Can the West Indies mount a serious challenge?

A cruel game is cricket. Twenty years ago the Fire in Babylon seemed to still flicker. Weak, yes, but there was still memorable performances which reminded the world of the super power which had for twenty years laid waste to all before it. The 1996 Cricket World Cup was probably the last time the Men from the Caribbean showed real, tangible potential to win the tournament. Having despatched South Africa on the back of one of the all-time great innings by one Brian Lara, the boys in Maroon then conspired, with no little help from a certain Shane Warne, to take the game by the scruff of the neck and throw it as far down a narrow well as possible. That was then, though. This is now. The current West Indian side has shown neither the inclination to fashion a reasonable assault on the trophy, nor have they shown ability. Fortunately for them though, they are in what could be argued is the weaker group, and as such avoid the big favourites for the competition, Australia and New Zealand. Unfortunately for them however, they simply aren’t in a position to feel any game is a gimme. For those who weren’t watching, AB de Villiers compiled a ruthless, merciless on a rather helpless Windies bowling line up to the tune of 149 runs in 44 balls. Indeed had he come any earlier, he might have had designs on mustering a double century. Keen to prove that this wasn’t a freak occurrence, and that they can in fact bowl, they proceeded to concede 365 runs in forty -two overs against a South African team in Durban. The nadir of this tour came in the final four overs, where they were spanked to the tune of 65 runs in four overs. They simply aren’t in a position to think they can bat their way out trouble either, as their batting line-up really isn’t much better. Their gun batter, Chris Gayle, has only hit two centuries since the start of the decade. In fact, Mr. Cool himself is averaging a rather cool 26.85 in the last five years. Combined with an opening partner who averages less than twenty, and a fragile middle order, then the responsibility of consistently getting the Windes to something approaching a respectable score lies in the hands of the Iceman (what is with West Indians and weather related nicknames?), Marlon Samuels. Samuels averages a better than par 37 in the last four years, and will definitely show a willingness to drive the Windies forward. I don’t think it’s going to be enough though. Prediction: Quarter Finals (possibly group elimination)

When Should it be #MillerTime?

One of the more interesting facets of the South African game during the West Indian series last month was the timing for the introduction of David Miller. Having started out a brutal smasher with a rather catchy philosophy ("If it's in the V it's in the trees, if it's in the arc, it's out the park"), he showed a greater understanding of the finer nuances of the game this summer. Admittedly, the Men from the Caribbean Islands didn't provide the greatest of opposition - to be kind - but Miller still showed high quality in his two knocks where he was given more time to build an innings. Indeed, Miller averages 45 batting at five, compared to 32 when he bats at six. That's a rather large variance in average, and for my money certainly displays a batsman capable of smashing it around, rather than a smasher with a vague idea of batting and all the complications it entails. The problem with Miller at five, of course, is that it's at odds with my previous article in which I proposed that AB De Villiers would make a very good #5. Averaging 45 in the position is indeed a solid effort, and might put you as one of the front line practitioners in the position, but it ignores the red herring that is caused by the fact his averages is significantly boosted by his last two knocks... And the minor matter if the fact that AB averages a phat 72 when he bats at five. This makes it rather complicated. Add in the fact that JP Duminy averages 55 when he bats at four, and you have a rather complicated jigsaw puzzle. It seems nearly impossible to create a batting line up which gets the best out of everyone as their best positions overlap. Personally, I'd put Miller in at six, AB at five, and Duminy at four. If JP plays, he gets wasted a bit lower down. He's a capable hitter, but hardly remarkable at it, and six isn't too far from Miller's best position. You lose a bit of de Villiers' dynamism when he comes in a little later, but he's a supremely gifted cricketer and as the hapless West Indians found, even ten overs of AB can turn a horrible day into the worst day of your professional career.

Should AB de Villiers bat at three for South Africa?

One of the greater talking points heading into the Cricket World Cup has been the display of pyrotechnics which AB de Villiers blessed us with against the West Indies in Johannesburg.In case you've missed it, Abbas smashed a 31-ball hundred against a completely helpless West Indian pace attack. Of interest is the fact that AB achieved this feat batting at first drop. For those not familiar with South African cricket, de Villiers has generally batted at four and five for South Africa, but there is a school of thought which reckons he should bat at three. It's certainly a matter worth considering as he is our best batsman, and the traditional thinking does have your best batsman batting at three. The elephant in the room though, is the fact that till now, Ab has shown at best hesitation and at worst flat out refusal to bat higher up the order. He won't even do it in the shortest format of the game. AB believes that he bats better coming in later, and the stats do bear it out. He averages a not insignificant 72 batting at five, vs 62 batting at three. Both are enormous averages, but a ten run swing does tend to give flesh to the idea that AB shouldn't really be moved. There's also the fact that Faf Du Plessis is probably a more natural #3 in any case. More adept at handling the pressure exerted on a batter batting at three if an early wicket falls. He is also quite a destructive hitter, as evidenced by his 46-ball hundred against the equally hapless West Indian T20 outfit. As a player he ticks all the required boxes for a sturdy #3. I'd venture so far as to say he's the sturdiest #3 in the game at the moment, and his record against Australia is exactly what's needed in a major tournament where Australia are the hosts. Whether you're talking of his heroics in Adelaide in Test cricket, where he obdurately clocked a match saving draw, or his rich vein of form in Zimbabwe a five or six months ago, where he showed great proficiency against a reasonably full-strength Aussie line up, there is no doubt that Faf rises to the occasion against the Australians better than any South African cricketer, maybe ever. The only drawback in continuing with Faf is that he isn't capable of the pyrotechnics at the end of an innings which AB is. There's no shame in that, no one is capable of the pyrotechnics AB has seen fit to bestow on international cricket. That doesn't and shouldn't change the fact that he is a very good cricketer more than capable of changing through the gears, and accelerating to the level which is expected of him. AB is just capable of accelerating to levels no one has ever seen before.