Ken Borland

South Africa’s stunning 3-0 whitewash of India has answered many questions surrounding the ODI squad as the heavily-favoured tourists lacked the composure or the skills under pressure to register a single victory over the Proteas, even in conditions that suited them.

Five batting places are secure with Quinton de Kock and Janneman Malan entrenched as the opening pair, Temba Bavuma averaging 51 in the No.3 position, Rassie van der Dussen being the master of the middle-order and David Miller showing the value of his finishing experience in the nailbiting final ODI.

In terms of the bowling, Keshav Maharaj and Tabraiz Shamsi remain crucial in the middle-overs and seamers Lungi Ngidi and Andile Phehlukwayo both had fine series with the ball, keeping the batsmen guessing with their range of skills.

Bavuma has also unequivocally shown he is the right man to lead the team.

So what questions remain for the Proteas ODI side?

• Has Aiden Markram done enough to stay in the starting XI or do South Africa sacrifice the sixth bowler for another batsman?

There is no other obvious candidate for the ‘JP Duminy role’ of batting in the top six and being able to bowl a few tidy overs of spin, so it’s a straight choice – keep Markram and have that sixth bowler, or drop him and have just five bowlers and possibly a more consistent batsman.

But Markram did a fine job with the ball, conceding just 5.00 runs per over in 17 overs and taking a couple of wickets. There were also encouraging signs with the bat in the way he stayed with Van der Dussen to help steer the Proteas to victory in the second ODI with a confident 37 not out. He was batting with good positive intent in the last game as well, before being caught on the boundary.

• Should Marco Jansen be a regular part of the starting XI?

The left-arm quick enjoyed a brilliant maiden Test series and was immediately thrown into the first ODI, where he bowled nine wicketless overs for 49 runs, lacking the consistency he had shown with the red ball. The 21-year-old is clearly an outstanding talent, but maybe we should all take a breath and not burden him with a big workload right now in white-ball cricket as well. While he brings useful variety to the seam attack, the Proteas still have Kagiso Rabada, Anrich Nortje and Ngidi in that department.

• What is Sisanda Magala’s future?

Captain Bavuma made a plea after the series that Magala does not receive half-hearted backing but that the selectors “suck everything they can out of what he offers”. A perennial poor starter – those nerves need to be managed somehow – Magala however showed promise when he bowled in the middle overs and at the death. He fairly thuds the ball into the pitch, hitting the bat hard with steep bounce, and he can also go full blockhole when required. The Proteas may have found the sort of skilful old-ball bowler they have been looking for.

• Will the CSA board listen to the players or decide to derail the team despite their progress and success versus India?

South Africa’s next ODI engagement is in March when they host Bangladesh. By then the fate of coach Mark Boucher should be known. As much as they are able to as contracted employees, the players have made clear how happy they are with their current management, and the results show that.  But will the CSA board ignore the clear growth and improvement in the team and instead only have ears for the tom-toms beating and the cries for one particular head to roll for things that happened twenty years ago?

There always seem to be whispers about Temba Bavuma’s place in the Proteas side for whatever format, but notwithstanding the questions over his role in T20 cricket, coach Mark Boucher gave his captaincy a ringing endorsement after he led them to victory in the West Indies in his first assignment in charge.

Bavuma’s one innings of note in the Caribbean came in the second T20 when he top-scored with 46 off 33 balls batting at number three as South Africa bounced back superbly from a mauling in the first game. But Bavuma ended the series with just 76 runs in five innings at a strike-rate of 108.57, opening the batting in the final match. Which is where he said he envisages himself batting in future.

But for keeping the side together through the ups and downs of a tricky series, with an unsettled team, Bavuma’s leadership deserves high praise.

“I thought Temba’s captaincy was great, if you look at the bowing this series it was fantastic, give or take one or two bad overs here and there. The way he managed his bowlers when it was really tough up front was impressive. There were a couple of gambles that didn’t pay off but that’s always going to happen in T20 cricket. I thought he led beautifully,” Boucher said.

Bavuma himself acknowledged that he is still trying to make his own way in international T20 cricket, having only played eight games before this series, while having the added responsibility of being captain.

“The execution of your plans is always put under pressure in T20 and I just tried to keep the guys calm, that was my biggest responsibility. I take it as a journey, I’ve been given the responsibility early in my T20 career and I’m still trying to grow as a player, while leading and inspiring the other players as well. I’m just trying to get better and better,” Bavuma said.

Bavuma’s stern visage on the field suggests he is not one to pamper his players and, although delighted with a series win at the first go, he is looking for further improvement.

“The win is a step in the right direction, the challenge now is to get better and better. We have to keep an eye on what is ahead and we had to find the balance around wanting to win the series but also seeing guys perform in certain roles ahead of the World Cup. I think we’ve done that and we’ll take a lot of confidence and clarity from winning against a top-quality West Indies outfit,” Bavuma added.

Eight teams in the top division and promotion/relegation are two good adjustments that Cricket South Africa have made to their domestic structure, but the fact that, from 2023/24, one or two teams will automatically climb from Division II to Division I is going to ask serious questions about the quality in depth of the competitions.

While the complacency that comes from teams being entrenched in the top division is not good for the game, automatic promotion/relegation means there is no guarantee that the team/s coming up are going to be better than the team going down. There should be a playoff game to make sure the top division is not being perpetually weakened.

And a lowering of standards seems inevitable because the team/s being demoted is going to lose sponsors and players, while the team/s coming up from Division II will not have the resources of the other Division I teams. Without television exposure, and the fact none of the Division II sides are based in major centres, there is not going to be a level playing field. In fact, the inequality is already written into the system because the Division I teams that will start playing next season will each receive R9.3 million from CSA and can contract 16 players with a maximum salary of R1.035 million.

Division II teams, however, will probably only receive around R5 million, can only contract 11 players with a maximum salary of R600 000 if private sponsorship can top up the CSA-prescribed maximum of R400 000. So it is clear that leading players are not going to be signing for Division II outfits.

The only feasible way a Division II side is going to avoid being relegated from Division I after just one season is if most of the players from the team they are replacing jump ship and join them. But those are the same players who were not good enough to avoid relegation anyway, so South African domestic cricket is set to be trapped in a merry-go-round, or more accurately a vicious circle, in which the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and there is precious little development of either players or teams.

The need for stability in the South African game has been the consistent call from the office of the South African Cricketers Association CEO Andrew Breetzke, but this new system does not seem to be bringing that. Even less so if the disastrous decision for two teams to be automatically promoted every season is made.

There are still so many questions surrounding the new domestic structure, not least of them being whether it is one or two teams that will be promoted every season and how the mechanism of promotion/relegation works. Will there be separate teams going up and down in each format or will some sort of averaging take place so that one team moves in all three formats?

These questions were also sent to those responsible for the communications portfolio at CSA but no response has been received. One would think for a decision of this magnitude to be passed, there would be a set of documents detailing the restructuring task team’s position on all these matters in order for the Members Council and the Interim Board to meet their fiduciary duties when approving the changes, but no-one seems to have seen them. At the moment they are as mysterious as the Fundudzi Report.

It is a massive change to make based on what, judging by what has been revealed so far by CSA, are flimsy reasons and little concrete financial planning. A good idea is at the kernel of the change, but, as has often been the case, CSA don’t seem to have considered the unintended consequences.

The process of doing away with the franchises and going back to provinces is a complex administrative task that includes dissolving companies, setting up new ones, sorting out all the tax implications and putting in place an entirely new contracting model for players.

And it all needs to be done within the next month because that’s when player contracts have to be finalised.

So far, the restructuring does not seem to make sense on many levels and the cynic in me believes the only reason the 15-strong Members Council have pushed this through is so the tail can wag the dog and two of the smaller provinces get to join the six major centres at the R9.3 million big table on a rotational basis.

The Bulls started their overseas tour with a parlous 38-14 defeat at the hands of the Blues in Albany on Saturday, a loss and awful performance that’s going to cause questions to be asked about the team’s coaching and management.

The Bulls were level 7-7 at halftime, having already conceded seven penalties, made numerous handling errors and looked out-of-sync on attack, but that’s as good as it got for the tourists as the second half saw them totally disintegrate as the Blues added five more tries to earn a bonus point.

Replacement scrumhalf Rudy Paige was given a consolation try after the final hooter, having not grounded the ball but probably deserving a penalty try anyway, but the Bulls had been goners long before that.

The Bulls started brightly enough with a promising attack in the Blues’ 22, but referee Nic Berry ended it with a harsh obstruction call. The home side’s backline was gone in a flash, roaring up the left side of the field and some superb handling and offloads by fullback Michael Collins and wing Melani Nanai saw scrumhalf Augustine Pulu scooting over the line for the opening try, in the third minute.

The Bulls would be back on level terms after 17 minutes as they earned a ruck penalty, flyhalf Handre Pollard’s super kick set up a lineout in the corner and prop Lizo Gqoboka burrowed over for a try after the driving maul.

There would be further opportunities for the Bulls in the first half, but they were ponderous with turnover ball and their dire handling meant errors interrupted just about every attack after a few phases.

The second half would be the same story, only worse, as the Blues quickly seized control of the game.

An early attack by the Bulls came to nothing as nobody seemed to know who was meant to clean, be a pillar or play halfback at a ruck, and Pollard then missed a tackle on Collins, allowing a lovely offload to wing Matt Duffie, who went through a poor tackle by opposite number Jamba Ulengo to score the second try, also converted by flyhalf Piers Francis.

The most astonishing example of clueless play by the Bulls came in the 56^th minute. Lock Lood de Jager did well to steal the ball at a five-metre lineout, but at the resulting ruck, scrumhalf Piet van Zyl went to play pillar and replacement flank Jannes Kirsten cleared the ball, making the awful decision to feed a pod inside his own in-goal area. That conceded a five-metre scrum, from which Francis’s pinpoint kick-pass across the field was claimed by Duffie for his second try.

It didn’t even help the Bulls when Blues flank Jimmy Tupou was temporarily sent from the field for a neck roll. Pollard was replaced on the hour mark in what was apparently a scheduled change, but new flyhalf Tian Schoeman was unable to find touch from a scrum penalty the Bulls earned.

Soon thereafter, Ulengo burst out of defensive alignment like a crazed shopper going after Black Friday sales, and the Blues’ replacement flyhalf, Ihaia West, knifed through to score.

The Blues were 24-7 up and continued to boss the game as one was left with the nagging impression that the Bulls ran out of legs.

The home side were able to hang on to the ball through numerous phases because of their impressive handling skills, with outside centre Rieko Ioane making his presence felt with a couple of great runs, going from one side of the field to the other before replacement hooker Matt Moulds ended the attack by going over in the corner.

West had barely kicked the conversion for a 31-7 lead when he was bursting through the line again, with the Bulls defence far too narrow, creating acres of space out wide for Nanai to go roaring through for a dazzling try.

The Bulls did get the final points as they earned a free kick at a scrum under the poles and Paige, who should have come on earlier for a hesitant Van Zyl, went on his own to score their second try.

While most pundits expected the Bulls to lose, nobody expected such a dismal display from them and they have a lot of introspection ahead of them this week before facing the mighty Chiefs.

Scorers

Blues – Tries: Augustine Pulu, Matt Duffie (2), Ihaia West, Matt Moulds, Melani Nanai. Conversions: Piers Francis (2), West (2).

Bulls – Tries: Lizo Gqoboka, Rudy Paige. Conversions: Handre Pollard, Tian Schoeman.