Listening to the commentary on the final of the 4 day series - it struck me that something is very, very wrong in the selection of the Protea team. During the discussions the performance of Ackerman was mentioned and that eld to a further point up.
The reason why experienced players ahead of younger better batsmen was the core of the discussion. In other words when selecting batsmen the first consideration is not how batsmen perform - but how they became experienced in the game and how the prime consideration should be how the experienced players can be utilized to advise the younger players in how they should play and react to specific conditions. I other words it has nothing to do with actual performance of players and everything to do with reputation.
Batting averages count for nothing - years of experience everything, When they talk about replacement they mentioned Erwee as an experienced replacement, When Haysman mentioned Verreinne as a replacement the otehrs said no - he is too unorthodox to be selected
Aside from the already bad quota system - we have to bear in mind the thinking inability of the selectors no doubt steeped in rubbish thinking like the above, No younger players have any hope of beings elected. Nobody in the world has ever told the dunces that all the other cricket playing countries use regularly bring in new players into their squads.
It is obvious that Smith and Boucher are of the same opinion - so SA cricket is trapped in a web where team renewal becomes virtually impossible, It took a brilliant guy like Erasmus to save the Springboks to get them out of the shit they found themselves in - is their nobody that could save the Proteas?