But SA chocked massively in a world cup semi final and never beat Australia in a test series, when in the mid 90's they werent as strong as they have been for the last 5 years or so. Anyway since when has being second best been a success?
Woolmer also had a very strong group of players to choose from with the only thing lacking from there team was a half decent spinner. I would reckon most coaches could and would have got good results out of that team.
SA have always been percieved, and rightly so IMO of being negative. Both Nasser Hussain and Steve Waugh have both said as much.
For example, if SA are batting second and looking to set a fourth innings target whereas most teams would look to accelerate their run rate to give themselves time to bowl out the opposition, SA would just plod along at 2 an over making sure they couldnt lose the game, but costing themselves a chance of winning it. surely this attitiude must stem from the coach as i get the impression that South African players are naturally positive and agressive.
I also think some of his innovations are a bit "gimmicky" with no real value. i.e. the marble slab he took to Old Trafford with Pakistan, so that his batters could counter Steve Harmison. What happened - Harmi routed Pakistan.
I take it we will have to agree to disagree on Woolmer, Wanderer, but at least we get some stimulating discussion out of it
.