Colin (if I may), and Neil - thanks for continuing the debate. As an Englishman, I am not qualified to comment about the detail of the playing tiers in South Africa. But we have similar issues in England. Our (England's) performance in the Ashes has shown two contrasting things: (a) players who do not play much (any) red ball cricket struggle in the test format; but (b) exceptional talent can adapt (Jacob Bethell's ton in Sydney; and Gus Atkinson, when fit).
I think the key to getting everything "right" is finding incentives that work for players (all levels, club to test), supporters and sponsors / broadcasters. I reckon there is a massive demand for cricket across South Africa - especially in townships from the little I've seen and heard of ; and the SA20 has demonstrated the depth of the market.
So, how to create space in the schedule for red ball cricket, to grow test players and sustain competition for the test squad (for men and women)? Could it be fewer / merged Provinces (as Wales have tried, not with great success, in rugby union); or Franchises, with internal checks to ensure reasonably level competition (as the NFL in the US)?
To be continued, one suspects - over cold beers, strong tea and so on!
Chris, really appreciate your comments and taking the time to respond. Hopefully you will not be surprised to hear that all of your thoughts and suggestions make perfect sense. I suspect you have probably visited South Africa (?) so will be aware of the many unique aspects and complicated history of sport in the country. There are around 40 private schools (some say 30, some 50) which produce a vastly disproportionate percentage of the talent. They are all, of course, formerly white schools but all are making serious efforts to transform. All but a couple of the Black African cricketers to represent South African have emerged via a scholarship of some sort from one of these schools. It is very 'unnatural'.
The other problem is 'political'. South Africa has 15 professional provincial teams which is preposterous. It should be six - eight at most. But CSA doesn't have the 'power' or gumption to dissolve the smaller, failing (often corrupt) provincial administrations so they've quietly adopted a 'let them die naturally' approach. Which means whatever meagre funds are available go largely to the administrators, not the players, none of whom will ever play international cricket. Complicated, isn't it? And I've barely scrtached the surface.
Colin. All due respect for your years in journalism and the shoulders you rubbed with. I don't see how eliminating/reducing/creating hybrid salaries at the provincial level can be anything but detrimental to the international game for South Africa.
As mentioned in the comments in a previous post by Manners, the game has moved on from the 90's. Dave Richardson had a law degree while playing for South Africa. Yet he shared a team with Pat Symcox that loved his drink and cigarettes a little too much. At the same time, girthy Australians were all the flavor. Bastmen batted at 40 strike rates, bowlers ran in and bowled the same lines they were taught from 10 years old like a metronome. What made them stand out from other dime-a-dozen bowlers was swing, and how much they could extract from thin air while others struggled. Looking at Matthews, Langeveld, Simons, etc. Or Donald...with sheer pace that no one else seemed to have without spraying it both sides of the wicket.
Nowadays these skills are seen as the BASELINE to entry into provincial cricket. Pace, bounce, swing, magical turners and flighters of the ball. Batsmen that can bat at 70 strike rates while averaging at LEAST 40. These are the baselines.
To have these players show up and perform, they need to train in the gym 5 days a week. They need to be fit to run singles all day long or bowl 15-over spells when asked.
Now add to that that ANY time spent of of the work force at a young age puts you at a serious disadvantage as you grow older (less people aged 40 own homes right now when compared to their own parents), and you have a scenario where even talented players may opt to NOT chase international glory if their stepping stone to get there, provincial cricket, cant even have them afford food, a car, and a home to sleep in.
Should provinces be more picky about whom they give contracts to? Perhaps.
Should CSA revamp the system to force international players to play more 1st class in this country? With the advent of T20 cricket and all the leagues that exist around the world...only the most die-hard test players will heed that call. Klaasen already told CSA to suck a carpet. Rightfully or wrongly is for others to decide.
One thing is for certain...if talent is what you are after, there needs to be an incentive for a young player to keep his tools of the trade in pristine condition, and not paying them a decent wage is not going to help anyone.
There is so much more that can be said on this topic....
Interesting debate! I notice neither refutes the statement that a good test player requires experience in playing red-ball cricket (except as Chris mentions some that have rare talent). Back in the day Currie Cup or Howa Bowl was 3 days. It can still be 3 days- save money by cutting the 4th day & award bonus points to encourage declaration (as used to apply). Tests hardly last 5 anyway. The emergency of players like Bosch & Rickelton show that they do benefit from provincial experience. Players like Brevis; Stubbs clearly need more. But how to PAY for provincial cricket? I suppose T20 is the 'cash cow'. It can do that- but within limits. We have more paid provincial/ state sides than Australia. Not justified. Let's cut the teams to align say with rugby in SA. Also, the lack of marketing by SCA of the provincial matches is not acceptable to me. Do they think test players fall from the sky? Not all can play County like Harmer & Bedingfield. But that is an option. As with rugby, thank goodness for school cricket, administrators & their coaches. They keep us top class. Unlike football in SA which is disorganised- and it shows. Cheers.
The biggest contentious issue I have around the idea of scrapping large salaries for provincial players is centered around the right everyone has to monetise their skills.
If you are going to go all in with what you know how to do best, you kind of deserve to earn a living from it. Its one of the reasons I could never stay angry at Protea players for too long if they opted for early retirement and then floated from one T20 league to the next. The money IS their retirement plan after spending YEARS of sacrificing time away from family, not really seeing your kids grow up, and knowing full well that when the time comes, the world is not going to give a crap about your past life, and you still need to put food on the table after framing your last bat.
Taking it back to provincial cricketers... no one ends up in that tier thinking "let's make this a career for the next 15 years or so". It just happens. Provinces are as much to blame for making players old, beyond their prime, and sending them into the world with no other monetizable skills once they are 40+ yrs old. All players think, when they get to the Cobras or Titans... "Right, one step closer to Protea colors".
What if provinces removed the need for players to earn large salaries by doing any of the following (all, or a combination of things):
1) Acquire a big-ish property with freestanding properties scattered around what looks like a security complex. Each contracted player who does not own or have their own property gets to live here for free. Food can be provided every evening based on dietary requirements, eliminating the need for lower-tier players to worry about nutrition.
2) Each player gets a car to drive...nothing flashy... awarded from a pool of maintained, low-budget cars...also belonging to the province.
3) The player is awarded " extra money" depending on the tier they find themselves on. This can be used to buy clothes, cover the costs of additional dietary requirements and perhaps even entertainment.
4) In return, players are required to never miss practices without a valid reason, always be on time for games to be played, and be involved in community upliftment, training of school players, etc.
5) Each player, once they reach a certain level (making them provincial "furniture", can be awarded a bursary to study anything that takes their fancy, and the bursary is repayable if the course is not completed and/or failed.
I have a suspicion that this could drastically reduce salary payments in general, while making sure your crop of players stays in good shape. AND, as an added measure, the province is also not just sending older players into the unknown with no real skills to carry on living after cricket.
Colin (if I may), and Neil - thanks for continuing the debate. As an Englishman, I am not qualified to comment about the detail of the playing tiers in South Africa. But we have similar issues in England. Our (England's) performance in the Ashes has shown two contrasting things: (a) players who do not play much (any) red ball cricket struggle in the test format; but (b) exceptional talent can adapt (Jacob Bethell's ton in Sydney; and Gus Atkinson, when fit).
I think the key to getting everything "right" is finding incentives that work for players (all levels, club to test), supporters and sponsors / broadcasters. I reckon there is a massive demand for cricket across South Africa - especially in townships from the little I've seen and heard of ; and the SA20 has demonstrated the depth of the market.
So, how to create space in the schedule for red ball cricket, to grow test players and sustain competition for the test squad (for men and women)? Could it be fewer / merged Provinces (as Wales have tried, not with great success, in rugby union); or Franchises, with internal checks to ensure reasonably level competition (as the NFL in the US)?
To be continued, one suspects - over cold beers, strong tea and so on!
Chris, really appreciate your comments and taking the time to respond. Hopefully you will not be surprised to hear that all of your thoughts and suggestions make perfect sense. I suspect you have probably visited South Africa (?) so will be aware of the many unique aspects and complicated history of sport in the country. There are around 40 private schools (some say 30, some 50) which produce a vastly disproportionate percentage of the talent. They are all, of course, formerly white schools but all are making serious efforts to transform. All but a couple of the Black African cricketers to represent South African have emerged via a scholarship of some sort from one of these schools. It is very 'unnatural'.
The other problem is 'political'. South Africa has 15 professional provincial teams which is preposterous. It should be six - eight at most. But CSA doesn't have the 'power' or gumption to dissolve the smaller, failing (often corrupt) provincial administrations so they've quietly adopted a 'let them die naturally' approach. Which means whatever meagre funds are available go largely to the administrators, not the players, none of whom will ever play international cricket. Complicated, isn't it? And I've barely scrtached the surface.
Thanks Neil - yes, I’ve visited South Africa (and lived there 2020-23). Keep scratching!
cheers
Colin. All due respect for your years in journalism and the shoulders you rubbed with. I don't see how eliminating/reducing/creating hybrid salaries at the provincial level can be anything but detrimental to the international game for South Africa.
As mentioned in the comments in a previous post by Manners, the game has moved on from the 90's. Dave Richardson had a law degree while playing for South Africa. Yet he shared a team with Pat Symcox that loved his drink and cigarettes a little too much. At the same time, girthy Australians were all the flavor. Bastmen batted at 40 strike rates, bowlers ran in and bowled the same lines they were taught from 10 years old like a metronome. What made them stand out from other dime-a-dozen bowlers was swing, and how much they could extract from thin air while others struggled. Looking at Matthews, Langeveld, Simons, etc. Or Donald...with sheer pace that no one else seemed to have without spraying it both sides of the wicket.
Nowadays these skills are seen as the BASELINE to entry into provincial cricket. Pace, bounce, swing, magical turners and flighters of the ball. Batsmen that can bat at 70 strike rates while averaging at LEAST 40. These are the baselines.
To have these players show up and perform, they need to train in the gym 5 days a week. They need to be fit to run singles all day long or bowl 15-over spells when asked.
Now add to that that ANY time spent of of the work force at a young age puts you at a serious disadvantage as you grow older (less people aged 40 own homes right now when compared to their own parents), and you have a scenario where even talented players may opt to NOT chase international glory if their stepping stone to get there, provincial cricket, cant even have them afford food, a car, and a home to sleep in.
Should provinces be more picky about whom they give contracts to? Perhaps.
Should CSA revamp the system to force international players to play more 1st class in this country? With the advent of T20 cricket and all the leagues that exist around the world...only the most die-hard test players will heed that call. Klaasen already told CSA to suck a carpet. Rightfully or wrongly is for others to decide.
One thing is for certain...if talent is what you are after, there needs to be an incentive for a young player to keep his tools of the trade in pristine condition, and not paying them a decent wage is not going to help anyone.
There is so much more that can be said on this topic....
Interesting debate! I notice neither refutes the statement that a good test player requires experience in playing red-ball cricket (except as Chris mentions some that have rare talent). Back in the day Currie Cup or Howa Bowl was 3 days. It can still be 3 days- save money by cutting the 4th day & award bonus points to encourage declaration (as used to apply). Tests hardly last 5 anyway. The emergency of players like Bosch & Rickelton show that they do benefit from provincial experience. Players like Brevis; Stubbs clearly need more. But how to PAY for provincial cricket? I suppose T20 is the 'cash cow'. It can do that- but within limits. We have more paid provincial/ state sides than Australia. Not justified. Let's cut the teams to align say with rugby in SA. Also, the lack of marketing by SCA of the provincial matches is not acceptable to me. Do they think test players fall from the sky? Not all can play County like Harmer & Bedingfield. But that is an option. As with rugby, thank goodness for school cricket, administrators & their coaches. They keep us top class. Unlike football in SA which is disorganised- and it shows. Cheers.
I have just thought of something.
The biggest contentious issue I have around the idea of scrapping large salaries for provincial players is centered around the right everyone has to monetise their skills.
If you are going to go all in with what you know how to do best, you kind of deserve to earn a living from it. Its one of the reasons I could never stay angry at Protea players for too long if they opted for early retirement and then floated from one T20 league to the next. The money IS their retirement plan after spending YEARS of sacrificing time away from family, not really seeing your kids grow up, and knowing full well that when the time comes, the world is not going to give a crap about your past life, and you still need to put food on the table after framing your last bat.
Taking it back to provincial cricketers... no one ends up in that tier thinking "let's make this a career for the next 15 years or so". It just happens. Provinces are as much to blame for making players old, beyond their prime, and sending them into the world with no other monetizable skills once they are 40+ yrs old. All players think, when they get to the Cobras or Titans... "Right, one step closer to Protea colors".
What if provinces removed the need for players to earn large salaries by doing any of the following (all, or a combination of things):
1) Acquire a big-ish property with freestanding properties scattered around what looks like a security complex. Each contracted player who does not own or have their own property gets to live here for free. Food can be provided every evening based on dietary requirements, eliminating the need for lower-tier players to worry about nutrition.
2) Each player gets a car to drive...nothing flashy... awarded from a pool of maintained, low-budget cars...also belonging to the province.
3) The player is awarded " extra money" depending on the tier they find themselves on. This can be used to buy clothes, cover the costs of additional dietary requirements and perhaps even entertainment.
4) In return, players are required to never miss practices without a valid reason, always be on time for games to be played, and be involved in community upliftment, training of school players, etc.
5) Each player, once they reach a certain level (making them provincial "furniture", can be awarded a bursary to study anything that takes their fancy, and the bursary is repayable if the course is not completed and/or failed.
I have a suspicion that this could drastically reduce salary payments in general, while making sure your crop of players stays in good shape. AND, as an added measure, the province is also not just sending older players into the unknown with no real skills to carry on living after cricket.
Any thoughts on this?