Boycott - what a prick

MM: And finally, Geoffrey, to the question you have picked as the best one that has come in for you this week. It is from Hiten Dedhia and he wants to know who you think will emerge as the best team in the future, since Australia are struggling a little and India are inconsistent. He thinks South Africa has the best shot at being No. 1 but they are forever plagued with internal problems.

GB: Well, I don't think South Africa will be No.1. Does he think in Tests or in ODIs? In Tests, South Africa will still be pretty good because Morne Morkel will get better. But Makhaya Ntini is beginning to fade; he is losing a little bit of his pace. He has been a fantastic bowler for South Africa for ten years. But when you have been bowling fast for ten years, it always takes its toll on you. I think we're beginning to see, just beginning to see, Ntini going over the top. Morkel will then come forward and then you have Dale Steyn, who is a lovely bowler. But South Africa will always have politics. They will always have to include so many coloured or black players because that is the political nature of the country. And so they won't always be able to play their best side.


So he's saying coloured/black players only bring the side down?

Wife bashing twat.

He's a little bit off the mark as far as the quota situation is concerned, as South Africa is starting to produce some seriously good black and coloured cricketers. But I guess if you look at the past, a lot of the black and coloured cricketers they have selected haven't been up to standard, and have clearly been there because of the quota, so I guess that's what he's basing his theory on. But as usual, everything else he said is pretty spot on.

WTF has Boycott's alleged "wife bashing" got to do with his take on Saffer cricket - albeit misguided through his ignorance of the quota system.

Let's face it, whether black, blue, white or yellow, a players skin colour ought not to
determine his god-given right to a place in the National team because the government decree it to be that way. This automatically gets outsiders wondering about its credibility in the face of alleged favouritism for one colour or the other.

We had it (favouritism) for the past 2 years under Vaughan's captaincy under the guise of "Vawney's pets"
(only in his particular case, depended on how closely his favourites sucked upto him) ...
perhaps this is what our Geoff was thinking about when making
that rash reference.

The rest of his statement was spot on.

Well he should get with it before making stupid comments.
All the 'black' players are there on MERIT.
There is no 'white' player who could possibly replace any one of them.

The problem is, Merlin, is that 'white' players get extended runs in the team even though their form is poor throughout entire tours and even seasons.

Black players get the chop after 1 or 2 bad performances and see the national side again only after 3-4 years of topping domestic championship tables.

I think he finished answering that question by saying that England had the best chance of being number 1. India, England and South Africa are the 3 teams most likely, imo.

Naeem wrote:Well he should get with it before making stupid comments.
All the 'black' players are there on MERIT.
There is no 'white' player who could possibly replace any one of them.

The problem is, Merlin, is that 'white' players get extended runs in the team even though their form is poor throughout entire tours and even seasons.

Black players get the chop after 1 or 2 bad performances and see the national side again only after 3-4 years of topping domestic championship tables.

Sorry Naeem but Philander is not there on merit.

I have posted on numerous occasions about the sorry state of Sa domestic cricket. Performances in it are meaningless.

Boycott may have missed the fading away of the quota system, still, to be fair, the system did produce some positive effects. Prince, Amla and a few others may have been ignored without it. And he's right about Ntini too. Maybe another year or so.

jim rich wrote:Boycott may have missed the fading away of the quota system, still, to be fair, the system did produce some positive effects. Prince, Amla and a few others may have been ignored without it. And he's right about Ntini too. Maybe another year or so.

What fading away?

It is still in force.

The problem is, Merlin, is that 'white' players get extended runs in the team even though their form is poor throughout entire tours and even seasons.

That's a load of rubbish. Remember Andy Puttick? One of the best bats in South African domestic cricket (And white), but the sports minister publically came out and said that he was just a stop gap player who would be dumped as soon as a half decent black or coloured player came along. About 2 weeks later, Hashim Amla was selected and Puttick hasn't been seen since.

Martin Van Jaarsveld? Another prolific domestic batsman, who played a handful of tests and ODI's, and hardly disgraced himself, but he was ruthlessly chopped as well.

Gulam Bodi was selected ahead of these guys, and he's rubbish (But coloured)

Herschelle Gibbs is coloured. How many chances has he been given in the last 2 years? In his last 20 tests, he averages 30.

Naeem wrote:Well he should get with it before making stupid comments.
All the 'black' players are there on MERIT.
There is no 'white' player who could possibly replace any one of them.

The problem is, Merlin, is that 'white' players get extended runs in the team even though their form is poor throughout entire tours and even seasons.

Black players get the chop after 1 or 2 bad performances and see the national side again only after 3-4 years of topping domestic championship tables.

Why should he "get with it" ??
SAf is the ONLY country that imposes a quota system on its national teams!
And also cut him some slack as he is a Tyke after all!

Seriously though, I'm not denying in the slightest that all the black players are
in the team on merit - but that's NOT the point.

The fact that segregation by quota is still considered necessary and thus enforced
by law, defies all belief.

Hylton Ackermann, Dale Benkenstein......

I am taking issue with him saying that having black/coloured/indian players in the team will stop SA choosing the best side available.

And by the way Henry, Andy puttick was selected for one game when Dippenaar was injured. He's an exciting batsman and can still make the national side.

Gulam Bodi was only selected for 2 ODI's vs Zimbabwe and then given the chop.

Gibbs is not in the test side anymore.

Look at a player like Ab de villiers, a so called great batsman before he even started playing international cricket. He is inconsistent and has a really poor temperament. Another is Paul Harris, a crap spinner who cant even hold an end up.

He's only stating the truth; that South African selectors do have to take 'colour' into account when they choose the team. It was wrong 40 years ago, and it's wrong now.

Another is Paul Harris, a crap spinner who cant even hold an end up.

He's still the best you've got.

Naeem wrote:I am taking issue with him saying that having black/coloured/indian players in the team will stop SA choosing the best side available.

The point is that he is right. If there are not POC's of the adequate standard available the team will be weakened. The fact that there are enough available at the moment does not change that.

If there are plenty of POC's of the adequate standard available, why not scrap the quota?