Ken Borland

For only the second time under Dean Elgar’s captaincy, South African cricket fans could see a Proteas team take the field without spinner Keshav Maharaj when the first Test against New Zealand starts at the Hagley Oval in Christchurch at midnight on Wednesday, South African time.

The only previous time the Proteas have gone into a game with an all-pace attack under Elgar was against Pakistan at the Wanderers in January 2019, but the gritty opening batsman was just standing in on that occasion for Faf du Plessis.

But since Elgar has been appointed as the official Test captain, he has always had Maharaj in his team, unsurprisingly in the West Indies but also in all three Tests against India earlier this summer on seamer-friendly pitches. The skipper has spoken previously about his reluctance to go into a Test without a spinner, but on the eve of the game in New Zealand, he admitted this was a possibility.

“Whether or not we play the spinner is obviously the hot topic for us, whether there is space for one is one of the bigger decisions we have to make,” Elgar said.

“Conditions won’t necessarily suit a spinner and history shows that a spinner does not have much of a role at Hagley Oval.”

Indeed, New Zealand have confirmed that they will be going into the match with four frontline pacemen and will probably also play two all-rounders who can bowl seam-up in Colin de Grandhomme and Daryl Mitchell.

Apart from settling on the starting XI with coach Mark Boucher and the other selectors, Elgar was also doing the admin on Wednesday of ensuring everyone in the team is on the same page in terms of their mindset going into the Test.

“We’re in a good mental space, although I mighty have answered differently if quarantine had been longer. I’m touching base with the guys and making sure we are all aligned with the goal,” Elgar said.

“The focus must now be more on the team. I’ve spoken to most of the team and the rest I’ll do today, but each guy will be in a different mental space and now we just need to align everybody.

“We knew what we had to fulfill in terms of quarantine, but the last three days have been brilliant, it’s like the players have a new lease on life and we’re all appreciating the outside world more,” Elgar said.

Either way, the Test series is going to see the Black Caps either remedy their terrible record against South Africa or continue their marvellous run at the Hagley Oval.

New Zealand have failed to win any of the 16 series they have played against South Africa, who have won 13 of them. It is the worst record amongst ‘top eight’ nations in cricket.

But the Black Caps have lost just one of their 10 Tests at the Hagley Oval – against Australia in 2016. They have been in rampant form in their last four games there – thrashing Bangladesh and Pakistan by an innings, India by seven wickets and Sri Lanka by 423 runs.

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?

The Proteas have passed the test of their character and fighting spirit when put under pressure, especially after losing the first Test, coach Mark Boucher said after South Africa sealed an epic 2-1 series win over India in the third Test at Newlands on Friday.

Chasing a testing target of 212, South Africa won by seven wickets thanks to three successive half-century partnerships between Dean Elgar (30), man of the series Keegan Petersen (82), Rassie van der Dussen (41*) and Temba Bavuma (32*).

Having been beaten so thoroughly by the world’s No.1-ranked side in the first Test at Centurion, it was a remarkable comeback by a team that is still in transition.

“The team showed great character and fight, but that did not surprise me because Dean Elgar is a captain that leads from the front and Temba Bavuma too,” Boucher said after his biggest triumph as coach.

“That fight showed in Dean and Temba’s batting as well, so the guys will certainly follow that. When you have real fighters like that as leaders, then that will probably be the character of the team as well.

“This is a team that is on its own mission and it is a special, driven changeroom to be in. It’s fantastic that the results are starting to come in now. There were lots of ebbs and flows in the last two Tests.

“But we played those pressure moments pretty well and if we lost a session, we didn’t lose it too badly so we were still in the game. We are playing good pressure-cricket at the moment,” Boucher said.

As the new-look Test side’s most notable triumph, the players are going to take away enormous confidence and belief from what is one of the best results for South African cricket sine the return from isolation.

“It was a really hard-fought series, and certainly one of the best, top-five, we’ve ever had in South Africa,” Boucher said. “We lost all three tosses and lots of people wrote us off after the first day of the first Test.

“But we need to see this result through the perspective of where this team is and where India, probably the best team in the world, are. Our youngsters will take a lot of confidence from this.

“There’s nothing like winning games when you know you’ve had to play very, very hard Test cricket. But our feet are firmly on the ground and we know we are not the finished product.

“But from where this team has come from, in terms of the on and off-field stuff, they have been through a lot as a unit. But we have had solid chats and we are a close-knit group that has worked very hard,” 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.