Zimbabwe Cricket Online - Editorial
Welcome to the first issue of Zimbabwe cricket's weekly on-line magazine
John Ward
17-Nov-1999
Welcome to the first issue of Zimbabwe cricket's weekly on-line
magazine. It has unfortunately arrived a week later than
planned, due to a computer breakdown, which has also made the
compilation much more difficult. But, barring such mishaps, we
plan to be here every week with much more information about
Zimbabwe cricket at all levels than the Zimbabwe cricket page was
able to provide in the past.
We are aiming this magazine primarily at our growing Zimbabwe
audience, and so plan to include a great deal of cricket of below
first-class level: in schools, in the clubs and provinces, and in
the development programme. It has proved difficult in some of
these areas to find correspondents, so we ask you to bear with us
as we continue our search for those willing to give of their time
to provide us with the information we need. We particularly
thank those who have contributed to this issue.
We still hope to contain much that will be of interest to the
wider world: reviews of international matches, reports on current
issues and profiles of and interviews with players among other
items. We also plan to include guest columns where possible,
inviting top writers and well-known people to contribute their
views.
Reader participation is of vital importance to us. Whatever
readers would like concerning cricket in Zimbabwe we will try to
include, although it may not always be easy or possible. We
would also like readers to contribute their views on any subject
concerning cricket in Zimbabwe, and will reserve a page
especially for your letters. If you wish to contribute or
comment, please send mail the editor at jward@samara.co.zw.
This first issue could hardly come at a worse time for cricket in
Zimbabwe, when the national side is at its lowest ebb since
gaining Test status in 1992, and have just suffered by far their
most overwhelming defeat at the hands of South Africa at home.
The team has been unrecognisable this season from the vibrant
team that beat India at home last season and South Africa in the
World Cup, among other recent achievements. The vital spirit
seems to have gone from the side, and the reason is not apparent.
The biggest disappointment is simply that they are playing well
short of their best.
The batsmen in particular during the three recent Test matches
have looked as if they haven't played first-class cricket all
year. And this is actually almost completely true. In the past
six months only Trevor Gripper, who played for the President's XI
against the Australians in Bulawayo, and Andy Flower and Neil
Johnson, who had a rain-ruined match in England in August for MCC
against Sri Lanka A, have played first-class cricket. Virtually
all the cricket the team has been able to play in that time has
been one-day cricket, either at international or at club level.
Instead of our usual Logan Cup matches as preparation for a
touring side, the team went off to play in one-day tournaments in
Singapore and Kenya. Then, still in one-day mode, as they
themselves admitted, they were called on to play Test matches
against the two strongest teams in the world. We cannot expect
our players to make the transition to Test cricket satisfactorily
under those circumstances, and we in Zimbabwe should all have
foreseen that. Let us hope our players do not have to cope with
a similar programme in future. Let's leave it at that.
With the benefit of hindsight, I feel this is the largest single
factor in Zimbabwe's present dismal state. But it does not
account for the loss of spirit in the team, although Andy Flower
has tried visibly to revive it by bringing his players out
jogging on to the field and tossing the ball to each other in the
Test against South Africa. Other problems and solutions have
been proposed by many.
One easy solution, according to many, is to throw out the
so-called 'old guard' and bring in new players. Yes, we have
some talented youngsters in Trevor Madondo, David Mutendera, Andy
Blignaut and others, but those who know them best do not believe
they are yet ready for Test cricket. More maturity is needed;
young batsmen need to be able to build an innings, young bowlers
to bowl line and length (unless possessed of exceptional talent
which it would be detrimental to stifle), or else it will be a
recipe for disaster. I believe that by and large the
first-choice players in the current Test team have a greater
combination of talent, form and experience than the younger
players are yet able to offer. But it's an easy option to call
for changes when a team is unsuccessful. It sound like the
traditional example of faulty logic: Something must be done; this
is something; so let's do it.
But the youngsters will not be left in the cold. Convenor of
selectors Andy Pycroft has said that, in view of the heavy
international programme this season, they plan to rotate players,
resting some and giving experience to others. This policy was
clearly in evidence in the one-day matches against the
Australians, when Mutendera, Blignaut and Gary Brent formed the
Zimbabwean pace attack in the first game with eight one-day games
and just three one-day wickets between them. Lacking experience,
they found it difficult to bowl to their fields and were little
more than meat and drink to the Australians. Older hands like
Bryan Strang and Pommie Mbangwa were omitted when their greater
accuracy would have helped relieved the pressure from the
beleaguered captain. Having said that, the experience gained by
these younger players should certainly stand them in great stead
for the future.
Disagreements with the ZCU over salaries and contracts has also
been cited as a cause of unrest for the Zimbabwean players. Part
of the problem is that they rub shoulders with the stars from
wealthy countries like Australia and South Africa and feel
aggrieved that they are only receiving a fraction of their
salaries. Unfortunately it is a fact of life that there is less
money in Zimbabwe. Nevertheless this is an issue to which a
satisfactory and permanent answer needs to be found, and
compromises will be necessary on both sides. It would be tragic
if the players are indeed allowing the issue to affect their
play.
Other targets for criticism are, of course, the manager and
coach, and there are some who believe they are not providing
strong enough leadership to the team. But the captain seems
always to be the one man with whom the buck stops, in the opinion
of many. Alistair Campbell has been the victim of a great deal
of harsh and generally uninformed criticism by those who don't
know him or understand him. He has his limitations, and he has
always been prepared to admit that. Calls to resign are all very
well, but there is always the question: is there anybody else who
could do a better job? If there was, the selectors would be more
likely to know than the public or the press.
Most captains can be described as average. A few are bad; they
may be poor tacticians, unwilling to learn, poor man-managers and
the cause of disaffection among the players. Campbell certainly
does not fall into this category. It is not easy to maintain the
loyalty of a losing team, but he did so to the end. He was
tactically limited, but he was aware of this and prepared to
learn. He did the best of which he was capable and did enjoy
some very satisfying successes on the field.
Only a few captains can really be described as outstanding. They
are few and far between, as England for one have found out ever
since the retirement of Mike Brearley. The best captains may be
outgoing personalities, leading by charisma and personal example,
and able to inspire their teams to play above themselves, such as
Eddie Barlow or, during his brief tenure, Peter Rawson. Others
may be quieter, usually better tacticians than the charismatic
variety, and excellent man-managers on an individual basis, like
Brearley - or Duncan Fletcher. But both types are rare. Their
lack is all the more evident in weak teams, and neither England
nor Zimbabwe are able to find such a leader at present. As the
search goes on, all we can do is support the captains we have.
There are two main reactions when the team we support do badly.
The easy option is to give way to emotions, to condemn, criticise
and blame. The other is to encourage and support, although still
offering constructive advice when appropriate. It is all too
easy in times of trouble to take the first option, as I have done
myself at times.
The Zimbabwe team has never been in greater need of public
support than the present. But it is so often only the critics
that the players here. Few seem to show the same positive
attitude as a Bulawayo friend who asked me after the Australian
Test how he could contact Alistair Campbell because he
particularly wanted to offer him and the team support and
encouragement.
As George Goodwin suggests in our guest column, though, it does
work both ways, and probably the Zimbabwean team has been so
immersed in its own problems that it hasn't given enough thought
to winning friends of the public. But if the mountain will not
come to Mohammad, maybe Mohammad should go to the mountain.
Perhaps supporters of Zimbabwe cricket can take their opportunity
now. How about sending a message of support for the team as a
whole, or Alistair Campbell, or Andy Flower, or any of the other
players? Simply write to them at the following e-mail address:
zcu@cricinfo.com
Such assurances can only serve to lift the players and perhaps
play an important part in the team's revival. Many players
testify how they got a lift in the World Cup as they stepped on
to the field and heard the roar of Zimbabwean supporters urging
them on; how they will never forget that sea of red below them
from the balcony at Chelmsford after beating South Africa. This
is how Zimbabwean supporters can contribute positively to their
team's success. How about it?