Old hands fail in Bowl pursuit

If a team can win all their matches in a competition then it deserves to win the main prize. Therefore, Guyana's triumph in the Red Stripe Bowl is fitting.

They had the most balanced team and played to their strategy. Barbados were the bridemaids so that their 13 year drought remains in tact.

Could we have done better or did we get what we deserved? These are questions that would arise.The 260 000 local experts are sure to have what they believe are the answers.

Any assessment should have some connection with the stated position of chairman of selectors, Richard Prof Edwards.

After the team was selected, Edwards said that he and his colleagues had chosen a team to win the competition, that's why many of the old guard were retained despite many calls to axe most of them in preference to the young brigade.

The chairman reasoned that limited overs cricket is not the best place to groom upcoming players. Some agreed, others disagreed.In effect, the team had to prove themselves to vindicate the selectors' faith in them.

That they reached the final means that there would be some job satisfaction for the selectors if not for some of the players. After all, Barbados had not won the tournament since 1988 so we can at least claim to be on par or just over.

The question that arises,though, is: do we at this stage need to put great emphasis on winning competitions or should we be developing our youngsters with an eye to placing people on the West Indies team?

In recent years we've only been able to have a couple of players in the West Indies squad; in the very latest we have only one Pedro Collins. It might have more to do with cricket politics than the ability of our players to perform on par with their rivals.

Therefore, it seems to me that by and large that if we want to get in line we have to be politically correct in team selection and pushing our youngsters a la the rest of the Islands.

They have certainly benefitted with a host of youth in the West Indies team.

I think it is true to say that West Indies cricket is now more political and strategic when it comes to selections at all levels and it's been clearly shown in recent times to be to the disadvantage of Barbados.

Bajans,once the gems of Caribbean cricket on the field and in the boardroom,are now it would seem handed token representation even as far as umpiring is concerned. Numbers count so we might be powerless when it comes to democratic voting but I think we are guilty of aiding the system by certain decisions we take.

Isn't it reasonable to assume,for instance,that we might have hurt Corey Collymore's chances of going to Sri Lanka by dropping him after two matches in the Redstripe Bowl?

Why, if he isn't good enough for Barbados how can he possibly be good for the West Indies? And how did we treat budding allrounder Kurt Wilkinson,a graduate of the Shell Academy?

It would appear that his selection was merely token when you consider that we batted low in the order and never got a chance to bowl when there was opportunity for him to do so. All this time some of his associates from the academy were being given maximum exposure by their teams.

Therefore,if we practice tokenism with our own players we leave nothing for others to do. Mind you, I'm all for balance but I believe that within the current cricket, political climate in the Caribbean we must give more priority to younger players. Otherwise, we're not going to be in a strong position to line up for the race.