HAD I BEEN a Barbados cricket selector, Dwayne Smith would have been in my team. Having said that, I respect, understand and appreciate the thinking behind the selectors’ move to ignore him for the opening match of the 2011 first-class competition.
I applaud chairman George Linton for making it clear what the intention is – to expose young talent on the regional stage with a view of catching the eye of the West Indies selectors and ultimately win an international call-up.
Nothing wrong with that. It wasn’t the first time it has happened and it won’t be the last.
For all of his huge loads of ability, Smith has not quite fulfilled the potential and promise that prompted the Barbados selectors to give him a first-class debut at the age of 18 and the West Indies selectors to follow suit and hand him an international cap at the age of 20. There are few players in the Caribbean that can strike the ball as cleanly as Smith. At his best, he is a joy to watch, a batsman capable of scintillating strokeplay that rekindles memories of no less a person than Collis King.
Too often, however, he has wasted his opportunities. At his worst, he sometimes picks the wrong ball to hit, aiming towards cow corner and the end result is either shattered stumps or catches in the deep.
It would appear that the Barbados selectors feel that Smith’s chances of playing another Test match are nil. If this is a view shared by many of us, I still feel that at age 27, it is too premature to write him off and he  should have been in the 13 travelling to Trinidad, especially after watching a fascinating turnaround in his approach during the recent Caribbean Twenty20.
The cross-batted strokes were eliminated and there was a refreshing level of maturity in his approach after he was presented with the challenge of a new role as opening batsman. If the selectors feel that Smith’s time has passed and now is the time to give those like Kyle Hope, Shamarh Brooks and Roston Chase the chance to show their worth, I have no problem.
Where I differ with messrs Linton and company, however, is the balance of the squad. It is too top heavy with batting and clearly short of a fast bowler and possibly a spinner.
Some of us won’t be convinced that Brooks, more known for his batting, is good enough to be our first-choice spinner but I am prepared to be guided by Linton – who should know something about leg-spin – who says that Brooks’ bowling has come on by leaps and bounds in the last two years.
I however, find it baffling that only three specialist fast bowlers – Pedro Collins, Tino Best and Jason Holder – have been picked.
I have never had the privilege of sitting on a national selection panel but if I were in the hot heat, my line of thinking would be to select the first eleven, plus a reserve batsman and bowler for cover.
As is customary, I assume the three fast bowlers will be part of the first eleven. Whoever is left out, it seems obvious it would be two batsmen and the starting line-up will still end up with wicketkeeper Shane Dowrich at No. 8 to be followed by Holder, who we all know is a batsman in his own right.
Is there really a need to have two batsmen in reserve? What if a fast bowler comes down with an injury on the eve of the match or in training an hour before the first ball? We should all remember when the West Indies, without fast bowling cover for a Test match at Kensington last June, had to call up Brandon Bess from the High Performance Centre on the first morning of the game after Nelon Pascal had to withdraw because of an injury in practice.
In the past, whenever we have dominated against Trinidad and Tobago, we did so with fast bowling to which the Trinis have often showed a level of vulnerability.
I just get the impression, however, that the emphasis on batting has something to do with Barbados’ disappointing record in Trinidad in recent years.
If I didn’t know any better, I would have felt this team was picked with intentions not to win, but to avoid defeat.
•[email protected]
