West Indians who have turned out in their thousands for the One-Day
Internationals against South Africa these past couple of weeks have
seen first-hand what they had previously had to endure from far-off
lands through the television screen and the
Tony Cozier13-May-2001West Indians who have turned out in their thousands for the One-Day
Internationals against South Africa these past couple of weeks have
seen first-hand what they had previously had to endure from far-off
lands through the television screen and the radio.The West Indies’ overseas record in the abbreviated game has been
every bit as calamitous as it has been in Tests, but at least they
have been able to hold their own in both at home. Now the South
Africans have come into our backyard and exposed the yawning gap that
has developed between the top teams in limited-overs cricket and the
West Indies. In every single department, the West Indies have fallen
so far behind the rest that we must wonder whether they will ever be
able to catch up again.The accompanying table that lists the depressing West Indies record in
One-Day Internationals since last July and Keith Miller’s observations
in his book almost half-century ago, quoted by Dr. Rudi Webster,
provide food for thought for those presently in charge of West Indies
cricket. The point is that there has been no improvement, generally or
specifically. Not one department, not one player, has got better. Some
have actually got worse.Compared to the South Africans and, indeed, most other teams the
fielding is an embarrassment. The batting lacks planning and common
sense and the bowling is unable to contain for even a short spell.The situation is compounded, perhaps even caused, by a confused
selection policy that was clearly exposed in Grenada and in Barbados.In the second match at the Queen’s Park Stadium, Carl Hooper arrived
quarter-of-an-hour late for the toss.It prompted obvious speculation that the selectors were still arguing
about the composition of the final 11, especially when Hooper was
unsure of the team changes at the mandatory TV interview.At Kensington, Hooper was on time but his reaction to the 11 he was
given 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 was
good as lost.At 21 and in a weak team, Jeremy’s straight-forward medium-pace
bowling may not measure up, but he is an enthusiastic young cricketer
who 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 of
progress, the failure to come even close to the standards set by South
Africa, Australia and the others who so consistently thrash the West
Indies.Every bowler worth his considerable fee has long since perfected the
changes of pace that are so essential in limited-overs cricket. Not
one West Indian has so much as tried it. In the Busta Series, Ian
Bradshaw, the Barbadian left-armer, was the only one I saw using
variations. The young batsmen continue to get out in the same way,
their weaknesses quickly identified and worked on by the opposition
without the necessary response.The fielding? The less said, the better.The finger of blame can be pointed at the coaches, not only, or even
primarily, Roger Harper, but those who are responsible for the players
in the formative stages.How many bowlers in the Under-19 tournament have been shown how to
deliver the slower ball? How many weak fielders, and there are plenty
around, have been made to work to improve? How many batsmen have spent
practice specifically eliminating their weaknesses rather than
indulging their strengths?It may be, of course, that no one listens and no one is prepared to
work hard enough. That is another problem. In the magazine for the
Cable & Wireless One-Day series, Chris Gayle responds to a comment
from interviewer Haydn Gill that his heavy-footed style has been
identified as his main weakness: Footwork doesn’t have anything to do
with it for me. I am scoring my runs with my technique and I’m
satisfied with that.It was an almost identical reply given to an identical question about
his footwork by Stuart Williams four years ago. I never really felt I
had a problem with it, you know, he said. I feel comfortable with my
style, 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 who
never fulfilled his promise. It would be heartbreaking to find Gayle
and the other young batsmen who have come through of late going the
same way.Nor are these two isolated cases. Coaches at every level report how
difficult it is to get their charges to understand that they can only
get better with practice and hard work. Unless that message gets
through, the West Indies will continue to falter, while the others who
appreciate 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 been
criticised for its attitude and application but also for its tactics
and techniques, particularly its footwork. It has received worldwide
condemnation for its un-West Indian tactics in the dying moments of
the Test in Barbados against South Africa.This is what Keith Miller, the great Australian all-rounder, had to
say about West Indian cricket 36 years ago in his book Keith Miller On
Cricket. It would be interesting to compare his comments with those
being made today about current West Indies players.Miller said: The act of good batting is to convert each delivery to a
length which enables you to execute the shot of your choice. This is
achieved by footwork. In batsmen of the highest class, the feet seem
unhurried as they move into position so automatically even good
bowling can be made to look innocuous.This is why West Indians are the most attractive cricketers in the
world today. They use their feet better than batsmen from all other
nations. Go back over the impressive recent West Indies successes and
a 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 West
Indians also possess a natural ability to relax which is one of the
foundations of good batting. They do not get knotted or twisted
mentally and they are never beaten by high reputations of opposing
players.As they are always prepared to use their feet and play aggressively
(but sensibly) the West Indians are always likely to put together a
match-winning partnership and you can never be sure you have them
beaten.Regarding our current adversaries, the South Africans, Miller wrote:
In the Australian summer of 1952-53, a team of South African
cricketers, few of them distinguished with the bat or ball, drew an
exciting series with a strong Australian team. They drilled themselves
into the skills of fielding for hours on the practice field. They were
the finest fielding team I have ever seen for not only did they take
some marvellous catches, but they saved runs galore through the
brilliance of their ground fielding and throwing.The South Africans have retained and strengthened their cricket
culture whereas the West Indies have not. So where do we go from here?
