/ 13 June 2003

Young, restless, but not quite ready

On Sunday, a day before South Africa’s biggest road race, the Comrades Marathon, Graeme Smith’s South African team will have set off on their own marathon — a quick dash through a triangular one-day series, followed by the long haul of a five-Test series against England.

No one outside the immediate confines of the squad is exactly bubbling over with confidence. In many respects this will be the least- fancied team to have departed from South Africa since Trevor Goddard took his side to Australia in 1963/64.

A dismal World Cup, a change of captaincy, the administrative uncertainty that seems to plague all of South African sport, selectorial indecision — you name it, Smith and his team don’t appear to have too much going for them, on the face of it, anyway.

Within the past week former South African coach Bob Woolmer has trashed the captain, the selector and South African cricket in general.

Although in the past Woolmer has demonstrated the remarkable ability to offer completely opposing views almost in the same breath, not too many have disagreed with his latest assessment of the state of affairs.

It is perfectly clear that by choosing a squad of 17 for the Natwest Series against England and Zimbabwe, and 16 for the Test matches, the South African selectors aren’t entirely sure of the composition of their best team. South Africa will have to learn to do without the talismanic figures of Allan Donald and Jonty Rhodes in the field, while Lance Klusener, and Nantie Hayward, in a manner of speaking, are left behind as a matter of choice. On the face of it, Smith and his party are being asked to succeed where better-equipped sides with more experienced leaders have failed.

In 1994 Kepler Wessels’s team squandered an emphatic Lord’s victory in the first Test to draw a three-match series 1-1, while in 1998 Hansie Cronje’s team stuttered on the brink of taking an unbeatable 2-0 lead at Old Trafford and subsequently lost a five-Test series 2-1.

The 2003 team, then, look to have their work cut out for them. What may stand in their favour, however, is youth, enthusiasm and the fact that it is not entirely clear how good England are. As ever, England appear to be a team on the rise. For the past decade or so this has been the enduring characteristic of a succession of England teams.

Two innings victories inside three days against Zimbabwe are all very well, but just how much should they set store by them? In turn, South Africans will point to the victories over Bangladesh, but in truth, both countries are very much in the same boat — the standard in Test cricket’s basement is now so low that not winning Test matches by an innings constitutes below-par performances.

From the England bowlers’ point of view, the matches against Zimbabwe were a happy introduction to Test cricket. Jimmy Anderson took five on debut at Lord’s; at Chester-Le-Street Richardson Johnson went one better by taking six, also on debut.

But what does this all mean? Anderson looks a fine prospect, able to swing the ball at length off good pace while while Johnson’s wickets were largely the reward for bowling straight. Steve Harmison, meanwhile, uses his height to make the ball bounce, but between them they have fewer Test matches than Graeme Smith.

Andy Caddick has sat out the early part of the year, but he could be the key if he is in the mood. Which, it has to be said, is not necessarily always the case. Darren Gough, too, gives so much to England and he is back in the one-day squad, but how effective he will be after what was initially viewed as a career-threatening injury remains to be seen.

England have experienced batsmen at the top and through the middle order. And while the decision to stick with the veteran Alec Stewart for the Zimbabwe Test matches made a number of former England players froth at the mouth, Stewart’s steadiness vindicated his selection.

Engand, then, look to be a good but not outstanding team, and what they do lack is Australia’s ruthlessness.

If and when South Africa get into trouble, it will be the duty of Smith’s senior lieutenants — Mark Boucher, Shaun Pollock, Jacques Kallis and Gary Kirsten — to counsel patience.

Nasser Hussain’s singular flaw as a captain has been his need to make something happen; while his imagination has often been his biggest strength, it has also proved his greatest weakness.

The older South African players, those who have toured England before, may need to keep reminding Smith that this tour is a marathon, not a sprint.

In some respects the outcome of the one-day series is irrelevant (the 2007 World Cup is a long way off) but the Test matches are the here and now, and they will be the measure of South Africa’s standing.

Long tours can make or break the careers of players and, in South Africa’s case, the head of their young captain has been thrust above the parapet. He will need others to stand up alongside him. It will serve the cause of no one if he is forced to stand or fall by himself.