Share this
Mister Wong
Digg
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Technorati
Newsvine
Googlize this
Blinklist
Facebook
Wikio
Hear this text
Print
E-mail
Leadership could make the differenceIndia has replaced South Africa as the number-one Test nation in world cricket after thrashing Sri Lanka in the recent Test series on Indian soil. It may be the start of a topsy-turvy period for three teams at the top of the world rankings – India, South Africa and Australia.
India will only be playing two Tests for the next 11 months, so hanging onto the crown would be extremely difficult for this subcontinent team.
Australia lost its position at the top of the summit after succumbing to England in the Ashes series. South Africa replaced Ricky Ponting's team as number one, but has had no opportunity to defend its newfound status, as the first Test against England is only due to begin next Wednesday.
Two teams have dominated world cricket for the past 33 years and have not surrendered their crown for close to two decades. The West Indians were number one from 1976 until 1995, while Australia held onto its position as trendsetter in international cricket from 1995 until 2009.
How could they have reigned for so long?
The West Indians possessed a quartet of fast bowlers who were simply magnificent and who gave them the edge over most teams. When some of these spearheads became 30-somethings, they had good strength in reserve to replace them.
In Viv Richards, Clive Lloyd, Brian Lara, Richie Richardson, Gordon Greenidge and Desmond Haynes, they also had batsmen of world class.
The X-factor – leadership
But the X-factor in its domination was the leadership of Clive Lloyd.
This was a massive factor in building the Windies. “Clive built us into a great team. He is the calmest man I know. It was a complicated thing to bring a West Indies dressing room together. Clive sent a message to the whole region. Hey, West Indies can be happy together,” recalled Richards.
Mike Brearley, a former England captain, said that a great deal of the success of the West Indians over 20 years was down to Lloyd and his leadership. He was a big man, and he came across as a big man and a wonderful cricketer, too.
He was a disciplinarian, and woe the player who stepped out of line.
One night he saw a senior player chatting up a woman in a corner of the hotel bar. Realising that the woman concerned was the wife of the team’s bus driver, he marched across to the player and ordered him to get to bed, an instruction that was obeyed instantaneously.
Rejoining the party, Lloyd remarked that the driver had looked after the players.
Graeme Smith’s leadership
It is something that Cricket South Africa would have to manage carefully.
Graeme Smith has done superbly over the past season, but there were ominous signs in the series defeat against England in the recent One-Day Internationals.
Smith’s tendency to ignore important details has hurt his team on a number of occasions.
Some years ago, the pitch at Newlands in the Test series against Australia displayed signs that it would assist the seam bowlers on the first morning. He ignorantly decided to defy conditions and bat first. Stuart Clark captured nine wickets on debut, and Australia proceeded to a 3-0 drubbing of South Africa.
This sort of ignorance could be attributed to inexperience, but three years down the line, Smith again erred against England.
Conditions at St. Georges Park in Port Elizabeth favoured swing bowling, as the ‘swing bowler’s wind’ was howling in the fourth One-Day International. Smith again ignored the small detail as well as the importance of adhering to ‘cricket tradition’ that if the bowler’s wind is in full cry in Port Elizabeth, you bowl first.
James Anderson destroyed the South African batting lineup, and England finally won the series.
Leadership is an important factor in South Africa’s efforts to beat England 2-0 to regain the top spot in the world rankings, but if Smith is not mindful of the small details, Australia may well reclaim this position at the expense of the Proteas.
Certainly one would lioke to see a far stronger Mickey Arthur and a far mopre unified management team as opposed to the run away Graeme Smith and although this article is relevant the problem may be deeper than what the writer suggests.