PITCH BATTLE
Why Domingo’s in the firing line
RUSSELL Domingo spent many strong words at a press conference on Monday explaining his decision at the World T20 in Bangladesh, where SA fell at the first hurdle in the knockout stages for the 11th time in 15 global tournaments.
Domingo also expressed his “disappointment” over “unfair” criticism, wondered whether one of the critics of his tactics, Kepler Wessels, was “trying to get a job” and said of those who doubted that SA were improving in the limited-overs formats: “Maybe some people don’t see it. Maybe they don’t want to see it. Maybe they just have other issues.”
Even then, he was not done. After the conference, Domingo buttonholed individual reporters with a single, clear question: “Do you understand what I’m talking about?”
The logic of Domingo’s argument is diamond hard. AB de Villiers is a better batsman in T20s when he comes to the crease after the 10th over. Faf du Plessis and JP Duminy are SA’s most successful batsmen in the format. No opinion required: those are facts backed up by stats.
In the pundit’s paradise of the television studio, nothing matters more than opinion backed up by experience.
Between them, Wessels, HD Ackerman, Mark Boucher and Daryll Cullinan have 827 test, one-day international and T20 international caps. Domingo does not own one.
For some, the four former players — now analysts in the cricket media, and vocal in their disapproval of SA’s game plans at the WT20 — represent 827 reasons why Domingo should not coach an international team.
By Friday, Domingo’s sting had been drawn: “Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, but for the next few weeks I am going to put my head down and then I’m going to start talking about cricket.”
And all this blood on the moon because South Africans want De Villiers to be Rohit Sharma — come in early in a T20 innings and smash.
Or are they hiding behind that argument to say that, in a battle between coaches who put their faith in stats and those who have been there and done that, there is only one winner?
Stats or feel?
Cricket is crunchy with numbers bent every which way. It also swims in nostalgia and sentimentality. In some senses, the game is where conservatism comes to die. New or less than obvious ideas are not welcomed, particularly if they come from someone whose stats are not bubble wrapped in feel.
Boeta Dippenaar: “It is hard for players to trust coaches who have not played at a high level. If I want to learn something, I go to someone with a lot more experience than I have.”
Experience v Expertise
Domingo has coached at every tier. He spent six seasons with the War- riors, turning them from no-hopers into contenders and winning two trophies. Is it fair to say that, as a coach, he lacks experience or expertise, or both? Or is an alchemy of luck and personality required for success?
Dippenaar: “The coaches who made the biggest difference for SA were Bob Woolmer and Gary Kirsten, but there are too few of those types of coaches around. We need to start identifying coaches of that calibre at lower levels.”
The good old days weren’t always good
Under Woolmer, SA failed at the 1996 and 1999 editions of the World Cup, although they did win the 1998 Knock Out. Kirsten came unstuck at the 2012 WT20 and the 2013 Champions Trophy. If even the gurus get it wrong sometimes, it seems unfair to beat up on Domingo.
Dippenaar: “Every time we fail at World Cups we come back to this point. We can stick our heads in the sand and say there’s nothing wrong. And then we’ll go to another World Cup. . .”
Home or away?
Woolmer changed the way South Africans thought about cricket. Kirsten found a way to make India’s giants March in step long enough to win a World Cup. Andy Flower brought realism to England. Is the future foreign?
Dippenaar: “We’re reluctant to get foreign coaches because we’re scared they’re going to tell us something we don’t know.”