champions
Bob Woolmer
FROM THE PAVILION
Australia is the dominant side in world cricket at the moment. South Africa are in transition, England too, while Pakistan and India are full of Eastern promise but short on fulfilling that promise. As soon as there is any bounce in the pitch they are found wanting. The West Indies are in a state of shock and Zimbabwe are battling against the odds as they have such a low player population. New Zealand are on the up, but Australia are dominant. South Africa were close to Australia but the recent changes and player movements, involving Darryl Cullinan and Allan Donald, have left South Africa with much to do.
A lot has been spoken about what should and should not happen and, yes, South Africa will need to work hard during this transformation stage in order not to lose touch with the Australians. I am always interested in why certain teams dominate during certain periods, and study of the current Australian set-up is as fascinating as studying the current Manchester United side and the Liverpools and West Indies of the Eighties.
There are, of course, certain common denominators and a number of factors that are specific to one team. The common denominators are usually: high skill levels, great team spirit, good support systems (creation of talent), great practice facilities, open-minded coaching, strong leaders and a high talent level. Not, of course, necessarily in that order. I remember my first few months as a coach, wrestling with how I should approach the role. It seemed common sense to have a good look at the successful teams in world sport and to have a look at some of the highly impressive American data on successful teams.
The team that stood out to me was the powerful West Indian cricket side of the Seventies and Eighties, which was captained by Clive Lloyd and included some of the great talents world cricket has seen – Vivian Richards, Michael Holding, Joel Garner, Roy Fredericks, Gordon Greenidge, Geoffrey Dujon, all legends in their own time. What was it that made them so good? I look at the Australian team and I see a team that has all the same ingredients and has done so for some time.
What then does South Africa have to do to compete? In 1986, Australia were struggling, beaten by England, under Mike Gatting, with stars such as David Gower, Graham Gooch, Ian Botham and Bob Willis. Mike Brearley provided the tough captaincy followed by Gatting, who understudied Brearley at Middlesex. Australia were the first to appoint a cricket coach/supremo, with Bobby Simpson transforming thinking within the Australian camp. He was instrumental, I am sure, in making Alan Border captain and the rest is history.
Simpson worked on two aspects of the
game that made Australia a force. One was the fielding – especially the catching (catches win matches) – and the other was running between the wickets. He also worked on the peer influence that had been rocked by Kerry Packer’s entrance into the cricketing world, and then with the two rebel tours to South Africa.
Australia were committed to the five-day game; they were good at the one-day game but not exceptional. It was, I suspect, Steve Waugh and Shane Warne that made a difference to their one-day form after India in 1997 where Australia did not make the tournament final which was contested by India and South Africa.
I remember Steve Waugh asking Hansie at an airport once what we were doing differently that had made us more competitive? I know Hansie was non- committal!
It was from here on that the Australians decided to alter their one-day teams and improve their one-day cricket. The recent arrival of John Buchanan from Queensland – a coach who has embraced modern technology – has advanced the Australian side yet again. The recent 6-0 Test demolition of India and Pakistan and their one-day domination must be attributed to great discipline and skill – and a lot of preparation. The team too are a strong unit, they look supremely fit and the advancement of Brett Lee has allowed Glenn McGrath to have a rest.
Off-the-field factors do not even compare with the problems currently being experienced by South Africa, and a small and compact selection committee have had their task made easy – apart from press speculation that Mark Waugh might be dropped. The Australians exude a tremendous air of confidence.
Behind the scenes is where Australia is really scoring. The money spent on their coaching systems and their practice facilities almost match, if not equal the money spent on our development programme. So the concentration is on the cream of talent. South Africa quite correctly are trying to improve the pool of talent and are attempting to equalise the injustices of the past.
If South Africa are to keep in touch with our antipodean neighbours then we too will have to make money available to upgrade the practice facilities and equipment available. This sounds like a direct criticism of our facilities, which is far from the truth. All our provinces’ facilities are good; Australia’s are special! Only when you play on them can you appreciate the difference. There is an abundance of talent and a likelihood of plenty more.
The Australians have set the benchmark and now we have to react.