I have to agree with him that, given our current ranking, we did well to make the semi-finals in the ICC World Twenty20 Cup in Bangladesh. Yes, I was as devastated as you when we lost to India, but we were outplayed tactically.
Wessels is never one to mince his words, which is possibly why his wisdom is not employed more proactively in SA cricket.
In an article on SuperSport he appeals for a review of the strategies we employ in the shorter versions of cricket, and suggests bringing in new coaching blood for these versions of the game.
The 50-over World Cup is exactly a year away. My suggestion would be that the current coaching staff continues in the test arena but that a coaching staff that specialises in T20 and 50-over cricket takes the team forward in the shorter versions of the game.
A number of the current coaching staff members did duty at the previous World T20 in Sri Lanka in 2012. That tournament wasn’t a success either.
It may be time for fresh ideas from a coaching group that embraces the modern T20 and 50-over format. A number of senior players retired recently, so the timing of a dynamic energetic group of limited-over coaches may be appropriate.
He also questioned the use of AB de Villiers lower down the batting order, and the decision to open the bowling with JP Duminy and not Dale Steyn. I must admit that my immediate reaction was to wonder if there were Indian bookmakers involved in that decision.
Wessels concludes:
The next World Cup is in Australia and New Zealand, so South Africa will be more comfortable there. Success, though, will only come with a disciplined and tactical approach that allows the talent in the South African squad to flourish.
A final word on the T20 World Cup: I was very pleased that Sri Lanka finally succeeded in their fifth attempt in as many finals. They have always been innovative in their approach – remember when everyone else built up towards an onslaught at the end? Sri Lanka set themselves a target of 75 in the first 15 overs, and changed the 50-over game for ever.
On Sunday, they very cleverly prevented the mighty Indian batting machine from firing on all cylinders, particularly in the final four overs, and then used the brilliant duo of Sangakkara and Jayawardene to win the trophy in their farewell match.
The Law – what for?
This phrase comes from a David Kramer/Taliep Pietersen production, and is equally valid when we look at what is happening in the world of rugby today.
Die reëls word voortdurend aangepas om ernstige beserings te voorkom, en tog groei die lys van gekrokte spelers by die dag. Kyk maar na die Bulle en Stormers, byvoorbeeld. Die Bulle was net op pad om weer hul ritme te vind, toe Potgieter en Stegmann beseer is. Dit was opmerklik hoe die Hurricanes skielik meer kompeterend geraak het na Dewald se besering.
Dit is nie net ons spanne nie – elke span in die kompetisie word in ‘n mindere of meerdere mate hierdeur geraak.
Dit wil vir my voorkom of die reëls nie werklik die impak maak wat dit moet nie, want die afrigters verander bloot hul speelstyl om kompeterend te bly, en ander komplikasies tree in. Moet sê, dit lyk of hulle afgeloer het by die finansiëledienste bedryf.
Op ‘n paar uitsonderings na, is rugby regtig nie meer aantreklik nie. Eerlikwaar, as rolmaal bewegings dit vir jou doen, moet jy ernstig oorweeg om Amerikaanse stoei op TV te kyk, gevolg deur ‘n uur of twee van die “Lingerie” vertoning op die mode-kanaal.
Dan is die beserings nie ook, soos in die ou dae, net ‘n geswikte enkel of ‘n blou-oog nie. Kyk maar hoe lank was Schalk Burger en Heinrich Brüssow byvoorbeeld van die veld af?
Die kern van die kwaad lê natuurlik in die groot geld wat professionele sport deesdae dryf.
Die ou gesegde, “geld wat stom is, maak reg wat krom is”, mag dalk geld vir erektiele disfunksie, maar beslis nie vir spelers wat aan onbillike vereistes blootgestel word nie.
