The match that was there to be won. Until it wasn’t …

“I feel quietly optimistic about what’s to come, having gone past the hurdle of a semifinal. Now this final is a reality for this team. Once you see the reality, you experience it, and this team and all South African teams know that.” – Hashim Amla

Telford Vice / Cape Town

THIRTY runs needed off 30 balls, six wickets in hand. Twenty-six off 24, still six standing. Twenty-two off 18, five down. Twenty off 12, six gone. Sixteen off six, no further loss. Only eight scored off those last six, and another wicket taken. Defeat by seven runs. How?

“It’s not the first game of cricket that’s been lost with a team needing 30 off 30. It’s more that India are allowed to bowl well, they’re allowed to field well, they’re allowed to go from that position to a position of strength.”

That’s Aiden Markram at his press conference after his team had been beaten by India in the men’s T20 World Cup final at Kensington Oval in Bridgetown, Barbados on Saturday. Note the term: beaten. They were not disgraced. They did not choke.

South Africa were in a winning position, but they did not squander it. The opposition were indeed, in Markram’s words, “allowed” to play well. If they play better than you, you lose and they win. That’s how sport works. And India were better in the last five overs.

It helped having the genius of Jasprit Bumrah on hand to bowl two of them. Hardik Pandya’s two overs unspooled like a redemption song for all he has been through since usurping Rohit Sharma as Mumbai Indians captain. Little wonder Pandya had to wipe the tears off his face before availing himself for one of those awful interviews conducted when hearts are still beating too fast for their own good.  

It wouldn’t have helped India get through those five overs intact knowing they would be the last time giants of the stature of Rohit and Virat Kohli would be in an India T20 shirt. Did the dressingroom know then that Ravindra Jadeja would also retire? Nor would it have helped that, despite everything the IPL has done for the format, it had been 17 years since India won this trophy. That’s pressure, and it showed in the tears of relief that flowed once the challenge had been met.

India deserved to win because they handled the stresses of the situation better and, consequently, played better cricket. Did South Africa deserve to lose? The question was irrelevant for Hashim Amla, who was part of a SuperSport studio panel that featured Russell Domingo and Chris Morris. Domingo and Amla, who are now on the Lions coaching staff, were sat either side of Morris, who said, “This is why these two do well at the Lions, because he [pointing at Amla] says you don’t deserve anything in this game, that the game owes you nothing. And this one [pointing at Domingo] says the game’s rude.”

Even so, Domingo could empathise: “It’s going to take them a long time to get over this. Emotions were hurt, and it takes so much out of you. You’ve given everything for two or three years leading to this event, and one or two things don’t fall into place. To get back up and step into the arena again is going to be a challenge and there might be a drop-off in terms of intensity for a period of time. They are so desperate to do well and they’re playing such good cricket, and once again they’ve fallen short.”

Domingo knows the feeling. He was South Africa’s head coach at the 2015 World Cup — when clumsy interference by CSA’s suits around team selection on the eve of the semifinal against New Zealand at Eden Park knocked the South Africans off kilter and probably cost them the game.

Then, Grant Elliott launched Dale Steyn over his head for the matchwinning six. This time, Suryakumar Yadav produced a furiously balletic catch on the boundary to remove David Miller and erase six of what might have been the winning runs.

It was the first ball of the last over, and while the target of 16 was steep the South Africans would have considered themselves to still have one hand on the trophy, albeit not as firmly as four overs previously. But while they had Miller, his face set with the knowledge and resolve that the job was his to get done, they had hope. One slipping hand on the trophy wasn’t enough when Yadav, with a hop and a skip either side of the boundary, got both hands to the ball, twice, and held on, twice.

Photographs and video suggested the boundary cushion had moved a few centimetres beyond a line of yellowed grass that looked suspiciously like where the cushion should have been: the actual boundary, in terms of this supposition. The implication is that the cushion was closer to the fence than the boundary.

And thus that Yadav, who was perilously close to touching the cushion when the ball was in his hands but did not do so, trod on the actual boundary while he was in contact with the ball. And so the catch should have been disallowed, six runs should have been awarded, and Miller should have been permitted to continue his assault. Did Richard Kettleborough, the television umpire who decided the catch was fair, get it wrong?

What cricket calls its laws says under “19.3: Restoring the boundary” that, “If a solid object used to mark the boundary is disturbed for any reason, then the boundary shall be considered to be in its original position. The object shall be returned to its original position as soon as is practicable; if play is taking place, this shall be as soon as the ball is dead.” But the faded grass line was visible on only some of the replays, and there was no discussion about whether the cushion was in the wrong place.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Yadav acted in accordance with where the cushion was, not where it perhaps should have been. There is nothing to say he was advantaged by where it was, or that he wouldn’t have adjusted his movements accordingly if it had been on the grass line. Besides, umpires’ mistakes — if this was that — are part of the game, just like those made by players.

Far be it for Amla to get into weeds as rancorous as these: “I feel quietly optimistic about what’s to come, having gone past the hurdle of [winning] a semifinal. Now this final is a reality for this team. Once you see the reality, you experience it, and this team and all South African teams know that.”

On Tristan Stubbs: “For a young boy playing his first World Cup, he came out playing without fear, took the game on, and got us ahead of the game.” On the new generation: “With the exposure they’ve had in the IPL, the SA20 and in our domestic system, you’re seeing these youngsters coming in and they’re straight into the game. Before it took longer to get into international cricket. They’re getting into it very quickly, and we’re seeing the performances.”

Amla has always seemed to be from some other, rarefied planet far above messy mortality. The rest of his cricketminded compatriots are struggling not to feel worse than they usually do after tumbling down a cliff of disappointment. For them, it’s precisely because South Africa seemed to have put the past behind them by showing they had learnt how to win tight games, because they reached the final this time, because they came so close to winning it, because they didn’t panic or choke, that this hurts so much. They did all that and made all that progress and it still wasn’t good enough.

Had South Africa been thumped on Saturday, the part of the nation that cares about cricket would have moved on by now. In that case, fair play to India, easily the better team on the day. But it wasn’t like that. The game was there to be won, until it wasn’t. 

Afterwards, Camilla Miller held her distraught husband of not quite four months with a tenderness so strong it was difficult to watch. Tabraiz Shamsi put one arm around Khadija Shariff, his wife, and the other around their three-year-old son. It looked for all the world like they were his supporting pillars, keeping him upright when he couldn’t quite find reason to look the world in the eye.

Love like that is needed now, and it seems a lot of it is around the players. But not all of us will have enough of the precious stuff. Some are trapped in bleakness, wondering how they are ever going to watch any team play any sport ever again. They will, of course, but right here, right now, the tunnel has no end. 

Cricbuzz

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Aiden Markram: the thinking person’s doer

“You’ve seen it in the close results, where we haven’t played some of our best cricket in certain games. But that will to win drives you to, by hook or by crook, get the job done.” – Aiden Markram

Telford Vice / Cape Town

IT seems cruel to describe Aiden Markram as an emotional black hole, but also apt. He was asked 14 questions during a long and winding press conference on Friday — seven of them tied in different ways to the fact that South Africa had never won a men’s World Cup or even reached a final.

Markram dead-batted every variation on the theme of what reaching the T20 World Cup final at Kensington Oval in Bridgetown, Barbados on Saturday with the same calm he has shown in guiding his team to eight consecutive wins. He refused to be sucked into the maelstrom that spins around any match that involves India, and which is exponentially heightened before a final. 

“We all know India are a great team,” Markram replied to the first of the seven questions. “Us as a team, as South Africans, have been sort of trending in the right direction the last couple of years. But maybe not progressed in tournaments as far as we would have liked.”

What?! Surely there was more to this than that?! You’re in a World Cup final! Against India! Come on man, hit the panic button already!

“You wake up tomorrow and there’ll be a lot of emotions that you’ll feel,” Markram said. “But for the time being we’re just excited at the opportunity and trying not to waste any energy — be it emotional energy or whatever — wondering about what tomorrow could look like. We’ve chatted about taking care of today, and today’s a rest day. So it’s about making sure we sleep really well and spend a lot of time with the feet up, and then take on tomorrow and see where it gets us.”

It was a remarkable state of grace for the leader of a squad of 15 in which nine players know the disappointment of losing a semifinal, Markram included. Quinton de Kock and David Miller have felt that emptiness three times each. Of the XI who went down to Australia by three wickets in the World Cup semi at Eden Gardens in November, only Temba Bavuma and Rassie van der Dussen are not in the current squad. If your glass is half-empty you would consider that a lot of scarring. Not only is Markram’s glass more than half-full, it has been repeatedly topped up during the tournament.

“It’s the same group of people who have been together for quite some time, and there’s a really strong will to win. But it’s not on the level of desperation. It’s an extreme hunger to win games of cricket. We haven’t achieved on the world stage what we would have liked to, and that gets the juices going — to finally achieve it or try to achieve it at least.

“You’ve seen it in the close results, where we haven’t played some of our best cricket in certain games. But that will to win drives you to, by hook or by crook, get the job done. That’s stood out for me in this group. You win those close games and you take a lot of belief moving forward that from any position you feel like you can still win the game.”

Only the first of South Africa’s victories — over Sri Lanka by six wickets in Nassau County on June 3 — was comfortable until they hammered Afghanistan by nine wickets in their semifinal in Trinidad on Wednesday. The rest have been in the seat-of-the-pants, skin-of-the-teeth category.

They were 12/4 in search of 104 to beat the Netherlands, their bogeymen opponents in the two previous World Cups, on a dodgy pitch in Nassau on June 8 before Tristan Stubbs and Miller shared 65 off 72. Miller needed all of his experience and skill, and nuggety partnerships with Marco Jansen and Keshav Maharaj, to clinch the win with seven balls to spare.

Two days later at the same ground against Bangladesh, Maharaj bowled the last over of a T20I for the first time with 10 runs to play with. Despite sending down a wide and three full tosses, Maharaj got away with conceding six. South Africa won by a single run against Nepal in St Vincent on June 14, when Ottneil Baartman defended eight in the last over. England needed an eminently doable 25 off 18 in St Lucia last Friday, when Kagiso Rabada, Jansen and Anrich Nortjé limited the damage to 14.

And so on and so forth. Usually by bowlers on pitches that challenged all who batted on them, and by fine fielding and catching — not least by Markram himself. It’s been a wild ride on and off the field, as epitomised by the South Africans’ journey from Trinidad to Barbados on Friday.

The flight itself lasts a piddling 35 minutes, or shorter than teams spend warming up, and it was due to take off at 10.40am. But a crash landing at Grantley Adams International in Bridgetown halted all air traffic to and from Barbados for hours. So the squad’s arrival, expected at 11.15am, stretched beyond 6pm. It wasn’t the first travel tangle experienced during the past few weeks.

“We’ve had a couple,” Markram said. “And we joke about it and say we’re used to it. It’s been part of this tournament. You’ve just got to crack on with things. There’s no point sulking and making it more miserable than what it might already seem to be. So, it was a slightly longer day. But you bite the bullet. You get there a bit later, you have some food, and you rest your head and wake up with a positive attitude about the next couple of days.”

Unpredictability has become part of a fast-paced routine. Thinking about what could go wrong — which has undone South Africa too many times — would be damaging. This tournament has been about doing, not thinking. And, so far, Markram’s men have done and done well.

“You play a game, you get on a plane, you fly, you check in at a new hotel and play your next game of cricket the next day. So there’s not too much reflection. After the competition we’ll sit back and appreciate what we’ve achieved. Whether you win or whether you lose you’ve gone a step further in the right direction. We’d love to win our first final, and hopefully in the years to come that can break the burden of what a lot of people are saying about us as a team.

“We were a happy bunch the other night after qualifying for the final, but straight after that game in the changing room we said guys, we’ve still got one more step to take. It’s not driven by a coach or a captain. The whole unit feels that and is driven by that. Sportsmen are highly competitive people and nobody would want to lose, and especially not lose in a final. There’s no sense that the guys are satisfied regardless of the result tomorrow.”

All of which was said in the gentle, warm, fuzzy, unassuming tone of someone talking casually to a friend. Not a captain taking a team where they have never yet been, and perhaps beyond even that. Panic? Over-thinking? Under-doing? Try somebody else. And know this: Aiden Markram is a scary man.

Cricbuzz

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Meet Keegan Petersen: Mr Modernism, the Bauhaus batter

“South Africans don’t just go away and die. We fight for what we believe in and we are very strong.” – Keegan Petersen

Telford Vice | Cape Town

IF you watched Keegan Petersen in the Test series against India, you know he’s a serious man. The diligence, the stickability, the unflusterability, the beautiful care he showed marked him out as someone not to be dismissed as a lightweight.

Or someone to dismiss easily. He faced more than 100 balls in half of his six innings, and never fewer than 22. He batted for at least an hour four times, and for 59 minutes in the second innings at Centurion. He was at the crease for more than four hours in the first innings at Newlands, and for more than three hours in the second dig. In the first innings at the Wanderers, he was there for three minutes short of three hours.

He was much more than there. Petersen scored important runs in a team not expected to score many. He did so on pitches that did not favour batters, and against a gun attack. He scored his runs unvarnished: see the ball, hit the ball, run, rinse, repeat.

Precocious players pose for pictures after they have crafted a noteworthy stroke. Petersen is many things, but he is not precocious. He plays a shot, takes the runs he has earned, and plays another. Or defends and defends and defends until there is an opportunity to pierce the field. There is nothing ornamental about his batting. If Jacques Kallis was Baroque, Petersen is Mr Modernism: the Bauhaus batter. Everything needed is in its right place, for as long as it’s needed. Then it isn’t and we start again. It is a perfect economy of requirement, intent and movement. 

“It keeps me switched on somehow,” Petersen told Cricbuzz about his approach to batting. “It’s nice … well, not nice. But it does make me feel that I have to be there all the time, in the present. And I have to work for everything. That makes you appreciate it more.”

That’s not to say watching Petersen bat is dull. Anything but, because there’s a lot going on. It takes flinty intelligence to play like he does and not only survive but prosper. If you think properly about what you’re doing it will look easy. Even, or especially, when it isn’t. You can see Petersen’s smarts not only in the choices he makes, but in the modesty of his movements. He’s got this. The emotion comes after he has finally been dismissed. He and Bjorn Borg would have plenty to talk about.  

This comes from having played 97 first-class matches before you crack the nod. And from making your debut, in St Lucia in June, three months before your 28th birthday. It comes from having lived some life, and taking it to the middle with you. It’s the knowledge of what matters, and what doesn’t. And it never stops evolving.

“In the first Test [against India at Centurion, where he scored 15 and 17], I batted like I would in domestic cricket, and I thought success is just going to come. After that Test I knew I had to work harder than I usually do to get the runs. It made me realise that it’s a step up. You are playing against the best team in the world, and they don’t give you much. I had to work for every run.” If that makes it seem Petersen learnt a lot about his game during the series, prepare to be surprised: “Not really. I’m always going to be the same.”

He is no stranger to hard work. Since readmission in 1991, only seven players have waited longer — in terms of first-class caps — to earn a Test call-up for South Africa. Stephen Cook is at the top of the list with 165, and Stiaan van Zyl just behind Petersen with 96.

“I was fortunate to start playing first-class cricket when I was still a kid, fresh out of school [at 18, in February 2012],” Petersen said. “So there were guys ahead of me. I played with the previous generation and I played with a lot of guys. Like Jacques Kallis. His last game for the Cobras [in February 2014], I was part of that squad. It’s been a long time, but I wouldn’t have done it any differently. My journey has been my journey and it’s unique. Even though I had to learn my trade for longer, that’s fine. I’m happy it came when it came.”

The all-time record for a South African late bloomer is held by Peter Kirsten, who had played 270 first-class games by the time he walked onto Kensington Oval in Bridgetown on April 18, 1992 — less than a month before he turned 37 — as one of 10 debutants. The exception was the captain, Kepler Wessels, who had 24 Test caps for another team whose colours are green and gold. But that was, of course, different: apartheid, isolation, and all that. Speaking of that other green and gold side, Mike Hussey was 176 matches and 15,313 runs into his first-class career when he made his Test debut for Australia.

Some of Test cricket’s belated beginners stick it out at the top. Some who haven’t had to pay as many dues do not. Petersen is only five Tests in, and has scored three half-centuries, but it’s difficult to believe he will not be among those who last. He’s the business. It shows in the way he hasn’t been satisfied with being given his chance — he has taken it, too. That hasn’t been true for Zubayr Hamza, for instance, who has class to burn but was able to score only 181 runs in 10 Test innings in 2019 and 2020, and was dropped. Aiden Markram, too, plays like a dream. But he made just 76 in six innings against India and can consider himself fortunate to have been retained for next month’s series in New Zealand.

Of course Petersen isn’t immune to dips in performance. It took him only 10 innings to score a first-class century, but he needed another 19 trips to the crease to make his second. Four innings later, he scored an undefeated 225 — which he followed with centuries in his next two games. First, he had to find his way again; like he did after he came back from the West Indies series with 44 runs in three innings. How do struggling players return to form?    

“You’ve just got to go back to what what you learned when you were a kid, go back to the basics and hope that it will come right. Eventually it does. But you are going to fail. There’s no two ways about it.” How did he know when he was on song? “I don’t know. The scoreboard will tell me.”

There was no flippancy in that answer, just a sobering seriousness that was apparent in a different way when he joined the Zoom call for this interview: he did so three minutes earlier than the appointed time. Up popped an image far removed from the cauldron of Test cricket. Casually clad, he sat on a couch. Family photographs were on the wall behind him. Happily, the bio-bubble had burst and something like real life had flooded into the void. “It’s what we long for, just a bit of normality.” It’s never that simple for people in the news. We spoke three days after the end of the Test series. How many interviews had he given? “Since then? I’ve lost count.”

So he would be forgiven fuzziness on how he came to be stationed at leg slip after one delivery of the third day’s play at Newlands. Not a chance: “Dean [Elgar] is going to hate me for saying this, but it was my idea. I told him the ball before that. I’m like, maybe we should just have a leg slip. He thought about it and said, ‘Okay go.’ And then the very next ball it happened.”

Marco Jansen pitched the delivery on leg stump. Cheteshwar Pujara tried to deflect it downward, but the bounce undid him. Still, it needed a lightning dive and a stabbing right hand for the airborne, horizontal Petersen to take the catch. That’s what experience does: it reminds you, sometimes subliminally, about what has worked in the past. 

Pujara and Virat Kohli had come together the previous evening after India had slipped to 24/2 in their second innings. They had added 33, and built the lead to 70, when Petersen, sensing the import of the moment, pounced. “The game was in the balance at that time because we knew that they were the big wickets. We had to make a play somehow, and I just felt at the time, with Marco bowling … he’s uncomfortable to face for anyone. He’s tall, lanky, and he unsettles a lot of guys. So I just had a feeling that I had to be there at the time.”

Trusting that feeling is another matter, particularly in a match against the No. 1 ranked team with the series on the line. And it can’t be easy finding the confidence to speak up when you’re a junior member of the side. It good to know, then, that the seniors are listening. “We try and help out Dean wherever, because he can’t captain every point of the game. He’s a really open guy and he won’t just shrug you off. He takes all of our suggestions on board. So when someone has a gut feel, they speak out about it.”

Could that be happening at least partly because a team shorn of all of their established batting stars have internalised that the buck stops with whoever is at the crease? The last of the big names, Quinton de Kock, retired from Tests after Centurion. It’s as if those he left behind are playing for each other more than they did when they could rely on De Kock, Faf du Plessis, Hashim Amla, AB de Villiers, Graeme Smith or Kallis to do more than their share of the heavy lifting. South Africa proved to themselves that they are more than the sum of their comparatively modest parts by rallying to win at the Wanderers and at Newlands. “The odds were against us, so that makes the victory taste more sweet. When ‘Quinny’ retired nobody expected it. We will miss him, but cricket goes on.”

It helps, no doubt, that what might be termed a likebloodymindedness prevails among the frontline batters. So it isn’t difficult to connect the dots between Elgar, Petersen, Rassie van der Dussen and Temba Bavuma. They share a brand of defiance that puts lumps in even the most jaded throats, and that doesn’t have to spark centuries to get the job done. This is as close to socialism as cricket gets, as epitomised by Van der Dussen grinding out an unbeaten 41 off 95 balls and in two-and-a-half hours to steer South Africa home in the deciding Test. “The 20s, 30s and 40s Rassie scored were massive for us,” Petersen said. “I think he’ll remember those innings better than his hundreds by the end of his career.”

There was more where that came from: “We’ve got strong characters in our changeroom. South Africans don’t just go away and die. We fight for what we believe in and we are very strong. Our captain is an extremely strong character and is the perfect guy to lead this group right now because it’s what this team and this country longs for. And we needed this win, to be dead honest.”

Petersen spoke from his father’s house in Paarl, where he spent a few days after the series. Dirkie Petersen, no mean player himself, was his son’s most important coach during his formative years and remains a valued source of advice and encouragement. But he has yet to see his prized pupil play a Test first-hand, what with the first two in the Caribbean and, because of the BCCI’s pandemic fears, spectators not being allowed during the India series. That had an upside.

“My dad is a nervous character, so he doesn’t really want to come watch. Because he goes crazy. But I’m glad I haven’t score a hundred yet because I’d like him to be there when it does happen.”

There is, as there is in everything Petersen does on a cricket ground, plenty in those few words: honesty about his father’s disposition, but a desire to please him nonetheless. And there’s this — when Petersen scores a century. Not if. Seriously.  

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Robin Jackman: A life in much more than cricket

Decent, loved, complex. Jackman was, like all of us, someone of light and shade.

Telford Vice | Centurion

ROBIN Jackman smiled as easily as he made others smile. He knew how to tell ordinary stories in extraordinary ways and in a warm, welcoming voice that helped him earn another career in the game. He could bowl a bit, talk a bit, and sing a bit: “Jessie, paint a picture about how it’s going to be. By now I should know better, your dreams are never free.”

Few of the evenings on which South Africa’s cricket media gathered didn’t feature Jackman crooning soulfully through Joshua Kadison’s 1993 song. Those happy times are no more. Jackman died on Friday. He was 75.

He lived a life that seemed to have spilled from the pages of a novel. His father was a one-legged officer with the Second Gurkha Rifles, which is why he was born in the Indian hill station of Shimla. His uncle was Patrick Cargill, a noted actor, who one day invited his nephew, then 15, to lunch. Also there were Charlie Chaplin and Sophia Loren — who arrived in a Rolls Royce and elegantly swept into the kitchen, carrying her own pots and pans, to do the cooking.

“She was drop dead gorgeous, sitting in a chair, a bit like royalty … I wish I could claim that I dazzled her with my scintillating conversation and rapier wit but I don’t think I said anything to her other than ‘Good afternoon’,” Jackman wrote, with the help of cricket journalist Colin Bryden in “Jackers: A Life In Cricket”, of his encounter with perhaps the most famous woman in the world at the time.

Despite the title of that 2012 book, Jackman’s life involved so much more than cricket. Even his playing career collided with the real world. His record lists four tests and 15 ODIs for England, but the truth is he was as much South African as he was English. His widow, Yvonne Jackman, is a nurse originally from Grahamstown in the Eastern Cape. His home was in the Newlands area of Cape Town. Along with Surrey, he played for Western Province — and managed and coached them — and what was then called Rhodesia. All that connection to pariah states like South Africa and Rhodesia was bound to raise red flags.

So what were England thinking when they picked Jackman for their tour to West Indies in 1981, considering by then his ties to South Africa stretched back 11 years? Guyana revoked his visa, England refused to back down, and consequently the second Test at the Bourda in Georgetown was cancelled. Barbados let Jackman in, and on debut at Kensington Oval he had Gordon Greenidge and Clive Lloyd caught at slip and Desmond Hayes taken behind.

No-one who knew Jackman was surprised by those polar opposites. He was made for drama, or comedy-drama. His uncle was the thespian in the family, but one of Jackman’s early ambitions was to follow him to the footlights. Instead he developed one of the most theatrical appeals of his era, which upset with Ian Botham. “When I first played against him I wanted to knock his head off because he really antagonised me; I thought you arrogant, strutting gnome,” Botham wrote in his autobiography. 

Jackman was proud of being able to bowl fast despite, as he described it, being “five-foot fuck-all” and built like an old-fashioned rugby scrumhalf. In the Times, Alan Gibson dubbed him the “Shoreditch Sparrow”. He was a workhorse for Surrey, sending down 71,094 deliveries in the 611 matches he played for the county from June 1966 to September 1982. He took 1,206 first-class wickets at 22.36 for them, and 399 at 20.73 in list A games.

His eyes shone like medals when he was told, in 2010, that he had dismissed Barry Richards more times — 16 — than anyone else who dared bowl to him in first-class cricket. That was no doubt influenced by the fact that Jackman had more chances than others to get Richards out because both played in England and South Africa, but it tells the story of Jackman’s class nonetheless. As did his decision not to use that truth to talk himself up, but to paint a picture of Richards’ greatness: “When the fixtures came out at the beginning of the season, one thing we always used to look at was whether we were playing Hampshire over the Wimbledon fortnight. Because if we were, there was very little chance that Barry would be playing. He managed to find a groin injury when Wimbledon was on.”

CSA’s interim board captured something of what Jackman meant to cricket in a statement on Saturday: “His passing … leaves a void in the cricketing world but particularly in South African cricketing life. We mourn the loss of a fine man, a lover of life, a cricket aficionado and a commentator who became part of the fabric of South African cricket in so many ways.”

A little later came confirmation that South Africa would wear black armbands on the second day of the first Test against Sri Lanka at Centurion on Sunday. But that wasn’t soon enough for Jacques Kallis, who tweeted on Saturday: “Sad to see no black armbands worn by Proteas for Robin Jackman today. A man that gave so much to SA cricket at all levels and all walks of life. RIP Jackers.” That would be same Kallis who has said nothing for all the months that the fraught conversation about racial injustice in cricket has ripped through the game in his country, and who has shown that he is not above using sport to talk abut politics by calling for the return of the death penalty in South Africa.

Ben Dladla, the president of the KwaZulu-Natal Cricket Union, a candidate for the vacant CSA presidency, and one of the few figures on the members council who commanded respect, died in the early hours of Sunday morning. Nobody said a word about him until a CSA statement landed at the stroke of lunch on Sunday. There was no mention of black armbands, although the team has been asked to state their position.

Even in death, Jackman can’t avoid the real world. The fact that he was fathered by a member of a colonising army in a brutally colonised country is in itself worthy of honest examination. Jackman wasn’t responsible for that, of course. But it was his decision to associate himself so closely with apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia, where a war between a minority white regime and a subjugated black majority raged even as cricket continued regardless.

And yet, it was impossible not to like Jackman. He neither suffered fools nor put himself on a pedestal. He afforded all he encountered a level of respect that, were it more widespread, would make today’s social media poisoned world exponentially more kind. It was as much a pleasure to talk to him as it was to listen to him. “Howzit Jackers,” was among the most common things you could hear in South Africa’s press boxes. As was: “Fine, thank you, mate. And how are you?”

Jackman’s life teaches us what we should know already: that no-one is entirely good nor entirely bad, and that most of us — if we’ve lived decently — will be closer to the former than the latter when we die. Jackman, who spent his evenings drinking and smoking but always looked good as new in the morning, who could crackle with swearwords and cackle with joy all in the same sentence, was decent. And complex. And loved. He will be missed, including by those who question aspects of his life and times.

An hour before the resumption at Centurion on Sunday morning, with the players warming up and the press filtering in for work, the strains of Joshua Kadison’s “Jessie” echoed around the ground, courtesy of the public address announcer. Few seemed to understand the significance, but those who did allowed their eyes to shine like medals.

Jackers, paint a picture about how it’s going to be. By now we should know better, our dreams are never free.

First published by Cricbuzz.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.