Proteas masters of mediocrity?

Graeme Smith’s captain’s speech and his remarks at a press conference after the third test against Sri Lanka at Newlands, reminds one of the movie Amadeus in which the 18^th century Venetian classical composer Antonio Salieri ends up in a mental institution and says while comparing himself to the genius that is Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: “I am the master of mediocrity.”

The SA team, captained by Graeme Smith, have won nine of their last 21 tests in the past three calendar years.  They were beaten in their own backyard by a mediocre Australian team in February and March 2009, drew a series at home with England in 2009/2010, drew at home with an Indian team who have become infamous for their poor record away from home, and lost a test against a Sri Lankan team who could not win any of their previous 15 tests.

Finally, for the first time since 2008, the Proteas won a test series at home by beating Sri Lanka 2-1. Bravo!

Commenting on the test series win, a jubilant Gerald Majola, chief executive officer of Cricket South Africa, said:  “This side, under the outstanding leadership of Graeme Smith, have the potential to make all South Africans very proud over the months ahead of us.”

South Africa's defeat in Durban against Sri Lanka (who won emphatically by 208 runs) had prompted media speculation that Smith, all-rounder Jacques Kallis and wicketkeeper Mark Boucher should step down.

Smith hit back at the critics after the 10-wicket win at Newlands that ensured that the Proteas won the series 2-1.

"Someone's head always seems to be on the chopping block ... but we haven't lost too many tests at home, we've just lacked a killer punch and the second-test defeat in Durban was a big disappointment for us," the skipper told a news conference.

The remarks by Majola and Smith confirm our worst fears – that like Salieri, the South African cricket team have become the masters of mediocrity. In fact, we are embracing it, endorsing it and applauding it.

Why is Smith such a wonderful test captain?

In Kallis, AB de Villiers and Hashim Amla, he possesses arguably one of the best top-orders ever assembled in South African cricket.

In Dale Steyn he has one of the most potent fast bowling weapons that has ever bowled for South Africa.

Steyn and Morkel were described as the best opening bowling pair in the world the past three years.

Vernon Philander has established himself as one of the most feared opening bowlers in international cricket during just four brief tests, taking 30 wickets with three five-fors in an innings.

And Boucher is a record-breaking glove man behind the stumps.

Yet, for all the quality in this team, it has become predictable during the past four seasons for imploding during second tests after winning the first test.

If you were a betting man, you could almost predict that if South Africa won the first test, they would automatically lose a second one.

When compared to the Australian cricket team under Steve Waugh that won 16 straight tests, this team is a master of mediocrity.

Just don’t wake Smith from his slumber, because he stated that this team has the potential to become the number-1 nation in the world.

Yet, in almost the same breath, he fails to explain South Africa’s poor performance in Durban against Sri Lanka.

Surely, after four straight losses in Durban, Cricket South Africa should have called for an investigation into Boxing Day tests.

There must be something wrong.

South Africa even started poorly in the Boxing Day test against the Australians in 2008 and if the Australians had not fielded so poorly, they might have won convincingly.

Einstein once said: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Surely, the SA team had a look at logistics. Surely they changed their Christmas menu after the first loss, change the Durban-venue (perhaps there was something wrong with the water or the Christmas turkey).

But strangely, they have always used the same programme: Christmas-eve dinner, and Christmas with the families.

The results, predictably, have been the same.

What worries one, is Smith’s inability to explain the losses.

Ask any chief executive officer of a big company in South Africa what would happen to him if they displayed poor results, and he failed to introduce a new strategy upon review. He would be replaced within six months.

Yet, Smith is adored and applauded as an ‘outstanding captain’.

Remarkable. The truth is that South Africa’s inability to sustain their high levels of excellence has become one of the most annoying aspects of their cricket.

Kepler Wessels, a former SA captain, recently remarked that South Africa boasts a team of world-class individuals who can beat any team in the world, but weeks later, they would suffer a batting collapse within one session and would lose against a much-lower ranked team in the world.

One wonders what would have happened to John Smit as captain if the Springboks had played Italy in a home-series of three tests, and lost the second in Durban.

Would the fans have voted with their feet, and their Twitter-fingers?

The stadium at Newlands for the third would have been half-empty, and Smit might not have survived the captaincy.

Surely, it is time for South Africa to replace the fumbling Boucher behind the stumps and to install AB de Villiers as new wicketkeeper-batsman.

Surely it is time for Smith to vacate the captaincy and to allow Hashim Amla to take over as leader, chief-planner and chief-motivator of the team.

Failure to make wholesale changes would just confirm our worst fear: the South African cricket team is indeed the master of mediocrity.

Perhaps another desperate need is to revise our planning strategy for the next three years.

You cannot expect your South African specialist batsmen to be amongst the biggest run-scorers per calendar year in test cricket if you fail to field them in first-class games while flooding their schedule with international Pro20-games.

South Africa played in only five tests in 2011, and their top-batsmen were seriously under cooked in the test series against Australia.

Ultimately, though, it remains a poor excuse. Why did South Africa fail to close the door in the face of the Australians at the Wanderers when they were superbly placed on 241 for four, only to implode to 266 all out?

If we accept excuses for such a collapse gleefully, we will defiantly also fail to look in the mirror like Antonio Salieri, and we would fail to admit that we are in fact masters of mediocrity.

Fanie Heyns