Publications
Partners
Dear AB,
Ah, man. My heart breaks for you. Or rather, as a long-standing Proteas supporter, you have broken my heart. You’re a gentleman of the game, and certainly one of the finest cricketers the world has ever seen, but we’re all left here with so many questions, and I believe we deserve answers.
Let’s not talk about performance – about how Dale didn’t have the greatest day, or about how we missed a bunch of catches and run-outs. These things happen, and I believe that whilst we were below average in the field, our batsmen more than made up for it.
However, there are a few lingering questions, and I think we deserve some answers. There’s a famous quotation (incorrectly attributed to Gary Player) that states: the harder I practice, the luckier I get, and let’s be honest, New Zealand were very lucky today.
And yes, I mean lucky exactly how this quotation means it: Brendan McCullum was bloody clever, and he had practiced being a captain in addition to a blazing batsman, something I feel you just hadn’t done.
Right, pleasantries aside, let’s get into it:
1) You chose to bat first. Understandable given the media’s incorrect postulation that we cannot chase targets. We both know this is rubbish, but you fell victim to the hype. You thought we’d have to bat first at all costs, and so you chose this option, foreknowing the massive threat of rain. Whilst statistics slightly disagree (52% of DL matches were won by the team batting first), we both know that New Zealand are far better players of the shortened game, and any reduced game would favour them greatly. But no, you chose to bat first. In response, Brendan McCullum took a huge gamble: he decided to use up the majority of his premium bowlers’ overs, leaving his 5th bowler horribly exposed in the latter overs. One simply had to listen to the commentators to appreciate just how high of a total one was expecting. 7 overs of a sub-premium bowler in the latter stages of a game to an in-form, set AB? Woah! Huge! His gamble paid off, and it resulted in a paltry two overs being bowled by the last-choice bowler. Was this simply pure luck, or was this clever captaincy? Shall we call it a home-ground advantage, and that he knew the rain was nearly certainly going to affect the game? I’m tempted to choose the latter.
2) You, along with the other selectors, chose an unfit bowler who was not performing over a completely fit bowler who was. Here, we’ll rely on some statistics. Vernon’s stats for this world cup: 28.3 overs bowled, 135 runs conceded, 4 wickets taken. Kyle’s stats for this world cup: 31 overs, 130 runs conceded, 9 wickets taken. In Vern’s defence, his figures were marred by New Zealand’s obliteration of him, but hey, he only took wickets against Zimbabwe and the U.A.E. He registered zero wickets against India. Vern was not in form before his injury, and he was woefully out of form after his injury. He should definitely not have been selected, and it makes me wonder if Kyle has done something to piss off a selector a two, as he can’t seem to buy a place in the team, even when his stats are far superior when juxtaposed with the statistics of the injured golden boy.
And finally, one more point to raise: Duckworth and Lewis. This much maligned system seems to be the thorn in our side, almost being mystical in its attempts to thwart our attempts at World Cup success. It’s a system that nobody really understands, and even fewer people like. To put things into perspective, if the NZ vs WI Quarter Final game was interrupted by rain at the 30 over mark (rain stopped play), WI would’ve had to chase 250 in 30 overs. Instead, the rain abated, and NZ posted an astronomical 393/6. Ironically, WI would’ve made it over the line, as they finished on 250 after 30.3 overs. What this tells us is that WI has some massive fire-power, but cannot last 50 overs. I can absolutely assure you that if this happened and NZ lost, the NZ media would’ve launched a veritable tirade against this ridiculous system. Another fact that utterly confuses me is that if rain had completely curtailed our innings at the 38 over mark, we’d have been awarded with 264 runs (6.95 RPO). This didn’t happen, and we had to bat another 5 overs. We amassed another 65 runs, lost 2 wickets, and ended on 281. NZ were then set a target of 298 to chase, which is an RPO of 6.93! We were punished for losing two wickets, even though we only had five overs to amass as many runs as possible, and did so in scintillating style. In other words, we’d have been in a better position if David Miller didn’t achieve his quick-fire 49, and we didn’t come out to bat at all. How utterly nonsensical.
This however is a gripe that cannot be addressed, and an arbitrary letter on a News forum is going to do little to allay South Africa’s heartbroken supporters.
We’re left with a bunch of what ifs, yet this time it feels markedly different. We didn’t choke. We had a game that we should’ve won, and if taken on cricketing merit alone, we deserved to win. Sport is ultimately rather unpredictable, and you use every single available factor within your control to influence the outcome. Usually, this is just the skill of the players at your disposal with a concomitant and relevant game plan, but Brendan McCullum – a bloody amazing captain – was able to think outside the box and take calculated risks. I can just imagine how he breathed a sigh of relief when that rain came down, as if his three 7s had suddenly aligned on his cricketing fruit-machine. He gambled, and he won.
And here we sit, heartbroken, again. I can remember where I was when we were knocked out of each and every world cup, yet somehow, this one hurts the most. I can only imagine how you feel.
