South Africa and Test openers

[Prince EWS]

I don't think de Villiers will ever find his feet as a lower-middle-order batsman. Ever. He's never batted there. I've had the discussion about his technique and opening with you before, people can make successful Test openers despite not appearing to be technically proficient enough. I don't feel de Villiers has failed at Test level as an opener sufficiently for people to write him off and say he should never open again in a Test - certainly not if the only alternative is McKenzie.

Regarding Dippenaar, I certainly don't feel he's conclusively someone who'd be best in the middle-order. In his first 29 innings against Test-class teams as a middle-order batsman he averaged less than 26, little different to his average as an opener of 23. He's had a few innings which have pushed that up (one of which was decidedly fortunate) of late, but his Test career has always been a mess in so many ways. I don't ever see him becoming Test-class wherever, really.

Gibbs has not been a Test-class opener (or middle-order batsman either for that matter) for a long time now. It's annoying that he got back in the team in 2004\05, pushing de Villiers down the order and starting the problems. I'd have preferred it if he'd either not gone out ITFP or if de Villiers had simply kept him out.

I think there's slightly more to it than picking people where they usually bat, whereas you don't. Batsmen will usually bat in the top order in first class cricket, because their teams want them to set the innings up and bat for as long as possible. Opening batsmen at first class level can come about simply through a player getting pushed up there in Z Grade to give them time to score 300 and eventually selected as an opener in each and every grade. It gives them some experience there, but does it actually give them the technique to do it at test level? No, IMO. Some players will be more suited to opening in tests than others, regardless of where they batted at first class level. Obviously, opening at first class level is desirable, but when you have little options, you have to try something else, and FC #3s succeeding as test openers is not that rare, especially in well-coached systems like South Africa.

 

[Richard]

What annoys me is that they don't have few options, they have a great many. If they were trying to make Test openers because they didn't have any domestic ones who even promised, fair enough.

But picking someone who might have opened 8 years ago and someone who's never opened in his life ahead of someone who has opened, had success and might have a slightly questionable technique is plain madness.

And more than picking middle-order batsmen to open occasionally, it's the proliferation of occasions they've picked openers in the middle-order, when there's nothing at all to suggest they'll do well there and there are other middle-order players on the bench.

The difference between opening in fourth-grade and Test level may be vast. The difference between doing it at First-Class and Test level isn't. At least, it's not as big as the difference between opening in Tests and batting in the middle-order at both third-grade and First-Class level.

 

[chaminda_00]

SA opening options in domestic cricket btw:

Andrew Puttick (27yo): 612 runs @ 51
Arno Jacobs (30yo): 421 runs @ 35
Imraan Khan (23yo): 402 runs @ 36

Khan probably not ready, Jacobs not a long term option. Only leaves Puttick who also averages 40 odd during his career. Played an ODI for South Africa so he was seen as option a couple years back. Anyone know why either him or Khan weren't considered.

 

[Richard]

Puttick is another one to throw into the mix, can undoutedly play.

Odds on him batting at six in a Test sometime soon?

 

[Prince EWS]

What annoys me is that they don't have few options, they have a great many.

Names?

Gibbs had to go. Whether his problems are limited to the new ball or not, he had to go.

De Villiers was struggling against new ball, and it's highly debatable that he should be in the team at all. His footwork outside off stump to the new ball moving away was getting him in serious trouble, and while he often looks good at the crease batting in the middle order, he rarely actually scores any runs. His entire career seems to be based on this match and then a series of cashing in against some pathetic bowling against the West Indies. Since then, he's done virtually nothing as is quite over-rated from where I sit.

Dippenaar's test career has been disastrous, and he's certainly a case of "tried and failed", especially as an opening batsman.

Jacques Rudolph is still under Yorkshire contract AFAIK and is completely ineligible while that's the case.

Remove those from the equation, and the next in line is Andrew Puttick. His record is that of a decent first class player but he shouldn't be in the line for a test opening spot, really.

Lots of options? In theory, yes. In practice, not really.

 

[sledger]

SA opening options in domestic cricket btw:

Andrew Puttick (27yo): 612 runs @ 51
Arno Jacobs (30yo): 421 runs @ 35
Imraan Khan (23yo): 402 runs @ 36

Khan probably not ready, Jacobs not a long term option. Only leaves Puttick who also averages 40 odd during his career. Played an ODI for South Africa so he was seen as option a couple years back. Anyone know why either him or Khan weren't considered.

Gun on ICC2005.

 

[chaminda_00]

The interesting this is all the so called options for the opening spot, Rudolph, Dippenaar and Morne van Wyk and all bat in the middle order for their franchises. Really the only guys who actually open the batting in domestic cricket who would even be close to Test standard are Heino Kuhn, Imraan Khan, Dean Egar, Loots Bosman, Alviro Petersen and Andrew Puttick. Considering this it not suprising they went for middle order batsmen. There doesn't seem to be that many options.

Kuhn, Khan and Egar are all not ready. Bosman well do I have to give a reason, anyone who seen him bat know what his like. Puttick and Petersen are the only real options out of specialist openers.

 

[Prince EWS]

Puttick should not be considered giving he had three completely dire first class seasons before this one.

2004-05 - 55 runs @ 13.75
2005-06 - 447 runs @ 27.93
2006-07 - 486 runs @ 25.57
2007-08 - 612 runs @ 51.00

Clearly not demanding test selection.

Petersen has been mentioned. Well..

2004-05 - 759 runs @ 39.94
2005-06 - 566 runs @ 31.44
2006-07 - 362 runs @ 22.62
2007-08 - 393 runs @ 26.20

Imraan Khan. Well, nice name, but not a bloody good fly spray.

2004-05 - 682 runs @ 42.62
2005-06 - 717 runs @ 39.83
2006-07 - 577 runs @ 28.85
2007-08 - 419 runs @ 32.23


Huge wealth of options? Complete myth. They've all been tried and either failed completely, been found out technically or are in poor form. The domestic openers aren't test standard, at all. I can see why McKenzie's been picked.

 

[Goughy]

South Africa is certainly short of options.

A combination of the Introduction of the Franchise system, quotas and Kolpak has left depth in SA cricket at a dangerous low.

This can be seen anytime an A Team is selected and there are hardly enough candidates, let alone guys competing for sports.

Its as simple as stick with what you have. Gibbs or AB should be opening with Smith. If AB opens them McKenzie slots into the middle order.

Rudolph is a legit possibility but he is on the backburner with the Kolpak.

As for young players, Imraan Khan has never particularly impressed me. I know Kuhn quite well personally and he is a very good cricketer but surely even SA couldnt enter a game with 3 wicketkeepers, plus he probably not ready yet.

There are a number of youngish other guys (Cook, Thyssen, Snijman etc) with ordinary-ok domestic records but not have deserved a callup. A couple of good seasons could see them in the frame.

Elgar probably being the guy earmarked for the future.

 

[Prince EWS]

Puttick should not be considered giving he had three completely dire first class seasons before this one.

2004-05 - 55 runs @ 13.75
2005-06 - 447 runs @ 27.93
2006-07 - 486 runs @ 25.57
2007-08 - 612 runs @ 51.00

Clearly not demanding test selection.

Petersen has been mentioned. Well..

2004-05 - 759 runs @ 39.94
2005-06 - 566 runs @ 31.44
2006-07 - 362 runs @ 22.62
2007-08 - 393 runs @ 26.20

Imraan Khan. Well, nice name, but not a bloody good fly spray.

2004-05 - 682 runs @ 42.62
2005-06 - 717 runs @ 39.83
2006-07 - 577 runs @ 28.85
2007-08 - 419 runs @ 32.23


Huge wealth of options? Complete myth. They've all been tried and either failed completely, been found out technically or are in poor form. The domestic openers aren't test standard, at all. I can see why McKenzie's been picked.

Oh, and FWIW...

Dippenaar:

2004-05 - 873 runs @ 45.94
2005-06 - 204 runs @ 29.14
2006-07 - 733 runs @ 52.35
2007-08 - 674 runs @ 51.84

McKenzie:

2004-05 - 727 runs @ 40.38
2005-06 - 837 runs @ 49.23
2006-07 - 756 runs @ 54.00
2007-08 - 771 runs @ 51.40

Ignoring what they've done at test level before, these are certainly the two standouts pushing for test selection in franchise cricket.

 

[Prince EWS]

Morne Van Wyk

2004-05 - 731 runs @ 43.00
2005-06 - 768 runs @ 56.14
2006-07 - 671 runs @ 55.91
2007-08 - 255 runs @ 18.21

A real shame this season worked out how it has. Does he open at FC level much? I hear about him in relation to openers a bit but whenever I check a scorecard, he tends to be in the middle order, and keeping. I guess it's a byproduct of what we've already discovered though that he is brought up as South Africa have few performing domestic openers. He opened for South Africa A against the West Indies so he's in the selectors thoughts for that role (scored 80 odd too) but he's been dire this season as a whole.

 

[Goughy]

McKenzie:

2004-05 - 727 runs @ 40.38
2005-06 - 837 runs @ 49.23
2006-07 - 756 runs @ 54.00
2007-08 - 771 runs @ 51.40
.

Especially when you consider his SA A record

Team  		Matches Inns Not Out 	Runs 	HS 	Ave 	100 	50 	Ct 	St 
South Africa A 	11 	16 	3 	908 	182   	69.84  	4 	3 	8

Deserves to be there but no as an opener. Ive championed his cause for a while now and, as I said, I think he is being set up to fail.

 

[Prince EWS]

Especially when you consider his SA A record

Team  		Matches Inns Not Out 	Runs 	HS 	Ave 	100 	50 	Ct 	St 
South Africa A 	11 	16 	3 	908 	182   	69.84  	4 	3 	8

Deserves to be there but no as an opener. Ive championed his cause for a while now and, as I said, I think he is being set up to fail.

Dippenaar is useful as well in that area.

Team		Matches	Inns	Not Out	Runs	HS	Ave	100	50	Ct	St
South Africa A	9	12	0	783	189  	65.25 	3	2	4

 

[tooextracool]

Mckenzie for mine has always been an exceptionally talented player against pace bowling and an ordinary one against spin. I have no doubt that he was unfortunate to be dropped when he was but that might have some effect on their reasoning behind having him opening the batting.

 

[Richard]

Names?

Gibbs had to go. Whether his problems are limited to the new ball or not, he had to go.

De Villiers was struggling against new ball, and it's highly debatable that he should be in the team at all. His footwork outside off stump to the new ball moving away was getting him in serious trouble, and while he often looks good at the crease batting in the middle order, he rarely actually scores any runs. His entire career seems to be based on this match and then a series of cashing in against some pathetic bowling against the West Indies. Since then, he's done virtually nothing as is quite over-rated from where I sit.

Dippenaar's test career has been disastrous, and he's certainly a case of "tried and failed", especially as an opening batsman.

Jacques Rudolph is still under Yorkshire contract AFAIK and is completely ineligible while that's the case.

Remove those from the equation, and the next in line is Andrew Puttick. His record is that of a decent first class player but he shouldn't be in the line for a test opening spot, really.

Lots of options? In theory, yes. In practice, not really.

Every single one of these should be opening in Tests before Neil McKenzie should.

Gibbs, yep, he had to go, he should have gone a little while ago actually, really. However, he might have gone sooner if there wasn't this constant middle-order\opener\middle-order\opener nonsense of the last 2 years.

ABdeV, well, I disagree that he was getting in "serious trouble". He had one good sequence of 5 games, the Centurion Test against England and the series in West Indies. He then had a poor series against Australia - he's far from the only person to do that - and since then he's opened 8 times (I'm amazed it's even that much), though admittedly he hasn't done much in that time. I refuse to say that his failures down the order say anything other than that he's not a good enough batsman to bat down the order in Tests. I will not accept, yet, that he's a failure as a Test opener. And I'm disappointed that he's ever been picked for Tests as anything other than an opening-batsman.

Dippenaar and Rudolph are both exceptionally fortunate to have played as many Tests as they have. Rudolph's domestic First-Class average was under 40 for most of his Test career.

But I'd way prefer have any of the above four - de Villiers especially - plus Andy Puttick, opening in Tests before I'd want Neil McKenzie.

 

[tooextracool]

This is merely the latest in a baffling trend. Since 2001\02, these batsmen have opened in Tests for South Africa:
Gary Kirsten
Herschelle Gibbs
Graeme Smith
Boeta Dippenaar
Martin van Jaarsveld
Andrew Hall
AB de Villiers
Jacques Rudolph
And now McKenzie

Every single one of these has also batted in the middle-order. Every. Single. One. Now, van Jaarsveld can be counted-out as he only did it once in an emergency... except for the fact that a specialist opener, Rudolph, was already in the side and batted three in that match.

Specialist openers like Rudolph, Dippenaar and de Villiers have been forced to bat in the middle-order for countless matches. While people like Hall (and now McKenzie), who's never had any pretensions whatsoever as an opener, have been pushed up to open. Insane.

Why can South Africa not pick openers to open, middle-order batsmen to bat in the middle-order, and instead of thinking "he's too good to sit on the bench" when an opener has 2 or 3 bad Tests, either persist with him or drop him?

Is it any coincidence that the only consistent batsman South Africa have had in the last 6 years is Jacques Kallis, who's never batted anywhere other than four?

Never really understood the point of Kirsten batting at 3 tbh. Not surprising that he did well, but youd expect most genuine openers to do better down the other than vice versa. Quite surprised at that trend really, and even more surprised to hear that Rudolph is a specialist opener. For someone who struggled miserably against the swinging ball in England on his last tour you'd expect a bit better.

 

[Prince EWS]

Never really understood the point of Kirsten batting at 3 tbh. Not surprising that he did well, but youd expect most genuine openers to do better down the other than vice versa. Quite surprised at that trend really, and even more surprised to hear that Rudolph is a specialist opener. For someone who struggled miserably against the swinging ball in England on his last tour you'd expect a bit better.

I certainly wouldn't call Rudolph a specialist opener. One capable of opening who has opened at first class level at various times, yes. But a specialist, no. He's a natural middle order player who generally bats there whenever possible. First class teams have balance problems as much as test teams doe if not moreso.

 

[Richard]

I think Rudolph was batting at the top of the order at the very start of his First-Class career. Camps was the one who first showed me it (I'd always presumed he was a middle-order batsman in every respect) so he'd probably be best to re-examine the issue TBH.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I think Rudolph was batting at the top of the order at the very start of his First-Class career. Camps was the one who first showed me it (I'd always presumed he was a middle-order batsman in every respect) so he'd probably be best to re-examine the issue TBH.

Nah, I think I can't remember what my Rudolph was way back then, but I don't think that was quite it. Seeing as Rudolph was a spinner at the very start of his first-class career.

EDIT: I think my point was actually that he has scored heavily opening the batting at domestic level, emphasizing his qualifications as an opener.

 

[Langeveldt]

Im a little upset about this. It looks like the selectors have set McKenzie up to fail.

He is very popular in SA, is the best captain in the country has been brilliant for the last 3-4 years and had to watch whist less deserving players have been given the nod.

There is little doubt that there are some that dont want him there. By putting him as opener, he has a good chance of failing and they can turn around and drop him easily.

Who would you have? I'm not keen on Gibbs opening at the moment.. Hasn't McKenzie been gun up in Jo'Burg as an opener? I'd have Andy Puttick anyway, and possibly with a view to someone like Jean Symes in the future..