Four takeaways for South Africa from Test series: Trouble with spin and overdependence on de Villiers

After ODI and T20I series wins to start the tour, the World No 1 in Tests — South Africa — were sent brought down to earth as India bounced back in style to outclass them in the Test series. The Proteas finally had their nine-year unbeaten streak away from home broken as they lost the series 3-0. While all the talk revolved around the pitch, South Africa were thoroughly outclassed in the series and being in the transformation stage, this defeat will be a huge learning curve for the Proteas.
Here are Firstpost's takeaways about the South African team from the Test series.
Blown away by spin:
Underprepared, clueless, battered are some of the terms that can be associated with the South Africa batsmen against India's spinners in this Test series. Even before the series started, South Africa knew what was coming at them when Faf du Plessis described it as the 'hardest challenge' and said, "We are expecting the ball to spin on day one, you expect it and then you plan for it."

However, despite du Plessis' words, the South African batsmen lacked planning and against Indian spinners they seemed like rabbits in headlights. Sixty-one of 69 South African wickets fell to spin in the series as the Indian spinners had their best series ever with a stunning average of 11.93 at a strike rate of 34.8 with six five-fers including a ten-fer.
This is not the first time they have struggled against quality spin bowling. Last year, against Sri Lanka, 28 of their 33 wickets fell to the spinners of Sri Lanka, and each wicket produced an average of only 29.53 runs in comparison to Sri Lanka's 60.33. In a rain-hit series against Bangladesh, they averaged a mediocre 32 with six of the 10 batsmen getting out to spin. In the last two years (since January 2014) South Africa (among the top eight nations) have averaged the least against spinners — 25.18, giving away 10 five-wicket hauls, the most by any team.
Bavuma, Abbott, Piedt positives for South Africa:
Amidst the gloom, there were a few bright spots for South Africa. Being in a transformational phase, the performance of Temba Bavuma, Kyle Abbott and Dane Piedt would have given them a lot of confidence ahead of the England series at home. Following consistent failures of Stiaan Van Zyl up the order, 25-year-old Bavuma was handed one of his hardest tests — that of opening the batting with Dean Elgar in Delhi. With the South African batsmen struggling to apply themselves, Bavuma showed great maturity and adapted to the situation very well in only his fifth Test. This was his first time as an opener, usually batting at five or six, but after being asked to kick off the innings, he impressed with his application. In the first innings, he showed solidity and made a restrained 22, unlike Van Zyl who looked totally clueless throughout the series. In the second innings, he started off the blockathon playing out 117 deliveries for his 34. "That was the toughest piece of batting I've had to do in my life," Bavuma said after the fourth day's play in Delhi, adding, "The toughest part is when I have to against my natural instinct, which is to score runs. Here, the main thing is time. It's not the runs and batting time is quite tough."
It might have been just two innings, but Bavuma managed to look better than most experienced batsmen in the side and he deserves to get more chances going ahead.
This series might prove to be the breakthrough point for Abbott who has had a start-stop career so far. He made his Test debut two years ago in February 2013, against Pakistan where he ended up with seven wickets in the match but here he was playing in just his fourth Test in Bengaluru. A perennial 'injury replacement' bowler, this time too Abbott was drafted into the side with Dale Steyn and Vernon Philander suffering injuries. He bowled with aggression and great heart in the last Test and ended up with a five-fer in the first innings of the Delhi Test. He showed that he can be dangerous with the new as well as the old ball, used reverse-swing to good effect and demonstrated that he can bowl on any kind of surface. With Philander ruled out of the first two Tests against England, this is the best chance for Abbott to seal his place once and for all in the South African starting eleven.
Another positive for South Africa was the performance of Dane Piedt. Piedt would have considered himself unlucky to miss out on first three Tests after an impressive debut last year where he scalped eight wickets against Zimbabwe. He, however, took his chance when presented with the opportunity in the last Test. He took a four-fer in the first innings and looked the most threatening South Africa spinner. His performance, however, dipped in the second innings and he went wicket-less. But with the variations and discipline he possesses, he seems to be one for the future for the Proteas.
Lack of quality and inexperience of spinners cost South Africa:
One of the major factors why England won the series in India in 2012 was the quality of their spinners — Graeme Swann and Monty Panesar. The duo ripped through the Indian batting line-up because of their accuracy and consistency.
In this series, the major difference between the Indian and South African spinners was the consistency and accuracy. Ravindra Jadeja, Ravichandran Ashwin and Amit Mishra were immaculate with their lines and lengths and that helped build the pressure. On the other hand, Simon Harmer and Tahir gave away too many gift-balls and were inconsistent with their lines and lengths. South Africa were always going to bank on their pacers to deliver the goods, but injuries to Steyn, Philander and Morkel (who missed the first Test), meant that the spinners needed to step up big time.
However, they were overawed by the occasion and in comparison to the Indian spinners who averaged 11.93 at a strike rate of 34.8, they averaged 26.76 at a strike rate of 50.5. Piedt, Harmer and Tahir showed promise but in patches. Somewhere down the line, the inexperience of the spinners was visible. Before the start of the series, Simon Harmer had played just two Tests, Piedt just one and Imran Tahir, who made his comeback to the Test side after a gap of nine months, just 16. They were also helped by some poor shot-making from the Indian batsmen. However, this could prove to be a good learning curve for them going forward.
Overdependence on AB de Villiers:
He can bat in any conditions, on any track, against any bowler and against any opposition. On difficult tracks and conditions, where most South African batsmen were found wanting on this tour, de Villiers showed his class and genius, and the Test series was no different. He ended up as the second highest run-getter in the series behind Ajinkya Rahane (266) wih 258 runs at 36.85. While the others looked like dead ducks against the spinners, de Villiers was the only one who looked somewhat assured.
He was the only South African batsman to hit a 50-plus score — twice — in the series. From plundering runs at will in limited overs to dead-batting almost everything in the last innings of the series, de Villiers showed his versatility and adaptability in different situations. He almost defied India with a defiant 297-ball innings for 43 in the second innings at Feroz Shah Kotla where he batted 354 minutes, unflustered.
The other batsmen did put up a fight in the final innings of the Test series, but it was like arriving at a wedding with only scraps of food remaining. Throughout the series, de Villiers needed support from the other end but no one put his hand up. He was the only South African batsman to average above 30. The next best average was 28 — by Bavuma, who played just one Test. Apart from these two, none of the South African players averaged above 20, and nine out of 16 batsmen in the squad had an average in single figures.
On this tour, de Villiers hit a brilliant 112 on a difficult track in Chennai but South Africa still lost the match. What this series and tour showed is that, de Villiers can't single-handedly win matches and he requires support. South Africa paid the price for being overdependent on de Villiers.