ABdV's World Cup tears

ABdV opens up about the loss to NZ in the WC semi

"AB de Villiers regards the 2015 World Cup semi-final defeat to New Zealand as the "greatest disappointment" of his cricket career and believes there could have been "other considerations" in the selection of the XI that took the field for that match last March.

The revelation that racial dynamics played a role in Vernon Philander being selected ahead of Kyle Abbott came in the aftermath of the tournament and was confirmed by CSA, who said transformation targets were part of pre-match discussions, but this is the first time any of the players involved in the match has spoken out.
...
Despite two losses in the group stage, South Africa advanced to the semi-final after achieving their first-ever win in a World Cup knockout match when they beat Sri Lanka in the quarterfinal in Sydney. De Villiers wrote that it was "generally assumed" the same team would play against New Zealand.

That team included three players of colour in Hashim Amla, JP Duminy and Imran Tahir. Throughout the tournament South Africa had played between three and five players of colour in their matches and had not received instruction on any specific number. At 5:30pm on the night before the semi-final, half an hour before South Africa's team meeting, de Villiers got a call - he does not say from whom - to tell him that Philander had passed a fitness test earlier and would play instead of Abbott.
...
"It depressed me to think of my team-mates in these outdated racial terms," he writes. "'Would anyone really mind if there were three or four players of colour in our side?" "

-----------------------------------------

Infuriating for SAf supporters that these race issues continue to be a blight on the National side.

It is even more infuriating that no one will say who made the selection decision. Clearly the captain was bypassed.

And in the end, it probably cost them the match. Very ironic when you're trying to promote a game to the masses.

Absolutely no doubt. Philander was not match fit and bowled tosh early to let the Sheep away to a flier.

While I can't speak of the impact on the dressing room, on the pitch, the match was being lost due to Steyn's horrendous bowling. They'd conceded 70 runs in the first five overs, none of which were bowled by Philander.

Not an unfair call, t. But when Philander came on, he got smashed and only bowled 6 overs. One could argue that Abbott (with his primed match fit condition) would've done at least a few runs better than Vernon.

Steyn was always the first picked, and yes, he had a shocker, including the final over that could have won his side the match, but saw him clattered for six to lose the game with one ball to spare.

It was a classic saffie choke. Abbott is a B grade cricketer.

One could argue that a B-Grade Abbott was better suited for the match than a un-match-fit Philander.

Of course, the great things about that classic semi were that:

a) Mukka was on song and smoked Stain, and had nothing left for the Final

b) Grant Elliott played the knock of his lifetime

c) The Snoozies knocked out SAf, who were Aus's biggest threat.

Steyn was the player who should have made way for Abbott, on the evidence of his performance on the day.

It's a bit pathetic IMHO that too little credit has been paid by some SA fans to McCullum and Elliott for their great performances; those fans preferring to dwell on what Abbott MIGHT have done if chosen instead of Philander or Steyn. He might of course have been tonked even more mercilessly than those two; given the form McCullum and Elliott were in.

lardbucket wrote:Steyn was the player who should have made way for Abbott, on the evidence of his performance on the day.

It's a bit pathetic IMHO that too little credit has been paid by some SA fans to McCullum and Elliott for their great performances; those fans preferring to dwell on what Abbott MIGHT have done if chosen instead of Philander or Steyn. He might of course have been tonked even more mercilessly than those two; given the form McCullum and Elliott were in.

Looking at the match figures one might argue that, but the evidence on the day was that Philander had been struggling with his form and then injury.  Both Steyn and Philander are better test than ODI bowlers, but the former at his best has still been a matchwinner in this form of the game, whereas Philander's really only ever proven himself as world class on a regular basis in the test arena.

Maybe the biggest thing to come out of it though is that regardless of what was the correct call, while the SA selectors insist on having a targets/quotas policy, there will always be suspicion around Allan borderline calls. Take away this sniff of suspicion and the odour disappears. One has to feel for the so-called quota player who is wrongly suspected to be given a free ride, but equally there can be an injustice for someone like Abbott, who in form should almost have been the first bowler picked for SA on that day.

lardbucket wrote:Steyn was the player who should have made way for Abbott, on the evidence of his performance on the day.

It's a bit pathetic IMHO that too little credit has been paid by some SA fans to McCullum and Elliott for their great performances; those fans preferring to dwell on what Abbott MIGHT have done if chosen instead of Philander or Steyn. He might of course have been tonked even more mercilessly than those two; given the form McCullum and Elliott were in.

Hindsight is an exact science.

The same way all the Aussie fans here have given SL credit for the recent test series win you mean? It is natural to focus on your team, rather than the opposition, when winning or losing.

'Hindsight' is exactly what the Saffie whiners have used to excuse their loss to NZ, scapegoating Philander ("oh, we would have won the world cup if only it wasn't for the nasty selectors choosing Philander over Abbott"). I have consistently said that this was and remains pathetic. Philander's form over the year leading up to this tournament had been great, such that if fit he would have been one of the first players chosen ... and he deserved his selection on merit. If fit.

The whole point is that he wasn't fit.

Well, if correct, that's the issue then ... nothing to do with 'a quota selection ruining the world cup'. Whine whine.

Who assessed him as fit?

No clue, but the fact remains that Abbott deserved to play on form.

lardbucket wrote:Well, if correct, that's the issue then ... nothing to do with 'a quota selection ruining the world cup'. Whine whine.

Who assessed him as fit?

Reading between the lines in the article, ABdV got a call to say Philander was fit AND in the team. He didn't disclose who called him. I'm betting someone with a shiny face. I maintain he simply was not match fit and should not have been chosen. He was injured in the Pool match v India on 22 Feb, and only had a half rat power work out v UAE on 12 Mar prior to the semi, and tweaked the hammy again. He was rested for the next game v SL on 18 Mar.  To me he clearly was not ready for the semi on 24 Mar. If not match fit, then his earlier form was irrelevant. Hence my sympathy for SAf supporters. To me he was played for quota reasons, and that possibly cost SAf the World Cup.

And who in their right mind would not have chosen Steyn in the XI, to make way for Abbott???

South Africa's national men's team will need to field a minimum average of six players of colour, of which at least two must be black African, in their XI effective immediately, in order to meet their transformation targets. The instruction was confirmed by CSA's board at their AGM on Saturday and follows confirmation in July that all national teams will be obliged to meet targets as part of what CSA has termed a drive to transform "aggressively," and "make cricket a truly national sport accessible to all."

http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/1053999.html

taipan wrote:South Africa's national men's team will need to field a minimum average of six players of colour, of which at least two must be black African, in their XI effective immediately, in order to meet their transformation targets. The instruction was confirmed by CSA's board at their AGM on Saturday and follows confirmation in July that all national teams will be obliged to meet targets as part of what CSA has termed a drive to transform "aggressively," and "make cricket a truly national sport accessible to all."

http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/1053999.html

Yeah, i saw that. England will do well out of it as white saffies look to greener pastures. I don't suppose the SA soccer team has the same 'inclusiveness' for white footballers.

Big Dog wrote:

taipan wrote:South Africa's national men's team will need to field a minimum average of six players of colour, of which at least two must be black African, in their XI effective immediately, in order to meet their transformation targets. The instruction was confirmed by CSA's board at their AGM on Saturday and follows confirmation in July that all national teams will be obliged to meet targets as part of what CSA has termed a drive to transform "aggressively," and "make cricket a truly national sport accessible to all."

http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/1053999.html

Yeah, i saw that. England will do well out of it as white saffies look to greener pastures. I don't suppose the SA soccer team has the same 'inclusiveness' for white footballers.  

The soccer board is a worse fark up than the cricket board..

taipan wrote:South Africa's national men's team will need to field a minimum average of six players of colour, of which at least two must be black African, in their XI effective immediately, in order to meet their transformation targets. The instruction was confirmed by CSA's board at their AGM on Saturday and follows confirmation in July that all national teams will be obliged to meet targets as part of what CSA has termed a drive to transform "aggressively," and "make cricket a truly national sport accessible to all."

http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/1053999.html

Rabada is an African who deserves to be selected on merit but who would be the other?

Skin colour selection policies should = the other countries Geoff boycotting them.

Red wrote:

taipan wrote:South Africa's national men's team will need to field a minimum average of six players of colour, of which at least two must be black African, in their XI effective immediately, in order to meet their transformation targets. The instruction was confirmed by CSA's board at their AGM on Saturday and follows confirmation in July that all national teams will be obliged to meet targets as part of what CSA has termed a drive to transform "aggressively," and "make cricket a truly national sport accessible to all."

http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/1053999.html

Rabada is an African who deserves to be selected on merit but who would be the other?

Skin colour selection policies should = the other countries Geoff boycotting them.

Or even the ICC complying to its own constitution. But it ain't going to happen.

Bavuma would be the other, but the total irony is that they have not been produced by CSA's existing quota system, but by the traditional private schools.

How did they get to the private schools , taips?

I know the private schools in Perth will give scholarships to promising footballers especially if they are indigenous

Not sure whether parents had money or scholarships.

Bavuma went to St David's Marist and Rabada to St Stithians. They are two of the most expensive schools in the country.

The point is that the quotas imposed on the lower cricket levels had SFA to do with their cricket development. It points to a total failure of CSA's grassroots development. They are now hiding their shortcomings by forcing quotas on the senior team.

taipan wrote:Not sure whether parents had money or scholarships.

Bavuma went to St David's Marist and Rabada to St Stithians. They are two of the most expensive schools in the country.

The point is that the quotas imposed on the lower cricket levels had SFA to do with their cricket development. It points to a total failure of CSA's grassroots development. They are now hiding their shortcomings by forcing quotas on the senior team.

Agree that a properly organised and funded program at the grassroots level would alleviate this need. It should attract kids to the game and ensure a fair and equitable path to senior ranks.

They should offer scholarships to the private schools too. Nobody should reasonably object to funded scholarships from those from disadvantaged backgrounds, but imposing quotas at the top levels defeats the purpose of everything the sport and society should be about.

Red wrote:

taipan wrote:Not sure whether parents had money or scholarships.

Bavuma went to St David's Marist and Rabada to St Stithians. They are two of the most expensive schools in the country.

The point is that the quotas imposed on the lower cricket levels had SFA to do with their cricket development. It points to a total failure of CSA's grassroots development. They are now hiding their shortcomings by forcing quotas on the senior team.

Agree that a properly organised and funded program at the grassroots level would alleviate this need. It should attract kids to the game and ensure a fair and equitable path to senior ranks.

They should offer scholarships to the private schools too. Nobody should reasonably object to funded scholarships from those from disadvantaged backgrounds, but imposing quotas at the top levels defeats the purpose of everything the sport and society should be about.

Exactly Red. If CSA had done their job there would be no need for this. But CSA is populated by government flunkies and ANC hanger ons. And yet whenever the racial make up of the team is questioned it is the racist whities causing the problems.