Online Reporter
THE past few weeks have been tough for Zimbabwe Cricket (ZC). This is because the senior national team – the Chevrons’ crushing defeats to South Africa and New Zealand have left fans and other enthusiasts angry, disillusioned and in search for answers.
Unlike in the previous years when they struggled for game time, the Chevrons have had an uncharacteristically busy schedule, which will see them playing 11 Test matches, the most by any global team apart from Australia this year.
But what was supposed to be a time for the Chevrons to demonstrate their clout and re-emergence to the wider international audience, has turned into mourning and a disgusting blame game off the pitch.
The Chevrons have been so poor they won only four of the 19 international games they have played this year across the three formats.
They lost 13 games and two ended with no results. It has indeed been a tough year for them and the national cricket family at large, so far.
The immediate reaction, largely characteristic of the Zimbabwean situation, has been predictable: blame it on the ZC Board and in this case one led by Tavengwa Mukuhlani.
We somehow find it strange that when the Chevrons lose big, as they have done lately, social media timelines are flooded with calls for the leadership to resign, as if a change at the top would have suddenly stopped Quinton de Kock from scoring freely or Trent Boult from swinging the ball like a magician.
The responsibility is shifted from those on the playing field to the boardroom.
But is it fair?
There is no denying that administration plays a huge role in the long-term health of sport. Poor planning, bad governance, and lack of vision can derail even the most talented generation of players.
It is also a fact that management boards may not be 100 percent perfect, but it also important to acknowledge when those in leadership would have done everything within their powers to facilitate for athletes and players to express their talents on the playing field and in the appropriate competition.
Yet, when a team steps onto the field, it is the 11 men in the middle who must confront the opposition and the players, especially the more experienced and senior ones, must take the lead and lift their hands to be counted.
In the case of the Chevrons’ last two assignments, we urge cricket fans, enthusiasts and even the ZC’s fiercest critics to acknowledge that South Africa and New Zealand are not just “teams”.
They are world cricketing powers with depth, resources, and experience far beyond what Zimbabwe can currently match.
We would like to believe that much as they may have their own shortcomings, blaming the ZC Board for every six that flies over the fence or every wicket that falls cheaply oversimplifies the story.
The truth it seems is more uncomfortable . . . we are fielding a side that is still trying to find its identity, with a limited pool of players to pick from.
Some of our cricketers are young and talented, but still learning, others are experienced but terribly struggling for form.
The coach, as happens with football or rugby, can be questioned on tactics and preparation, but ultimately, international cricket is a ruthless arena.
This pattern of blame is not unique to cricket. In football, every Warriors defeat is followed by demands for ZIFA’s dismissal, while in rugby, the union takes the heat when the Sables fall short.
Yet in both sports, as in cricket, there may be deeper realities – player quality, preparation, fitness and the sheer class of opponents – that cannot be ignored.
Boards can create structures, but they cannot pass the ball, make the tackles, take the wickets or put the ball into the net.
None of this absolves administrators of responsibility. They must continue to create pathways for talent to flourish, improve facilities, and attract investment into the game.
Accountability must remain. However, it is also crucial to acknowledge the tough but hard facts that the board did not bowl the half-volleys, miss the tackles, or squander the scoring chances.
Fans have every right to be frustrated. But if we are serious about building Zimbabwean sport, we must assess defeats with perspective – looking at the quality of opposition, the form of our players, and the realities of where we stand in world sport.
Sometimes the simple explanation – “the Board must go” – is not the honest one.
Zimbabwe sport will only rise if administrators, players, coaches and fans each play their part.
In the case of cricket, they also have a panel of selectors for which the national coach is a key figure.
Given the amount of flak they have taken as a board, Mukuhlani and his leadership may need to also have tough conversations with those responsible for national team selection, amid a flurry of accusations of corruption and nepotism levelled against the selectors.
There will need to ask whether those selected players have so far been up to the challenge?
And are they carrying the right attitude into the game? Or, is it the technical team that has shortcomings? Does it follow that the poor results are directly linked to poor management?
All these questions could be answered by a formal inquiry into the operations of the cricket ecosystem.
Without a proper investigation into the challenges, witch-hunts and blame games can only result in more harm.
Anger is natural, but perspective is essential.
