Zimbabwe’s performances in the 5-0 series defeat against Sri Lanka have raised a number of issues, the most pressing being the role of Walter Chawaguta

Steven Price in Harare03-Dec-2008
Zimbabwe’s batting proved consistently brittle in the series against Sri Lanka, but questions surround their approach when chasing small targets © AFP
Zimbabwe’s performances in the 5-0 series defeat against Sri Lanka have raised a number of issues, the most pressing being the role of Walter Chawaguta.Chawaguta was picked as coach in August when the board decided not to renew Robin Brown’s contract. While he had some track record in Under-19 cricket and as an assistant to previous incumbents, Chawaguta’s pedigree to look after an international side was almost non-existent, and his name unknown outside the small circle of Zimbabwe cricket.Critics were quick to suggest his appointment owed more to his willingness to tow the party line on selection policy than any technical brilliance. Those suspicions were reinforced by the fact he came from Takashinga, the club with close links to Zanu-PF and one treated with great favour by those running Zimbabwe cricket. What’s more, his experience as a player was even less compelling than his coaching credentials.Although he has not had much chance to prove himself, what we have seen so far has hardly been inspirational. He has kept his bosses happy, but at a cost. “As an individual, he’s a decent person,” one close observer of the national team said. “Humility used to be a feature too, but the new-found status seem to have eroded that away. But he himself would be the first to admit, if he were to be honest, that he was not the right man for the job on his appointment.”While Chawaguta’s focus should be on the players, many fear that most decisions are out of his control. Those “influential in fast-tracking his appointment” are pulling the strings as one local journalist said, adding: “And they are quite strong forces in the context of bulldozing key decisions.”His public utterances have hardly been inspirational, largely lacking in substance and seemingly designed to ensure he avoids blame for the team’s failings. This is in complete contrast to his predecessor, Brown, who shielded his charges from much of the flak. When Zimbabwe tied with Canada in a Twenty20 game and then lost an ODI to Kenya, Chawaguta sought to concentrate on a victory over Ireland, treating it with all the importance of a victory over a far greater opponent. It showed a complete detachment from reality.Brown’s problem throughout his brief tenure was that he refused to be beholden to the wishes of an increasingly politicised board. He was privately lambasted for not picking more black players, regardless of ability, but he stood up to his critics on cricketing grounds. In the end, he paid with his job. The right team according to the bosses was more important than the best team. Enter Chawaguta.Brown’s record was hardly anything to shout about. He won once in the 12 ODIs during his year in charge; Chawaguta has already one win from his seven. But, the bare statistics hide the reality. All Brown’s opponents were Full Member countries – Pakistan, South Africa and West Indies – and the win came against West Indies. Chawaguta’s success was against Ireland, and he has also managed a loss to Kenya.Brown was pitch-side when Zimbabwe beat Australia in the World Twenty20 in September 2007, a result which gave the game a tremendous fillip, and his no-nonsense approach won over a young squad and gave them belief in themselves. Kevin Curran, his predecessor, had often seemed to abandon thoughts of winning to try to ensure the scale of the defeats were limited; Brown told his players they should win or perish trying. He persuaded them, in some cases for the first time, they were good enough to compete.In the Sri Lanka series, Chawaguta has proved unable to give his young charges the lead they desperately needed. This was best highlighted in the last ODI. When the situation was crying out for calm heads and careful batting, Zimbabwe’s top order approached the innings as if it was a rain-shortened Twenty20 game. Either Chawaguta had given orders and they had been ignored, or he had completely misread the situation. In the end, it cost them the game.Chawaguta’s lack of experience comes out when the dressing-room door is shut. One insider said: “In the national side, the system is militant. He in nature appears quiet and reserved, but can be notoriously candid behind closed doors if things are not going the team’s way. He and team manager Givemore Makoni, form a fearsome pair. The players’ response to the regime is more out of fear than respect.”There is a clear message in Chawaguta’s appointment. The cricket is of secondary importance to the back-room politicking. While that remains, the only losers will be the young players who the board is happy to select, match in, match out, to face the music. Only when that changes will there be any real hope for Zimbabwe cricket.