'Bulldog' Roelof finds new Territory

T20 Merry go Round keeps turning

    One of the best story lines to emerge from the inaugural SA20 at the beginning of the year involved Roelof van der Merwe becoming the catalyst for the Sunrisers Eastern Cape to turn their fortunes around after an unconvincing start and forge on to win the title against the best team in the tournament, the Pretoria Capitals.

    SEC captain Aiden Markram readily singled out van der Merwe as the man who “provided the spark we needed” once the team had been reconfigured to include him in the starting XI and he very quickly established himself as a favourite with fans. So, having done it at the age of 38, there’s no reason he can’t be a crucial part of the title defence at 39. Right? Wrong.

    Van der Merwe has left the SA20 to join their rival league in the UAE, the ILT20. Another overseas pro from the cup-winning squad, James Fuller, is heading in the same direction. In fact, no fewer than 11 overseas players have from last year’s SA20 have already signed with the ILT20.

    One of the frustrations of the franchise auction system is that teams are only permitted to retain a limited number of players each season. They are forced to ‘gamble’ with some players whom they would like to keep on their books by hoping to pick them up once again when their names reappear under the auctioneer’s hammer.

    Van der Merwe may have been one of them, perhaps not. But why would a player at his stage of career hang around and wait? Without a core of local players, the ILT20’s demand for international players, and the size of their budget, allows them to hoover up whatever talent is available, whether it’s officially on the market or not.

    It is also clear that the two leagues have significantly different approaches to what ‘signing’ a player actually means. In the SA20 it means ‘he’s committed to playing the tournament for us.’ In the ILT20 it means ‘he’s available to play for us.’ The Dubai Capitals, for example, currently have 14 international cricketers on their books.

    Take the case of Joe Root. Keen as he is to establish himself on the T20 circuit for when his glittering Test career finally ends, England’s former captain is not going to decline his country’s need for him during their five-Test tour of India next year. But by signing, Root is paid handsomely (by our standards anyway) for his image rights and marketing opportunities it provides his ILT20 franchise.

    Similarly, Mark Wood’s recent mega-bucks signing, also for the Dubai Capitals, made headlines around the cricket playing world. Not so much for the number (reportedly around $400k) but for the fact that he would miss at least the first three of England’s five-Test series in India. Anybody and everybody who knows Wood is aware that he will be in India if Ben Stokes asks him to be. But if Stokes says his pace will be wasted on slow, dry pitches, and they’re likely to play two spinners anyway, then he’ll be free to cash in. Really cash in!

    The subject matter of this edition of the column may raise some readers’ eyebrows. There is a misperception that the SA20 is unpopular fare. It is not. The was always going to be, and probably always will be, critical to the survival of the professional game in South Africa. The belief that placing it front and centre, however, does not equate to condoning the marginalisation of other formats and competition to the point of suffocation or starvation.

    The selection unavailability of close to 60 players for two Tests in New Zealand next year remains deeply distressing:

    “It’s a very difficult one to get into, but we are engaging with Pholetsi and his team consistently,” said SA20 Commissioner, Graeme Smith. “Obviously our goal at SA20 is to just elevate and focus on what we control, and that’s ultimately making sure our event is the best. That’s been very clear from the start, in terms of how things were created and structured. Our job is to engage as early as possible to set our store window for four weeks, and things go from there.”

    “From our side, to see the clash is not ideal, but we’re just going to try and focus on making sure we deliver the best four weeks of competition and we’ll hopefully leave the rest to CSA to figure out.” Not only is Smith doing his job, but he might have pointed out that it was CSA CEO Pholetsi Moseki who signed off on the NZ Tour itinerary over six months ago.

    Moseki, it seems, has indeed ‘figured it out.’

    “This tour confirms CSA’s commitment to honouring the ICC’s Future Tours Programme (FTP), regardless of other competing and equally compelling engagements,” he said. “But our plans are on track. The auction [September 27] will be the next milestone and Shukri [Conrad, the Test coach] will then determine player availability for the tour.”

    That, at least, should be enough to prompt redefinitions of the concepts of ‘commitment’ and ‘on track’.