of the various sports sift through the wreckage of 2020 once this pandemic has passed, they will have the opportunity to perhaps ‘reboot’ several aspects of their product.

It seems inevitable, given the financial damage Covid-19 will do to the coffers of sport across the board, that the sporting landscape will change once the world returns to ‘normal’ again. Sadly, some cherished things might fall by the wayside; happily, some blights might disappear.

Writing in The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2020/mar/16/beware-sporting-disaster-capitalists-crisis-go-to-waste), the excellent Jonathan Liew speaks about the Covid-19 crisis causing financial turmoil and then warns of “greedy disaster capitalists” taking advantage. Sporting bodies could be forced into some unpalatable decisions simply due to financial pressures.

The column ends with the warning – “For the next few weeks, perhaps even months, the power-brokers of sport – administrators and executives, sponsors and speculators, agents and marketers – will be at a loose end. Nothing to do but plot and strategise and kick around ideas. And then ask yourself a question: how far do you trust these people to act in the best interests of the sport you love?”

The South African situation is further complicated by Icasa, the broadcast and telecoms regulator, drawing up the new legislation governing the coverage of sport in the country. The amendments are due to be published by the end of September and Icasa have already said the goal is to ensure more free-to-air coverage of sporting events that are “in the national interest”.

The problem is the free-to-air broadcasters do not have the means to do this properly; the national broadcaster is all but bankrupt and e.tv are far from the forefront of the sports business game.

The loss of income from the exclusive television rights SuperSport pays will only add to the burden of our sports bodies after the Covid-19 pandemic.

SA Rugby seem to be one of the earliest movers in terms of strategising for what happens next. There have been strong suggestions that once it is safe to start playing rugby again, SuperRugby 2020 will be rebooted with the South African franchises (and possibly the Free State Cheetahs) playing each other in a series of local derbies.

This is a fantastic idea and hopefully crowd attendances will be much greater than they have been for SuperRugby in recent years.

And the icing on the cake would be if this spurs major change in our competition structures and the Currie Cup is restored to its rightful place as a major tournament and not just an afterthought.

With enthusiasm waning for the 25-year-old SuperRugby concept, change, accompanied by a move towards Europe, could be good.

https://citizen.co.za/sport/sport-columnists/2258834/post-pandemic-days-a-chance-for-sport-to-reboot/