Comment: Rob Houwing, Sport24 chief writer

Cape Town - The quick-fire ICC Champions Trophy generally added a splash of colour to the South African spring, underlining the country’s ability to seamlessly stage international tournaments but also amplifying the Proteas’ ever-burgeoning potential to wilt in their own habitat.

GALLERY: ICC Champions Trophy final

It was viewed up front as a key event in determining whether 50-overs cricket, in its existing format, was sustainable, yet the outcome was notably inconclusive – it did little to massively enhance it, nor did it hasten any significant funereal dirge.

The oft-maligned ICC, I thought, deserved kudos for the energy and marketing investment they put into a tournament that, in the frenetic modern fixture climate, is no longer the easiest “sell” in the world.

Their officials were everywhere, and certainly courteous and efficient toward the media, for instance, in the few days I spent on the Highveld soaking the event in.

It is a shame that the prize-giving was absurdly drawn-out and over-the-top, considering the Champions Trophy’s moderate gravitas, but that has become the norm for sporting jamborees everywhere, especially as corporates muscle themselves in cynically and unashamedly for their glow beneath the spotlight, and to hell with the merely mortal cricketers.

Still, winning captain and stand-out batsman Ricky Ponting branding this the “best and most enjoyable” Champs Trophy would have been music to the ears of the bigwigs in Dubai and enjoyed at CSA HQ in Johannesburg too.

And if the latest gathering of the clan earned a credible 6.5 score out of 10, by my book, the reasons for it failing to earn a distinction-level eight or nine lay in circumstances rather out of the ICC’s hands.

Survival threat

A major drawback was the decided absence of close finishes to contests, a phenomenon always likelier in the Twenty20 code which poses so influential a survival threat to traditional ODIs.

The vast majority of the tournament’s 15 games were won by comprehensive margins, and instead of the showpiece trio of knockout games producing the most deliciously see-sawing moments, the semis and final arguably even took the one-sidedness further.

Of course Australia blitzing England, for example, by nine wickets with an imperious eight-and-a-bit overs left was a compelling indicator of that country’s determination to rule the planet once more, but it didn’t necessarily make for must-see television for neutrals as the outcome was so seldom in doubt.

The bungling home side failing to crack the last four meant domestic street corner discussion all too quickly reverted to the Currie Cup or Bafana’s pre-2010 woes, while India’s elimination simultaneously plucked away a titanic television audience from the event.

It was a shame, too, that the weather gods, who bathed the event in sparkling sunshine initially, turned rather more pragmatic as the tournament wore on and wintry jerseys and sometimes brollies became de rigueur once more. A no-result for India v Australia was also hardly what the ICC desired in captive-market terms.

For all that, there was plenty of good, sometimes cerebral cricket for the establishment enthusiast, on quirky pitches that differed intriguingly between SuperSport Park and Wanderers.

But for the perhaps younger, vibier folk more desirous of clear-cut, boom-boom entertainment value than subtle strategic nuances and the like, the Champions Trophy may well go down as ho-hum: we might give this format another whirl some time, we might not.

Local television pre-publicity cleverly tried to flog this 50-overs jamboree as containing “two-and-a-half times the excitement” of the T20 recipe. Nice crack; again perhaps no cigar.

Lingering scrutiny

If the event did one ultimately useful thing, it was illustrate that even the installation of Powerplays, as presently structured, has not quite stripped the ODI brand of its middle-overs lethargy.

In that respect, maybe the thoughts of Jonty Rhodes, for so long a poster-boy for the good principles of 50-overs cricket, deserve more lingering scrutiny.

Rhodes was quoted in Indian newspaper The Hindu recently as saying that all Powerplay overs – including the one by the batting side – should be done and dusted by the start of the 31st over.

“This way you could have plenty of action between overs 20 and 30: the last 20 overs are bound to be interesting in any case.”

His proposal would probably find an Australian ally in commentator Ian Chappell, who constantly lamented batting teams leaving their Powerplay to the very last minute, seeing it as a wasted opportunity at a stage when willow-toting positivity ought to be the urgent theme even without it.

Speaking of Australia, they were massively worthy winners of the event, playing with intensity, verve and discipline for still more, enviable silverware from a tourney featuring all their closest rivals.

It is an interesting thought that their arsenal did not differ substantially from when they were beaten home and away by South Africa over the course of 10 ODIs last summer, but the restoration of fit-again Brett Lee and Shane Watson brought both better balance and a steelier edge.

Once again, the Aussies may have handed the rest of the world a lesson in optimum conditioning levels, too: South Africa love to thump their chests on the virtues of their pace attack, but for consistent high pace readings even on unforgiving tracks the likes of Lee, Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle – on evidence of the final, now cutting his teeth nicely beyond the Test arena, too – breathe less heavily than most.

Vastly talented

As for tail-between-the-legs South Africa, I will repeat my claim that failure to win the Champions Trophy (and then some, in truth) does not constitute a be-all and end-all. They remain a vastly talented outfit who will win more ODI matches than they lose.

But public patience is understandably wearing thin over their inability to spark at world get-togethers, even as their rankings status continues to exude good health.

Hopefully the Proteas will not be so stubborn as to contemptuously ignore claims from respected cricketing neutrals that they are just too rigid and robotic -- their comfort-zone formula blissfully readable, like the international spy’s agenda fatally left on a passenger train seat, by foes.

There is an illuminating article on Cricinfo.com by its India-based editor, the measured Sambit Bal (who counts as a friend and who thoroughly enjoys his forays to our scenic shores) entitled “South Africa’s strength is their weakness”. Catch it, perhaps, before it disappears into the cyber-bin.

I am positive that Mickey Arthur, who can never be accused of a bloated ego, will see or have seen it, and even mull over it as he plots a fairly rapid redemption charge …