http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/colu...ry/280950.html

when reading it - the process felt less true than the product. more prejudice than precision maybe!?

He starts the lazy, predictable assertions about SA by protesting a "SA push OZ off top spot" headline and his reasoning is almost convincing - England and NZ certainly aided in the "fall" as did missing players (i have no sympathy for the last - OZ whitewashed the ashes, it matters none that they were playing against a team missing 4/5 of what was the best team in the world in 2005). but SA had to be in second spot to keep up the pressure (it seems in passing that he mentions it - or fails to mention that beating OZ recently, let alone the manner, contributed to their second spot).

he then spends quite a bit of time `commenting` on the SAfrican phsyche - like there could be an established phsyche in what is still really a new democracy with no less than 11 national languages. it is so fluid a sporting phsyche that a comment on it last about as long as a million zimbabwe dollars. of course he does say "sporting phsyche" and uses literary excerpts to extend the assertion and i`m going to dwell on this a while...

in his assessment he quotes waugh and then knox (the literary reference) who are both australians, significant only because the particulars he refers to were during a time when the rivarly was closest so sledging becomes not only par for the course but meaningless (not "fair" as he imposes). Things in SA have been in a state of change (a vital one but a difficult one) so maybe this comment from knox does have a ring of truth:

a fictional aussie says of the SA team (also fictional really but presented otherwise)...
"they think they`re like us ...but they're not, they're f---ing not at all. Something in their history makes them tough but insecure, hard on the surface but soft-centred. They fight and fight and never give up, but when you've beaten them, there's something in them that accepts it. As if deep down they're too guilty to take the last step."

in terms of "guilty" sporting physches (he must be referring to the elite sports of rugby and cricket as i`m assuming, safely, that he is talking about white SA - despite calling it the "SA phsyche") i think there may be something (and i`m focussed specifically on sport at the moment) - being deservedly unaccepted in the eyes of the world on moral/ethical grounds will certainly have effects ... i don`t know the extent of such sentiments ("guilt") with regards the non-sporting white populous, but in sporting terms it`s just possible!!

this, however, doesn`t help his arguement extensively, as despite the possible detrimental sporting result of such a phsyche and a transitory political landscape in which sport is not exempt, SA have still managed to win the rugby WC and perform in other global sporting areanas (as i mentioned briefly in another thread with a vaguely similar theme to this one).

what may have been a more interesting and hopefully more insightful read would be an analysis of the quote: "they`re not like us...deep down they`re too guilty to take the last step" because i am only wondering now ... why, given both histories, does knox find room to seemingly mock those suposedly feeling the weight of history? - {i guess this question may be more fully addressed in knox`s book, but if so Tim`s selected quotes don`t let on}

in any case, like i said, it was the process that sounded off, the product: ie that SA may not be the best ODI side in the world (though saying they aren`t is unbecoming imo) is probably right ... but they`ve come a long way from the shambles left by cronje and are hopefully a nation on the mend - phychologically speaking!!

and btw, i think Tim`s pieces are always worth a read - this one no exception!!