How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Participate in discussion with your fellow Zimbabwe cricket fans!
User avatar
zimbos_05
Posts: 2148
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 6:00 am

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by zimbos_05 »

CholeZimbo wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 8:33 am
My points.

1) On the Windies my point was to show that you do not need to be white to be a world class cricket team or batsmen also linked to the issue of white and black genetics in cricket.

2) You gents are now justifying the very low batting averages of a lot of white players based on strength of opposition. Fair point to a certain extent however not conclusive because the current best batsmen in the country have not faced such top opposition also. Based on that reasoning, Taylors average would be much lower than what it is now as he has not played any meaningful cricket against the top teams.

3) Since 2004, Zim's best batsmen have been BT, Hammy, Ervine, Taibu and Williams (We cannot keep on including batsmen that had potential and left, because those that have stayed, PJ and Burl have not been as good as even Taibu, so it is no guarantee they would be better.)

4) You will keep on trying to overlook my main point which is Zimbabwe Cricket does not have decent (because this has historically been a typical white zim batsmen. see point 2 if you insist on it being due to opposition) batsmen because of poor management and YES by a BLACK board. Taylor, Hammy, Taibu, Williams have/had talent and temperament to rise above this and are in the same league of batters.

5) Let me drive home my point. Taibu and Hammy prove the fact that zim can produce competitive black batsmen. However, we just have not seen a lot like these over the years not because the batting talent is not there amongst blacks but because of mismanagement, poor coaching right from age group cricket to have black batsmen get to Zim pre 2004 white standard batting (Which is overrated in this thread).
1) Genetics does not only mean skin colour. If that were the case, then white people all over the world would be amazing at football, but you don't see any whites from Africa dominating the sport. The West Indies is different to the African black. I don't think anyone is saying blacks can't be good or successful, but Zim hasn't really shown that as most of Zims top players have all tended to be white.

2) Saying Taylor has not played meaningful cricket is blasphemy. As Sloan has said, he has scored centuries against the top nations, not just at home, but away too. He also was pivotal in our first T20 win against Aus. Taylor has also been better at converting his 50s in to 100s. There is a reason he got a county contract and plenty of plaudits after the 2015 World Cup.

We agree that the management has been poor, but poor management has not stopped the like of Taylor, Ervine and Williams from pushing on and showing their quality to be our best batsmen, so why haven't others done so in the same way, especially as they were given favouritism and all the benefits from the board.

Zimco
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:11 pm
Supports: Matabeleland Tuskers

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by Zimco »

WI got full membership in 1926 and Zimbabwe in 1992. Whites from all over the world are good at soccer, there just aren't that many that play in Africa. And there have been some.

Genetics only plays to a large extent in sprint events. Hitting a moving object would be a universal ability of all humans. We were all hunters. Maybe muyeye will be the first great African batsmen from Africa :)

Yeah Taylor has been great and one of best, a match winner, but he could of been better if he had focused on his fitness a bit more.

User avatar
zimbos_05
Posts: 2148
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 6:00 am

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by zimbos_05 »

Zimco wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:28 pm
WI got full membership in 1926 and Zimbabwe in 1992. Whites from all over the world are good at soccer, there just aren't that many that play in Africa. And there have been some.

Genetics only plays to a large extent in sprint events. Hitting a moving object would be a universal ability of all humans. We were all hunters. Maybe muyeye will be the first great African batsmen from Africa :)

Yeah Taylor has been great and one of best, a match winner, but he could of been better if he had focused on his fitness a bit more.
As someone who has worked in football, there are many whites from Africa who play it, they just don't excel. You could probably count on your hand the genuine good white footballers to come out of Africa, particularly in the Southern region.

Zimco
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:11 pm
Supports: Matabeleland Tuskers

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by Zimco »

Yeah but it's not genetical cause they are of the same genetics as the British or Dutch who have produced good white footballers.

Also most of the best footballers from Africa come from west Africa because of the population and perhaps closeness to Europe.

Look at basketball, most Chinese are short and theoretically shouldn't be good at basketball but they have a team that compete with the Europeans due to their population, love for the sport , good branding and it suiting their big city living. Like most Zimbabweans aren't very tall but you get a blessing now and again. You just got to find them.

The black Africans in the usa are obviously elite at basketball but that doesn't mean whites can't be good at basketball cause Serbia has a good team. Australia has a good team for population due to a professional set up and loyal following by some of the population. Obviously basketball is important to Serbia so they have a passion for it and invest a lot into it just like the white population at the peak of Zim cricket. It was a community buy in, much like how India is mad about cricket now. The best athletes become cricketers and also others that have dedicated themselves to the sport. Spain is also good at basketball.

CholeZimbo
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 11:06 am
Supports: Mashonaland Eagles
Location: Johannesburg

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by CholeZimbo »

Zimco wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:24 pm
Yeah but it's not genetical cause they are of the same genetics as the British or Dutch who have produced good white footballers.

Also most of the best footballers from Africa come from west Africa because of the population and perhaps closeness to Europe.

Look at basketball, most Chinese are short and theoretically shouldn't be good at basketball but they have a team that compete with the Europeans due to their population, love for the sport , good branding and it suiting their big city living. Like most Zimbabweans aren't very tall but you get a blessing now and again. You just got to find them.

The black Africans in the usa are obviously elite at basketball but that doesn't mean whites can't be good at basketball cause Serbia has a good team. Australia has a good team for population due to a professional set up and loyal following by some of the population. Obviously basketball is important to Serbia so they have a passion for it and invest a lot into it just like the white population at the peak of Zim cricket. It was a community buy in, much like how India is mad about cricket now. The best athletes become cricketers and also others that have dedicated themselves to the sport. Spain is also good at basketball.
Could not have said it any better! Again, though this is really getting old, being good at cricket is not dependent on your race. Such mentality will actually kill the sport. Talent, passion, commitment from a young age, good coaching and exposure can make anyone in Zim good at cricket.

Zimco
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:11 pm
Supports: Matabeleland Tuskers

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by Zimco »

With some time overseas. I don't think the Zim system can produce great players anymore as of itself. Maybe chatara, all the other good players have had stints overseas developing their game.

That's partly why people also want to play county in England etc I have heard is that everything functions, players are paid, matches aren't delayed because some didn't turn off the sprinklers or players are striking etc and the history of playing in the home/birthplace of cricket

CholeZimbo
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 11:06 am
Supports: Mashonaland Eagles
Location: Johannesburg

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by CholeZimbo »

CholeZimbo wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:59 pm
Zimco wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:24 pm
Yeah but it's not genetical cause they are of the same genetics as the British or Dutch who have produced good white footballers.

Also most of the best footballers from Africa come from west Africa because of the population and perhaps closeness to Europe.

Look at basketball, most Chinese are short and theoretically shouldn't be good at basketball but they have a team that compete with the Europeans due to their population, love for the sport , good branding and it suiting their big city living. Like most Zimbabweans aren't very tall but you get a blessing now and again. You just got to find them.

The black Africans in the usa are obviously elite at basketball but that doesn't mean whites can't be good at basketball cause Serbia has a good team. Australia has a good team for population due to a professional set up and loyal following by some of the population. Obviously basketball is important to Serbia so they have a passion for it and invest a lot into it just like the white population at the peak of Zim cricket. It was a community buy in, much like how India is mad about cricket now. The best athletes become cricketers and also others that have dedicated themselves to the sport. Spain is also good at basketball.
Could not have said it any better! Again, though this is really getting old, being good at cricket is not dependent on your race. Such mentality will actually kill the sport. Talent, passion, commitment from a young age, good coaching and exposure can make anyone in Zim good at cricket.

And a good example.

https://www.kentcricket.co.uk/news/muye ... -for-kent/

User avatar
zimbos_05
Posts: 2148
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 6:00 am

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by zimbos_05 »

Zimco wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:24 pm
Yeah but it's not genetical cause they are of the same genetics as the British or Dutch who have produced good white footballers.

Also most of the best footballers from Africa come from west Africa because of the population and perhaps closeness to Europe.

Look at basketball, most Chinese are short and theoretically shouldn't be good at basketball but they have a team that compete with the Europeans due to their population, love for the sport , good branding and it suiting their big city living. Like most Zimbabweans aren't very tall but you get a blessing now and again. You just got to find them.

The black Africans in the usa are obviously elite at basketball but that doesn't mean whites can't be good at basketball cause Serbia has a good team. Australia has a good team for population due to a professional set up and loyal following by some of the population. Obviously basketball is important to Serbia so they have a passion for it and invest a lot into it just like the white population at the peak of Zim cricket. It was a community buy in, much like how India is mad about cricket now. The best athletes become cricketers and also others that have dedicated themselves to the sport. Spain is also good at basketball.
Based purely on the assumption that training and coaching are responsible, South Africa should really be pretty much a full black side then.

No one is saying that black people cannot be good at cricket because they are black. The point about genes is that genes do have some sort of effect. Research on aerobic endurance shows that some people respond more to training than others. Training also increases cardiac efficiency, but the extent of this increase may depend upon genetics. Genetically gifted athletes will have a much greater response to training and will have a large increase in the number of mitochondria in cells.

Once again, no one is saying that race only determines how good you are at cricket, but in the case of Zim, why is it that the minority non black population have still excelled and been better players than the majority black players.

TapsC2
Posts: 495
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:40 pm

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by TapsC2 »

zimbos_05 wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 12:08 am
Zimco wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:24 pm
Yeah but it's not genetical cause they are of the same genetics as the British or Dutch who have produced good white footballers.

Also most of the best footballers from Africa come from west Africa because of the population and perhaps closeness to Europe.

Look at basketball, most Chinese are short and theoretically shouldn't be good at basketball but they have a team that compete with the Europeans due to their population, love for the sport , good branding and it suiting their big city living. Like most Zimbabweans aren't very tall but you get a blessing now and again. You just got to find them.

The black Africans in the usa are obviously elite at basketball but that doesn't mean whites can't be good at basketball cause Serbia has a good team. Australia has a good team for population due to a professional set up and loyal following by some of the population. Obviously basketball is important to Serbia so they have a passion for it and invest a lot into it just like the white population at the peak of Zim cricket. It was a community buy in, much like how India is mad about cricket now. The best athletes become cricketers and also others that have dedicated themselves to the sport. Spain is also good at basketball.
Based purely on the assumption that training and coaching are responsible, South Africa should really be pretty much a full black side then.

No one is saying that black people cannot be good at cricket because they are black. The point about genes is that genes do have some sort of effect. Research on aerobic endurance shows that some people respond more to training than others. Training also increases cardiac efficiency, but the extent of this increase may depend upon genetics. Genetically gifted athletes will have a much greater response to training and will have a large increase in the number of mitochondria in cells.

Once again, no one is saying that race only determines how good you are at cricket, but in the case of Zim, why is it that the minority non black population have still excelled and been better players than the majority black players.
Some things take generations to fix. It’s going to be interesting to see what you think if Muyeye cracks the England team before Byrom and Welch. This is a real possibility by the way because the system there seems to have a soft spot for him. Believe it or not it will also be a win for the ECB to have a quality black batsmen.

It’s also interesting to note that the current new crop of potential national team batsmen are black. We all saw Oldknow play alongside Wes, Shumba and Myers. We all know who is better. There is young Bawa as well coming through.

Why I say it takes generations is because you had the BT generation. For me Taibu was just as good as BT but he let a lot of things get to his head but on average the white batsmen were better. Then you have the PJ/Kasuza and Tari/Burl generation where I believe the gap is much smaller.

Now you have the new generation where I believe the black kids are better batsmen. Or at least on the same level. The really good ones (Welch, Muyeye and Byrom) have a black kid as the best out of the lot. The Zim standard good ones (Myers,Wes,Shumba, Oldknow) are majority black. Things are changing right in front of our eyes. The next u19 World Cup squad is going to be interesting

CholeZimbo
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 11:06 am
Supports: Mashonaland Eagles
Location: Johannesburg

Re: How come Namibia doesn't have a quota but Zim/SA have?

Post by CholeZimbo »

zimbos_05 wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 12:08 am
Zimco wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:24 pm
Yeah but it's not genetical cause they are of the same genetics as the British or Dutch who have produced good white footballers.

Also most of the best footballers from Africa come from west Africa because of the population and perhaps closeness to Europe.

Look at basketball, most Chinese are short and theoretically shouldn't be good at basketball but they have a team that compete with the Europeans due to their population, love for the sport , good branding and it suiting their big city living. Like most Zimbabweans aren't very tall but you get a blessing now and again. You just got to find them.

The black Africans in the usa are obviously elite at basketball but that doesn't mean whites can't be good at basketball cause Serbia has a good team. Australia has a good team for population due to a professional set up and loyal following by some of the population. Obviously basketball is important to Serbia so they have a passion for it and invest a lot into it just like the white population at the peak of Zim cricket. It was a community buy in, much like how India is mad about cricket now. The best athletes become cricketers and also others that have dedicated themselves to the sport. Spain is also good at basketball.
Based purely on the assumption that training and coaching are responsible, South Africa should really be pretty much a full black side then.

No one is saying that black people cannot be good at cricket because they are black. The point about genes is that genes do have some sort of effect. Research on aerobic endurance shows that some people respond more to training than others. Training also increases cardiac efficiency, but the extent of this increase may depend upon genetics. Genetically gifted athletes will have a much greater response to training and will have a large increase in the number of mitochondria in cells.

Once again, no one is saying that race only determines how good you are at cricket, but in the case of Zim, why is it that the minority non black population have still excelled and been better players than the majority black players.
So currently the Indian race is the best at cricket and at batting? Listen! Zimbabwe Cricket management has not been the one required to nurture any talent black or white to reach their full potential period! Entry into grassroot cricket for Black SA cricketers remains difficult. Those that have fought their way up have topped world rankings in some cases. Point still remaining it is not about being black or white! No race is superior at cricket than the other. Do not confuse dominance with superiority. BT speaks highly of Wes because he knows when someone is a good batsmen. Why is Wes good? not because he is black, but because he has dedicated himself to the game from a young age, has been disciplined and has trusted the process. A certain Hammy scored a century on debut against a top WI and that was no fluke, and because most here can freely extrapolate careers of young white kids who have left Zim, I can also say had the system not collapsed, Hammy had the potential to be way better than he ended up.

As we have gone to find out with the current young white players in the side, who have been dismal, being white is a mere skin tone to performance in cricket it guarantees nothing.

Post Reply