Blanket ban on Cronje absurd, says Woolmer

By G. Viswanath

KIMBERLEY, OCT. 15. Bob Woolmer was ready to talk about Hansie Cronje. His views about Cronje's alleged murky dealings following the Delhi Police's expose (which came to be known as `Hansiegate') are well known. But he was still forthcoming and aired his remarks about the man, and the treatment meted out to him by the establishment. Woolmer said Cronje committed a blunder and was punished, but doesn't approve the blanket ban on the former South African skipper. He feels it's absurd and sees in the realm of possibility Cronje working as coach of the National team in the long-term future.

Woolmer was in Bloemfontein and Kimberley to establish contacts with the Kenyan cricket management. He doesn't mind regarding himself as a `Walking Cricket Academy'. At 53, he's on the payroll of the International Cricket Council (ICC) as a High Performance Manager, a dedicated post that involves developing the game in the two African nations, Kenya and Namibia, as well as in Netherlands and Canada.

Woolmer has to spend time in these countries and interact with their officials and cricketers, and prepare them for the 2003 World Cup. The ICC-related job has brought him back to international cricket after a gap of two years.

He did not have a distinguished career for England the way he did as coach of the South African National team. He spent a little over five years with South Africa and formed a formidable team with Cronje. He applied for the job because he wanted to study the new generation players in various aspects. He felt his job was not confined to coaching, but also in assisting the players in handling the media, even in trivia like selecting neckties and how the team must pose for a group photograph.

His last major assignment with the South African team was World Cup '99 in England. He was disappointed that South Africa did not win it having been knocked out by Australia, but said ``there was still so much joy in that match.'' He and Cronje were `made for each other' as coach and captain, and worked wonders to help the Proteas regain their position as a strong cricketing nation. They bonded well and that's precisely why there was a sympathetic word from the former coach about the condemned captain.

Woolmer has said a lot about match-fixing and corruption in cricket, and also about the alleged involvement of Cronje with certain Indian syndicates. When asked if he would like to say something on that subject, he quipped: ``If I can have my life again, if I could have one way sure, if I could have one dream and say I could go back in time and change one thing, that will be the change I would have done... stop Hansie Cronje from getting involved.

``Because I have known him (Hansie) very well, I am unfortunately in an invidious position. What he did was wrong, but the sad thing is that, it affected somebody with whom he's very close. So I have a more conciliatory view as to how he should be treated rather than what many others think. He, obviously, deserved to be punished. He won't come back into the game. He has said that.

``But it is not a good thing to stop him from writing on the game or commentating on it, and even coaching children and coaching, maybe, in the long-term future, his country. To ban him for life for what he has done is not a good thing, when people who have done worse things than that (what Cronje has done) and have not been banned for life.''

Mutual respect

Woolmer respected Cronje's captaincy as well as his cricketing acumen. Cronje reciprocated by appreciating what Woolmer did for South African cricket. ``I am in regular contact with him. He is very distraught about the whole thing and contrary to people's opinions, he's very sorry about what he did. It's a sad thing. What he did was wrong and was rightly punished. But it's dragging on far too long now and I hope cricket will sort it out quickly.''

Two years after he was forced to snap direct links with South African cricket (Graham Ford was appointed coach) he said: ``I did not know it (match-fixing) was happening. Unless you knew it was happening, how do you stop it? There was a meeting before the match in Mumbai in 1996. I attended only one meeting. What was said in that meeting appeared trivial, all fun and not as anything serious. As Dave Richardson said, `I think we have come of age because we have been approached.' It was like a schoolboy prank. That's what it seemed at that point of time, down the line though, it took a more serious effect.''

About Cronje confessing that he took money, Woolmer remarked: ``He was in a way, forced to confess, because of the tapes. But what's happened to those tapes? Nobody has seen the transcripts of the tapes. I think it's (match-fixing and players involved with betting syndicates) a sad episode for cricket. Sooner it's knocked on the head, the better.''

Hi-tech innovations

Woolmer also talked about the famous `ear piece' incident during the India-South Africa World Cup match at Hove. Woolmer and Cronje, with full knowledge of the United Cricket Board of South Africa, used a device that helped them communicate with each other during the encounter. ``It (ear piece), I think, has a role to play, though the International Cricket Council (ICC) is there for superior judgment. But certainly, communication with players is the way you coach. That's the bottom line. Well, if you don't tell someone that he's playing badly and then don't tell him to play better, you are not doing your job as a coach.

``You have to identify the fault, but the most important part of it is, you have to rectify it. And if you can try to do that on the field and nets, it doesn't generally matter. You try to get the batsman better.''

Personally, Woolmer is all for the use of technology. When asked to comment on the recent remarks made by Shaun Pollock that certain decisions should be dealt hands-on by the field umpires, Woolmer said: ``Cricket is such a great game which creates diverse views with what happens. If you have a third umpire and enough cameras, then the square-leg umpire actually becomes redundant. He should stand at leg-slip and see if it (nicks) `carries' (to the fielders). He can get closer to the scene of action. Maybe he must move. He can go to extra-cover or mid- wicket and study from different angles. Maybe he should study no balls and help the umpire at the bowler's end who's looking for lbws. Why have a square-leg, if there are enough cameras.''

He is convinced that cameras can handle the line decisions. ``Well, the guy (umpire) is standing in the way. He's blocking the camera. One can take technology to the extreme. The new `Skyscope' and `Hookeye' things, they are wonderful innovations. I was there when they were developing them. They are almost hundred per cent accurate. It's computer technology, it's army technology.''

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Sport
Previous : England tour hinges on players' safety
Next     : Another milestone for Pollock