West Indians who have turned out in their thousands for the One-DayInternationals against South Africa these past couple of weeks haveseen first-hand what they had previously had to endure from far-offlands through the television screen and the
Tony Cozier13-May-2001West Indians who have turned out in their thousands for the One-DayInternationals against South Africa these past couple of weeks haveseen first-hand what they had previously had to endure from far-offlands through the television screen and the radio.The West Indies’ overseas record in the abbreviated game has beenevery bit as calamitous as it has been in Tests, but at least theyhave been able to hold their own in both at home. Now the SouthAfricans have come into our backyard and exposed the yawning gap thathas developed between the top teams in limited-overs cricket and theWest Indies. In every single department, the West Indies have fallenso far behind the rest that we must wonder whether they will ever beable to catch up again.The accompanying table that lists the depressing West Indies record inOne-Day Internationals since last July and Keith Miller’s observationsin his book almost half-century ago, quoted by Dr. Rudi Webster,provide food for thought for those presently in charge of West Indiescricket. The point is that there has been no improvement, generally orspecifically. Not one department, not one player, has got better. Somehave actually got worse.Compared to the South Africans and, indeed, most other teams thefielding is an embarrassment. The batting lacks planning and commonsense and the bowling is unable to contain for even a short spell.The situation is compounded, perhaps even caused, by a confusedselection policy that was clearly exposed in Grenada and in Barbados.In the second match at the Queen’s Park Stadium, Carl Hooper arrivedquarter-of-an-hour late for the toss.It prompted obvious speculation that the selectors were still arguingabout the composition of the final 11, especially when Hooper wasunsure of the team changes at the mandatory TV interview.At Kensington, Hooper was on time but his reaction to the 11 he wasgiven was obvious by his refusal to offer Kerry Jeremy a single over,even when it was clear from as early as the 20th over the match wasgood as lost.At 21 and in a weak team, Jeremy’s straight-forward medium-pacebowling may not measure up, but he is an enthusiastic young cricketerwho didn’t pick himself.His treatment was demeaning and unnecessary, but it was instructive.Nor will it fill those coming into the team with confidence.The most worrying aspect of the whole business is the lack ofprogress, the failure to come even close to the standards set by SouthAfrica, Australia and the others who so consistently thrash the WestIndies.Every bowler worth his considerable fee has long since perfected thechanges of pace that are so essential in limited-overs cricket. Notone West Indian has so much as tried it. In the Busta Series, IanBradshaw, the Barbadian left-armer, was the only one I saw usingvariations. The young batsmen continue to get out in the same way,their weaknesses quickly identified and worked on by the oppositionwithout the necessary response.The fielding? The less said, the better.The finger of blame can be pointed at the coaches, not only, or evenprimarily, Roger Harper, but those who are responsible for the playersin the formative stages.How many bowlers in the Under-19 tournament have been shown how todeliver the slower ball? How many weak fielders, and there are plentyaround, have been made to work to improve? How many batsmen have spentpractice specifically eliminating their weaknesses rather thanindulging their strengths?It may be, of course, that no one listens and no one is prepared towork hard enough. That is another problem. In the magazine for theCable & Wireless One-Day series, Chris Gayle responds to a commentfrom interviewer Haydn Gill that his heavy-footed style has beenidentified as his main weakness: Footwork doesn’t have anything to dowith it for me. I am scoring my runs with my technique and I’msatisfied with that.It was an almost identical reply given to an identical question abouthis footwork by Stuart Williams four years ago. I never really felt Ihad a problem with it, you know, he said. I feel comfortable with mystyle, I’m going to use my style and I’m going to die with it.Williams, like Gayle, was an opening batsman with abundant talent whonever fulfilled his promise. It would be heartbreaking to find Gayleand the other young batsmen who have come through of late going thesame way.Nor are these two isolated cases. Coaches at every level report howdifficult it is to get their charges to understand that they can onlyget better with practice and hard work. Unless that message getsthrough, the West Indies will continue to falter, while the others whoappreciate the secret to cricket success widen the gap even further.Letter from Dr.Rudi WebsterThe West Indies team of the last two years has not only beencriticised for its attitude and application but also for its tacticsand techniques, particularly its footwork. It has received worldwidecondemnation for its un-West Indian tactics in the dying moments ofthe Test in Barbados against South Africa.This is what Keith Miller, the great Australian all-rounder, had tosay about West Indian cricket 36 years ago in his book Keith Miller OnCricket. It would be interesting to compare his comments with thosebeing made today about current West Indies players.Miller said: The act of good batting is to convert each delivery to alength which enables you to execute the shot of your choice. This isachieved by footwork. In batsmen of the highest class, the feet seemunhurried as they move into position so automatically even goodbowling can be made to look innocuous.This is why West Indians are the most attractive cricketers in theworld today. They use their feet better than batsmen from all othernations. Go back over the impressive recent West Indies successes anda kaleidoscope of dancing feet come to mind.The West Indians come from a country where feet are always moving,where even the labourers in the street are given to dancing. The WestIndians also possess a natural ability to relax which is one of thefoundations of good batting. They do not get knotted or twistedmentally and they are never beaten by high reputations of opposingplayers.As they are always prepared to use their feet and play aggressively(but sensibly) the West Indians are always likely to put together amatch-winning partnership and you can never be sure you have thembeaten.Regarding our current adversaries, the South Africans, Miller wrote:In the Australian summer of 1952-53, a team of South Africancricketers, few of them distinguished with the bat or ball, drew anexciting series with a strong Australian team. They drilled themselvesinto the skills of fielding for hours on the practice field. They werethe finest fielding team I have ever seen for not only did they takesome marvellous catches, but they saved runs galore through thebrilliance of their ground fielding and throwing.The South Africans have retained and strengthened their cricketculture whereas the West Indies have not. So where do we go from here?
