Peter Robinson cricket A few years ago Fanie de Villiers argued that South Africans don+t quit. In his more recent incarnation as a TV presenter, De Villiers says lots of things and not all of them make immediate sense, but at Sydney in 1994 he was able to explain in a few short words exactly why South Africa were able to beat Australia by five runs. In Kandy this week, South Africa again stared down their opposition. When it got really tight and tough, when the second Test match had boiled to a test of nerve rather than technique, South Africa kept their gaze steady. Sri Lanka, on the other hand, dropped their eyes. It was a memorable victory, an important moment for South African cricket – and all those who wondered about Shaun Pollock+s ability to lift his team or exactly what Graham Ford was doing in the dressing room should now applaud these two. It was also an improbable victory, after South Africa had been in arrears on the first innings. Not many non-Asian teams win on the subcontinent. The right-handed South African batsmen have worked out a way to deal with Muttiah Muralitharan and that is by getting across and playing him outside the line of off stump. The bowlers, too, performed with far more common sense than in the first Test, and with Lance Klusener shortening his run and bowling off-cutters, South Africa were able to compensate, at least partially, for their lack of an off-spinner. But there are still areas of concern, the most obvious of which are the use of Neil McKenzie as an opening bat and the form, or lack of it, of Paul Adams. The latter is not bowling well after a long lay-off through injury.
Boeta Dippenaar should open, McKenzie or Andrew Hall should play in the middle order and a bowler, Adams, should be left out. This would strengthen the batting and still leave Pollock with five bowlers, including a spinner, with whom to juggle. But it would be an all-white team. Would the United Cricket Board go with this? I somehow doubt it. Peter Robinson is editor of CricInfo