Publications
Partners
Over the past week or so, it seems “choice” has been crossing the minds of many diehard Proteas fans out there – and I don’t mean the brand of government-issued condoms.
Although, if we must find some link, I’d say both senses of the word have to do with protection.
Since the swashbuckling Australian T20 team came to South Africa on their whistle-stop tour ahead of the ICC World Twenty20, which gets into full swing next week, I’ve caught wind of much disdain from fans about the choices made by the Proteas management in composing teams to play the Aussies.
And that disdain hit fever pitch by the end of the second match, which Australia won by five wickets to level the three-match series.
Why was an in-form Hashim Amla excluded? Why was a hideously out of form JP Duminy included? What right did Farhaan “Fudgie” Behardien have to be selected when he’s proven time and again he has nothing to offer the Proteas in any aspect of the game, be it batting, bowling or fielding?
What difference would it really make if Quinton de Kock drops down the batting order to give Amla an opening spot and simultaneously free up AB de Villiers from having to keep wicket?
These were some of the burning questions that emerged during and after that match at the Wanderers.
Then, in the series decider at Newlands on Wednesday night, we saw Amla included and Fudgie excluded.
But just as we breathed a sigh of relief, we learnt that AB and recent limited-overs batting sensation Chris Morris were left out for an iffy Rilee Rossouw to enter the fray and for an average David Wiese to maintain his spot.
And so it turned out that by the end of a series in which South Africa were meant to stamp their authority in the T20 format and dot the i’s on their game plan, they were left with no momentum going into the International Cricket Council (ICC) showdown.
What made things worse was that their apparent form against England last month was somewhat negated. Besides that, it’s never great losing to Australia, especially an Aussie T20 outfit still trying to find its feet after a walloping from India not long ago.
Granted, the coach and captain used the series as an exercise in finding the right combinations and formulas for the upcoming tournament on the subcontinent, but my sense is that they tweaked a promising setup beyond recognition, or logic, to take on Australia, and in the process had the wind knocked out of their sails. To use another cliché, they would have done well to go by the dictum “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.
What we also learnt from the tour gone by is that the Proteas are more than competent in chasing and setting targets, but find themselves lacking when it comes to defending scores.
After all, the two matches they lost to Australia were the only two in which they’ve had to defend in their past five T20 outings.
What this perhaps says is that captain Faf du Plessis doesn’t quite have a handle yet on bowling the right bowlers at the right times and setting their fields accordingly; and that the bowlers themselves don’t possess the killer instinct required when defending totals, however low or high they may be.
All we can do now is wait and see how the Proteas turn up at the World Twenty20, as once again they’ve given us little confidence ahead of an ICC tournament. And it was all a matter of choice.
@Longbottom_69 is an armchair cricket critic. He sometimes thinks choice is overrated
