Tony Becca
THROUGHOUT their 76 years of Test cricket, the West Indies have produced some of the greatest bowlers in the world, and although the majority have been fast bowlers, even though, like exciting batting, fast bowling is synonymous with West Indies cricket, a few of them have been spin bowlers.
In fact, the few, the three, Sonny Ramadhin, Alfred Valentine and Lance Gibbs, were so great that many cricket fans around the world place them in the company of the great fast bowlers Wes Hall, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Malcolm Marshall, Curtly Ambrose and Courtney Walsh.
While the fast bowling tradition appears set to continue, however, that is not the case with spin bowling.
As far as West Indies cricket is concerned, spin bowling seems to be a dying art, and the question is why.
HARDLY A GOOD
SPIN BOWLER AROUND
The reason, it appears, is that while there are a host of good, young fast bowlers in the region, there is hardly a good spin bowler around, and on the surface that seems to be true. That, however, is not necessarily the case not with an offspinner like Omari Banks and a left-arm wrist spinner like Dave Mohammed around.
The reason for a cupboard full of young fast bowlers is the one-eyed selectors around - selectors who look in every nook and cranny in their search for fast bowlers while turning a blind eye on spin bowlers, selectors who offer the West Indies cap to every youngster who attempts to bowl fast while ignoring the skill and the performance of slow bowlers.
The selectors, it appears, always seem to be looking for another Hall, another Roberts, another Holding, another Marshall, another Ambrose or another Walsh.
Based on the treatment of spin bowlers, the selectors never seem to be looking for another Ramadhin, another Valentine or another Gibbs, and that must be why, regardless of the pitch, fast bowlers are always selected ahead of spin bowlers and why, in spite of poor performances, with the ball and in the field, fast bowlers are offered opportunity after opportunity and spin bowlers dropped after a match or two even when, like Mohammed in South Africa, they bowl better and get more wickets than the fast bowlers.
While fast bowlers always get other opportunities even after disappointing performances, base on the treatment of spin bowlers, it appears they must take four or five wickets in an innings or they are dropped.
The selectors seem to have forgotten the influence of spin, through Ramadhin, Valentine and Gibbs, on West Indies cricket, they seem not to notice the dominance of spin bowlers in other teams, they seem to forget that spin bowlers need time to develop, and they seem not to appreciate that unless a team is blessed with four great fast bowlers, success depends on its ability to get wickets on different types of pitches.
SHORT MEMORIES
The selectors also seem to suffer from short memories.
Remembering Brian Lara's words when he said that a spin bowler may have won the Test match against England at the Antigua Recreation Ground six weeks ago, that must be the reason why they refused to play a spin bowler in the Test match now in progress in St. Lucia.
The West Indies needed a spin bowler so badly that shortly after lunch on the first day, Lara had to turn to batsmen Christopher Gayle and Ramnaresh Sarwan to bowl some spin, and although they are no better than ordinary, but for them, Bangladesh, lowly Bangladesh, would probably still be batting.
One never knows, but a specialist spin bowler like Mohammed probably would have ran through Bangladesh on Friday, and with Fidel Edwards, Tino Best, Jermaine Lawson and Pedro Collins as the four fast bowlers, he should have been in for one of them.
