By Zaahier Adams
Three years ago the Proteas brainstrust adopted a strategy labelled "brave cricket". Many pundits were confused by the term. Pages of copy were written about it and various former players and administrators were consulted to make sense of the strategy.
The only people who understood what it really meant was Proteas coach Mickey Arthur, captain Graeme Smith and the players. But maybe that's how it was meant to be and should be.
One way Arthur did try and explain his philosophy to the media back in 2006 was: "(Our defensive nature) is something we are looking to change. We want to be braver. We really do. And we're in the process of doing that. Hopefully you'll see a new brand of cricket, we really want to make it an entertaining brand."
Continues Below ↓
Arthur also said the team would along the way scale spectacular highs (the 438 win over Australia) and some disappointing lows (being bowled out for just 149 in the 2007 World Cup semi-final defeat to the Aussies).
One thing we can deduce from this is that at least Arthur is a man of his word. What troubles me, however, is that the one-day squad recently selected for the Kenya and Bangladesh series has no traits of the "brave cricket" philosophy. I have always believed that to play "brave cricket", you need to select bravely.
And while two weeks is a long time in international cricket, let alone three years, and that the playing personnel at Arthur's disposal has changed, which has possibly led to a change in strategy, surely elements of "brave cricket" should remain.
Dropping Makhaya Ntini and Andre Nel was not brave. Both pacemen are over 30 years of age, and have been struggling in limited-overs cricket for a while. Nel has conceded 352 runs in his last 10 one-dayers, with an economy rate of 4.88. That is very acceptable in modern-day ODI cricket, you might argue.
Continues...
|
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Digg
Delicious
Newsvine
Facebook
muti
Twitter
