da bet7： If a team can win all their matches in a competition then itdeserves to win the main prize
Andi Thornhill17-Oct-2001If a team can win all their matches in a competition then itdeserves to win the main prize. Therefore, Guyana’s triumphin the Red Stripe Bowl is fitting.They had the most balanced team and played to theirstrategy. Barbados were the bridemaids so that their 13 yeardrought remains in tact.Could we have done better or did we get what we deserved?These are questions that would arise.The 260 000 localexperts are sure to have what they believe are the answers.Any assessment should have some connection with the statedposition of chairman of selectors, Richard Prof Edwards.After the team was selected, Edwards said that he and hiscolleagues had chosen a team to win the competition, that’swhy many of the old guard were retained despite many callsto axe most of them in preference to the young brigade.The chairman reasoned that limited overs cricket is not thebest place to groom upcoming players. Some agreed, othersdisagreed.In effect, the team had to prove themselves tovindicate the selectors’ faith in them.That they reached the final means that there would be somejob satisfaction for the selectors if not for some of theplayers. After all, Barbados had not won the tournamentsince 1988 so we can at least claim to be on par or justover.The question that arises,though, is: do we at this stageneed to put great emphasis on winning competitions or shouldwe be developing our youngsters with an eye to placingpeople on the West Indies team?In recent years we’ve only been able to have a couple ofplayers in the West Indies squad; in the very latest we haveonly one Pedro Collins. It might have more to do withcricket politics than the ability of our players to performon par with their rivals.Therefore, it seems to me that by and large that if we wantto get in line we have to be politically correct in teamselection and pushing our youngsters a la the rest of theIslands.They have certainly benefitted with a host of youth in theWest Indies team.I think it is true to say that West Indies cricket is nowmore political and strategic when it comes to selections atall levels and it’s been clearly shown in recent times to beto the disadvantage of Barbados.Bajans,once the gems of Caribbean cricket on the field andin the boardroom,are now it would seem handed tokenrepresentation even as far as umpiring is concerned. Numberscount so we might be powerless when it comes to democraticvoting but I think we are guilty of aiding the system bycertain decisions we take.Isn’t it reasonable to assume,for instance,that we mighthave hurt Corey Collymore’s chances of going to Sri Lanka bydropping him after two matches in the Redstripe Bowl?Why, if he isn’t good enough for Barbados how can hepossibly be good for the West Indies? And how did we treatbudding allrounder Kurt Wilkinson,a graduate of the ShellAcademy?It would appear that his selection was merely token when youconsider that we batted low in the order and never got achance to bowl when there was opportunity for him to do so.All this time some of his associates from the academy werebeing given maximum exposure by their teams.Therefore,if we practice tokenism with our own players weleave nothing for others to do. Mind you, I’m all forbalance but I believe that within the current cricket,political climate in the Caribbean we must give morepriority to younger players. Otherwise, we’re not going tobe in a strong position to line up for the race.