-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* South Africa Tour of Sri Lanka 2018
- Thread starter StephenZA
- Start date
Mr Miyagi
Banned
Wow. Lose Abbott. Lose MMorkel. Still able to leave out Philander?
I wonder if Philander's batting will come into the equation to save him.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Depends how much they try and doctor them. Word is al Jazeera is looking into it for us.
Mr Miyagi
Banned
I'm probably going to get hung to dry for this comment, but we all know quotas exist, so it is relevant to selection: iirc Vern doesn't meet the full African Black quota, he only meets the Black quota.
So if its a close call - this will go in Ngidi's favour. But Vern's batting has to be a factor if deemed necessary.
They need 3 full black players over most all the year in all formats. Rabada, and Ngidi are the best candidates. Or you get Phelukwayo and Bavuma in a lot more games somewhere.
For the three black players, Amla, Philander and Maharaj/Tahir/ and even Duminy may help. Berhadien, not so much.
This is a tricky balance for the selectors to tightrope walk over.
So if its a close call - this will go in Ngidi's favour. But Vern's batting has to be a factor if deemed necessary.
They need 3 full black players over most all the year in all formats. Rabada, and Ngidi are the best candidates. Or you get Phelukwayo and Bavuma in a lot more games somewhere.
For the three black players, Amla, Philander and Maharaj/Tahir/ and even Duminy may help. Berhadien, not so much.
This is a tricky balance for the selectors to tightrope walk over.
Last edited:
StephenZA
Hall of Fame Member
It is foolish to think that SA will drop Vern, it is all about the perception that he is not good on 'flat' wickets even when he has shown his worth time and again....
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Didn't even realise this was a thing, or that Philander was in a different category to Ngidi
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I thought it was only two? And in that case Bauvma is Best XI with de Villiers gone.
StephenZA
Hall of Fame Member
Apartheid classified into black, 'coloured' (mixed race, indian, pakistan etc) and white.... and each group was negatively/positively affected more/less as dictated by the law. So today with an 80%/12%/8% percentage population black/coloured/white the dictates from sport ministry/SA cricket are 3 black players avg across teams and a total of 7 avg across teams of previously disadvantaged (black/coloured).....
Last edited:
Dendarii
International Debutant
It is only two at international level (unless something's changed recently which I'm not aware of), so with Bavuma in the side only one of Rabada or Ngidi would have to play to meet the quota. And not even that as it's an average over the entire season in all formats, and with Rabada, Ngidi, and Phehlukwayo likely to be regulars in the shorter format they should meet that part of the quota criteria without too much difficulty. Where they fell short last year was not having enough other non-white players, but that wouldn't affect a choice between Philander and Ngidi.
Last edited:
StephenZA
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah international is avg 2; Provincial is 3 right? or is it 4 now?
Dendarii
International Debutant
I think it's still 3, with that being a hard quota that must be adhered to, unlike the flexibility they have at international level.
Mr Miyagi
Banned
It is def 6 for intl averaged out:
as far as I understand its (and this is unofficial and secret despite it exists)
African Black 3 (many sites suggest 2);
Mixed African like Philander, Duminy, Berhadien or Asian like Mahraj, Tahir, or Amla aka Black 3 (many sites sites suggest 4 if the above is 2);
White 5
over 80 or 90% of the days of international games.
The provincial quotas are stricter than the international (so there is wiggle room for WC finals and big deciding matches - possibly post Abbot v Philander WC 2015).
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2017/07/01/crickets-quota-system-has-impacted-south-africa/
https://www.cricket.com.au/news/sou...ni-2015-world-cup-philander-abbott/2016-09-04
(the above however suggests its 4 and 2 and not 3 and 3 - either way it is 5 white)
but they must meet the annual average over the minimum meaning some series, like Zimbabwe, get an inferior team facing them.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-quota-system-in-the-South-African-cricket-team
Whether it is 4 and 2, or 3 and 3, the difficulty besides Rabada is meeting the African quota which means Lungi Ngidi is invaluable - because Bavuma isn't great.
It would be great to get official SAC release on this, because it is all speculation. We know it exists, but not the precise numbers of quota or percentage of games.
https://indianexpress.com/article/s...h-africa-team-an-unpleasant-headache-5012131/
Selecting a SA team for each series - with the annual quotas is difficult. I don't envy the task.
The difference is easy to see - from the team that played Zimbabwe to the team that played Australia - re Phelukwayo in tests.
as far as I understand its (and this is unofficial and secret despite it exists)
African Black 3 (many sites suggest 2);
Mixed African like Philander, Duminy, Berhadien or Asian like Mahraj, Tahir, or Amla aka Black 3 (many sites sites suggest 4 if the above is 2);
White 5
over 80 or 90% of the days of international games.
The provincial quotas are stricter than the international (so there is wiggle room for WC finals and big deciding matches - possibly post Abbot v Philander WC 2015).
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2017/07/01/crickets-quota-system-has-impacted-south-africa/
https://www.cricket.com.au/news/sou...ni-2015-world-cup-philander-abbott/2016-09-04
(the above however suggests its 4 and 2 and not 3 and 3 - either way it is 5 white)
but they must meet the annual average over the minimum meaning some series, like Zimbabwe, get an inferior team facing them.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-quota-system-in-the-South-African-cricket-team
Whether it is 4 and 2, or 3 and 3, the difficulty besides Rabada is meeting the African quota which means Lungi Ngidi is invaluable - because Bavuma isn't great.
It would be great to get official SAC release on this, because it is all speculation. We know it exists, but not the precise numbers of quota or percentage of games.
https://indianexpress.com/article/s...h-africa-team-an-unpleasant-headache-5012131/
Selecting a SA team for each series - with the annual quotas is difficult. I don't envy the task.
The difference is easy to see - from the team that played Zimbabwe to the team that played Australia - re Phelukwayo in tests.
Last edited:
Dendarii
International Debutant
I can't find an official statement, but there's been enough written about it that we do know that it's a minimum average across all games of six non-white players, with at least two of them black African.
For example: https://www.sport24.co.za/Cricket/Proteas/proteas-set-to-miss-201718-transformation-targets-20180321, and the values there are consistent with other articles.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
So Philander isn't black? he's mixed race? Which doesn't count as black? Seems kind of, I don't know, wrong and hypocritical. You're not black anymore because you have an ancestor who isn't black.
Last edited:
Dendarii
International Debutant
Philander never would have been regarded as "black" in a South African context
There are four main racial classifications (ordered from largest to smallest):
1) Black
2) Coloured (mixed race)
3) White
4) Asian - also referred to as Indian because they make up the bulk of this group
While in other countries coloured people might be regarded as black, in South Africa they're a distinct group with their own cultural identity. It can be a bit confusing as sometimes "black" gets used in official documentation as a synonym for "non-white", but in everyday usage a coloured person wouldn't see themselves as black (nor would anyone else). Black people suffered more under apartheid than the other non-white groups which is why there can be more of an emphasis on them in things like quotas.
I think this is an American attitude to race more than anything. Nobody I've met from countries with big genetic mixing regards themselves as black simply because they have black ancestors to the exclusion of all their other ancestors.
Coloureds are a mix of a bunch of different genetic groups. Southern African (Khoisan, who have light brown/yellowish skin, but are called black), West African (Bantu, who are a traditional picture of black), white, and a few types of Asian etc. They don't identify with any of these groups because they are their own one. Calling them anything but coloured is a bit like calling you a European in terms of cultural identity, but even less correct in terms of genetic makeup.
Bahseph
State Captain
South African racial classification is sometimes a tricky subject. I'm classified as a "coloured".
Have ancestry from India mainly, but a dash of Malaysia, Botswana and Scotland of all places mixed in. My teachers at school literally would have to pull me aside and ask me what race group I fall under(our department or education likes to keep stats of these things). As much as we can explain it to you guys, it doesn't make sense to some of us as well.
Have ancestry from India mainly, but a dash of Malaysia, Botswana and Scotland of all places mixed in. My teachers at school literally would have to pull me aside and ask me what race group I fall under(our department or education likes to keep stats of these things). As much as we can explain it to you guys, it doesn't make sense to some of us as well.