West Indian cricket fans welcome the recent victory of the region's senior team in the short two-Test series against Zimbabwe. This series was a rare occasion of success overseas in the last six years. During this period in contests abroad the West Indies team almost invariably had suffered either "whitewashes", as in Pakistan, South Africa, New Zealand, Aus-tralia, Sri Lanka and Sharjah, or less resounding, but still embarrassing defeats, such as those experienced in England and India.
The only exception to this sequence of humiliating defeats overseas was in the team's first visit to Zimbabwe in June, July and August 2001. On that historic tour the team, led by Carl Hooper, achieved statistically the same result as that of Lara's side recently - a 1-0 victory with the other Test drawn. This recent triumph, though welcome, was for several reasons very disappointing.
The disappointment is related to the apparent disparity between the two sides. Zimbab-we, currently ranked ninth ahead only of Bangladesh among the teams involved in Test cricket, has always been one of the weakest sides in international cricket. Their normally weak team was depleted further by the absence - for various reasons, including retirement, injury, migration and study - of several of their best or most promising players. Among those absent were seasoned batsmen such as Andy and Grant Flower, Murray Goodwin and Alistair Campbell, all-rounder Guy Whittall, fast bowler Henry Olonga and the talented newcomer, Hamilton Masakadza, who in 2001 became the youngest cricketer to score a hundred on his Test debut.
In their absence the Zimbabwean team, led by Heath Streak, was an inexperienced experimental side. To make matters worse, Zimbab-we had lost its eleven previous Tests before Lara's team arrived. Furthermore, it had never defeated the West Indies in any of the four previous Tests between the two teams, two in the Caribbean in 2000 and two in Zimbabwe in 2001. The West Indies had won three of these matches comfortably, with the other game drawn.
In these circumstances the West Indies started the recent Test series as "overwhelming favourites". As one commentator observed on the eve of the first Test, "the West Indies will be favourites to beat a Zimbabwean side that lags well behind the visitors in terms of experience, and has been weakened by injury." This view was endorsed by Tony Cozier, the Caribbean's most renowned cricket commentator, who stated that "Zimbabwe are so below strength that anything less than a convincing (West Indies) performance will be a setback."
In short, although it was well-known that the West Indies had an abysmal record in Tests overseas in recent years of 25 defeats, 5 wins and one draw, Lara's team was expected to defeat Zimbabwe easily and to gain at least as commanding a victory as was achieved in 2001. On that occasion Hooper's team overwhelmed Zimbabwe in the first Test by an innings and 176 runs, while the second Test, which the West Indies dominated initially before Zimbabwe made a remarkable recovery, ended in a tame draw, with the West Indies, 98 for the loss of one cricket, needing 250 more runs to win the game.
Lara's team, though eventually victorious, did not live up to expectations. It was both incredible and embarrassing to West Indians to see their team completely outplayed by Zimbabwe throughout the first Test at Harare, having to struggle to avoid following on after Zimbabwe made one of its highest scores in a Test innings, 507 for 9 declared. It was even more humiliating to witness the West Indies struggling to survive to secure a draw in a match which Zimbabwe would have won had it not been for the late declaration by their ultra-cautious captain and the commendable temperament and solid, stubborn defence demonstrated by the last pair, Ridley Jacobs and Fidel Edwards, who defied the Zimbabwean attack for the final eleven overs. After the nail-biting finish, Brian Lara acknowledged the obvious but the unexpected, when he observed: "They (Zimbabweans) bowled better, batted better, fielded better and looked the better team."
Admittedly, West Indian fans were relieved, if not happy, when their team won the second Test at the Queen's Sports Club at Bulawayo. The victory, though statistically by the comfortable margin of 128 runs, was, however not convincing. When the team collapsed in the second innings for 128, the second lowest Test score in Zimbabwe, on a worn but by no means difficult wicket, as it has frequently done all over the world in recent years, it gave the opposition an opportunity to achieve what would have been a notable come-from-behind victory. Fortunately, however, the 233 runs which Zimbabwe was required to make proved beyond them and the West Indies were eventually able to retain the Clive Lloyd Trophy.
Some will say "all's well that ends well." The stark truth, however, is that for many West Indians it was a disappointing victory. Although the West Indies are ranked eighth just ahead of Zimbabwe, it was widely assumed that there is a significant gap between the two sides - in talent, experience and the other prerequisites for success in Test cricket. The formidable challenge posed by weak Zimbabwe must be seen as an indictment against, and a revelation about, the true current state of the West Indies Test Cricket.
The second instalment of this article will examine other reasons why the recent victory in Zimbabwe should be considered disappointing by all those who have the welfare of West Indies cricket at heart.