Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

mikesiva wrote:But now Abbott has moved on, and so has Rossuow. It's unfortunate, but it's time to move on with players who are committed to the future of South African cricket. For the final Test, Abbott should be replaced by Wayne Parnell or Duanne Oliver. If South African cricket was as dominated by quotas as the English and Indian cricket media would have us believe, Parnell would've played this series instead of Abbott.

Instead, Abbott played, and now he's gone, in pursuit of the pound. Tell the truth, Kyle...this is all about you wanting to earn as much money as possible. Nothing else....

South Africa need 2 black African players per test (and 4 other non-white - Duminy, Amla, Maharaj, Philander): http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica ... 53999.html Bavuma and Rabada are there so Abbott can play.

If Bavuma gets dropped which is quite likely then Abbott would have to be replaced. There's no black batsman in line to come in so Phelukwayo or Magala would have to come in for Abbott.

Abbott says it's not to do with quotas and he has done it for financial reasons. So no real need to accuse him of hypocrisy.

But even if he did think his potential for being in the SA team is compromised by quotas, he hasn't commentated on that and he has the choice of making his future where he wants. He doesn't have to stay, just to give the impression the system isn't a problem for him.

Arguably, India (and the England/Australia breakaway) have to revise their plan as was always obvious. If India don't have anyone to play against, then they harm themselves. If the other countries can't retain their players, then no one wins.

Am I the only person here thinking that comments like "White South Africans havent changed their spots" are unacceptable?

sussexpob wrote:Am I the only person here thinking that comments like "White South Africans havent changed their spots" are unacceptable?

nope you are not

especially when Abbott gets accused of not supporting the "New South Africa" ...

Well, it's probably a common point of view among many who feel Abbott's decision more personally, and more symbolically. And there will contrastingly be many others who will view this through the preconception of their dislike of positive discrimination. But really I'm not sure it has much for the polemicists. If people have an opportunity to improve their lives economically, they will take it. And it will be a less itinerant life playing county cricket, which must be attractive.

I don't think it's unsupportable to imagine that someone who believed more in the 'new SA' might be more likely to stay in that country. But from an interview, it looks like Abbott feels he has already done that over a period of four years of availability. Of course, how much belief in the 'new SA' is enough is a matter for interpretation and no two people will agree.

I concur with Mike though that the UK might not be the best place to come to right now for a better life. But given Abbott's trade, his options are limited.

rich1uk wrote:

sussexpob wrote:Am I the only person here thinking that comments like "White South Africans havent changed their spots" are unacceptable?

nope you are not

especially when Abbott gets accused of not supporting the "New South Africa" ...

A pretty poor generalization.

It feels like Abbott didn't go about things that well and it is hard to accept his not keeping CSA informed of his intentions. His team mates were not aware either, and still wouldn't be if the story hadn't got out on cricinfo. You can argue about whether he owed CSA anything for their investment in him as a player, or whether he had repaid that, or even had a duty to. But it's reasonable that they should have had a voice in the process.

Rossouw too, of course.

not saying Abbott is blameless in all of this, far from it, he probably did not expect to be in the position he is in when he started discussing the arrangements with Hampshire. he was probably 5th choice seamer and only got his chance because of the injuries to Morkel and Steyn.

none of us have ever been in his position, he wasn't someone likely to get a big IPL contract and given he is approaching 30 obviously decided he needed to try and cash in when he still could. its easy for us to talk about "loyalty" and "patriotism" on his behalf and as fans want to think people "play for the jersey" but with no guarantees about his future in the SA setup, especially with the quota system, its hard to blame him for the decision he has made.

completely agree Rich, playing for your country is amazing and not much can top that...however your family's financial security is definteily the priority!

Fair enough. I'm not suggesting that what he has done is wrong. It's fine for him to take up a different opportunity. I hate all that 'Judas' b******* you hear in football. He has no moral duty to be patriotic, even if that is an issue at all. But maybe you could argue that his secrecy has incorporated some dishonesty that has been inconvenient for others. Perhaps that's being too minutely critical though. Picky. Of course, he could be dropped without warning at any time; but that is something that can never be known in advance and isn't planned, and this was.

sussexpob wrote:Am I the only person here thinking that comments like "White South Africans havent changed their spots" are unacceptable?

Its par for the course for Mike though, especially when he actually tries to justify the WC semi decision. His points lost all their credibility right there.

sussexpob wrote:I found some of the posts in the last few pages pretty offensive. To say that white people in South Africa leave the country because they are incapable of living in a new, multicultural society of modern South Africa is racist and ignorant. Using the pretext of apartheid to spout such views as being acceptable is not correct.

Ssshhh... only white people can be racist.

Hmm this thread is gonna go south quite quickly i feel...maybe we need to take 5 and chill, before someone says the wrong thing and says something they cant undo...

andy wrote:Hmm this thread is gonna go south quite quickly i feel...maybe we need to take 5 and chill, before someone says the wrong thing and says something they cant undo...

Quite right.

I dont agree. Why should Abbott in anyway feel indebted to South African cricket, or feel the need to repay them? Its only 4 odd years ago he took 7/20 on test debut against a creditable test line up, and as a reward he didnt play a test afterwards for over a calendar year, and was overlooked on a central contract which was given to the quite frankly awful duo of Kleinveldt and Peterson. Kleinveldt wasnt even picked in any squads, but he had to have a contract over Abbott because he was black. So lets not get into this "quotas dont mean anything" rubbish. You drop a player who takes 7/20 in his own game, and replace him with someone you wont even pick, because he had been rubbish the year before? Give me a break!!

I am sure its easy to call him a money grabber, or sit there and tell him its for the greater good, but if one of the best debut innings of all time results in you being replaced by two token players of inferior skills, based on their skin colour, then dont expect him to be whistling the national anthem in the shower and embrace the positive changes of South African culture. I am sure basically no one in his position would be thinking, "yeah, this lack of meritocracy is fricking amazing".