Mickey Mouse or King Arthur? And the future?

It was a so-so day, with the humming of work and industry (there is an auto-repair shop adjacent to my office) filling the air with rands and cents. During a moment of “downtime” (ie procrastination), I was surfing the web and was surprised to read of the departure of Mickey Arthur as South African cricket coach.

Arthur has always been a figure that never quite received universal approval from the Proteas cricketing politick. There were always two camps: either you liked the East London resident, or you did not, simple as that.

His results are filled with excellent highs: the series wins in England and Australia (now that was some damn good cricket), and drawing in India with the homeside sabotaging the pitch for the third Test to make an Indian win more probable. Based on the back of these results, plus many others, he was the man at the helm along with Graeme Smith when South Africa became the world’s No 1 ranked ODI and Test playing nation.

His lows include the return series loss to the Australians when they were ripe for the taking, the drawn series against England that has just concluded (though that would be a bit harsh) and successive failures in ICC tournaments (two T20 World Cups, the Champions Trophy and the 2007 World Cup).

He re-introduced Dale Steyn to the red ball, saw AB de Villiers stand on the verge of greatness (the England series would’ve sobered this outstanding batsman up a bit, but he has it. It’s just a matter of when), watched Hashim Amla become one of the most if not the most improved batsman in international cricket, backed Paul Harris to turn it and maybe, saw Morne Morkel finally realise how good he actually is.

He has also seen the introduction (rise and fall … sort of) of JP Duminy, the ending of Makhaya Ntini’s career (if he comes back, I wouldn’t be surprised but my money is on it being all over for SA’s third highest wicket-taker) and the failed experiment of pushing Ashwell Prince up the order.

A lot has happened under Arthur’s watch, and whether you like him or not, it should be said that he took SA cricket forward (maybe when it comes to transformation, that politically loaded word, probably not but as much as it is a failure of the coach, it is also the failure of the system).

His resignation also pre-empts the restructuring of Cricket South Africa, which shouldn’t be discarded. The present board, which also saw fit to relieve Mike Procter of his selectorial duties, were in conflict with Arthur in relation to what their corresponding visions were for South African cricket.

Rob Houwing from Sport24, the former editor of South Africa Sports Illustrated and the Wisden Cricketer (SA), wrote quite an insightful piece on the matter, so here’s the link.

My thoughts would have to agree with his: as much as it was a surprise, it wasn’t a shock and is maybe just the sort of tonic the national side need to freshen themselves up (admittedly, before a very tough tour of India). As Houwing says, if someone had to go, it wasn’t going to be Smith.

That does beg the question: If there was a replacement for Smith, which there isn’t, would he have seen the chop? The answer isn’t certain, but I still believe he is the right man for the job. His batting certainly hasn’t suffered, having outlasted three coaches and two England captains (that was a low blow, but amusing all the same).

And what of Arthur’s replacement? With disciplinarian Ray Jennings starting the Smith era, followed by the more genial Eric Simons and Arthur, the time is right for a slightly harder character who can challenge Smith and the rest of the team to go beyond what they already have achieved. There was always the question of “What now?” once SA had reached the respective summits of Test and ODI cricket (excluding the ICC chokes … those performances were hard to swallow). Once there, the team appeared unsure of what to do next, so perhaps this is the wake up call that was required.

Vincent Barnes has also been removed, with Allan Donald being the people’s favourite for the post. The English felt inclined to use him in 2008, so he must know his stuff, and if indeed that is the case, he would be an ideal replacement with Steyn leading the way, Morkel maturing and Parnell learning his way. Whether he gets the job is an entirely different matter.

My favourite for the post? It might upset the stomachs of some (I’ve personally had to “smash” some Rennies to sprout this), but the name Tom Moody rings a pleasant tune. He has coached at international level, doing great work with Sri Lanka before going to western Australia. There are whispers that at the end of the current season, his contract at the Waca will have expired, so if we can get the Australian that would be considered a job well done. I’m not certain a South African can take the job, and what of Duncan Fletcher?

Corrie van Zyl is the man that has been tasked with getting the Proteas through India, and considering the circumstances, he was the best man for the job since he was familiar with Arthur and the senior leaders within the team, being Smith, Boucher and Kallis.

Arthur might not have been everyone’s cup of tea, but he can never be accused of being unselfish, with the interests of the team always appearing to be his primary concern. As Houwing mentions, a win-win situation? Let us hope so.