Protea's History in World Cups

Mozart made an interesting remark about the history of the Proteas in the WC:-

"A CWC final is as much about controlling nerves and mental strength in the clutch."

He then went on to say that the Proteas had a long history of losing games as a result.   Hpwever, I am not sure that that is what actually happened and t he explanation is not always that easy:-

1992 WC 

The problem here had nothng to do with losing their nerves.  It has everything to do with the wrong concept and game plan used by the Proteas.   Lets face facts - the concept at that time by the SA coach and captain was "to build an innings",  In that process they did not keep on a reasonable run rate and was way behind the English in the semi-final.    With 14 balls left - they needed 22 runs to win  the semi.    Rain started falling and ultimately they  had only 1 ball to make the 22 runs.   

I would not call that losing their nerve - I would call it plain wrong game plan.

1995

They had a very poor game against New Zealand and the team  grossly under-perform in a match against New Zealand.    Mozqart was probably right in this case - just not excusable.

1999

There was a problem here inasmuch as there were two major bugger-ups made by players that should have had their buts kicked seriously.   

In he play-offs the Aussies was on the skids and the only real top class batsman left was Steve Waugh.    Waugh had a ball into the covers and Gibbs "caught"  the ball.  The idiot caught the ball and in the same movement through it away.   His bravado ensured that the Aussies went through to the semi-s against SA.  Waugh in fact said to him - "that is going to cost you the WC.

In the semi's SA needed one run to win the semi with three balls left.   Lance Klusener was batting and he hit a bal within 5 meters from the stumps and started running.   Donald was stupefied by that idiocy and did not run -  so Klusener was run out.   

This had nothing to do with the team losing their nerve - everything to do with the idiocy of two players.

2003  WC

SA needed  1 runs to beat Sri Lanka to go through to the semi's .  There were 4 overs left and a drizzle - not heavy enough to stop the game - was falling, but getting heavier.   Management send th wrong message about the Douglas-Lewis situation through to the batters and instead of hitting the last ball in the over and making the run - they thought the game was won.  The result was different.   Rank stupidity on the part of the tam management - nothing else.  I do not think the team was to blame for that one.

2011 WC

This was the worst team performance in any WC and the reason was the poor team leadership by Graeme Smith - who showed no interes in any game he played in - and when the team was beaten and out - he did not even bother to return to SA and went off to Ireland.   The problem was not the team - it was the captain, whose own performances was a seriously bad joke in that series.   

In essence  we had a case where the management of the team was poor and often enough it was the senior players in the team that let the team downthrpough inexplicable actions of bravado or stupidity.   End of story.   l  

De Villiers is one of eight players who have been to World Cups before, which means almost half of South Africa's squad are major tournament rookies. That includes de Kock, Rossouw and Behardien but even with inexperience laced through their line-up, South Africa will continue to play what convener of selectors Andrew Hudson called the "style of cricket" they have made their own over the last two years. "We like to play seven batsmen or maybe an allrounder at No.7, and then five frontline bowlers," he said. "There process of selection has been about supporting that type of cricket."

South Africa have had a lengthy build-up period to decide on their final squad, which will see them play more ODIs than any other team in the six months before the tournament. That has included series' in Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe and a recce in New Zealand and Australia. The last of those served as a "reminder we still have a lot to do if we want to be serious contenders", according to Domingo. South Africa lost 1-4 in Australia, but Hudson does not believe that marred their preparations.

"The World Cup is not about only about playing Australia, its about playing minnows and sides with different batting and bowling strengths and being able to accommodate and play cricket accordingly," Hudson said, while de Villiers only saw it as a speedbump on the way to success. "I can't see it as a blessing in disguise because I hate losing," he said.

That may ultimately be the message South Africa are given when they begin the tournament which, this time, they believe is theirs for the taking. "We've got the right players to win, we've just got to find a way to do that," de Villiers said.

This one is going to be exciting...at least there are no foregone conclusions...the variations are vast...common sense seems to dominate that Aussie in Australia should be the one to beat and not only that...Oz cricketers are cunning and clever but maybe they might be too overweighted in all rounders...anyway it looks very open to me...because the 3 Asian giants are all capable of pulling it off too...England too and NZ could get it right and the outsiders like WI have a good side.

It appears to me the cricket WC, like the rugby could very likely spring some surprises. I don't have a problem with the selections.