It ended not with a bang, but a whimper. Test match cricket once again at its maddening, spirit-testing, soul-searching best had tantalised and teased for a day. The South African team, chiefly in the form of batsmen AB de Villiers and Faf du Plessis, had seen out most of the day to put South Africa in a position to do one of two things. The first possibility, the one which would have been the focus of most of the hopes and plans at the outset of the final day, was a draw. Having batted all day, to have saved a game on which they had a tenuous grasp at the day’s outset, would have been a very good achievement from manifestly the best team in the world. They are ranked number one, and deserve to be so. A brave, young, inexperienced Indian side had put up a good fight, and a draw would have kept the series alive for both sides going into the second and final game in the two match series.
The second possibility was to go for a win. To go for a win which was within grasp. To go for a win which, if achieved, would have made history; increasing the long-held record for successful match-winning run chases run chase by a barely credible 10 per cent. Well within grasp as such a feat was, it required gambling on a risk-reward axis of high sporting stakes; to do so would mean risky shots which would put the draw in danger; batsmen still to come in were the least competent of the line-up, one was injured and batting for him would either be impossible or run the risk of worsening his injury.
The option taken was the first one. Safety won the day, the draw was secured and the best team in the world went to the second and final match in the series with the series still theirs to win – as they duly did after seeing off more plucky Indian resistance. The decision was an entirely sensible, logical, professional one.
Which is precisely the problem. The series had already been ruined before it started by the money-wielding intransigence of the Indian authorities bullying scared and compliant South African authorities into accepting a format of the visitor’s wishes. A two match Test series is, all agree, deeply unsatisfying and ultimately insignificant. In the long-term, no one will remember who won a two match series. But it suited the Indian authorities to have it this way, so that’s what happened. Money won the political game. With a two match series forced on them, it made perfect sense for the South African team, clearly superior to the Indians, to safely bat out the draw and go into the second game with the series there for the taking.
What better way to undermine the power of money and cricket politics than brazenly going for the illogical win when every professional instinct preached safety first? What better way to transform a very good team stacked with a few great players into the history books by taking the rarest of opportunities to rewrite what players, fans and journalists thought of as possible? History was lost on the altar of safety.
Safety isn’t always dangerous. The human instinct towards safety is there to keep us alive, clearly. But sometimes it’s best unheeded; it’s possible to train your instincts to cut against the grain and go for that which seems illogical. The reasons not to do so are always good. Make prudent financial plans, sure. But what if a little bit of imprudence might release what’s needed for a project to start that could ultimately lead to the employment of many more and raising them beyond mere subsistence? I’m not claiming greatness for myself, by any means … but there were many appealing jobs in nice places I could have taken; instead we chose the adventure of a new country and a job that was all potential and no recognition. I know which option presented me with more life. On the face of it, there’s more logic in not living for God. There’s no proof of His existence, there’s no reward that I can see and touch dangled before me; following seems a life-lesson of giving-up. But … what if there’s eternal fruit for others in the no-reward choices I make today? What if there are consequences I can’t dream of to me investing in 2 or 3 lives of no so-called ‘significance’?
What, comes the reply, if I die and there is nothingness? Well, I won’t ‘know’ objectively so it won’t matter. But I will have lived for something beyond me, more than me.
The courage to risk at the right times comes with a sense of history and heritage, of knowing the wider context. If you know the sweep of history of which you’re a part, then you’ll know when your place in that lies within your grasp. Cricket has a rich history. One way of expressing that is in the numbers on the front of the shirts the players wear. These represent where that player stands in the history of his nation’s sporting heritage – if the number is 123, then he will be the 123rd player to have played that format of cricket for his country. In the day-to-day grind of professional sport, it’s easy to lose sight of a game’s historical significance. This is one way of cutting against that. The South African team is an exception. The country was excluded from cricket, and many other sports, in the apartheid years. The numbers on South African shirts count only those who represented the country since it was readmitted to world cricket in 1991.
Entirely understandable – the desire and need to build a new country. But as the heroes of the safe transition to South African democracy taught us, you can’t forgive what you don’t know. History has no reset button; what makes the achievements of the South African nation great is the scars and the pain which freedom has been achieved in spite of. The present means nothing if you don’t know where you’ve come from. Others have done a better job of unpicking this than I have – click here for but one example.
The current South African team is, and deserves to be, the best in the world. It contains some great players and other very good ones. In 30 years time the players may be remembered, but the winner of a two-match ‘series’ won’t be. Within their grasp lay a history rewriting shot at corporate greatness, lost at the hands of professional safety and logic. What if …. ?
What if, indeed. In 2013 I lost a friend to terrorists. Like all of us, he was a flawed human, but one thing you could never accuse him of was a desire to play safe. He impacted lives because he chose the illogical and the great at the expense of the sensible. There is a time and a place for planning, prudence and safety. Of course there is. But let’s resolve to never let safety scare us into inaction. If it hadn’t been for God’s illogical decision to pack Himself into human form and allow Himself to be spat upon, whipped, broken and hurt, I’d have had to find something else to live for.
The sums of eternity do not add up. No. They make a deeper sense than logic.