• 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.

CSA confirms guideline on selection quota

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
We all knew it existed but ffs.

Lorgat used to be CEO of the ICC, what a disgrace. Obviously this goes higher than the CEO but its still ridiculous to think this guy used to run the global cricket administrative body.
 

Gnske

International Coach
Well like Jono said this is hardly surprising. It would be interesting to find out whether there's truth to the story of de Villiers wanting to walk out of the Semi Final because of this.

Got to feel for Vernon too, the guy is world class and has deserved his spot for the last four years but now this could throw a shroud over his entire career. Politics is a b**ch.
 

Niall

International Captain
They should have picked Beherdien instead of Roussow, he would have added another few overs with the ball, and heck hide him down the order if worried about his batting, gun in the field as well.

Abbot missing out for Vern was absurd.
 

Shady Slim

International Regular
having vernon or behardien competing for the spot is as if the aussies had hazlewood and mitch marsh competing for a spot, gotta feel for the both of the players involved as i agree with what Gnske said
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Interesting the report mentions Tahir as one of "three players of colour".

He's undoubtedly non-white, but I'm pretty sure I've read articles before that've said he doesn't count as a fornerly disadvantaged player because he didn't grow up in RSA.

Anyway, it stinks, doesn't it? The quotas are completely arbitrary (if they were a real reflection of SA's demographics the team would have to include at least 8 or 9 black Africans in the 11) and if there's ever a case for special dispensation it has to be a WC semi.
 

jcas0167

International 12th Man
Interesting the report mentions Tahir as one of "three players of colour".

He's undoubtedly non-white, but I'm pretty sure I've read articles before that've said he doesn't count as a fornerly disadvantaged player because he didn't grow up in RSA.

Anyway, it stinks, doesn't it? The quotas are completely arbitrary (if they were a real reflection of SA's demographics the team would have to include at least 8 or 9 black Africans in the 11) and if there's ever a case for special dispensation it has to be a WC semi.
It does stink and the ICC should advise that racial discrimination in selection won't be tolerated.
 

Dan

Global Moderator
It does stink and the ICC should advise that racial discrimination in selection won't be tolerated.
Oh, how badly the poor oppressed white person must have it!

In all seriousness, let's have something other than a knee-jerk response to this confirmation of an existence of a guideline. Look, they're ungainly and annoying and easy to criticise but I for one support any move they make to attempt to give chances to players who were formerly disadvantaged. Sure, they **** up from time to time (Ontong > Rudolph and Philander > Abbott being the two main examples), but overall the selectors accept that it isn't a hard-and-fast rule -- it's a guideline telling them to consider selecting players of colour (and, let's face it, there are enough decent players of colour who make the teams on merit, and plenty more who would come into selection calculations).

I completely agree that the pre-2007 policy (4 players of colour being forced into the XI irrespective of merit) was pretty poor, but this one really isn't that bad when you actually think about it. They've ****ed up here and deserve to be held to account -- assuming the selection of Philander was purely race-motivated -- but overcoming past disadvantage by putting a target in place is hardly evil.

Saying "ideally we'd like to have 4 players of colour in our XI and as such we'll look closely at the development of players of colour to see if they're viable options" is completely different to a hard-and-fast quota that shoehorns absolute shunts into the XI ahead of good players. It isn't even like the selection of Philander was that ridiculous; sure, Abbott had the form, but there's certainly a logic to showing loyalty to the incumbent player who has historically performed well for the country. Hardly like an underserving shunt took the place of Bradman-incarnate.

Think of it this way, how many genuinely underserving selections of players of colour have there been since 2007? The only one I can think of off the top of my head is the continued persistence with Tsotsobe, and being obsessed with quick left arm seamers even if they aren't quite good enough has been pretty universal as of late. Not exactly down to his skin tone.
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
Oh, how badly the poor oppressed white person must have it!

In all seriousness, let's have something other than a knee-jerk response to this confirmation of an existence of a guideline. Look, they're ungainly and annoying and easy to criticise but I for one support any move they make to attempt to give chances to players who were formerly disadvantaged. Sure, they **** up from time to time (Ontong > Rudolph and Philander > Abbott being the two main examples), but overall the selectors accept that it isn't a hard-and-fast rule -- it's a guideline telling them to consider selecting players of colour (and, let's face it, there are enough decent players of colour who make the teams on merit, and plenty more who would come into selection calculations).

I completely agree that the pre-2007 policy (4 players of colour being forced into the XI irrespective of merit) was pretty poor, but this one really isn't that bad when you actually think about it. They've ****ed up here and deserve to be held to account -- assuming the selection of Philander was purely race-motivated -- but overcoming past disadvantage by putting a target in place is hardly evil.

Saying "ideally we'd like to have 4 players of colour in our XI and as such we'll look closely at the development of players of colour to see if they're viable options" is completely different to a hard-and-fast quota that shoehorns absolute shunts into the XI ahead of good players. It isn't even like the selection of Philander was that ridiculous; sure, Abbott had the form, but there's certainly a logic to showing loyalty to the incumbent player who has historically performed well for the country. Hardly like an underserving shunt took the place of Bradman-incarnate.

Think of it this way, how many genuinely underserving selections of players of colour have there been since 2007? The only one I can think of off the top of my head is the continued persistence with Tsotsobe, and being obsessed with quick left arm seamers even if they aren't quite good enough has been pretty universal as of late. Not exactly down to his skin tone.
Na this is a bridge too far.

Quotas are a heavy handed and inherently backwards way of addressing a problem. No one benefits from being given an artificial leg up. I definitely think South African cricket should be working to promote cricket with players of colour, but it should be doing this by providing a stronger infrastructure to these players, by providing greater incentives and assistance at lower levels of the game.

Having a team guideline to make sure you tick a political box does nothing for anyone and only makes the divide greater.
 

jcas0167

International 12th Man
Oh, how badly the poor oppressed white person must have it!

In all seriousness, let's have something other than a knee-jerk response to this confirmation of an existence of a guideline. Look, they're ungainly and annoying and easy to criticise but I for one support any move they make to attempt to give chances to players who were formerly disadvantaged. Sure, they **** up from time to time (Ontong > Rudolph and Philander > Abbott being the two main examples), but overall the selectors accept that it isn't a hard-and-fast rule -- it's a guideline telling them to consider selecting players of colour (and, let's face it, there are enough decent players of colour who make the teams on merit, and plenty more who would come into selection calculations).

I completely agree that the pre-2007 policy (4 players of colour being forced into the XI irrespective of merit) was pretty poor, but this one really isn't that bad when you actually think about it. They've ****ed up here and deserve to be held to account -- assuming the selection of Philander was purely race-motivated -- but overcoming past disadvantage by putting a target in place is hardly evil.

Saying "ideally we'd like to have 4 players of colour in our XI and as such we'll look closely at the development of players of colour to see if they're viable options" is completely different to a hard-and-fast quota that shoehorns absolute shunts into the XI ahead of good players. It isn't even like the selection of Philander was that ridiculous; sure, Abbott had the form, but there's certainly a logic to showing loyalty to the incumbent player who has historically performed well for the country. Hardly like an underserving shunt took the place of Bradman-incarnate.

Think of it this way, how many genuinely underserving selections of players of colour have there been since 2007? The only one I can think of off the top of my head is the continued persistence with Tsotsobe, and being obsessed with quick left arm seamers even if they aren't quite good enough has been pretty universal as of late. Not exactly down to his skin tone.
It's not a knee-jerk response. It's easy to criticise because it is morally wrong to treat people differently on the basis of race. It simply subjects new individuals to racial discrimination.

In the case of the Philander selection for the semi-final is appears that was made over the head of the captain and coach. So it definitely does seem a case of shoe-horning someone coming off injury, ahead of a form player, on the basis of race.

As you say, there are plenty of players there who deserve to be there on merit regardless, so the existence of a selection quota to generate some desired racial balance (which I understood was a fairly odious way of thinking) might not even be necessary.
 
Last edited:

Gnske

International Coach
I agree with you but Athlai was obviously joking there. He said so in the very next sentence.
Do I look a person with reading comprehension to you? Let alone someone who actually reads anything longer than two sentences.

You are mistaken and you should apologize immediately.
 

Top