| Series | Countries | Live Scores | Fixtures | Results | News |
Features
|
Photos | Video & Audio | Blogs | Statistics | Archive | Games | Mobile | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why aren't the critics talking about the Amlas and the Duminys? A look at the hypocrisy in South African attitudes towards transformation
June 2, 2009
![]()
|
|||
|
Related Links
Teams:
South Africa
|
|||
Merit selection has pretensions to perfect science: put the best 11 players on the field and let them get on with delivering of their best. Simple, equitable, the only way.
Not quite. What if the best players are kept off the field by some extraneous factor, like racially based selection policies? What if they've given up their dear ambition to play for their own countries and resort to becoming international mercenaries? What if, because of these issues, no one knows who the best players really are? Merit selection? Based on what, exactly?
If you think this refers to the current climate in South African cricket, with its affirmative-action mindset, think again. The truth is, no South African team has ever been picked on merit.
Basil D'Oliveira knew exactly how Allan Lamb and Kepler Wessels felt when the door to an international career was shut in their faces. Kevin Pietersen? He opted for England because he didn't like the terms of a contract offered him by the Dolphins way back when he was no more nor less than a decidedly ordinary offspinner.
Unlike D'Oliveira, Lamb and Wessels never had to apologise for daring to be born into a society imprisoned by an arsenal of evil laws. Their generation of white South African players had their Test careers snuffed out or rendered stillborn by 22 years of apartheid-induced isolation. But that was as nothing compared to the many generations of black players who were forbidden to compete with those who were fatuously called the country's finest. Now the pendulum has swung. In fact, it's still swinging.
The ever-swelling ranks of the South Africans who ply their trade in England, among them players with international experience, are grist to the reactionaries' mill. They never seem to tire of telling us how much talent is draining away. What these closet bigots don't say is that many of those who have decided to further their careers overseas have exhausted their potential, that their experience is their only bargaining chip, that their places have been taken at franchise and international level by younger, more talented, better players. All we ever hear from them is how unfair the South African system is. Would they wade in so passionately if the players who were leaving were not almost all white?
Verily, to be South African in modern South Africa is to be cursed to live in times that are too interesting by half. But there is evidence that the era of good intentions being sideswiped by smoke, mirrors, stuff and nonsense is nearing its end.
The first inkling of this happy day finally breaking came when South Africa won their Test series in England last year. The squad included seven players of colour, a fact that had been held up as a reason for South Africans not to be too cheerful about the impending rubber. "A mixed team went to England and came back with a series win; that hadn't happened for 30 years," said commentator Aslam Kota. Ashwell Prince scored two vital centuries and Hashim Amla another. A bloke with fire in his belly didn't get a game. His name? JP Duminy.
Seven black players were also in the squad for last season's tilt at South Africa's Holy Grail: a series win in Australia. Duminy replaced the injured Prince, and the runs boomed off his bat much like his confidence leapt at opponents. His 166 in Melbourne, where South Africa clinched the series, is destined to be celebrated among the finest innings played in this country's cause. Amla, meanwhile, was his regular rock-like self with three half-centuries in the series.
Somehow, these successes escaped the notice of the malcontents. Ever ready to play the race card when South Africa failed, they were suddenly rendered colour-blind and struck silent. "When you're winning and guys of colour are performing, you don't hear from the detractors," Kota said, a view echoed by Norman Arendse, the former president of Cricket South Africa: "I know that some people had issues with the fact that there were seven players of colour in the squad that went to Australia, but winning masks everything."
As a team, all the South Africans had to do was go out and win. Finally, merit selection made some sort of sense. One of these years, we might achieve it. If we do, we shouldn't forget the much-maligned Arendse. Along with the late Percy Sonn, Arendse fought the fight with all the passion he could muster. The victory in Australia belongs to him more than it does to many of his compatriots.
| The ever-swelling ranks of the South Africans who ply their trade in England are grist to the reactionaries' mill. They never seem to tire of telling us how much talent is draining away. What these closet bigots don't say is that many of those who have decided to further their careers overseas have exhausted their potential, that their experience is their only bargaining chip | |||
"Certainly, that kind of [political] pressure wasn't a factor in Australia," said Mark Boucher. "Things have improved a lot in the past year or two. Whether you're white, black, pink, blue, it's a matter of getting the job done." Did Boucher think transformation was working? "I should hope so, considering the amount of time and money that has been put in."
That reply hints that matters of transformation remain sensitive. "The [black] players understand where the whole process is coming from and where it is going to," Kota said. "But they're wary of talking about it because then the whole thing hits the headlines and it puts them in a difficult position. Maybe they hope that no one will ever ask them about the issue."
A leading black player confirmed Kota's view, declining to be interviewed on the subject. "Some of the guys have spoken out in the past, and it hasn't gone down too well," the player said. It also didn't go down too well that Australia avenged their defeat with an emphatic victory in South Africa in the second half of the season. But even that didn't ignite the racial embers.
According to Arendse, the fact that Mike Procter is South Africa's convenor of selectors tends to shut some people up. "Not only is he strong as a selector, he was also highly respected as a player and he has built up a lot of experience as a match referee," Arendse said. "That wasn't the case with some of his predecessors. We would occasionally be reminded by certain figures within cricket and by inferences in media reports that they had not played at the highest level. You can't say that about Mike Procter. He's been there."
Because of the success of transformation, Procter enjoys a luxury that some of the other men who have occupied his seat must have gone to bed dreaming about. "We sit down as selectors and we don't really think about transformation," he said. "It's no big deal, we just get on with selecting the team. Somebody said to me before the Cape Town Test against Australia that we had six players of colour in the 12. To be honest I hadn't even thought about that."
Sounds like merit selection. Almost.
| ||||||
| Comments have now been closed for this article |
||||||
Telford Vice, crash-boom-out left-hand bat, sort-of legspinner, was never
sure whether he was a cricket person. He thought he might be when he
sidestepped a broken laptop and an utter dearth of experience to cover South
Africa's first Test match in 22 years in Barbados in 1992. When he managed
to complete Peter Kirsten's biography as well as retain what he calls his
sanity, he pondered the question again. Similarly, when he made it through the 2007 World Cup - all of it, including the warm-up matches - his case for belonging to cricket's family felt stronger. But it was only when the World Twenty20 exploded gloriously
into his life in 2007 that he knew he actually wanted to be a cricket
person. Sort of ...
'The most complete fast bowler I've seen'
Allan Donald on one of the bowlers he found intimidating: the relentless Wasim Akram
Monty's haul, and keeper-captains
Ask Steven: Also, most Tests at Lord's, the Don's drop, Olympic gold stadium, and Mandela the cricketer
'Would you want to face Finn?'
Switch Hit: Jonathan Harris-Bass and team talk about England's win at Lord's, 4am Twitter antics, and the week in county cricket
'We've got a good bowling attack for English conditions'
Mohammad Hafeez's resurgence, after three years in the international wilderness, symbolises that of his team
Cricket Sadist Hour: Mark Butcher, Iain O'Brien and Jarrod Kimber discuss why Broad can be great or garbage, and, how Root looks worse topless than Compton
Pollard sledges Watson, Dravid is angry
Plays of the day from the IPL match between Mumbai Indians and Rajasthan Royals in Mumbai
A talent that didn't know its own worth
Sreesanth wasn't the most likeable team-mate or opponent, but he had skill beyond doubt, which we might have seen the last of
Even at the height of his success with the national side, Sreesanth was a lonely cricketer who felt hard done by
Unfortunate Sunrisers let match slip away
For 36 overs, Sunrisers painstakingly built a position of strength only for one terrible over to spoil it for them
A time for anger, a time for action
Out of the shattered lives of three young men caught up in allegations of fraud, newer and stronger players must emerge
Even at the height of his success with the national side, Sreesanth was a lonely cricketer who felt hard done by
Dravid and the art of T20 captaincy (56)
Despite a small squad bereft of big names, Rajasthan Royals' captain has churned out win after win
Anderson's magic not to be missed (44)
None of the other three England bowlers with 300 Test wickets - or many other of the game's finest swing merchants - could have bowled better than James Anderson at Lord's
Pollard sledges Watson, Dravid is angry (43)
Plays of the day from the IPL match between Mumbai Indians and Rajasthan Royals in Mumbai
"Minimise sixes" - Two words sum up farcical contest (40)
The eight-over dash between Bangalore and Chennai was as close as cricket played on the field can get to cricket played on smartphone apps
ICICI Bank M2I. Register Now and Get A Gift Offer.
Safe & simple online money transfer. Apply Now!
Buy Wisden 2013 & get a FREE Playfair
Available now at Cricshop
Thank you for a great article Mr Vice. While things seem rosy now I assure you there is still a way to go. Quotas are much more intensified at school level and white Saffers feel agrived that white kids aren't getting oppotunities. On the other hand all the coaches in good cricket schools are white and without quotas the black kids never get to play due to white preference so it's a difficult one. Even at international level there issues. The recent non-selection of Prince for the home series against Australia proves there are still some problems. Underperforming players like McKenzie and Boucher (ABdV can keep) were retained while it was said that there was no place for both Prince and JP. Prince had been the best SA batsmen for the past 3 years, even better than Kallis. Options to include him were available but ignored, this would simply never have happened had he been white. While proggress is being made we are no at the promised land yet. Great article though.
Posted by gary_f on (June 4, 2009, 14:05 GMT)SA is blessed with good sportsmen in both cricket & rugby; when we get decent adminstrators, we can fulfil our potential. While he says the SA side can be chosen without quotas in mind, it was not long ago we had the Andre Nel/Charl Langeveld debacle. I disagree. Whilst I am not a Pietersen fan, far from it, it is hard to be believe that the powers that be manage things so badly that players leave. We have plenty of unhappy players like Nel & Langeveld that have left as things have been so badly managed.
Imagine how good we would be if we cut politics out, genuinely selected our best team & the management worked with the team rather than against it. The SA cricket tour after Nel & Langeveld was a disaster & we won the Rugby World Cup despite of not as a result of the sport adminstrators.
Posted by Robeli on (June 3, 2009, 17:07 GMT)Oh boy. I hope his English teacher doesn't see this article. He will flunk it! What's the thread? He's rambling in circles and I am still trying to figure out the point he wants to bring out. Is he sad quotas are gone? Or are they not gone? Does he wants quotas again? Or not? Are selection now on merit or not? ??? So many questions! The article is named "Who's talking about colour now?" Clearly he is!! I think I'm loosing my mind and getting more confused. Need to go smoke a zol to straight my mind, or maybe Vince was smoking something when he wrote this. :)
Posted by edgedfor4 on (June 3, 2009, 16:53 GMT)Telford!!! please get over this now. I totally understand the history and more so the modern day pressures of South Africa's cricketers, BUT you as a journalist have the power to start taking more positive spins on the incredible rise of South Africa as a team in the modern game. It is like a stuck record this colour card - please give us more than just race in cricket. You make it out like there is this army against the players of colour I can guarantee most of South Africa are proud and happy to see the team win and more proud to see players of colour doing well
Posted by Philip_Gnana on (June 3, 2009, 16:09 GMT)A thought provoking article here. Strong words too and no mincing of words. It takes courage to put your thoughts to pen and paper. I have been just enjoying the cricket that is being produced without giving much thought to the things in the background. Recognition and praise should be given when and where it is due. It is quite right that there was affirmative action to encourage the black players. After all the white players had had it all along when it came to coaching, training and development. Discriminination can never be eliminated but can be minimised. I was encouraged by Mike Proctors words too. It tells you how far the majority of the white South Africans have come. We will always have a minority who will be extreme. The North South divide , and their cast system in certain countries is hard to overcome. Destroying the instituition will be an impossibility. Keep these pieces coming Telford. Facing the facts. Philip Gnana, New Malden, Surrey.
Posted by ianbellfan on (June 3, 2009, 12:07 GMT)Mr.Vice's argument is funny. Unless I am mistaken SA also tried very average cricketers like Henry Williams, Justin Ontong, Thami Tsolekile, Monde Zondeki and a whole lot of others. These are guys who would not have made it to the first class level in other countries. If Ntini, Gibbs, Prince, Amla and Duminy have reached where they are now it is on the strength of their abilities and nobody grudges their place in the team. They are there on account of their merit. We may one day see a SA team comprised of 11 coloured cricketers who got their place on cricketing merits alone. But Mr. Vice and people like Norman Arendse should have the grace to accept that it is quite possible that there may also be a situation when the best 11 from South Africa can all be whites. Mr. Vice must till that time stop from indulging in this game of oneupmanship for however good his intentions may be his talk will only drive the wedge deeper.
Posted by sap1979 on (June 3, 2009, 11:09 GMT)I think the point Telford is trying to make is that all South Africans irrespective of race should be very proud that they have successfully come out from the painful process of transformation with positive results. Is that so hard to understand? For Australians maybe who in their 100 years of cricket history never had an aboriginal player but not for south africans.
Posted by ScottieK on (June 3, 2009, 9:50 GMT)What is the article trying to say? I don't get it.
We want the best team on the pitch, regardless of black, white, pink, orange or green, etc
If we field an inferior side because of political interference which then underperforms, then I think fans (who shell out their hard earned cash to watch and follow their team) have a right to make their views known. Isn't it that what democracy is all about?
Posted by gpharrison on (June 3, 2009, 7:26 GMT)i have to agree with many of these comments - what is the point of the article? something about race becoming a non-issue in south africa's team selection? maybe that the many people out there who grumble about proportionate team composition are really just making straw man arguments, since regardless of race, the guys of colour are as good as anyone?
but then: 'The truth is, no South African team has ever been picked on merit.' so it's picked on other criteria? but then again: 'Sounds like merit selection. Almost.' i'm confused, probably because the article is confused. there are so many different points and there appears not to be a thread to tie them together. either vice is not a very good writer, or he is simply far too smart for me. judging by his other pieces, i'd be inclined to go with the former.
Posted by Howie_CrowEater on (June 3, 2009, 6:24 GMT)Well I tried to read this article but couldn't quite get through it all. Bad Writing.....sorry mate.