by Bob Woolmer

Ooooh, it was close. In the end it wasn't enough, as Inzamam knows only too well © AFP

So near yet so far is, I guess, the story of Pakistan's Test series against South Africa. I used a figure of 5% as the likelihood of a subcontinent side winning a Test here before. The figure for a series win is, of course, lower.

Statistically, South Africa deserved the victory. Subcontinent teams have pushed them since their readmission, but only Australia and England have bettered them over a series. Interestingly, Inzamam said that of all his tours this was the closest and best effort by a Pakistan side. I hope that the words I use will not be construed as excuses but will provide fair reasons why Pakistan failed at the final hurdle.

Madness of the modern-day calendar

I believe that, with these itineraries, it will become harder for teams to have enough preparation in adjusting to conditions. Seven days was not enough for us and the problem was compounded by Shoaib Malik and Umar Gul picking up injuries during Pakistan's Twenty20. So our best bowler and a fine allrounder missed the Test series, after both broke down during the one warm-up game in Kimberley.

By hook or by crook

Centurion Park is an ideal venue for the home team. The pitch has bounce and reasonable pace and while our tactics of taking on their pace bowlers were well-conceived, both our shot selection and timing went awry in the first innings, with seven of our players out hooking. Our total was adequate but not a winning one. In order to beat South Africa you have to score big runs like the Australians do. South Africa were able to build a substantial lead which, on that type of surface, is match-winning.

Make that a large one

Mohammed Yousuf's unavailability meant that the younger members of the team needed to put their hands up. Though Imran Farhat and Yasir Hameed both scored fifties at Centurion they needed to score hundreds. The fact that no Pakistan player scored a hundred in the series is a telling statistic. Inzamam's quite superb innings in Port Elizabeth, Yousuf's cameo in Cape Town and Younis Khan's belligerence went close but were not enough, though in Port Elizabeth they helped win the Test.

Bowl, bat, catch, appeal: Is there anything Jaqques Kallis can't do? © Getty Images

A man of many talents

You can't blame the batsmen entirely for we have to give credit to Shaun Pollock, Makhaya Ntini, Dale Steyn and Andre Nel who all did their bit for the home team. But South Africa have, in Jacques Kallis, one of cricket's great batsmen and bowling allrounders.

At Centurion and Cape Town we managed to dismiss Kallis in the first innings but he was rock-solid both times. At Port Elizabeth, he nearly denied us victory. His technique and desire enabled South Africa to cross the finishing line and he was ably helped by Ashwell Prince who has matured into a fine batsman.

Ultimately, Kallis turned out to be the difference between the two teams as his performances, especially at Cape Town on the last morning, were magnificent. He saw off two of the most outstanding young bowlers to emerge recently in Mohammed Asif and Danish Kaneria. Pakistan had their chances but crucially the few that they did have were missed despite a fielding display that was much better than in recent times.

Not all gloomy

Despite the doom and gloom that prevails over a Pakistan loss, I believe it was, as Inzamam said, a real sign that this side is progressing to a new level. The squashed nature of itineraries increasingly creates fatigue among the bowlers and leaves little or no time to work on the frailties of batting techniques. Therefore it conspires along with lack of preparation time to change the flow.

The win in Port Elizabeth was absolutely fantastic. A brief glimpse of Shoaib Akhtar in the game positively cries out for an Asif, Akhtar and Gul combination. There is no doubt in my mind if these three were fit together then Pakistan would be a real force. With today's schedules though, it may be asking too much.

Ntini is an exception to the rule and somehow his body seems to be indestructible although it was abundantly clear that, at Cape Town, he was exhausted. Steyn, who had been injured earlier in the Indian series, provided pace and took vital wickets at the end and by contrast Asif almost needed a wheelchair to get to the crease by the end, such had been his workload.

Lessons learnt

1. Never again must two countries agree to these torturous schedules, especially before the World Cup.

2. Players have to be completely match-fit in order to play Test cricket.

3. Pakistan need to create bouncier faster-paced pitches if they want to succeed abroad.

4. South Africa they need to look at the preparation of their pitches if they are to produce more batsmen of Kallis's pedigree.

The pitches were bowler-friendly throughout and Newlands in Cape Town has a lot of off-season maintenance ahead in order to bring the ground back to where it was. I say this remembering the bowler-friendly pitches at the Wanderers and Trent Bridge. Transvaal and Nottinghamshire used the conditions to win trophies with great bowling attacks, but eventually it cost their sides dear as their batsmen began to struggle.

And finally

I believe that Pakistan and India are improving on bouncier surfaces. Pakistan showed steel, competed harder than ever before and with more focus on weaknesses they will soon test southern hemisphere nations and eventually beat them.

Ultimately, it was a fascinating and competitive series. It will serve both teams well at the World Cup to have had a contest like this where all games could have finished differently and the result was never a forgone conclusion. This is what Test cricket is about.

Herschelle Gibbs: will miss one Test, one Twenty20 and one ODI © AFP

Telford Vice

There are times when the International Cricket Council deserves nothing so much as a smack around the head. The ICC's handling of the Gibbs saga was not one of those times.

Of course, the suits can't be expected to get everything right, and there was some messiness in the form of Gibbs' ban being tweaked to include a Twenty20 game in the guise of a one-day international.

But the dismissal of his appeal should engender confidence in all who care about the game - and about its place in the modern world - that the ICC is capable of making the right decision on important matters.

Might Gibbs have appealed at all had his offence not fallen under level three of the code of conduct, which brought race into the equation? Part of this regulation governs "any language or gestures that offends, insults, humiliates, intimidates, threatens, disparages or vilifies another person on the basis of that person's race, religion, colour, descent or national or ethic origin".

Quite how Gibbs and his representatives came to the opinion that calling Pakistani supporters a "fucking bunch of fucking animals" and telling them to "fuck off back to the zoo" was not a violation of the above would surely boggle greater minds than mine.

Richie Benaud saw matters differently to Gibbs and the original charges stuck. Just as importantly, Benaud took pains not to brand Gibbs a racist. Which would seem to mean that it was Gibbs' crime - and not Gibbs himself - that was the target of the action the ICC took.

Semantics? Not if you have, as Benaud would seem to do, an understanding of South Africa's murky race politics. For a start, some South Africans would describe Gibbs as black. Others would call him coloured, which is probably what he calls himself.

Still others will label him a Khoisan, and another bunch will refuse to classify him. The truly weird will refer to Gibbs as a so-called coloured, and make little quotation marks in the air with their index fingers as they do so.

But Gibbs' race is irrelevant in all this. It's the race of the target of his words that matters, and they were plainly Asian or of Asian descent.

In those terms, who can be surprised that Gibbs' epithets pushed all the wrong buttons of the people who heard them when they were broadcast live courtesy of the stump microphones?

Speaking of which, Benaud, of course, has an intimate knowledge of cricketing life on both sides of the mike. "If you do not use the words they do not get to air," was his bulletproof advice. If this needs reinforcement, and it shouldn't, here it is: the stump mike did not say anything, Herschelle Gibbs did.

Take a bow, Mr Benaud. Not forgetting Chris Broad, the match referee whose findings were vindicated. Amazing, isn't it, what a couple of sensible blokes can achieve.