A ‘lack of leadership’ can be a nebulous term. What does it mean, in practical terms? And how can it be addressed? A national captain, with whom I was working in my brief foray to the ‘other side’, once said: “We’ll have to dig deeper” following a monstrous defeat.
What did he mean? Run more laps of the ground, have more and longer net sessions? I asked him, after the press conference in which he’d made the statement, and he was non-plussed. “Try harder…?” he offered, after a while.
The lack of leadership at Cricket South Africa in the aftermath of the squad announcement to tour New Zealand could not have been more emphatically displayed if it had been on Billboards, nationwide. Dozens of current and former players, around the world, were shocked and appalled by the downgrading of Test cricket.
CSA were accused of disrespecting the format of the game which 99% of players still regard as the pinnacle, even those who do not play it. They were said to be leading the way in reducing Test cricket to inconsequence, if not its eradication. The response was interesting:
“We commend Head Coach, Shukri Conrad and his staff for preparing the selected players for this tour, and we are confident that they will represent the Proteas badge with honour. We wish them all the very best. It is an opportunity to demonstrate the depth of talent that we have in South Africa,” said a CSA statement.
“Our schedule for the remainder of the FTP has been managed to ensure that there will not be any further clashes between our bilateral commitments and the SA20.
“CSA remains fully committed to international cricket and to strengthening the SA20, a tournament that was initiated by us to help grow and sustain the game.”
That’s it. Cricket South Africa’s response to global outrage. Succinct and simple. Disingenuous, too, but so be it. The most revealing part is how it finishes. Here it is.
ENDS
Issued by: Cricket South Africa - Corporate Communications
That’s it. No name, face, ownership, or responsibility. No leadership. The impression is of a group of, no doubt, talented businessmen and women covering their backsides in the aftermath of a disastrous deal. The use of the word ‘Corporate’ is prescient. They all need to keep individual reputations intact for their next assignments.
The SA20 starts today. All hail to the Saviour. I am not cynical about the tournament in the slightest. South African cricket lovers should be proud of it. I am cynical of the level of expectation being heaped on it. Even it continues to grow and generate more income than expected, as it did in the first year, it won’t be enough to bankroll the game as it is currently structured.
Still, applause is due to Supersport for their tireless efforts to make the tournament different to all of the others. A commentary and presentation team of 17. Seventeen. And a permanent camera so you can see them all the time. And the boundary couch is back. Richie Benaud was famous for many things, mostly being the best commentator ever. But, also, for his pithy advice to newcomers. “Less is more,” he would tell them. And “Remember…it’s not about you.” But that was before T20 leagues. Times have changed.
It’s easy to accept players specialising in T20 cricket when that’s what they want to do. But it’s a peculiar reflection on the sport when that do so patently for the money and against their cricketing instincts. Heinrich Klaasen sounded like he was giving a baby up for adoption when he announced his retirement from all red-ball cricket. He spoke of “sleepless nights.”
“It's a difficult decision that I have made because it is by far my favourite format of the game,” Klaasen said. “The battles that I faced on and off the field have made me the cricketer I am today. It has been a great journey and I am glad I could have represented my country. My baggy Test cap is the most precious cap I have ever been handed.”
The Proteas’ next Test assignment after New Zealand is in the Caribbean, in August, when The Hundred will be played in England. And Klaasen stands to earn around R2.5million. He might have expected around R250k for a two-Test tour. Who wouldn’t retire in such circumstances?
Toni de Zorzi was scheduled to open the batting and captain the Test team to New Zealand but, ten minutes before the squad was announced, the Durban Super Giants released a statement confirming him as their latest recruit. As a replacement for injured fast bowler, Kyle Abbott.
Abbott was purchased in the player auction in the basement bracket of R175k, but that doesn’t necessarily mean de Zorzi will be paid the same. SA20’s regulations stipulate that a replacement player can ‘negotiate’ his fee between the bracket of the player he is replacing and the next highest – R750k in this case.
Those negotiations, and the resultant price, were “confidential”, and it may well be that the Durban Franchise offered to match the R250k for the New Zealand tour. But even if it was closer to the Abbott price, and de Zorzi stood to actually lose money in the short term, he would have accepted the offer.
Although he hasn’t said so publicly, De Zorzi would most certainly have preferred to play two Tests in New Zealand than sit on DSG’s bench for a month, which is most likely what he will do given the existing strength of their batting line-up.
Which just goes to show: it’s not just the players earning ten times as much for T20 cricket who are turning their backs on the format they love the most, it is also those who dare not risk upsetting teams who might pay them a lot of money in the future. To not play the game they love the most. It’s no wonder people are confused.
CSA are politicians looking after their own interests and not for the game.
Sorry to sound like a stuck record, but Klaasen's comments are exactly the type that make my blood boil. OK, if you want to go after as much money as humanly possible, go for it (and let's not forget that he also has a vastly valuable IPL contract for which there's a de facto international window). But don't pretend that you give a flying one about test cricket. From the figures I could find, R250k is almost ten times the median wage--PLUS his IPL contract. Sorry but you don't need the money. Pursuing more than you need--fine, if those are what your values are. Tear-jerking hypocrisy about giving up a format you love--not so fine. If you love it, play it, and get paid many times what an ordinary South African is paid for doing the job they love (or possibly hate).
Re the de Zorzi question--that mainly shows to me that a lot of players are mighty confused. If you love something, do it (and get paid handsomely compared etc....) Don't over-theorise about what MIGHT happen if you ever happened to be in the market for a CSK contract. I also wonder how realistic such fears are. Are IPL franchises REALLY going to hold it against a player for not choosing to come in as an injury replacement because there's an FTP tour on? Even in acquisitive-IPL-land, I can't quite see that one. It all looks a little bit "what on earth would I do if someone forced me at gunpoint to have a sex change?"--that is: don't worry, it's unlikely to be an issue!