What can SA learn from playing palookas like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe?

Boxing is more civilised than cricket, which demands that punchdrunk opponents keep getting up if only to keep being floored.

Sunday Times

TELFORD VICE in Cape Town

“MOER hulle.” You mightn’t think a machine as carefully tuned as South Africa’s cricket team would look to the crassness of the clownish Fikile Mbalula for guidance.

But they have followed the former sports minister’s mantra in thrashing Bangladesh in two tests and three one-day internationals and merely beating them in the first T20 before walking all over them again in the second.

If the three series had been three rounds of boxing the fight would have been stopped when Bangladesh walked into South Africa’s opening jab, fell over and swallowed their mouthguard.

But boxing is significantly more civilised than cricket, which demands that punchdrunk opponents keep getting up if only to keep being floored.

So, what are South Africa to do except inflict damage that will scar the Bangladeshis for years to come?

Or, as Faf du Plessis said: “We have a standard and we strive to play to that standard no matter the opposition, and we have done that well this series.”

Hell yes. Of all the 885.2 overs bowled on Bangladesh’s tour, South Africa have not been demonstrably on top only in the first nine overs of the first T20 in Bloemfontein on Thursday. That’s an almost 99% success rate.

Zimbabwe are doubtless in for a similar shellacking in the four-day test at St George’s Park in December.

What might it all mean in a summer that will also feature tours by India and Australia? How much can South Africa — who were, remember, convincingly beaten in England this winter — learn from knocking out palookas like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe?

Plenty, said selection convenor Linda Zondi: “The manner in which we have won matters a great deal. When you know you’re on top and you’re playing against a weaker opponent you have to dominate them.

“That’s what I’ve been thrilled by — we’ve dominated them from the first test.”

Besides, he didn’t quite say, a suspension of disbelief was required.

“We had to prepare as if we were playing against one of the top teams, because that’s how winning becomes a culture.”

The intensity vacuum caused by Bangladesh’s inability to compete had given the selectors time and space to assess individual players more fully.

Players like Aiden Markram, who was in South Africa’s dressingroom in England but didn’t play. Instead, he made 97 on test debut against Bangladesh, 143 in his second test, and 66 on his ODI debut.

“There was a narrative that said maybe, if we had picked to play against England, he would have failed — but that’s cricket,” Zondi said. “We wanted him to first learn the culture and the ethos of the international set-up.

“So it was important to give this laaitjie a run against Bangladesh. He looks solid and very confident at the crease, and he can gain momentum from there.”

As for Bangladesh, for their trip home they might want to pack what Floyd Patterson called a “loser’s suitcase”.

It included a false beard and moustache to keep him safe from angry, disappointed fans. Like Bangladesh’s.