Three players who should not be in SA squad

Whenever a Proteas squad is announced I consider whether we have selected the best squad out of what is available. Usually I only think one or two changes should have been made, but now I am unhappy with the selection.

The Proteas squad to play Australia in the three tests starting on Wednesday in Centurion:

Graeme Smith (captain), Hashim Amla, AB de Villiers, JP Duminy, Faf du Plessis, Dean Elgar, Rory Kleinveldt, Ryan McLaren, Morne Morkel, Wayne Parnell, Alviro Petersen, Robbie Peterson, Vernon Philander, Dale Steyn, and Thami Tsolekile.

For me three of these players should not be in the test squad.

Thami Tsolekile (33)

Tsolekile bats in the lower order for the Lions. Image taken from http://www.iol.co.za/.

While he is a good wicketkeeper, he is old and is an average if not poor batsman.
Wicketkeeping is very important in cricket because the guy behind the stumps has to be able to catch a ball and whip the bails off quickly if need be. 
But a guy who is at least decent at that, while being able to bat well, is a better option.
Mark Boucher was a world-class wicketkeeper but also a finisher with the bat. 
Sangakarra, Gilchrist and Prior were also good wicketkeeper-batsmen.
The best sides always had wicketkeepers who could bat a little, and Tsolekile's first-class average of 30.26 is not impressive.

I think Quinton de Kock would have been a better choice. 

Rory Kleinveldt (30)

I have seen him bowl, get hit for a few boundaries, and still not change his line and length. Image taken from http://www.thebounce.co.za/.

To be brutally honest, he is the worst bowler I have seen bowl for SA since Roger Telemachus.
He has average speed, little movement and petty strategy.
He can bat a little but otherwise is a mediocre player.
Hi test bowling average is 42.20 and in ODIs it is 37.33. 
His first-class bowling average is not even that good (29.09).

Abbott should be in the squad instead of Kleinveldt.

Wayne Parnell (24)

To his advantage Parnell is a left arm seamer. But just because you are left handed does not mean you should be selected. Image taken from http://www.ghkothari.com/. 

Parnell and Ryan McLaren are the allrounders selected to replace Kallis.
I understand that our batting is deep with Philander and Peterson so perhaps an allrounder will ensure all bowlers have breaks while a strong batting order is maintained.
Nevertheless the choice to replace Kallis with an allrounder is illogical to me.
With Duminy helping the bowlers, we can afford to have seven good batsmen.

They should bring in de Kock or Elgar at seven instead, but if the Proteas insist on playing an allrounder, they should play McLaren instead of Parnell. 
McLaren is better in both departments.
Parnell should be replaced with de Kock or Stiaan van Zyl; or McLaren if an allrounder is the preferred option.

There are also three T20s after the three tests.

Kallis - What he means to me

I had prepared a long blog post about Jacques Kallis, who recently retired from test cricket.

It was about how I believe we judge people by their deeds and character, and how I think you can judge Jacques Kallis by his. 

However, he kept things simple, even his farewell.

Jacques Kallis (38) scored a century in his final test innings, taking him to third in the highest all-time run scorers list in tests. Image taken from http://www.cricketdawn.com/.

So I will briefly tell you what Jacques Kallis means to me, Nicholas Zaal.

Jacques Kallis showed that a nation like mine is capable of dominating in a certain field, forgive the pun. Like Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara, Kallis gave his nation hope that they can be as good, if not better, than the countries which were traditionally seen as the best in cricket (England & Australia) - although Lara's nation already dominated world cricket once before him. 

Of course these people were not alone in this, they were assisted by their side-kick contemporary teammates. Tendulkar was assisted by Dravid, Sehwag, Kumble etc. and Lara was assisted by Chanderpaul (one of my favourite batsmen), Gayle and Sarwan. Kallis had Pollock, Ntini, Smith, Gibbs, de Villiers, Amla, Steyn and more.

While Barry Richards, Graeme Pollock, Peter Pollock, Eddie Barlow and Mike Procter did the same for South Africa in the previous century, Kallis took it much further. 

What I am trying to say is that Jacques Kallis has shown me we have tremendous potential in this country. I think that his success in cricket has raised the bar in South African cricket. Our modern batsmen are not content with test averages in the forties or even ODI averages in the thirties (think Amla, de Villiers and Smith). 

Kallis is living proof that we as a nation are as good as any other, and I believe his effort and success is linked to our own country's in cricket. South Africa is the number one test nation, having kept the test mace since we first won it on 1 April 2013, and we look set to retain it for a while.

PS: For those of you who are interested, I have been away from my computer for a while because I have developed Carpal Tunnel Syndrome in my right hand. I was prohibited from using the computer or playing guitar. It will get better, but I will probably have to have an operation. I am unable to avoid using the computer now with my new job.

The irrationality factor of sport

The three match ODI series between South Africa and India was supposed to be one of the most competitive this year. 
It was not.

South Africa dominated India in the first two ODIs and scored 301/8 in the third before rain prevented a result. SA won the series 2-0. In all three games Quinton de Kock (20) scored a century. He received man of the series for this.  

Quinton de Kock (20) scored his first century of the series in pink. sports.ndtv.com aptly gave this photo the caption: "Baby-faced 'pink panther' Quinton de Kock takes Proteas to win in 1st ODI". Image taken from sports.ndtv.com.

This is why I love sport: Things happen that shouldn't.

Wigan beat Chelsea last season (football), Ireland nearly beat New Zealand this year (rugby), football players are judged to he worthy of extreme prices but profusely fail to live up to their designated values, and a 20 year old scores three consecutive centuries against the world number one ODI side (cricket).

These are all unpredictable occurrences that defy logic. Common sense cannot comprehend these events and has to turn its face away.

For English football fans this picture needs no explanation. For everyone else: A few years before Fernando Torres (29) came to Chelsea he was one of the best strikers in European football. Going to Chelsea, one of the better clubs in England, he received a contract worth 50 million pounds. Since then Torres has not been nearly effective. Image taken from http://www.lfcreds.com/.

In this ODI series the Proteas batsmen actually played spin better than pace, dispatching the spinners all around the ground for numerous fours and sixes. I have never seen South Africans do so well against spinners, and against Indian spinners nogal! India does not just have world-class spinners, they have world-class spinners on the bench, or unselected. Think Ashwin, Jadeja, Mishra, Ojha, Chawla...

India were (and are) the number one ODI team. South Africa are currently tied fourth with Sri Lanka. The demolition of India in the ODI series demonstrates either two things: 

1) India are still very poor away from home and their success in cricket and position in the ICC rankings is primarily due to the abundance of cricket they play at home.
2) The Proteas were simply much better than the Indian team.

Why is it that in sport we see the best lose against the worst and the most unlikely and unpredictable things happen? 

Whatever the reason, this factor makes sport all the more interesting. 

Despite the ODI series going the way it did (illogically), I am still looking forward to the Test series as I think it will be more competitive.

One last thought: the Proteas' dominance of India was predominantly facilitated by the brilliance of Quinton de Kock. Why can't he be placed in the Test squad?

Sachin

In a game where false starts can end your international career before it really gets going.

In a game where media scrutiny and public criticism can smother one's self-confidence to the point of paralysis.

In a game where foul play and match-fixing abound and honesty is unexpected.

One man stood up as a shining symbol.




Image taken from http://htmlgiant.com.

 
Sachin tendulkar (40) stood up to the challenges of cricket and prevailed as a symbol of skill, resilience and integrity.
 

Image taken from http://sportsupdate360.blogspot.com.

Image taken from www.hdwallpapersinn.com.





Image taken from http://tendulkar.co.in.

Sachin Tendulkar is one of the best batsman the world has ever seen. He is the leading run scorer in tests and ODIs. He has scored 15,921 runs in tests at an average of  53.78, including 51 centuries and a best of 248*. He has scored 18,426 runs in ODIs at an average of 44.83, including 49 centuries and a best of 200*.
 
His ODI 200* was scored at the age of 36 against South Africa on 24 February 2010 and was the first ODI double century. Since then Virender Sehwag (219) and Rohit Sharma (209) have passed Tendulkar. 
 
A myriad of Tendulkar records can be seen on his website (http://tendulkar.co.in/) and at http://www.thatscricket.com/india/players/sr-tendulkar.html. My favourite is that he has the record for most number of man of matches and man of series in ODIs and man of matches in world cups; because that shows how superior he is to other players.
 
Tendulkar was just as good away from India. He scored a record 8,705 runs in tests away from home, including a record 29 centuries. He scored 3,630 test runs at an average of 55.00 in Australia.
 
Tendulkar began his career at the age of 16 and was the third youngest player to make a test debut. He then played international cricket for 24 years. As his records show, he was a brilliant batsman. As a bowler Tendulkar also took 46 wickets in tests (ave. 54.17) and 154 wickets in ODIs (ave. 44.48).

Image taken from www.examiner.com.

 

As a person Tendulkar showed integrity and humility right up until his departing speech, thanking and honouring everyone involved in his development in cricket. He began his speech by thanking his father.
 
Cricket South Africa Chief Executive Haroon Lorgat said of Tendulkar, "Sachin has been one of the best role models the game of cricket could have ever wished for... we would all love our children to play the game in the same spirit that he does... I would argue there is no better modern cricketer in the complete sense than Sachin Tendulkar."
 
The few controversies Tendulkar was involved in can be found here http://www.deccanchronicle.com/130424/sports-cricket/article/controversies-involving-sachin.

I believe that Virat Kohli will be the next super-batsman, not just for India but for world cricket.

James Anderson best bowler of this era? Nonsense. Ajmal and Steyn are better.

Wasim Akram has called James Anderson, a bowler for England, “ the best bowler of this era”. Firstly, Akram is a legend of cricket, being one of the best pace bowlers of all time (having taken 414 test wickets at an average of 23.62 and 502 ODI wickets at 23.52) so this is a huge statement. It is also huge when we realise that Dale Steyn (SA) and Saeed Ajmal (PAK) are both bowling in the same era. I am going to show you that Akram’s claim is nonsense.

James Anderson (31) of England is undeniably a good bowler, and I enjoy watching him bowl, but he is not the best. Image taken from http://www.dailymail.co.uk.

As on 01 October 2013 the ICC bowling rankings tells us that:

In tests Steyn is rated the best bowler in the world. Ajmal is fourth and Anderson ninth.

In ODIs Ajmal is third, Anderson sixth and Steyn is 15^th

In T20s Ajmal is second, Steyn is 21^st and Anderson is not even on the top 100 list.

ICC BOWLING RANKINGS (01 October 2013)

	Anderson	Steyn	Ajmal
Test ranking	9	1	4
ODI ranking	6	15	3
T20I ranking	-	21	2

The full ICC rankings lists are available at http://www.espncricinfo.com/rankings/content/page/211270.html

These rankings tell us that Saeed Ajmal is actually the best bowler in the world. Dale Steyn is undeniably the best in tests, and has been for a while, but in terms of consistency over all three formats Ajmal is the best.

I find it incongruent to compare pace bowlers with spinners. So let us compare Anderson to Steyn.

James Anderson is 31 years old

He has played 87 tests, 174 ODIs and 19 T20Is

In tests he has 329 wickets at 30.11

In ODIs he has 245 wickets at 29.11 (economy 4.97)

In T20Is he has 18 wickets at 30.66 (economy 7.84)

Dale Steyn is 30 years old

He has played 65 tests, 73 ODIs and 29 T20Is.

In tests he has 332 wickets at 22.65

In ODIs he has 102 wickets at 29.07 (economy 4.92)

In T20Is he has 39 wickets at 16.64 (economy 6.30)

Statistics show that Steyn has better averages in all formats and better economy rates than Anderson. Anderson only has a better ODI ranking than Steyn because he has been in superb form recently, England plays far more cricket than South Africa so their players can accumulate more points and Steyn has been injured lately so he has missed even more ODIs.

As prominent as Wasim Akram is in the cricketing world, statistics refute his claim. Saeed Ajmal is the best bowler of our era and Dale Steyn is the best pace bowler of our era.

By the way I am South African and might be biased in my evaluation if I did not use statistics as my primary tool of comparison. 

Should Jacques Kallis retire now?

It seems that in recent talk from Jacques Kallis, CSA CEO Haroon Lorgat and Proteas coach Russell Domingo that while they would all like Kallis's experience in the 2015 World Cup, form will be a factor. Thus they say they will monitor his performance "season by season". 

Read the story here: http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/663705.html  

Jacques Kallis (37) has made 11,498 runs in 321 ODIs for the Proteas. Image taken from http://www.espncricinfo.com

My Opinion

Kallis's performances for South African cricket cannot be described in words. When he is not playing, his presence is sorely missed and in theory it would be great having him play for SA in the 2015 WC to be held in Australia and New Zealand. However, do we know he will still be great, or worth his place, then? His choosing to not play in a few ODI series the last couple of seasons has probably been good for prolonging his career but has this been what's best for the team? It is hard to say. Certainly a better and refreshed Kallis is good now, but then we were weaker in the games without him.

I think that I tend to over-analyse situations, but here I go. Kallis wants to prolong his career so he can play in 2015. But we don't know if he will still be good then. Domingo has said that no one is guaranteed a place in the WC, it all depends on fitness and form. Domingo has also said that Kallis must play enough ODI cricket if he wants to play in the WC. This sounds wise to me.

Although, if Cricket South Africa think that Kallis will still be good enough to play in the WC in 2015, even if he has to miss half of the series before then, I would say let it be. Kallis is a great after all, likely SA's best ever cricketer.

But if Kallis is perceived to be getting worse and less fit to be able to play, of which there is no shame as it happens to everyone over time, CSA should make the hard decision and put in place a succession plan for him before 2015. I am not saying that Kallis must retire today, but if CSA thinks he will not be able to compete effectively at 2015, they must start looking for a replacement(s) in the ODIs from this season. In test matches a Kallis replacement should be a batsman and in the ODIs, with Duminy back, we probably would also only need to swap him with a batsman.

Kallis says,  "It remains my aspiration to be available for the 2015 World Cup but, at the same time I know as an allrounder approaching my 38th birthday, I will need to assess my future in the game season by season." 

I think CSA need to monitor Kallis closely in this upcoming cricket season (and by the way let's hope that this scrutinising does not add detrimental pressure to Kallis), and make a decision that will be best for the team.

Cricket legends are given too much agency about when they* would like to retire. This can sometimes hurt them as well as the teams they are in. Your thoughts?

Kallis's cricket averages (Taken from http://www.espncricinfo.com on 23 August 2013) 

Batting and fielding averages

	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	4s	6s	Ct	St
Tests	162	274	40	13128	224	56.10	28486	46.08	44	58	1469	97	194	0
ODIs	321	307	53	11498	139	45.26	15756	72.97	17	85	903	136	125	0
T20Is	25	23	4	666	73	35.05	558	119.35	0	5	56	20	7	0
First-class	253	415	57	19534	224	54.56			61	97			258	0
List A	417	399	65	14764	155*	44.20			23	108			156	0
Twenty20	134	130	21	3517	89*	32.26	3153	111.54	0	26	349	73	42	0

Bowling averages

	Mat	Inns	Balls	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	Econ	SR	4w	5w	10
Tests	162	267	19842	9341	288	6/54	9/92	32.43	2.82	68.8	7	5	0
ODIs	321	280	10636	8558	270	5/30	5/30	31.69	4.82	39.3	2	2	0
T20Is	25	19	276	333	12	4/15	4/15	27.75	7.23	23.0	1	0	0
First-class	253		28643	13338	423	6/54		31.53	2.79	67.7		8	0
List A	417		13559	10650	348	5/30	5/30	30.60	4.71	38.9	3	3	0
Twenty20	134	115	2138	2742	87	4/15	4/15	31.51	7.69	24.5	1	0	0

The first Ashes test was one to remember

James Anderson  (30) took 10 wickets and man of the match. Image taken from http://www.dailymail.co.uk. He is really the bowler with the best form in the world right now, following his success at the Champions Trophy.

England were the strong favourites going into the game at Trent Bridge and were dominating before the Australian number 11, Ashton Agar, came to the crease. England made 215 in the first innings and Australia were on 117-9. Agar and Phil Hughs made a record 10^th wicket partnership by any team (163 runs). Agar produced the record number of runs by a test match number 11 (98).

A number 11 making 98 runs does not happen in cricket. Yes, amazing acts of determination and defiance take place, but number 11 bowlers do not make scores like 98. Include the fact that Agar is 19 years old and this was his test debut, and a cricket fan like me cannot compute the possibility that this happened. Of course he moved up the order in the next innings.

Australia managed to get 280 (Agar 98, Hughs 81), a lead of 65 runs. England had a very good second innings thanks to an Ian Bell 109. They made 375 all out, leaving AUS with 316 to win. The Aussie openers made good scores, giving AUS a chance (Watson 46, Rogers 52). However wickets fell and Australia needed 80 runs with one wicket left.

Such was the determination of the last batsmen (Brad Haddin and James Pattinson) that before lunch on day 5, England were scared. It was visible that they were doubting they would win. England eventually got Haddin’s wicket and won by 14 runs. Haddin (71 off 147) and Pattinson (25 off 57) nearly stole the game for Australia.

Defiant: Ashton Agar (19) stunned everyone coming in at 11 and scoring 98. If his bowling can become as good as his batting he will go far. Image taken from http://www.theaustralian.com.au.

The match was filled with as much controversy as I’ve ever seen in a test. First Ashton Agar was given not out by the third umpire when he should have been given out stumped. His foot was not behind the line [England lost out because of this decision due to Ashton making another 92 runs]. Then Jonathan Trott was given out LBW because all the available technology pointed to him being out, but the side-on hotspot could not be utilised because of a technical glitch. The ex-England cricketer and commentator Sir Ian Botham felt certain it was an edge onto the pads [England lost out again]. The umpires later apologised for this!

Then the most memorable moment in the test came. Stuart Broad clearly edged a ball to slip. The umpire gave him not out. Australia had no reviews left. Whether the umpire had just made a mistake, was not concentrating or was trying to make up to England for Trott’s dismissal, it is unknown. In the end a lot of people have voiced their frustration at the incident. Many say that Broad should have walked, the ex-West Indian great and commentator Michael Holding said that Stuart Broad should be banned from cricket for not walking, calling Broad’s actions “contrary to the spirit of the game”.

The incident occurred when Broad was on 37. He finished on 65. This means that he made 28 more runs than he should have, twice the amount England won by. One way to look at it would be that England won because Broad stood his ground. Although, both the controversies involving Agar and Trott cost England more than 28 runs.

In my opinion if the umpire was really just giving Broad a lifeline because of the mistake involving Trott then Broad should have walked. If the umpire thought Broad was not out then I think it would be fine for Broad to stand his ground.

There are five test matches in this Ashes series. England are 1 – 0 up and the second test starts this Thursday at Lord’s in London. The other tests are on 01 August, 09 Aug and 21 Aug.