I'm with you in this, Neil. I note in Australia that Mitchell Starc (among others) has been able to pick his preferred format. Great players should get extra consideration, given their ability to add quality when they play.
Hi Ruth, appreciate your comment. If we aren't prepared to make (rare) exceptions for our best players then we can't expect to win the big matches. I love commentating on cricket but I couldn't do it all year round. We all need a break from work, even if it's the best job in the world. Playing international cricket is emotionally and physically exhausting and, like or not, most players just need a break from time to time.
Although we do miss players like Klaasen and AB, I do think it's wrong when players, contracted to CSA only want to play in those tournaments that suit themselves. So I can understand perhaps why these players have not been chosen.
On a slightly, if I may, different note. Can someone tell me why it is necessary to select so many different players over the three formats? Surely any bowler worth anything should be able to adjust his line and length to whatever format he's playing in? I'd go along with maybe one or two maybe not meeting the requirements for one or other of the formats. But just how many different bowlers have been used over the past year or two? It is no longer any sign of merit or needing to be special to be awarded a Protea cap as they are now issued to just about anyone. Perhaps Niel, you'd like to ask your statistician, if you have one, to supply us with the number of different players that have been used across these formats with special attention being given to the bowlers? Surely, it is better to stick to those players that are identified as being the best and give them game time? Obviously, injuries and replacements for injured players must be taken into account. But it'is still ridiculous the amount of players that have been used.
My opinion and subject to be attacked for it. Ha ha.
Everybody needs a break from their jobs, Edwin, no matter how great the job is. Often, the very best in the business (any business) need more time off because they invest so much physical and emotional energy in becoming the best. If we're not prepared to do that then we must accept that the team may not fulfil its potential.
The irony about Shukri Conrad using 30+ players in the last 15 months is the mission statement he gave when he started, that "the best team will play at all times." And "if any player wants to play for South Africa then he must be available for every game." It sounded (very) strange at the time and, obviously, that's not the way it has worked out. It's not the way it 'works'!
Neil, thanks for your reply but I agree and disagree with you. I agree that the players are under tremendous pressure to perform or lose their jobs. But they have a number of days break between games. Also, what bowler worth anything cannot bowl four or ten overs in a day without too much effort. Other than the mental one while bowling? I'm sorry but I'm very much old school and think that players are too wrapped in cotton wool these days. I DO agree that players, in spite of my previous comment, do need a bit of a break every now and again. But I'm sure that if a graph could be drawn of the number of days each player has PLAYED over the past two years it wouldn't amount to them being overplayed. Which brings me back to my earlier comment that there is no need to choose as many players as has been done. They are making a mockery of earning an international cricket cap. Just about anyone seems to be getting the cap these days.
I'm with you in this, Neil. I note in Australia that Mitchell Starc (among others) has been able to pick his preferred format. Great players should get extra consideration, given their ability to add quality when they play.
Hi Ruth, appreciate your comment. If we aren't prepared to make (rare) exceptions for our best players then we can't expect to win the big matches. I love commentating on cricket but I couldn't do it all year round. We all need a break from work, even if it's the best job in the world. Playing international cricket is emotionally and physically exhausting and, like or not, most players just need a break from time to time.
Although we do miss players like Klaasen and AB, I do think it's wrong when players, contracted to CSA only want to play in those tournaments that suit themselves. So I can understand perhaps why these players have not been chosen.
On a slightly, if I may, different note. Can someone tell me why it is necessary to select so many different players over the three formats? Surely any bowler worth anything should be able to adjust his line and length to whatever format he's playing in? I'd go along with maybe one or two maybe not meeting the requirements for one or other of the formats. But just how many different bowlers have been used over the past year or two? It is no longer any sign of merit or needing to be special to be awarded a Protea cap as they are now issued to just about anyone. Perhaps Niel, you'd like to ask your statistician, if you have one, to supply us with the number of different players that have been used across these formats with special attention being given to the bowlers? Surely, it is better to stick to those players that are identified as being the best and give them game time? Obviously, injuries and replacements for injured players must be taken into account. But it'is still ridiculous the amount of players that have been used.
My opinion and subject to be attacked for it. Ha ha.
Everybody needs a break from their jobs, Edwin, no matter how great the job is. Often, the very best in the business (any business) need more time off because they invest so much physical and emotional energy in becoming the best. If we're not prepared to do that then we must accept that the team may not fulfil its potential.
The irony about Shukri Conrad using 30+ players in the last 15 months is the mission statement he gave when he started, that "the best team will play at all times." And "if any player wants to play for South Africa then he must be available for every game." It sounded (very) strange at the time and, obviously, that's not the way it has worked out. It's not the way it 'works'!
Neil, thanks for your reply but I agree and disagree with you. I agree that the players are under tremendous pressure to perform or lose their jobs. But they have a number of days break between games. Also, what bowler worth anything cannot bowl four or ten overs in a day without too much effort. Other than the mental one while bowling? I'm sorry but I'm very much old school and think that players are too wrapped in cotton wool these days. I DO agree that players, in spite of my previous comment, do need a bit of a break every now and again. But I'm sure that if a graph could be drawn of the number of days each player has PLAYED over the past two years it wouldn't amount to them being overplayed. Which brings me back to my earlier comment that there is no need to choose as many players as has been done. They are making a mockery of earning an international cricket cap. Just about anyone seems to be getting the cap these days.