Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[justforkix]

The big learning from this series for India should be that our spinners have to be attacking. With most teams in the world quite weak against quality spin (loop, flight), there should be no place for an economical spinner like Bhajji in the Indian team if we want to improve in ODIs. MK is an attacking bowler. PC also seems to be. Perhaps this Ojha guy is too. Until Bhajji decides to be an attacking bowler, he can play 1st class and county cricket.

[LosingNow]

The big learning from this series for India should be that our spinners have to be attacking. With most teams in the world quite weak against quality spin (loop, flight), there should be no place for an economical spinner like Bhajji in the Indian team if we want to improve in ODIs. MK is an attacking bowler. PC also seems to be. Perhaps this Ojha guy is too. Until Bhajji decides to be an attacking bowler, he can play 1st class and county cricket.

Agree..
something about Bhajji.. he did so well in the T20.. and just flattered to deceive here. Looks like .. when one drops him...he becomes attacking and the moment his place is secure, he falls back to his defensive motto.
He really is doing a great amount of injustice to his talent.. oh, I wish he bowled like his debut series - with zero expectations and clear mind.

[inoc]

i think the title of the thread should be

MAULING MIRACLE at MUMBAI

 

[amit_c]

The big learning from this series for India should be that our spinners have to be attacking. With most teams in the world quite weak against quality spin (loop, flight), there should be no place for an economical spinner like Bhajji in the Indian team if we want to improve in ODIs. MK is an attacking bowler. PC also seems to be. Perhaps this Ojha guy is too. Until Bhajji decides to be an attacking bowler, he can play 1st class and county cricket.

Agree..
something about Bhajji.. he did so well in the T20.. and just flattered to deceive here. Looks like .. when one drops him...he becomes attacking and the moment his place is secure, he falls back to his defensive motto.
He really is doing a great amount of injustice to his talent.. oh, I wish he bowled like his debut series - with zero expectations and clear mind.

WN,

Bhajji's change of attitude has more to do with the legacy of the Indian board/selectors than anyone else. It is
a terribly lopsided risk/reward scenario, which makes people mortally afraid of being dropped. Players do ANYTHING
to not be excluded from the side, and Bhajji's defensive bowling ensures that his resume is padded just enough.
What if he attacks for a couple of games, and gets the daylights hit out of him ?

Traditionally, if you are not in the topmost echelon, being recalled to the Indian team is a complete crapshoot.
Inane assurances of the selectors about "going back to basics" notwithstanding, Bhajji knows that pretty
well. So, he is just managing his career. It is frustrating for sure, but we cannot simply blame him for that.

By the way, this is one of the things Greg Chappell did/tried to address - he wanted a system where people
didn't feel that being dropped from the national team was the end of their career, and they always have a
realistic chance of getting back if they performed well. Up until that is done, we will always end up with more
Bhajji's at similar stages of their careers.

[OldPal]

i think the title of the thread should be

MAULING MIRACLE at MUMBAI

 

Amen to Wish1

[dhruvdeepak]

i thought it was BRILLIANT of kartik to say he did edge the ball. fairly cheap of ramiz to ask him in the first place. it was like rubbing salt in the wounds for the aussies.
and if you noticed, today's win took the sheen of their series triumph. they were all so glum - symonds was almost pissed off at being man of the series. what a prick he is in anycase

[OldPal]

ICC ODI Rankings
=============
1. Australia        128
2. South Africa   124
3. New Zealand  114
4. India             109         
5. Sri Lanka       108
6. Pakistan        108               
7. England         107   
8. West Indies    102

We are now back to #4 

Ya .. Just couple of points away from No 7

[Vick]

The big learning from this series for India should be that our spinners have to be attacking. With most teams in the world quite weak against quality spin (loop, flight), there should be no place for an economical spinner like Bhajji in the Indian team if we want to improve in ODIs. MK is an attacking bowler. PC also seems to be. Perhaps this Ojha guy is too. Until Bhajji decides to be an attacking bowler, he can play 1st class and county cricket.

Agree..
something about Bhajji.. he did so well in the T20.. and just flattered to deceive here. Looks like .. when one drops him...he becomes attacking and the moment his place is secure, he falls back to his defensive motto.
He really is doing a great amount of injustice to his talent.. oh, I wish he bowled like his debut series - with zero expectations and clear mind.

well even in 20-20 he was defensive. Just look at the number of wickets he picked in comparision to other spinners like Denial and Afridi.

[Cover Point]

Play out the overs.. that was the mantra...nice job by the tail for playing it out... bravo, boys.

The Maharathis fail.. but the newrathi - RU and the gutsy tail delivers.

The Maharathis haven't failed. SG was the victim of laws of average. SRT did reasonably well......and RD didn't play at all. It was a low-score match anyway.................for bigger scores you will still need the Maharathis.

Bigger scores ... Maharathi SG plays ..... Scores real slow ... we lose.

Smaller scores ... harder pitch ... Maharathi SG fails... we almost lose.

I did not expect Blwe to agree with me about the uselessness of SG in ODI's. Wow. You provided so much material to my other thread about the real value of SG.

[LosingNow]

The big learning from this series for India should be that our spinners have to be attacking. With most teams in the world quite weak against quality spin (loop, flight), there should be no place for an economical spinner like Bhajji in the Indian team if we want to improve in ODIs. MK is an attacking bowler. PC also seems to be. Perhaps this Ojha guy is too. Until Bhajji decides to be an attacking bowler, he can play 1st class and county cricket.

Agree..
something about Bhajji.. he did so well in the T20.. and just flattered to deceive here. Looks like .. when one drops him...he becomes attacking and the moment his place is secure, he falls back to his defensive motto.
He really is doing a great amount of injustice to his talent.. oh, I wish he bowled like his debut series - with zero expectations and clear mind.

WN,

Bhajji's change of attitude has more to do with the legacy of the Indian board/selectors than anyone else. It is
a terribly lopsided risk/reward scenario, which makes people mortally afraid of being dropped. Players do ANYTHING
to not be excluded from the side, and Bhajji's defensive bowling ensures that his resume is padded just enough.
What if he attacks for a couple of games, and gets the daylights hit out of him ?

Traditionally, if you are not in the topmost echelon, being recalled to the Indian team is a complete crapshoot.
Inane assurances of the selectors about "going back to basics" notwithstanding, Bhajji knows that pretty
well. So, he is just managing his career. It is frustrating for sure, but we cannot simply blame him for that.

By the way, this is one of the things Greg Chappell did/tried to address - he wanted a system where people
didn't feel that being dropped from the national team was the end of their career, and they always have a
realistic chance of getting back if they performed well. Up until that is done, we will always end up with more
Bhajji's at similar stages of their careers.

BINGO!!! You have nailed the root cause. Quite insightful and well articulated. Applause.
--
Explains the behavior of many (established) players in the team.
--
I was thinking about this odd behavior - how come the aussies are able to rotate players (including someone like Hayden, Haddin, Gilchrist, Lee) without batting an eyelid and for us even "resting" a player is like pulling teeth without surgery. The answer was as you pointed out - self-preservation, insecurity and the huge part played by luck or element of chance. Once you are out, you could be gone for good.

So here is a thought on the solution .. we as a country play about 110-120 days of cricket in a year - say that is approx 40-50 ODIs + 14-15 Tests a year.  Maybe in the contract of each player, BCCI should stipulate that you are contracted to play a maximum of 70(say about 60% of the total cricket) days of international cricket in a year  (which for a regular TEST & ODI player like SRT would translate into 8 Tests (2 major series) and 30 ODIS) without reducing the pay.
I think this will solve a lot of issues:
1. Players will stop complaining about excessive cricket..and will have time for families and other commercial ventures.
2. Selectors will be able to plan out their selections based on the annual calendar and will not have to worry about this "resting"/"dropping" business. They will not have to worry about sending the SRT/RD/SG's of the world to BD tour..knowing that they will be used for some of the other important tours like Pak at home and Aus away. Alternatively, they may send RD to England and Aus tours (where he is much valuable in the swinging conditions) but not play him against Pak at home etc etc
3. More players will get a chance to play and eventually the team will develop a good bench strength..and who knows this approach may eventually lead to the death of this maharathi culture which is the bane of our system
4. It will provide the job security to all the performers and enable them to perform to the best of their ability and the team's needs...and eliminate the behavior you have described above
5. It will also allow players to go back to domestics and play there ..help their teams, the domestic talent, fine-tune their skills etc
6. The sponsors will also be aware that players are on international duty for a certain max # of days, and will accept the non-selection of certain maharathis for each and every tour/game...because the expectation is clearly defined upfront

What do you think? good idea or a dumb idea? If it is good, can this be implemented in Indian cricket? What do you think are the potential roadblocks? Did I miss any other corollary benefits or obvious drawbacks?

[LosingNow]

The big learning from this series for India should be that our spinners have to be attacking. With most teams in the world quite weak against quality spin (loop, flight), there should be no place for an economical spinner like Bhajji in the Indian team if we want to improve in ODIs. MK is an attacking bowler. PC also seems to be. Perhaps this Ojha guy is too. Until Bhajji decides to be an attacking bowler, he can play 1st class and county cricket.

Agree..
something about Bhajji.. he did so well in the T20.. and just flattered to deceive here. Looks like .. when one drops him...he becomes attacking and the moment his place is secure, he falls back to his defensive motto.
He really is doing a great amount of injustice to his talent.. oh, I wish he bowled like his debut series - with zero expectations and clear mind.

well even in 20-20 he was defensive. Just look at the number of wickets he picked in comparision to other spinners like Denial and Afridi.

True, I guess he can still contribute in 20-20 by being defensive.
--
BTW, I thought MSD's actions today clearly demonstrated that he was not happy with HS.. did you notice that?

[inoc]

WN

There are two problems i can see which might make this impossible to implement.

1. there are usually 4-5 core players in any team. you would not want to be playing without them. your suggestion of not playing against BD is good but a series against them will come once in two years at best. there are no other teams against which we can drop the best players. as an example if you choose a player like flintoff, of course when fit and playing well, you will not want to be without him because the entire balance of the team depends on him.

2. although we play round the year test cricket - our domestic season is not all year round. a rested player may just sit twiddling his thumbs when no domestic cricket is being played - which in turn may be detrimental to his form (even the aussies looked jaded in the T20 after a break).

added problems like replacing specialist players (in form openers, all rounders, as well as captains) may alter the dynamics of he team in a major way.
the aussies do rotate but they rotate their peripheral players only (unless somebody opts out) they dont replace AG,RP,MH nor did they rotate GM/SW.

[Cover Point]

WN

There are two problems i can see which might make this impossible to implement.

1. there are usually 4-5 core players in any team. you would not want to be playing without them. your suggestion of not playing against BD is good but a series against them will come once in two years at best. there are no other teams against which we can drop the best players. as an example if you choose a player like flintoff, of course when fit and playing well, you will not want to be without him because the entire balance of the team depends on him.

2. although we play round the year test cricket - our domestic season is not all year round. a rested player may just sit twiddling his thumbs when no domestic cricket is being played - which in turn may be detrimental to his form (even the aussies looked jaded in the T20 after a break).

added problems like replacing specialist players (in form openers, all rounders, as well as captains) may alter the dynamics of he team in a major way.
the aussies do rotate but they rotate their peripheral players only (unless somebody opts out) they dont replace AG,RP,MH nor did they rotate GM/SW.

So change the domestic setup too and play domestics all year round.  Our weather is fine enough (if it is fine for international cricket it is fine for domestics)

[kban1]

Bhajji's change of attitude has more to do with the legacy of the Indian board/selectors than anyone else. It is a terribly lopsided risk/reward scenario, which makes people mortally afraid of being dropped. Players do ANYTHING to not be excluded from the side, and Bhajji's defensive bowling ensures that his resume is padded just enough. What if he attacks for a couple of games, and gets the daylights hit out of him ?

Traditionally, if you are not in the topmost echelon, being recalled to the Indian team is a complete crapshoot. Inane assurances of the selectors about "going back to basics" notwithstanding, Bhajji knows that pretty well. So, he is just managing his career. It is frustrating for sure, but we cannot simply blame him for that.

Excellent points 

By the way, this is one of the things Greg Chappell did/tried to address - he wanted a system where people didn't feel that being dropped from the national team was the end of their career, and they always have a realistic chance of getting back if they performed well.

Yes, Greg really epitomized this principle.

He also invented the wheel, how to make fire, the IC engine and pasteurization. 

[LosingNow]

WN

There are two problems i can see which might make this impossible to implement.

1. there are usually 4-5 core players in any team. you would not want to be playing without them. your suggestion of not playing against BD is good but a series against them will come once in two years at best. there are no other teams against which we can drop the best players. as an example if you choose a player like flintoff, of course when fit and playing well, you will not want to be without him because the entire balance of the team depends on him.

2. although we play round the year test cricket - our domestic season is not all year round. a rested player may just sit twiddling his thumbs when no domestic cricket is being played - which in turn may be detrimental to his form (even the aussies looked jaded in the T20 after a break).

added problems like replacing specialist players (in form openers, all rounders, as well as captains) may alter the dynamics of he team in a major way.
the aussies do rotate but they rotate their peripheral players only (unless somebody opts out) they dont replace AG,RP,MH nor did they rotate GM/SW.

Good points..

My thoughts ..

1. I think, given the size of our cricketing population(which in some sense is our competitive advantage vis a vis an Australia or any other country), we can have a bench strength of 3-4 players for each position..and a "core" of 12-13 players. It really is a #s game.. we have enough talent, we need to nurture them and give them the opportunity..to get the right quality. I fully understand that this will not happen in 1 year .. it will take 4-5 years for us to get there (and maybe BCCI can start the contract stipulation with a max of 80% of games in year 1 and scale it down to 60% over 5 years)..they just need to start moving in that direction.

2. We play domestic cricket from October till April. Except for England tour (which happens once in 4 years) and the  odd ODI tournament - we mostly do not play international cricket from May through September. So the players are mostly idle during the summer (unless they play county cricket). The probability of somebody twiddling their thumbs is only when they are not selected for the England tour or those odd ODI tournaments.

My objective is not to just copy the Aussies here.. it is to go one step beyond the Aussies and use our size as a competitive advantage. Dont get me wrong, we will need all kinds of infrastructure and support system to pull this off.

[prfsr]

There is another solution -- I know it is totally unacceptable to free-market theorists. Simply regulate the money coming in and distribute it more evenly among 50 probables. Then people will be less keen to play every match. In fact reduce the money going to national team players as well.

The money saved can be used to make academies and infrastructure. This is closer to the Australian model than our current model, as well. However, we do not want to emulate that part of the Aussies.

I think Harbhajan has enough money that if he does not earn a dime after today, he will have earned more than the lifetime earnings of the best-paid IIT/IISC/University professor in India. Ditto for Dhoni and the rest. If you do not like professors, think of the space scientists at ISRO or teaching doctors at your favorite hospital.

-P

[LosingNow]

There is another solution -- I know it is totally unacceptable to free-market theorists. Simply regulate the money coming in and distribute it more evenly among 50 probables. Then people will be less keen to play every match. In fact reduce the money going to national team players as well.

The money saved can be used to make academies and infrastructure. This is closer to the Australian model than our current model, as well. However, we do not want to emulate that part of the Aussies.

I think Harbhajan has enough money that if he does not earn a dime after today, he will have earned more than the lifetime earnings of the best-paid IIT/IISC/University professor in India. Ditto for Dhoni and the rest. If you do not like professors, think of the space scientists at ISRO or teaching doctors at your favorite hospital.

-P

I have the greatest respect for teachers, professors, space scientists.. I believe they are under-appreciated/under-recognized/under-paid..
..but why should not a Bhajji maximize his earnings from his talent and/or skills. He is not stealing from anyone or doing anything illegal! Anyway, we should prob discuss this in another thread.

[prfsr]

There is another solution -- I know it is totally unacceptable to free-market theorists. Simply regulate the money coming in and distribute it more evenly among 50 probables. Then people will be less keen to play every match. In fact reduce the money going to national team players as well.

The money saved can be used to make academies and infrastructure. This is closer to the Australian model than our current model, as well. However, we do not want to emulate that part of the Aussies.

I think Harbhajan has enough money that if he does not earn a dime after today, he will have earned more than the lifetime earnings of the best-paid IIT/IISC/University professor in India. Ditto for Dhoni and the rest. If you do not like professors, think of the space scientists at ISRO or teaching doctors at your favorite hospital.

-P

I have the greatest respect for teachers, professors, space scientists.. I believe they are under-appreciated/under-recognized/under-paid..
..but why should not a Bhajji maximize his earnings from his talent and/or skills. He is not stealing from anyone or doing anything illegal! Anyway, we should prob discuss this in another thread.

Well WN, I am sure you pay income tax. Is it because your income is stolen? You pay sales tax on top of that. Your money goes to support the society you live in.

Also your company does not distribute all its profits to employees. A part of that goes towards making sure that the company does well in future.

Since it is your opinion that the BCCI company is doing spectacularly badly, would it not make sense to reduce salaries and improve infrastructure?

As far as being underpaid goes, who, other than cricket players in India are properly appreciated? I am leaving out self-employed people (incl movie stars) since they are not a state-sponsored team.

-P

Anyway, you are right, the free-market myth probably merits a separate thread.

 

[inoc]

There is another solution -- I know it is totally unacceptable to free-market theorists. Simply regulate the money coming in and distribute it more evenly among 50 probables. Then people will be less keen to play every match. In fact reduce the money going to national team players as well.

The money saved can be used to make academies and infrastructure. This is closer to the Australian model than our current model, as well. However, we do not want to emulate that part of the Aussies.

I think Harbhajan has enough money that if he does not earn a dime after today, he will have earned more than the lifetime earnings of the best-paid IIT/IISC/University professor in India. Ditto for Dhoni and the rest. If you do not like professors, think of the space scientists at ISRO or teaching doctors at your favorite hospital.

-P

in other words reduce the difference in earnings for an international and a domestic player. that will do the job.
unfortunately it will take away the incentive to reach that higher goal as well.

an important example in that regard. the english county system. other than national recognition, financially it was not much different to remain indifferent (lazy) and continue to play for the county for long periods of time. financially stable the impetus to achieve greater status was not there for years. people like Nasser Hussain highlighted it in their autobiographies and the central contracts brought in now tried to achieve this financial discrepancy (in the absence of commercial incentives) so that players strive to do better. it is already producing results in 5 years or so.

[achutank]

ICC ODI Rankings
=============
1. Australia        128
2. South Africa   124
3. New Zealand  114
4. India             109         
5. Sri Lanka       108
6. Pakistan        108               
7. England         107   
8. West Indies    102

We are now back to #4 

Ya .. Just couple of points away from No 7

STILL WAITING FOR THE SORRY , ON THE THREAD  PT SIR

[Libran]

Yes, Greg really epitomized this principle.

He also invented the wheel, how to make fire, the IC engine and pasteurization. 

Wheel...yes...and it is working well and has come one full cycle
how to make fire ...he did set it up but the flames have fortunately been doused, Rajan Bala and PP not withstanding
IC (Ian Chappell) engine ... Has started whirring up pro-India,pro-SG sentiments, of late
pasteurization ... viruses and harmful elements have been eliminated... is now busy with a "still-born" ICL and pouring  venom on the current Chairman of Selection Committee

[broadbat]

                    Murali’s ‘Mumbai Magic’

There is an email joke doing the rounds and a small portion of it goes thus. An eagle is sitting very high up on a tree doing nothing. A rabbit comes hopping along and on spotting the eagle asks if it too can sit under the tree and do nothing. ‘Sure why not’ says the eagle and the rabbit does just that. A fox comes by, pounces upon and eats the rabbit. The moral of the story being that if you want to sit on the ground doing nothing you better be very, very high up on a tree. Rahul Dravid having just recently come down from such a high perch found to his discomfiture that he was not in the playing XI on the morning of the game, most likely the decision fueled by the fact that he was doing nothing.
When Australia won the toss and batted, many of us may have silently kissed away this game a goodbye, the early wicket of Clarke notwithstanding. However that there was magic in air was evident from the pitch. The ball seemed to have a life of its own and very rarely did the bowlers bidding. A combined total of 36 wides in the match tells the whole story and let us not even get started on the extras, 69!
It was the sort of wicket that people would hesitate to use even for a Test match for fear of organizers having to refund 3rd, 4th and 5th day proceeds back to the paying public to avoid litigation, let alone an ODI.
Predictably on such a track the batsmen were all at sea and it ultimately boiled down to who wanted it more. It was a game where the inadequacies of Harbajan as a spinner were further exposed by Kartik in his magical spell. Flight and loop are as much a part of a spinner’s repertoire as is the wand for a magician. Three close in catchers on the off side for Kartik and your memories could easily be forgiven for drifting back to the glory days of Indian spin. It was mesmerizing stuff and to watch the World Champions being bowled out under 200 with more than 8 overs to spare, c’mon where was all this before this game?
However when the Indian chase began the fans were quickly made aware that it may not be a one man show after all. The Aussie quicks were menacing and at times unplayable. The less said about the early Indian effort the better and at 64-6 it seemed the only job left was to call the undertakers.
Robin Uthappa seems these days to offer to the public his own version of a personal guarantee. It seems to suggest ‘A forty when you need it’. Not credited with having the technique to play against the moving ball he seemed the most comfortable and confident at the crease. He put the first worry lines on Aussie foreheads out in the field. We hope he will soon upgrade his guarantee to, ‘A fifty when you need it’ and take it further from there in future.
The Aussies however are ruthless when it comes to putting down an opponent and at 143-8 the people were wondering what was taking the undertaker so long. However in walked the magician himself, this time with the ‘wand’ in his hand and what followed was a partnership of pure simple magic worth 52 priceless runs.
Zaheer Khan more than made up for his dropped catch with an innings with the bat that many knew he was always capable off but rarely conjured up for his team.
In the end the Aussies will realize that this was Mumbai Magic, something that even Copperfield would find difficult to recreate.

[amit_c]

Bhajji's change of attitude has more to do with the legacy of the Indian board/selectors than anyone else. It is a terribly lopsided risk/reward scenario, which makes people mortally afraid of being dropped. Players do ANYTHING to not be excluded from the side, and Bhajji's defensive bowling ensures that his resume is padded just enough. What if he attacks for a couple of games, and gets the daylights hit out of him ?

Traditionally, if you are not in the topmost echelon, being recalled to the Indian team is a complete crapshoot. Inane assurances of the selectors about "going back to basics" notwithstanding, Bhajji knows that pretty well. So, he is just managing his career. It is frustrating for sure, but we cannot simply blame him for that.

Excellent points 

By the way, this is one of the things Greg Chappell did/tried to address - he wanted a system where people didn't feel that being dropped from the national team was the end of their career, and they always have a realistic chance of getting back if they performed well.

Yes, Greg really epitomized this principle.

He also invented the wheel, how to make fire, the IC engine and pasteurization. 

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this
problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to
the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame
with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during
his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing
particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

[keep-it-cool]

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this
problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to
the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame
with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during
his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing
particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

I agree. A lot of issues that GC outlined were genuine issues and we are not any closer to getting answers / resolving them even now.

[kban1]

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

Articulating a problem and yet not doing anything to change them, especially the issues that were within his direct control tantamounts to paying lip service to a particular idea and nothing more.

If anything, espousing a lofty ideal in public and acting contrary to the same wrt issues under his direct purview reeks of hypocrisy.

Its not about finding a new villain, its about setting the record straight regarding his actual acts, as contrasted to what he said.

Talk is cheap, actions define a person.

[justforkix]

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this
problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to
the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame
with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during
his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing
particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

I agree. A lot of issues that GC outlined were genuine issues and we are not any closer to getting answers / resolving them even now.

But didn't most of what GC said was just stating the obvious - which almost all serious indian cricket fans already knew. Could he have changed anything - as long as BCCI existed, no. Could he have executed better within bcci constraints - yes.

[Libran]

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this
problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to
the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame
with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during
his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing
particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

I agree. A lot of issues that GC outlined were genuine issues and we are not any closer to getting answers / resolving them even now.

If only he had spent time in getting his hands dirty and dig deeper to find solutions....but, no...he was busy with SMS, emails and playing games with players and their careers and furthering his own academy's cause...
He had the tacit support of a Chairman wh was willing to be wrapped around a finger ...but, all for a single agenda...so let's not bring Chappell and his ideas into these discussions... We needed a Coach not a fly by night Consultant

[Blwe_torch]

Bhajji's change of attitude has more to do with the legacy of the Indian board/selectors than anyone else. It is a terribly lopsided risk/reward scenario, which makes people mortally afraid of being dropped. Players do ANYTHING to not be excluded from the side, and Bhajji's defensive bowling ensures that his resume is padded just enough. What if he attacks for a couple of games, and gets the daylights hit out of him ?

Traditionally, if you are not in the topmost echelon, being recalled to the Indian team is a complete crapshoot. Inane assurances of the selectors about "going back to basics" notwithstanding, Bhajji knows that pretty well. So, he is just managing his career. It is frustrating for sure, but we cannot simply blame him for that.

Excellent points 

By the way, this is one of the things Greg Chappell did/tried to address - he wanted a system where people didn't feel that being dropped from the national team was the end of their career, and they always have a realistic chance of getting back if they performed well.

Yes, Greg really epitomized this principle.

He also invented the wheel, how to make fire, the IC engine and pasteurization. 

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this
problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to
the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame
with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during
his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing
particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

Plz do a reality check. Our team has certainly played much, much better than what it did during Chappel's tenure..........that includes series victories in England, 20-20, etc.

[LosingNow]

There is another solution -- I know it is totally unacceptable to free-market theorists. Simply regulate the money coming in and distribute it more evenly among 50 probables. Then people will be less keen to play every match. In fact reduce the money going to national team players as well.

The money saved can be used to make academies and infrastructure. This is closer to the Australian model than our current model, as well. However, we do not want to emulate that part of the Aussies.

I think Harbhajan has enough money that if he does not earn a dime after today, he will have earned more than the lifetime earnings of the best-paid IIT/IISC/University professor in India. Ditto for Dhoni and the rest. If you do not like professors, think of the space scientists at ISRO or teaching doctors at your favorite hospital.

-P

I have the greatest respect for teachers, professors, space scientists.. I believe they are under-appreciated/under-recognized/under-paid..
..but why should not a Bhajji maximize his earnings from his talent and/or skills. He is not stealing from anyone or doing anything illegal! Anyway, we should prob discuss this in another thread.

Well WN, I am sure you pay income tax. Is it because your income is stolen? You pay sales tax on top of that. Your money goes to support the society you live in.

Also your company does not distribute all its profits to employees. A part of that goes towards making sure that the company does well in future.

Since it is your opinion that the BCCI company is doing spectacularly badly, would it not make sense to reduce salaries and improve infrastructure?

As far as being underpaid goes, who, other than cricket players in India are properly appreciated? I am leaving out self-employed people (incl movie stars) since they are not a state-sponsored team.

-P

Anyway, you are right, the free-market myth probably merits a separate thread.

Yeah.. I pay taxes, see the role of the government in certain activities, would love to discuss free-market myth vs reality with you in a separate thread.
--
The BCCI spends only 13% of its revenues on international player compensation. It has enough money to spend on infrastructure before it cuts international player salaries and can certainly afford adding more players with such salaries. We have not reached the stage of taking money from player salaries to pay for infrastructure, yet. The pie is not small.. it is huge and is growing. There is enough money to go around.. the problem is not of sufficiency but one of improper use.
Also, don't know what cutting player salaries will achieve ..because a bulk of the income (of key players) comes from endorsements.
On the players making a lot of money vs other professions.. please note that their productive shelf-lives are short (6-10 years as opposed to other professions where people can work for 40-45 years) .. the one-two year earnings comparison between short-life (movies, cricket etc) professions to other long-duration professions is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Having said that, I agree that teachers etc are under paid.. but I believe the reasons for that are different.. which we can discuss on that separate thread.

[Cover Point]

Bhajji's change of attitude has more to do with the legacy of the Indian board/selectors than anyone else. It is a terribly lopsided risk/reward scenario, which makes people mortally afraid of being dropped. Players do ANYTHING to not be excluded from the side, and Bhajji's defensive bowling ensures that his resume is padded just enough. What if he attacks for a couple of games, and gets the daylights hit out of him ?

Traditionally, if you are not in the topmost echelon, being recalled to the Indian team is a complete crapshoot. Inane assurances of the selectors about "going back to basics" notwithstanding, Bhajji knows that pretty well. So, he is just managing his career. It is frustrating for sure, but we cannot simply blame him for that.

Excellent points 

By the way, this is one of the things Greg Chappell did/tried to address - he wanted a system where people didn't feel that being dropped from the national team was the end of their career, and they always have a realistic chance of getting back if they performed well.

Yes, Greg really epitomized this principle.

He also invented the wheel, how to make fire, the IC engine and pasteurization. 

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this
problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to
the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame
with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during
his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing
particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

Plz do a reality check. Our team has certainly played much, much better than what it did during Chappel's tenure..........that includes series victories in England, 20-20, etc.

So series win in WI, since it was during Chappel era, doesnt get any credit? (When SG and Wright failed). 16 wins in a row chasing doesnt get any credit.

We have not been any better after Chappel left. We could not even beat a crappy Pommie team in ODI's.

Its easy to blame everything including the WW2 and the African wars on Chappel for some just because they hated ONE (good) thing he did.

[Blwe_torch]

Bhajji's change of attitude has more to do with the legacy of the Indian board/selectors than anyone else. It is a terribly lopsided risk/reward scenario, which makes people mortally afraid of being dropped. Players do ANYTHING to not be excluded from the side, and Bhajji's defensive bowling ensures that his resume is padded just enough. What if he attacks for a couple of games, and gets the daylights hit out of him ?

Traditionally, if you are not in the topmost echelon, being recalled to the Indian team is a complete crapshoot. Inane assurances of the selectors about "going back to basics" notwithstanding, Bhajji knows that pretty well. So, he is just managing his career. It is frustrating for sure, but we cannot simply blame him for that.

Excellent points 

By the way, this is one of the things Greg Chappell did/tried to address - he wanted a system where people didn't feel that being dropped from the national team was the end of their career, and they always have a realistic chance of getting back if they performed well.

Yes, Greg really epitomized this principle.

He also invented the wheel, how to make fire, the IC engine and pasteurization. 

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this
problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to
the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame
with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during
his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing
particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

Plz do a reality check. Our team has certainly played much, much better than what it did during Chappel's tenure..........that includes series victories in England, 20-20, etc.

So series win in WI, since it was during Chappel era, doesnt get any credit? (When SG and Wright failed). 16 wins in a row chasing doesnt get any credit.

We have not been any better after Chappel left. We could not even beat a crappy Pommie team in ODI's.

Its easy to blame everything including the WW2 and the African wars on Chappel for some just because they hated ONE (good) thing he did.

What, you keep harping on 16 wins everytime?! .......on one hand you complain that SG supporters resort to history in his support............how different are u, when you try to prop up an inadequate coach with some historical figures?! Out of those 16 wins, most of them came at home grounds against a decidedly weak Sri Lanka and England. The better results were against Pak in Pak.
Anyway, GC has proved beyond everything that he was the worst coach to have coached any cricket team.

[amit_c]

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this
problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to
the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame
with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during
his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing
particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

I agree. A lot of issues that GC outlined were genuine issues and we are not any closer to getting answers / resolving them even now.

If only he had spent time in getting his hands dirty and dig deeper to find solutions....but, no...he was busy with SMS, emails and playing games with players and their careers and furthering his own academy's cause...
He had the tacit support of a Chairman wh was willing to be wrapped around a finger ...but, all for a single agenda...so let's not bring Chappell and his ideas into these discussions... We needed a Coach not a fly by night Consultant

Ravi,

Calling Chappell a 'fly by night' consultant is simply incorrect. His work ethic (the man used to put in rather
ungodly hours into his job) was never questioned by anyone, including the players. Compared to his
illustrious (desi) predecessors, the man worked meticulously on technical details of each player in the
team and knew more about up and coming players in India than our samosa-chai drinking selectors.

It is one thing to diasgree with his strategic ideas or particular actions, but questioning the time, effort
and seriousness he put into the job is quite another. An important distinction to make.

[Cover Point]

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this
problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to
the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame
with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during
his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing
particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

I agree. A lot of issues that GC outlined were genuine issues and we are not any closer to getting answers / resolving them even now.

If only he had spent time in getting his hands dirty and dig deeper to find solutions....but, no...he was busy with SMS, emails and playing games with players and their careers and furthering his own academy's cause...
He had the tacit support of a Chairman wh was willing to be wrapped around a finger ...but, all for a single agenda...so let's not bring Chappell and his ideas into these discussions... We needed a Coach not a fly by night Consultant

Ravi,

Calling Chappell a 'fly by night' consultant is simply incorrect. His work ethic (the man used to put in rather
ungodly hours into his job) was never questioned by anyone, including the players. Compared to his
illustrious (desi) predecessors, the man worked meticulously on technical details of each player in the
team and knew more about up and coming players in India than our samosa-chai drinking selectors.

It is one thing to diasgree with his strategic ideas or particular actions, but questioning the time, effort
and seriousness he put into the job is quite another. An important distinction to make.

Your patience is amazing. Isnt it clear that their attacks on GC have nothing to do with his work or ethics but is just about ONE thing he did?

But I am glad you are indulging the likes of Ravi and Blwe. One should never shut anyone out.

[amit_c]

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

Articulating a problem and yet not doing anything to change them, especially the issues that were within his direct control tantamounts to paying lip service to a particular idea and nothing more.

If anything, espousing a lofty ideal in public and acting contrary to the same wrt issues under his direct purview reeks of hypocrisy.

Its not about finding a new villain, its about setting the record straight regarding his actual acts, as contrasted to what he said.

Talk is cheap, actions define a person.

Kban,

I give you (an Indian) about 18 months to bring about a systemic change in the Indian cricket system. Not a
cosmetic one, mind you, but a change which will seriously overhaul the way the national and local politics-
laden BCCI and the selection committee functions. Take the truly shady power-brokering essentially out of
it. Do you think you will be able to get any of it done ? If you are not able to achieve that and yet decide
to talk about it, will you be considered a hypocrite ?

Anyway, I don't wish to get into a Greg Chappell bash/praise fest here. It is rather tiresome. What I do
object to is the reflexive up-in-arms attitude even when he has made a legitimate observation
about why Indian players play defensive cricket in general. It may have been obvious to Indians (actually
I doubt that it is), but surely not to an Australian.

[amit_c]

Plz do a reality check. Our team has certainly played much, much better than what it did during Chappel's tenure..........that includes series victories in England, 20-20, etc.

What reality check ? You seriously think the Indian team is playing much better cricket in the last 6 months ?
We must be watching two very different teams then.

[Blwe_torch]

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

Articulating a problem and yet not doing anything to change them, especially the issues that were within his direct control tantamounts to paying lip service to a particular idea and nothing more.

If anything, espousing a lofty ideal in public and acting contrary to the same wrt issues under his direct purview reeks of hypocrisy.

Its not about finding a new villain, its about setting the record straight regarding his actual acts, as contrasted to what he said.

Talk is cheap, actions define a person.

Kban,

I give you (an Indian) about 18 months to bring about a systemic change in the Indian cricket system. Not a
cosmetic one, mind you, but a change which will seriously overhaul the way the national and local politics-
laden BCCI and the selection committee functions. Take the truly shady power-brokering essentially out of
it. Do you think you will be able to get any of it done ? If you are not able to achieve that and yet decide
to talk about it, will you be considered a hypocrite ?

Anyway, I don't wish to get into a Greg Chappell bash/praise fest here. It is rather tiresome. What I do
object to is the reflexive up-in-arms attitude even when he has made a legitimate observation
about why Indian players play defensive cricket in general. It may have been obvious to Indians (actually
I doubt that it is), but surely not to an Australian.

Hello Amit......I agreed to the bolded part. Unfortunately, most of our better players are on a slump. We are missing Virendra Sehwag badly..........or someone like him. Yes, anyone can see that we are playing defensive cricket. But yet, I personally couldn't digest GC's modus operandi of coaching thru the media/ data-services whatever. We had Bobby Simpson for a while( as a consultant). I wished he had stayed back as a full-timer.

[kingcool1432]

Its easy to blame everything including the WW2 and the African wars on Chappel for some just because they hated ONE (good) thing he did.

Don't be silly. We all know WW2 was Ganguly's fault

[Aloo Kashmiri Ul Haq]

Leaving the specifics of the Ganguly episode and potshots at Greg Chappell aside, he did articulate this problem with our system in various interviews (vis a vis the Australian system, I'd think). I think it goes to the core of the indifferent performances we see over and over again. We have laid a good deal of blame with smug confidence at Chappell's feet  - people like Harbhajan Singh have done it repeatedly during his tenure. Chappell's been gone for over 6 months now. Does anyone think that the team has been playing particularly inspired cricket since ? Perhaps it is time to look for newer villains.

Articulating a problem and yet not doing anything to change them, especially the issues that were within his direct control tantamounts to paying lip service to a particular idea and nothing more.

If anything, espousing a lofty ideal in public and acting contrary to the same wrt issues under his direct purview reeks of hypocrisy.

Its not about finding a new villain, its about setting the record straight regarding his actual acts, as contrasted to what he said.

Talk is cheap, actions define a person.

Kban,

I give you (an Indian) about 18 months to bring about a systemic change in the Indian cricket system. Not a
cosmetic one, mind you, but a change which will seriously overhaul the way the national and local politics-
laden BCCI and the selection committee functions. Take the truly shady power-brokering essentially out of
it. Do you think you will be able to get any of it done ? If you are not able to achieve that and yet decide
to talk about it, will you be considered a hypocrite ?

Anyway, I don't wish to get into a Greg Chappell bash/praise fest here. It is rather tiresome. What I do
object to is the reflexive up-in-arms attitude even when he has made a legitimate observation
about why Indian players play defensive cricket in general. It may have been obvious to Indians (actually
I doubt that it is), but surely not to an Australian.

Hello Amit......I agreed to the bolded part. Unfortunately, most of our better players are on a slump. We are missing Virendra Sehwag badly..........or someone like him. Yes, anyone can see that we are playing defensive cricket. But yet, I personally couldn't digest GC's modus operandi of coaching thru the media/ data-services whatever. We had Bobby Simpson for a while( as a consultant). I wished he had stayed back as a full-timer.

Beware!
Kyunki Shaitan bhi Kabhi Consultant Tha

[amit_c]

Hello Amit......I agreed to the bolded part. Unfortunately, most of our better players are on a slump. We are missing Virendra Sehwag badly..........or someone like him. Yes, anyone can see that we are playing defensive cricket. But yet, I personally couldn't digest GC's modus operandi of coaching thru the media/ data-services whatever. We had Bobby Simpson for a while( as a consultant). I wished he had stayed back as a full-timer.

Blwe,

Entirely respectable players may be in a slump at any point of time - that's just a fact of life. My contention
here is completely different. If Ponting, Hayden, Gilchrist lose form and are dropped for a couple of games, they
wouldn't necessarily fear for their career. They know that they play for an intrinsically consistent and
fair system that will bring them back in if/when they regain their feet. Harbhajan on the other hand, panics when he
gets dropped, simply because he doesn't know if that is it for him. There is essentially no feedback mechanism in this
very very inconsistent system. Bhajji's main objective is to not get dropped. If figures of 10-2-35-0 help him achieve
that, he will continue doing it for match after match. What exactly is the risk/reward ratio of being more
aggressive than that ?

[kban1]

amit_c:

Kban,

I give you (an Indian) about 18 months to bring about a systemic change in the Indian cricket system. Not a
cosmetic one, mind you, but a change which will seriously overhaul the way the national and local politics-
laden BCCI and the selection committee functions. Take the truly shady power-brokering essentially out of
it. Do you think you will be able to get any of it done ? If you are not able to achieve that and yet decide
to talk about it, will you be considered a hypocrite ?

Anyway, I don't wish to get into a Greg Chappell bash/praise fest here. It is rather tiresome. What I do
object to is the reflexive up-in-arms attitude even when he has made a legitimate observation
about why Indian players play defensive cricket in general. It may have been obvious to Indians (actually
I doubt that it is), but surely not to an Australian

You missed my point.

I go into a company and one of my missives is to repair the work culture, I observe that morale / confidence is low due to random hirings and firings. If I point that out, that is the right thing to do -- saying that the company culture needs to change. I present my report to the CEO since not all the changes I prescribe are within my jurisdiction --all very good up until this point.

But then a few cases come about which are within my jurisdiction to solve. And my reaction is to continue in the same method of hiring and firing even in cases over which I have adjudicative responsibilties -- this action on my part then makes my earlier comments and the report to the CEO mere lip service and indicative of hypocrisy.

The above is quite applicable to Greg because he paid lip service to giving security to players in the team (giving them chances, not discarding them and so on). In reality, in cases within his control he displayed quite the opposite --random experimentation, smsing outside reporters and being critical of players and allowing personal ego and vindictiveness to stand in the way of players making a comeback.

Ergo -- public comments were window dressing, lip service; Actions hypocritical.