Time to 'Bite the Bullet' on Ridley

There are exactly 10 weeks remaining, before the start of the 8th ICC World Cup in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Kenya. Participating countries have until the last day?in December to submit their respective squads.

My published expression of disgust concerning the non-coverage of cricket from Bangladesh has been replaced by a less intense, but equally nagging concern, of a?different nature...

Should Ridley Jacobs go to the World Cup? There are probably a little more than two million reasons why that may not be the?wisest of moves! I'll explain that?later. But, using the most?compelling of them -- consistently poor performances in ODI cricket?-- my answer is firmly in the negative. I describe this issue as being a 'nagging concern', because from all indications; he?most likely?will be going.

Having been entrusted with the mantle of leadership by his employer, even if by default; it is obvious he is still in the 'thick of things' and, it seems a foregone conclusion that the jaded, woefully out-of-form wicketkeeper/batsman, will be an active member of the World Cup squad in February.

The case?for his non-consideration, as I intend to indicate, is particularly sound; and though?it may not preclude the selectors showing their faith in him; certainly will provide some food for thought. There's nothing personal associated with this; as with all my arguments on cricket, I present, and?deal with facts.

In a four-year span; from the quarter-finals of the Wills International Cup in Bangladesh in late October 1998 to the just-abandoned fixture against Bangladesh, where he managed to score just 10, Jacobs's batting returns in ODI cricket, specifically,?have been dismal. Inexplicably, the selectors have?been remarkably reluctant to consider replacing him.

It is common knowledge that though he has sometimes struggled with his batting for extended periods, he has remained 'untouched' in the wicket-keeping position for basically his entire career; that is somewhat of an anomaly.

What?baffles me most about this 'indispensable'?scenario, are the related facts.

Consider the following:?Including the aforementioned quarter-final in 1998, and up to our most recent encounter in Bangladesh; Ridley Jacobs has played 86 one-day?innings; 20 of those have been?undefeated(not outs); 67 of the 86 innings (or 78 percent) have been scores of 25 or less; 35 of the 67 (a staggering 52?percent) were single-digit scores, of which only 5 were not-outs! Of?more relevance, is the fact that?in 2002, he has only?scored 197 runs in 15 innings with 5 not outs, with a highest of 60* against New Zealand in mid-June.

His scores in 2002 to date: 25, 1, 13*, 0, 36, 3, 60, 4, 25, 2, 0, 9*, 9, 0, and 10. Sad to say, but these are certainly not?World Cup selection statistics. Which begs the question: what would be the possible or probable considerations for his selection at this point in time? Batting at number seven, he may not be expected to?score centuries or even?half-centuries regularly, but frankly, the only?noteworthy consistency at present, is that of low scores!

Also, clearly evident, is the fact?that the aggressive intent?and confidence - which he at times displayed in the past - are now a thing of the past; replaced unfortunately?by sheer?timidity! The pitiable display (failing to make any contact)?in the dying stages of the?first ODI in India, coupled with his surprising?exposure of Pedro?Collins in the sixth game of that same series, puts it all in a nutshell.?

Some persons have expressed the opinion, that it is imperative that we go to the World Cup?with a specialist wicketkeeper. Their theory is based on the likelihood of a 'backstopper' or 'stand-in' dropping a crucial catch, or conceding too many byes which could cost us dearly. I beg to differ. In the past few years, I have witnessed innumerable crucial catches, some relatively simple, being floored by all and sundry in West Indies cricket. Case in point. Courtney Browne, who is?believed by many?to be?a far more fluent and technically correct wicketkeeper than Jacobs. He?became a 'marked' offender for his transgressions, and you guessed it, he's a 'specialist'!

How do the purists?rationalize that?

Recently, one of our best at present, Ricardo Powell, put down a 'sitter' -- by his own lofty fielding standards -- off Sanjay Bangar, who remained until the victorious end for India. It happens. Anyone, at any position,?and irrespective of status,?can drop a catch. So, why all this fuss then about 'specialists'? Those who have seen Wavell Hinds behind the stumps, and know of his ability in the field, will stand behind me in saying that it is highly unlikely that the superbly coordinated and conditioned?athlete, with his excellent reflexes as a close catcher, and great hand-eye coordination, will make a hash of his makeshift duty in a 50-over affair, as the skeptics are implying.

My views on this matter are well-documented. I have repeatedly said that our best option for this World Cup is to use the versatile young Jamaican as our man behind the stumps. Any other move will be based purely on sentimentality! With the exception of the mighty Australians, and their irrepressible wicketkeeper/batsman Adam Gilchrist, no other team would have the edge over us in that department; should we choose to use Hinds.

Quite significantly, not only would that arrangement totally erase the uncertainty associated with any of our top seven, but also quite comfortably facilitate the imminent return to the middle order of our master batsman Brian Lara. The middle order looks capable as it is; but I remain adamant, that the return of a fully rested Lara, will give it the required boost and authenticity for the 'big dance'.

Irrespective of what the uninformed and myopic think, the genius must assume his rightful position; unless of course, he indicates otherwise.

Because of his endearing demeanour and general characteristics, Jacobs has become the player that the selectors and fans would least like to 'hurt'. I myself have admired his commitment and tenacity, and have never previously ventured to question his legitimacy in the team. But, all good things must come to an end, and this may just be one of those occasions. The time is nigh; and the stakes are high!? There isn't much room for error. It's?barely 70 days and counting!

As I mentioned earlier, there are a little more than two million reasons that Ridley Jacobs wouldn't be on my squad to the 'dance'. The winner's?share of the US$5 million in?prize money, will be?approximately US$2.2 million, and I am 100 percent certain that that signed document and the trophy that will accompany it will not have the words; 'Sympathy', 'Empathy' or 'Sentimentality' written or engraved on them.

Ridley Detamore Jacobs, a decent, over-worked and?committed West Indian cricketer must be tangibly rewarded for his long and dedicated service?to our?cricket, but the West Indies?must be?tangibly represented at the 2003 World Cup. I don't think he has it left him. The West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) and its selectors have got to 'bite the bullet', put sentiments aside, and address the issue of squad selection logically, with a view to exceeding expectations in February and March of 2003.?????

Nigel McKenzie pens a weekly column on cricket for Guyana Kaieteur News.