Ken Borland

Given they have already fielded one debutant in the batting line-up in Sarel Erwee, one could sense Proteas captain Dean Elgar’s unease when it comes to introducing another new face for the second Test against New Zealand starting in Christchurch at midnight on Wednesday evening South African time, but making runs right now is surely the embattled Aiden Markram’s last safe port of call.

Markram was far from the only failure in a first Test which saw the Proteas bundled out for embarrassingly low scores of just 95 and 111, but his poor run of form now extends to just 97 runs in his last 10 innings. Captain Elgar admitted on Wednesday that the time for talking is over.

“There is a big possibility of a couple of changes, no doubt,” Elgar said. “Conditions and weather will play a part, but some guys are low on confidence, especially in the batting. But it’s difficult for debutants to come in and make a play.

“Aiden is a tough one and I don’t need to speak to him anymore. We’ve had a lot of tough conversations, he needs to score runs and his position is vulnerable at the moment.

“He knows that. There’s no need for me to harp on about it. He needs to contribute, he’s in a very important position in the top-order. We can’t afford to carry guys in positions like that.

“We’ve had a lot of very good conversations over the last few weeks that have definitely resonated with him. But I need him now to return the favours,” Elgar said.

Apart from the uncertainty surrounding Markram, South Africa have also suffered a blow to their bowling hopes with the news that Lungi Ngidi is still on the road to recovery from his back strain and will not be available for the second Test either.

The Proteas bowlers made the spiteful Hagley Oval pitch look like a road at times, so poorly did they bowl, and Elgar would have loved to have the accurate and probing Ngidi as an option, coming in for Glenton Stuurman, who showed promise with the new ball on debut in the first Test, but grew increasingly flat and ineffective as New Zealand’s massive first innings grew and grew.

If the pitch is considerably flatter after a week of more sunshine than it was for the first Test, then spinner Keshav Maharaj may come into the reckoning. But South Africa are unlikely to not field four pace bowlers, so the left-arm spinner would have to replace a batsman, a risk in itself given what happened last week.

The advent of the Currie Cup competition running concurrently with the United Rugby Championship has played a role, but Bulls coach Jake White was never going to change much for his team’s derby against the Lions at Loftus Versfeld on Saturday, given how thoroughly they outplayed their neighbours last weekend at Ellis Park.

With the Bulls also having a midweek Currie Cup game, there has been little crossover between the two teams and the only change in personnel has been Cornal Hendricks replacing David Kriel on the bench. Zak Burger is now the starting scrumhalf with Embrose Papier coming off the bench.

It is a stark contrast to the Lions, who will bring a much-changed team to Pretoria with half-a-dozen big names missing.

“I have confidence in these players, the team is strong enough to win if we play well,” White said on Friday. “Victory is not a formality though, there are standards we have to meet and we have to make sure we play well again.

“The Lions will be different though and we expect they will play better. Their coach and captain has given them the gears and they have made several changes.

“That’s a massive message and clearly they’re telling their players that if they don’t play well, don’t pull their finger out, then they won’t get picked.

“We’ve had to field two teams this week, so circumstances have also played a part in us keeping the same group together. But I prefer our model, keep the combinations playing together so you get cohesion,” White said.

Beating the Bulls at Loftus Versfeld has been an impassable mountain for almost all visitors over the last couple of years, until the last fortnight, with the home side tasting defeat to the Stormers in the URC and then to the Free State Cheetahs in the Currie Cup.

“We don’t want to lose anywhere and there is internal pressure around that of course, that’s the way it should be,” White said. “But there’s no external pressure, rugby is meant to be fun and we’ve got to enjoy it.

“If it had been a do-or-die match in midweek against the Cheetahs then maybe we would have fielded our strongest team, but we are mindful of our end goal.

“In 1996, Super Rugby’s first season, the Canterbury Crusaders finished last and they became the most dominant team in the competition. One of the key attributes of a succesful team is understanding and synergy between the players.

“Being a bomb detonator – now that’s a pressure job!” White quipped.

He will be hoping his team bring the same explosiveness they produced at Ellis Park last weekend to avoid another bombshell upset at home.

Bulls team:Kurt-Lee Arendse, Canan Moodie, Lionel Mapoe, Harold Vorster, Madosh Tambwe, Morné Steyn, Zak Burger; Elrigh Louw, Arno Botha, Marcell Coetzee (CAPT), Ruan Nortje, Walt Steenkamp, Jacques van Rooyen, Johan Grobbelaar, Simphiwe Matanzima. IMPACT-Bismarck du Plessis, Lizo Gqoboka, Robert Hunt, Janko Swanepoel, Muller Uys; Embrose Papier, Chris Smith, Cornal Hendricks.

Given the Proteas’ history of being slow starters in series, there are those who would be tempted to arrange that they always lose the first match of a rubber like they did against India, before rebounding superbly to claim the spoils 2-1.

Even captain Dean Elgar admitted in the wake of the epic seven-wicket win in the decisive third Test at Newlands that he was aware, and rather bemused by, the trend. South Africa were well-beaten in the first Test against India at Centurion, going down by 113 runs. But they then staged a remarkable comeback, winning by seven wickets at both the Wanderers and in Cape Town, chasing down daunting targets of more than 200 on pitches with plenty of movement on both occasions.

“There were so many lows in that first game and losing first-up is never ideal at home,” Elgar said. “But it’s almost a trait of the Proteas that we need to be 1-0 down to realise that our backs are against the wall.

“So after losing the first Test we really knew we were up against it, but the guys really stood up from a character point of view. It worked to bring the best out of the players.

“I’m very relieved the guys responded the way they did and it was a proper squad effort, and a few individuals did exceptional things as well.

“Those were the highlights – the individual performances of players like Keegan Petersen, Marco Jansen, KG Rabada, Temba Bavuma and Lungi Ngidi. It boils down to the mutual respect we have in the squad,” Elgar said.

After all the turmoil over the last couple of years, the sensational victory over the world’s No.1-ranked side is evidence that things are stabilising in South African cricket. Under-fire coach Mark Boucher is comfortable that his national team are doing okay whatever his strident critics might be saying.

“I believe we turned the corner quite a while ago, actually. We’ve had pretty solid results for the last six months to a year,” Boucher said. “We’ve tried out a few players and they are coming good now.

“So we are getting some depth, but we are keeping our feet firmly on the ground because we know we are not the finished product. But I liked the intensity we showed, especially in the run-chases when we were looking to score,” Boucher said.

It was never going to be a dolly of a catch that Social Justice and Nation-Building ombudsman Advocate Dumisa Ntsebeza found himself under, but given the evidence provided during the last week of hearings, his job over the next month in compiling his final report should be like taking a firmly-struck drive straight to you in the covers.

Given the legal pedigree of Ntsebeza, I would be surprised if he fumbled. Even though the way assistant Sandile July seems to have already made up his mind about who the villains of this piece are is a bit like your team-mate distracting you under a high catch by also trying to get under it.

As Ntsebeza has often reminded, his brief is to find whether there has been racial and gender discrimination in South African cricket.

For those of us who have been involved in the game since unity, the evidence has clearly backed up what we knew all along. There was most certainly racial discrimination and lingering Apartheid attitudes that caused some fine cricketers and people to be dreadfully treated.

But since around 2010, the issue becomes cloudier. The national team became more representative and more aware of diversity and cultural differences. Cricket South Africa’s Board became majority Black.

The last week has seen Ntsebeza admit that the evidence provided by those found guilty of attempting to corrupt the game – Alviro Petersen, Lonwabo Tsotsobe, Ethy Mbhalati and Thami Tsolekile – that they had been discriminated against on the basis of their colour, was “a red herring”.

Ntsebeza expressed his regret that so much time had been spent on the issue, likening it to “a runaway horse” that was eventually corralled by the testimony of those who led the matchfixing investigation in 2015/16.

So their evidence – save for some of the harrowing tales from Tsolekile’s youth – should be discounted. Along with that of former CSA independent director Eugenia Kula-Ameyaw, who ironically came up with the SJN idea.

That she actually has very little clue on the game in this country was borne out by much of her evidence being picked apart by the compelling testimony of SACA chief executive Andrew Breetzke, CSA’s acting head of pathways Eddie Khoza and acting CEO Pholetsi Moseki.

High-profile lawyer David Becker, along with Moseki, also cleared up many of the untruths about how Graeme Smith came to be in CSA’s service as director of cricket.

It is a pity that none of Smith, Mark Boucher or AB de Villiers have given public testimony, but hopefully there is enough in their affidavits for Ntsebeza to have a clear picture of their side of the story.

It is to be hoped that Ntsebeza, who seemed to grow increasingly frustrated towards the end of the hearings but managed to remain in control and exude a definite air of fairness, is able to produce a final report that CSA can call into service to ensure they continue the progress in transformation that they have made.

The importance of the SJN is to guide CSA into the future and not to settle the scores of those who are bitter, especially those who are chiefly responsible for their own demise.

Selection and quotas will always be a contentious issue. And even though Khaya Zondo was clearly unfairly treated in 2015, it is difficult to say it was on the basis of his colour given the fact that Black people, and not just De Villiers, were involved in that controversy.

Speaking of being unfair, July himself admitted that targets were discriminatory but were designed to undo previous wrongs. It is an argument with huge merit, but the other side of the coin is that innocent people are being punished for the sins of their fathers.

I always think the opinions of West Indian great Michael Holding should guide one’s view in most cricketing discussions. But even he appeared a bit stumped by the whole quotas issue when he addressed the SJN hearings at their closure.

Calling them “an unnecessary burden” for players of colour, allowing the churlish to say they are only in the team because of regulations, he added that he understood the reason for them because people wanted to see a team that is fully representative and that the fear is, without quotas, this will not happen quickly enough.

Holding said he hoped they would eventually no longer be necessary.

My hope is that the SJN leads to exactly that, where all cricketers in this country have an equal opportunity to play for the Proteas.