Ken Borland

South Africa have only really done what was expected of them in beating an under-strength New Zealand team in their one-day series and their selectors still have some tough decisions to make for their tour of India in October.

Sure, South Africa were missing players as well, but only a trio – JP Duminy, Morne Morkel and Faf du Plessis – compared to the half-dozen stars the Black Caps were without, including tone-setting batsman Brendon McCullum, middle-order kingpin Ross Taylor and strike bowlers Trent Boult and Tim Southee.

So, playing at home, one would have expected the Proteas to win the series, which they did with an impressive performance in Durban.

But with Duminy, Morkel and Du Plessis all set to return for the five ODIs in India, the selectors have to decide how to fit them back into the squad.

Their most pressing issue is that they still have not solved the all-rounder problem.

David Wiese was unable to have any impact with the bat, scoring just 34 runs in three innings at a strike-rate of 72, and he also met his match in the New Zealand batsmen, conceding over seven runs an over, although he did make an improved contribution with the ball in the win in Durban, taking three wickets.

He bowled 20 overs in those three games and whether he met the expectations of the selectors remains to be seen … their deliberations for the India tour squad will surely also involve Duminy taking Wiese’s place or maybe even giving Ryan McLaren or Chris Morris another go.

One player who most certainly proved himself in the series against New Zealand was Farhaan Behardien.

The 31-year-old has been one of the best finishers in domestic cricket for the last few years and showed that ability with his calm knocks of 70 off 87 balls in Potchefstroom and 40 off 28 deliveries in Durban.

Behardien is seemingly one of those sportsmen that has to work doubly hard to win over the demanding South African public; I’m reminded of Springbok fullback Zane Kirchner in that respect.

The strength of Behardien is his ability to play a dual role – he can play the role of supporting batsman, rotating the strike, for a top-order player who is set, and he can clear the boundary himself in the closing stages. Throw in a couple of overs of medium-pace and his fielding skills and it is clear Behardien is a useful limited-overs package.

Obviously the returns of Duminy and Du Plessis will put his place in the starting XI in danger, but Behardien is the type of player the Proteas should be very happy to have in their squad.

The other big selection decision is whether to persevere with Morne van Wyk after his half-century in Durban. Although the conditions were testing, Van Wyk’s 58 was on the slow side, coming off 100 deliveries and the way he struggled against the slower bowlers, when the ball was not coming on to the bat, suggests the Indian tour could also be a tough one for him.

There seems little point in delaying the return of Quinton de Kock, who went away and did everything the selectors would have asked of him by scoring three centuries for SA A in those same Indian conditions.

While he is certain to be in the squad, the place of David Miller in the starting team could also be on the table after the left-hander continued his run without a half-century to 11 innings, going back to the unbeaten century he scored against Zimbabwe in the opening game of the World Cup. In his defence though, there have been two 49s, a 46 not out and a 44 in that run.

The South Africa A bowlers still occasionally sprayed the ball around like confetti, but their overall performance was much better as they bowled the England Lions out for 209 to clinch a 78-run victory in the final limited-overs international at Willowmoore Park in Benoni on Thursday night.

After Reeza Hendricks’ century had carried SA A to 287 for six, just two English batsmen really troubled the home bowlers, with Jonny Bairstow scoring 64 and Samit Patel 55 as they added 76 for the fifth wicket.

Kagiso Rabada was the most successful SA A bowler with four for 51 (and one just had to love the way he kept bouncing back from being belted for a boundary by invariably dismissing his tormentor), but Chris Morris was the best of the attack with an outstanding two for 23 in eight overs.

SA A captain Dean Elgar called on him to bowl the first batting powerplay over with the England Lions still very much in contention on 180 for five, needing 108 runs off 90 balls to complete a 4-0 series triumph, and Morris delivered a superb spell, conceding just four runs in three overs and claiming the wickets of Adil Rashid (8) and Tim Bresnan (1).

It was a super evening all round for him as he had earlier made a vital contribution with the bat, lashing 35 not out off 20 balls to boost SA A after a middle-order collapse saw them lose four wickets for 37 runs.

The start of the England Lions run-chase was delayed for 35 minutes because the floodlights were not working to full capacity and they were quickly under pressure as Marchant de Lange and Beuran Hendricks each took a wicket with the new ball.

Captain James Vince looked threatening as he scored 23 before Rabada had him caught at cover-point, but it was Elgar who showed he’s an under-rated bowler when he claimed the key scalp of Bairstow, trapped lbw with a straight, full delivery, as he delivered an excellent spell of one for 16 in five overs just before the powerplay.

Hendricks stamped himself as a new contender for the national team’s opening berth as his splendid century carried South Africa A to 287 for six.

Hendricks and Elgar formed a wonderful partnership up front as they added 149 for the first wicket in 28 overs after SA A were sent in to bat.

What was most impressive about their stand was the way they married watchfulness with an ability to work the ball around and keep the scoreboard ticking over.

While Elgar fell for a determined 66 off 74 balls, Hendricks went on to score 107 off 128 deliveries, with 10 fours and a six, before being bowled by Bresnan with the total on 210 in the 39^th over.

The England Lions were on top from that moment on, claiming three more wickets and it was only thanks to a fiery late burst from Morris that SA A were able to post 287, when something over 300 was certainly on the cards.

Hendricks went to his half-century first – his third of the year – off just 59 balls with seven fours.

Elgar reached his half-century six overs later, although he took two fewer deliveries, but his demise came when he tried to slog-sweep leg-spinner Rashid, but could only top-edge a catch to deep midwicket.

Hendricks brought up his second century of the series in the batting powerplay with a beautifully balanced and controlled flick off his pads off left-arm seamer Harry Gurney for his 11^th four, but an over later, SA A lost their second wicket.

Theunis de Bruyn had breezed to 29 off 25 balls, as he and Hendricks added a run-a-ball 53, but then chanced his arm once too often against the impressive Jack Brooks and was bowled.

Brooks was the golden arm for the England Lions on Thursday as he also bowled Stiaan van Zyl for 21 and then claimed a return catch off Khaya Zondo (7) as the SA A innings just faded away.

Bresnan claimed the wicket of Hendricks in the 39^th over, hitting the middle stump as the 25-year-old tried to drive through the on-side.

Gurney added the soft wicket of Dane Vilas (8), cutting to point, and it was only the big–hitting Morris, smiting three fours and clearing the boundary twice, that lifted SA A in the last handful of overs.

Brooks was the best of the touring bowlers, finishing with three for 55, including two for 18 in his last three overs at the death.

http://citizen.co.za/321616/south-african-clinch-victory/

It is now one month since South Africa’s painful World Cup exit and a range of questions still remain despite Cricket South Africa’s defiant dead-batting of any suggestions there was interference in the selection of the team for that semi-final against New Zealand.

Fresh questions have sprung up like: Why would Mike Horn say things like “It doesn’t matter how politics or the quota influenced the players” and “Now we need to fill gaps, now we have to make the difference with less but give more,” if there hadn’t been any interference?

If three players of colour was sufficient for half the games the Proteas played at the World Cup, including the quarterfinal, why would that not be the case for the semi-final?

Why do CSA not understand how Aaron Phangiso not playing a single game at the World Cup is a disaster for transformation?

And, perhaps most tellingly, if there was no interference, why hasn’t a single player stood up and told the media to leave the whole selection saga in the past?

The players are understandably reticent to break out of the corral and speak openly about what happened on tour because there have been precedents before where players have been victimised or punished either openly or behind the scenes for speaking out of turn.

But all is clearly not well in South African cricket, even if CSA still want to live in la-la land with investigations conducted by their own directors and statements that are playing with semantics. Six months after the launch of the #ProteaFire campaign, the public trust in our cricket administrators is back to the minimal levels of 2009-2012 during the Gerald Majola bonus scandal.

Their rapid investigation last week immediately reminded me of former CSA acting president AK Khan’s investigation which cleared Majola of any serious wrongdoing, but which was subsequently described as a “cover-up” by the Nicholson Inquiry.

Team unity is often a fragile thing after the bitter disappointment of defeat, but it is clear that the players believe there was interference, it is they who have been driving the rumours as the media speak to people once-removed from the side. Even this week, I had fresh corroboration of the interference from someone, intimately involved in cricket, who had spoken to one of the players of colour in the team.

In order for our national team to bloom as they move forward into fresh challenges, this selection issue needs to be dealt with in a manner that satisfies not just the CSA board, but also the players and the stakeholders of the game – the public.

Personally, I believe the first step in achieving this is for captain AB de Villiers – the only player who really knows what happened in the selection meeting – to speak out and reveal what the truth is from his eyes.

De Villiers will not be the first captain who didn’t get his preferred team – rightly so because selection panels are there to balance out the views of the skipper to avoid the risk of cliques developing in the side – but as South Africa’s finest cricketer, he is in the unique position of being able to speak out because surely not even the CSA board would dare to punish him for honesty?

It would not be the first time there has been interference in selection – the cases of Jacques Rudolph and Charl Langeveldt readily spring to mind – but it would also not be the first time there has been a misunderstanding between the captain and the selectors.

There have also been suggestions that the Proteas are reacting to their own poor performance by making a controversial selection the scapegoat.

Whatever the case, the responsibility now rests on De Villiers, as the leader of the team, to lance South African cricket’s festering boil as soon as possible.