Is it time for Duminy to shed bowling duties?

Who is slower than Jacques Kallis in bowling speed terms, lower than him in batting order terms, and is required to do the same job? JP Duminy.

It may sound unlikely that South Africa would entrust the responsibility Kallis had thrust on him to Duminy, perhaps because of their obvious differences. Even early in his career, Kallis had an aura of seniority: he batted in a bubble and bowled in bursts. Fairly late into his career, Duminy is sometimes still regarded as a youngster: he bats after the big names and bowls almost as a novelty, but with those seemingly bit-part roles, he is expected to be provide the same kind of balance Kallis did. In some cases, he does.

In limited-overs cricket, Duminy stabilises South Africa so much that when they are without him - like late last year in a series against Australia - they seem lost. As a short-form player, Duminy switches between marshaling the lower order to operating as a finisher and with ball in hand, he is able to get rid of a few overs usually in a bid to slow the opposition down. In long-form cricket, those roles demand more.

A lower middle-order batsmen has to be capable of absorbing and transferring pressure, while a part-time bowler may be used as a placeholder and to also ensure the game does not drift. The way Duminy is being used now, he is not able to fulfill either of those roles to his full potential.

Consider that Duminy first represented South Africa when he was 20. He has been an international cricketer for a decade, and a Test player for seven years. At 31, you would expect his record to boast more than 31 Tests, four Test hundreds and 36 Test wickets. Kallis, who also debuted at 20, had played 102 Tests by the time he was 31, scored 24 centuries and taken 200 wickets. Kallis had a more sustained run than Duminy, who was dropped for a year and out injured for seven months, but still, his numbers should make for better reading.

Part of the Duminy problem could be that he bats too low down the order. By the time he arrives at the crease, the tone of the innings has been set and all he can do is add a few punctuation marks. Even if he strings together a few nagging partnerships with the tail-enders, that seems to be a waste of his batting ability. As Duminy showed in his debut series against Australia, he can bat for long periods of time in difficult situations and add value if allowed to do that.

Nobody knows that better than former South Africa batsman Ashwell Prince, who is now a national selector. Duminy replaced Prince, who had broken a thumb, in that Australia series and then kept Prince out of the side for a year. Understandably, Prince has a lot of praise for Duminy the batsman and believes that to see the best of that, he needs to stop operating as a bowler as well.

"I'm going to take off my selector's hat for a minute and speak as a fan of JP the batsman: I would like him to play as a batsman, a world-class batsman, and the onus, the responsibility of his off-spin needs to come off his shoulder," Prince had said on SuperSport's Inside-Edge show before the Bangalore Test. "It must be seen as a bonus, as with Dean Elgar's left-arm spin. JP is a batsman and I would like to see him doing more of what he did in his first series in Australia."

For Duminy to do that, he may need to be given more of an opportunity to bat for longer periods of time. The make-up of the current South Africa line-up will only allow him that if he is permanently installed at No.6, ahead of the wicketkeeper.

In this series, that has been the case, with Dane Vilas coming in at No.7. But in previous series, Duminy has batted behind Quinton de Kock. Given that de Kock's recall is imminent, Duminy could be back at No.7 but if South Africa hope to get the most of him, he should not drop there. The difference between No.6 and No.7 may not seem like much but determines whether a batsman has more chance of forming a partnership with a top-order player or whether he will be required to do more of a guiding role with the tail. Duminy should be doing more of the former.

That could result in Duminy fading as an allrounder and becoming more of a part-timer, something South Africa may find difficult to accept. They have had Duminy to function as both a batsman and a bowler since they picked him as the only spinner in the 2012 Brisbane Test. Duminy ruptured an Achilles' tendon at the end of the first day and played no part in that match. But South Africa clung to the idea and when Duminy returned to the team for the 2013 series against Pakistan in the UAE, they used him in that capacity.

In the time since then, Duminy has made some vital contributions - a century against Australia in Port Elizabeth last year, and another ton against Sri Lanka in Galle where he also took three wickets - but there is a feeling he could have offered more, especially with the bat. To get that out of him, his bowling has to be acknowledged as the secondary discipline it is.

Nothing proves that as much as this series has. Here, where spinners have called the shots, Duminy's efforts with ball in hand have been bypassed by part-timers like Elgar, who few would dare to call an all-rounder. That should be evidence enough that dividing Duminy's time and headspace between disciplines means neither is doing as well as it should. If South Africa want to replace Kallis, they may have to look somewhere else.