Print

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

[CLR James]

Greg Chappel is proving himself to be quite an inverted Leninist. Let us look at his recent statement in the light of a continuing musical chair policy adopted by the Indian team in the current series. I am citing a few key statements from the recent oracular pronouncement from Guru Greg posted in another thread.

http://www.cricketvoice.com/cricketforum2/index.php?topic=7864.0

"With the World Cup just round the corner, coach Greg Chappell says there would be no room for emotions when the final squad is picked for the mega event which would call for certain "cold and calculating" decisions."

""We have to be fairly cold and calculating in making decisions and base them on facts than fiction, on knowledge and experience than whether media or general public is going to like it. We have taken some tough decisions and most of them have worked out well."

Which decisions have worked out well? Who is going to be the arbiter of these facts? Coldness of course is Chappel's speciality. The way I look at things, these are the facts:

1. The World Cup is going to be played in the West Indies, and not in the tracks of India which are familiar to the juniors. We might keep a Raina or an Uthappa in the squad, but there will always be a nagging doubt whether they can acquit themselves properly in alien conditions. Raina's performance in the previous WI series leaves us enough reasons to be skeptical. On the other hand, the man who was reasonably successful in the Carribeans last time -- Mohd. Kaif -- still does not feature in the playing squad. The point is, even if we expect these younsgters to deliver when the time comes, no selection committee is going to stick their necks out and field one of these rookies instead of say a Ganguly or an SRT. All 'emotions' and 'facts' will fly out of the window if DB or GC dare to drop an SRT for a RU. This is not just because of the reputation of established players, but because the 'wonder boys' have failed to deliver on their promise. We will thus opt, at the end, for known faces. More so because our ODI record, in the recent past, has been abysmal outside the subcontinent.

2. Hence, the first eleven is already formed in our minds, give or take a couple of names. If one includes the couple of names to the list, we get a 13 man core from which the first eleven will be picked. After all, bench strength in cricket (unlike soccer) really cannot influence the course of a match.

3. The point is then to 'settle' this eleven + two (say VS/RU, or HS/RP), slot them into decided batting positions and let them get into rhythm and form. Give them an extended run, let the dynamic of team play be attuned to their specific skills and limitations. The WC is only six matches away. We do have to put our eggs in the same basket now. Theaters often have back up casts, but it is the first choice actors that appear for the dress rehearsal before the show. But instead, we have chosen to drop Ganguly from the playing eleven despite the fact that he needs as many matches as possible, having returned after such a long hiatus.

4. Why is VS still out of the squad? What about MK? How is he, in the circumstances, not a better bet than Raina? Given SR's abysmal overseas record, even if he scores a run a ball fifty in one of the matches, can one guarantee that in the big stage he will be a better option than even the long forgotten VVS?

5. Why will the team management, instead of making stupid and idle statements like the one projecting Raina as an allrounder, decide on the IP issue once and for all. The Baroda youngster needs to get into the middle immediately if he is to be in the schema of things.

6. The cardinal problem is that these pieties about 'settling/unsettling' notwithstanding, this team management has refused to acknowledge responsibility for players being out of form or not being able to adjust to international cricket. Mr. Greg Chappel should understand one thing: during his tenure our established world class bats like VS and SRT have not only lost form, but show no signs of returning to it. He should also realize that he has failed to produce a single young player in this year and a half (SS apart, which makes me think that GC is a better bowling coach) who has given clear signals of being more than able to displace these so called 'old foggies'. A young team sounds very nice, but the 'fact' is that the young uns had to be dropped because they were persistently scoring in single digits.

7. So if a coach is not able to bring a single player out of form, or develop a single youngster, what good is he? What is he supposed to do, just issue big statements from time to time? What do we expect of him? Why has there been an overall decay? RD averages 55 in tests during the GC period, but we know that that is largely the outcome of two big hundreds in absolutely dead tracks in Pakistan (VS got a 254 in the first one too). If a cricket coach is trying to find a solution for Sachin Tendulkar's batting woes for months and not being able to deliver, he should be fired immediately. It is not just about one or two players, quite a lot of them. One is tempted to think that players like ZK and SG seem to return 'better crickers' precisely because they spend time away from the 'process'. Why does SRT return from injury with a bang everytime and then peter out once he is in the clutches of the process again?

8. Many of GC's defenders in this DG seems to think that any player who fails to perform has to be punished and made to go through a rectification process by being kicked out of the team. Hence, SG went back to the nets in Kolkata under Debu Mitra and Gopal Bose. From what I hear, VS has sought the help of his old coach too. While this is not entirely unjustified, may I ask how does one evaluate the performance of India's coach? Why should he expect get only 'in form' players for team India, and then wash his hands off as sson as he loses form? Remember, this is the management that has done the unprecedented thing of returning players in the middle of the series. During the JW era, we lost or kicked out seniors like Azhar and Sidhu, but got two supreme talents in the form of Sehwag and Laxman. What has Guru Greg given us? During the JW era, our prime batsmen -- RD, VVS, SRT -- entered the best phase of their careers. Why has YS, despite the promise, not been able to lift his averages beyond the early thirties? During the JW era, even young sideshow operators like Deep Dasgupta or Sanjay Bangar produced the ocassional, but memorable gritty knock under pressure in foreign shores. What have Greg's blue eyed boys done?

9. Alll pundits are unanimous in saying that for people like SRT and VS, the problems seem to lie largely in the mind. That is, SRT has not developed polio in his arm, or VS is not seeing three balls at a time. SO if that is true, who is supposed to take care of the 'mind'? Who is resposible for the psychological nourishment of the players, giving them strength and confidence? If one is dealing with talents like SRT and VS, it should be the easiest thing in the world for a batting coach!

10. The musical chair with personnel is accompanied by the see-saw of batting positions. What use is this? If Raina comes in at number three next match and scores a hundred, will he be fielded that high up in lieu of RD/VS, or SRT in a WC match against Australia? The process continues...

[suraj]

Great post again CLR- very good points and issues that have baffled my mind too. I agree with most of the issues and will post more later. I, however, do not agree that all these issues can be squarely blamed on GC alone- that is too easy an escape for the stated problems.

Anyway more later

[CLR James]

Suraj,

I have not blamed GC for all the problems. If you see, I have taken the 'management' to task for somethings. I do, however, feel that the coach has to take a lot of responsibility for players not being able to perform up to potential or return to form.

Now let us see. Some players like VS, HS are said to have failed because of 'attitude problems'. Others like SG and ZK seem to have been mentally lazy. Granted. Now what about SRT? MK? IP? SR? RD himself? Mentally lazy? Arrogant? Slowly turning into 'not so good people'?

We have suffered this BS for too long. It is time Mr. Chappel stands up and shoulders his part of the blame.

[suraj]

Suraj,

I have not blamed GC for all the problems. If you see, I have taken the 'management' to task for somethings. I do, however, feel that the coach has to take a lot of responsibility for players not being able to perform up to potential or return to form.

Now let us see. Some players like VS, HS are said to have failed because of 'attitude problems'. Others like SG and ZK seem to have been mentally lazy. Granted. Now what about SRT? MK? IP? SR? RD himself? Mentally lazy? Arrogant? Slowly turning into 'not so good people'?

We have suffered this BS for too long. It is time Mr. Chappel stands up and shoulders his part of the blame.

CLR,

I agree with you- I had brought some of these issues to the fore here too:

http://www.cricketvoice.com/cricketforum2/index.php?topic=7864.msg103461#msg103461

Your post provides an excellent summary of the frustrations- there is collective fault with coach, management, selctors and players all to be blamed but there are specific areas where the coach definitely has to face all the criticism

To me GC has only proven that at best he is an average coach and at worse a bad one. The hopes of him becoming a trendsetter foreign coach are fast vanishing away.

[sudzz]

CLR great post as usual.

The fact is that BCCI does not have a learning curve it is has learning spiral it is always one step forwards and three back.

I think about two years ago Chappell floored them with a slick PPT and the BCCI thought we will leave the cricket to this man and we will concentrate in playing politics...little did they know that they had brought in not a master tactician but a master politician who effectively managed to destroy the fabric of the team.

The sad thing is that the bozos at BCCI did not realise it till too late and could not do anything even after they realised it.

[kban1]

Insightful post as usual CLR --reflects and summarizes the bewilderment, surprise,and disappointment of many of us.

Applause!

[RicePlateReddy]

I disagree with the general premise here, Sir James. While I am no doubt disappointed with GC and his prejudice especially against Ganguly, I wouldn't blame him for more fundamental woes that rankle our team. I want to highlight my more strident disagreements to some of your points.

"With the World Cup just round the corner, coach Greg Chappell says there would be no room for emotions when the final squad is picked for the mega event which would call for certain "cold and calculating" decisions."

""We have to be fairly cold and calculating in making decisions and base them on facts than fiction, on knowledge and experience than whether media or general public is going to like it. We have taken some tough decisions and most of them have worked out well."

Which decisions have worked out well? Who is going to be the arbiter of these facts? Coldness of course is Chappel's speciality. The way I look at things, these are the facts:

The point that decisions have to be made in a cold and calculated fashion is quite right. While one can question how correct those decisions have been for Chappell, to assess that he is speaking garbage, one needs to come up with a list of decisions that were not cold and calculated. He is saying "remove emotions from the equation". Other than Ganguly's omission that we have hashed to death, he has not been emotional in his thinking as far as I can tell. His point that the media and public should be kept at bay is right - especially from what we have seen of the pusillanimous media, and the public that show up at airports in Orissa!

4. Why is VS still out of the squad? What about MK? How is he, in the circumstances, not a better bet than Raina? Given SR's abysmal overseas record, even if he scores a run a ball fifty in one of the matches, can one guarantee that in the big stage he will be a better option than even the long forgotten VVS?

Excellent questions, but the bearer of responsibility for this has got to be Vengsarkar. GC can weigh in with his input as can RD, but Vengsarkar decides. Perhaps GC was adamant for VS's inclusion but Vengsarkar wasn't. We don't know. Ultimately  when these guys come down to deciding the team, each suggests who they think can pull it off. Each look at the player from a slightly different perspective and are likely to have differing opinions, especially when performances are far from consistent. Kaif has been a major disappointment since Natwest, though admittedly the latest axe has been timed unfortunately. Our problem is our overall medicority of talent and big match temparament. That it not really GC's fault. Nor is it Vengsarkar's as he has barely got started.

6. The cardinal problem is that these pieties about 'settling/unsettling' notwithstanding, this team management has refused to acknowledge responsibility for players being out of form or not being able to adjust to international cricket. Mr. Greg Chappel should understand one thing: during his tenure our established world class bats like VS and SRT have not only lost form, but show no signs of returning to it. He should also realize that he has failed to produce a single young player in this year and a half (SS apart, which makes me think that GC is a better bowling coach) who has given clear signals of being more than able to displace these so called 'old foggies'. A young team sounds very nice, but the 'fact' is that the young uns had to be dropped because they were persistently scoring in single digits.

I disagree that the team management needs to take any responsibility for VS or SRT or RD being out of form. They bend over backwards to accommodate their desires, all three and certainly RD and SRT given how non-controversial and well-liked they are. No one puhsed them to play when they didn't want to. No one refused to step forward to offer words of help when asked about an issue. Their lack of form is their problem and their's alone. These are not some wet behind the ear youngsters who need some guidance from GC. Two of them are arguably in the same category as GC and don't need constant unsolicoted technical advise from him. GC has worked awfully hard with VS. The fact that it hasn't panned out may also indicate that VS sucks. We can't blame the management without knowing all the facts and speaking with VS himself. Does even he think the management should have helped him more?

7. So if a coach is not able to bring a single player out of form, or develop a single youngster, what good is he?

Is that the only things or even part of the top 5 things expected of a coach? What if the senior player has simply lost his abilities/reflexes/speed? What if the youngster was an overhyped chappy who got lucky in the first few matches before the opponents plundered his weaknesses?

If a cricket coach is trying to find a solution for Sachin Tendulkar's batting woes for months and not being able to deliver, he should be fired immediately.

You can't be serious. There is the distinct possibility that Tendulkar is well over the hill yet displays occasional flashes of brilliance.

Why does SRT return from injury with a bang everytime and then peter out once he is in the clutches of the process again?

Do you think SRT will meekly accept the "process" and suffer humiliation as a result if this conclusion is even half true? SRT worships cricket and will not allow an obvious impediment to sully his burning desire of winning the WC. All SRT has to say is that GC needs to move and the Indian public if they get wind of it will manhandle his wife and stone him out of India. If indeed SRT's game is being affected adversely by a coach, SRT will stand up and say this, in private, to the powers that be and there will be change faster than we can imagine. All I have heard of thus far is agreement of SRT with GC's methods.

While this is not entirely unjustified, may I ask how does one evaluate the performance of India's coach?

That is a great question and the answer in my book is deceptively simple. How often did he win? Was there a period of building that he asked patience for, before we can start micro analyzing his win record?

My answer - GC's performance has been spotty with ups and downs. If we win the WC (lot of luck involved for all teams except Australia) he will be worshipped. If we fail to make the finals, he will be vilified. If we make the finals and lose, it will be wash, like it is right now.

During the JW era, we lost or kicked out seniors like Azhar and Sidhu, but got two supreme talents in the form of Sehwag and Laxman. What has Guru Greg given us? During the JW era, our prime batsmen -- RD, VVS, SRT -- entered the best phase of their careers. Why has YS, despite the promise, not been able to lift his averages beyond the early thirties? During the JW era, even young sideshow operators like Deep Dasgupta or Sanjay Bangar produced the ocassional, but memorable gritty knock under pressure in foreign shores. What have Greg's blue eyed boys done?

I thought Wright was a great coach, period. I liked him better than GC. But these comparisons mentioned by you are deceptive.
- VVS was a treasure to behold before he played his first test.
- Sehwag was lucky to get included in the test team and then shone on the main stage. Sehwag has been an enigma - his reflexes and eyes were hailed for all those unorthodox impossible shots. It is not surprising to see him fall off the deep end as these were anomalies to begin with plus he has received world wide scrutiny given his success.
- Dasgupta and Bangar with the occasional gritty knock? What about Dinesh Karthik? None of these have anything to do with the coach!

9. Alll pundits are unanimous in saying that for people like SRT and VS, the problems seem to lie largely in the mind. That is, SRT has not developed polio in his arm, or VS is not seeing three balls at a time. SO if that is true, who is supposed to take care of the 'mind'? Who is resposible for the psychological nourishment of the players, giving them strength and confidence? If one is dealing with talents like SRT and VS, it should be the easiest thing in the world for a batting coach!

A senior batsmen: 90% of the blame is on him; 10% is coach, if the coach is not listening to his requests.
A junior batsman: 80%-20%.

No amount of coaching is going to rectify poor native talent. If we want a witch hunt, let us go after (a) the meaninglessness of the domestics (b) the "Academy" and (c) the selectors in that order.

10. The musical chair with personnel is accompanied by the see-saw of batting positions. What use is this? If Raina comes in at number three next match and scores a hundred, will he be fielded that high up in lieu of RD/VS, or SRT in a WC match against Australia? The process continues...

That I agree with for a change. Playing with the batting order has been ridiculous. GC and RD equally share the blame on this angle. Their joint think tank operations on order have failed so far.

[CLR James]

KoP,

Very well articulated rejoinders to my post. Applause! (I also thank Sudzz, kban, and Suraj). I am sympathetic to many things you are saying, especially what you say about the 'emotions' part. Also, as far as seniors are concerned, coach/management can help only to some extent. But here we are talking about an entire spectrum of events. That raises the bar of skepticism IMO. In other words, when you talk of specific individuals, you can indeed come to certain conclusions:

1. SRT: Of course one can argue that at 33, he is over the hill. However, the point of skepticism here is that hardly ever, in the history of cricket, has there been a fall so dramatic for a talent so supreme. Moreoever, in patches (in the Challengers for instance) Tendulkar has looked exactly like his old self.

2. Is VS over the hill too? GC has certainly worked very hard on him. The point is, has the hard work, from the coaching point-of-view, been well directed? Bluntly put, has the work been good enough, from the qualitative point of view?

3. Are SR or MK over the hill too?

4. Why has RD curbed his range of shots? Even when he has succeeded I have seen that on most ocassions (the first ODI being an exception) his batting has appeared one dimensional.

You see, you and I can speculate on both ends, but the numbers and instances (SRT, VS, IP, HS, MK, SR, VRV) all add up. You can say these individuals are to be blamed squarely for their problems. I can say that so many instances of lack of confidence, tentativeness, 'mind not being in the proper place' are an outcome of a climate of procedural uncertainty and instability fostered by Chappel and co. Remember, this coach is perhaps the only coach in the whole world who dropped a player from the playing eleven (Pathan in the WI) and announced to the entire world that he was suffering from a crippling lack of confidence. 

Hence, when one considers individual cases, one can, of course give GC the benefit of doubt. But these do have a cumulative effect. The bottomline is, under GC, we have strange lost our best batsmen and the much vaunted youngsters have failed to deliver (including SR, who GC pronounced to be the next big thing). One can say what one may, but all performances of custodianship have to, at some point, be evaluated in terms of the bottomline. Secondly, one can of course say that there is a paucity of talent. But there can also be another possibility, that the team management lacks the ability to pick the right ones.

It is because of these cumulative reasons that without arguing with your breakdown of what percentage of application involves GC directly (10 percent or 20 percent), I will simply say that there is enough evidence to wonder whether GC has been doing even that properly. and that job, is not restricted to 'bending over backwards' to accomodate so and so's wishes. A SRT is undoubtedly largely responsible for his batting woes. For that he should be held accountable in time, and if need be, dropped. But who is to take responsibility for team India's woes? Who should be held accountable and sacked for that? What usually happens in the world of sports?