Print

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

[prfsr]

Interestingly JW does not rule out his coaching India again.
-P

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070326/asp/sports/story_7566127.asp

The players owe fans an answer, says Wright
INDRANIL MAJUMDAR
   
Port of Spain: In the driveway leading to the Hilton, the young man staged a silent protest holding a poster not many could have missed on Saturday.

“Port of Suicide for Team India”, read the message as he tried to portray the feelings of thousands of Trinidadians of Indian origin here.

The players’ performance has left them speechless. “You guys can’t even make the Super Eight! And you boast of being the best! What happened with your Tendulkaah? Can’t he deliver when it’s needed most?” has been the common refrain.

The players had a despondent look about them a day after losing to Sri Lanka with most deciding to stay indoors. Some who turned up at the hotel lobby tried to enquire about the reaction back home. An uneasy calm prevailed as the players tried to come to terms with the happenings. John Wright was among those who couldn’t hide his feelings.

“The Indian players owe their fans an answer. It’s a shame for their fans… A big loss. I know the players must be feeling equally bad. A huge disappointment. It must have been hard for the players to digest too,” the former Team India coach told The Telegraph.

Wright did not want to go into the reasons that led to the disaster. “I’m sure there will be a lot of introspection and self analysis. It’ll not be fair for me to make a comment. I feel for the players.

“Trainer Gregory King and computer analyst Ramakrishna had dinner with me last evening (Saturday). They were in a state of shock… I can visualise the players’ feelings,” he added.

Now that Greg Chappell’s term has ended, will he be ready to take charge if the offer comes his way?

“Let’s wait and see what happens,” Wright, who guided India to the World Cup final in 2003, refused to speak his mind.

Former West Indies cricketer Larry Gomes wouldn’t blame Greg Chappell. “The players lacked application. Why blame the coach? I was amazed to see not one batsman showing the determination to stay till the end. They clearly lacked the mental approach. There was no devil in the wicket.”

Colin Croft agreed with Chappell that the players failed to cope with the pressure.

“There is something seriously wrong. Why don’t you guys let your players play freely? Let them be normal human beings… The burden of expectations is doing them no good. The sooner you realise this the better for Indian cricket,” he remarked.

Gomes felt that with the Indians’ exit, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and the West Indies would reach the last four. “From there it’s anybody’s game.”
 

[dextrous]

Looks like Wright might be open to another offer?

[suraj]

Looks like Wright might be open to another offer?

Might be one the best things to happen to us in a while

A Yuvi-Wright combo or Yuvi-Patil combo is what I am rooting for at this stage

[inoc]

i would love to have him for another stint but sequels usually dont match up to the original. he may even have SG as captain but if i was him i wouldnt take it.

[esvee]

I have a feeling Whatmore will be roped in. Pawar and BCCI know how to play to the gallery. Bring the coach of the team that beat us, as our coach might go well with the masses.

[inoc]

I have a feeling Whatmore will be roped in. Pawar and BCCI know how to play to the gallery. Bring the coach of the team that beat us, as our coach might go well with the masses.

zero chance of getting whatmore/ moody whatever money you throw at them.

[bouncer]

I have a feeling Whatmore will be roped in. Pawar and BCCI know how to play to the gallery. Bring the coach of the team that beat us, as our coach might go well with the masses.

zero chance of getting whatmore/ moody whatever money you throw at them.

Why?

[esvee]

I have a feeling Whatmore will be roped in. Pawar and BCCI know how to play to the gallery. Bring the coach of the team that beat us, as our coach might go well with the masses.

zero chance of getting whatmore/ moody whatever money you throw at them.

Any particular reason why you think so?

[inoc]

bouncer/esvee

i dont really understand why i have to spell this out.

to start with both have been rejected by india
they are now presiding over successful achievements unlike india
their respective boards will try everything to upset the indian overtures.

do you really think a coach is capable of that much change unless he is given the authority. unlikely in the indian scenario a fact which even GC suffered from although under unmitigating circumstances.

no they will not be lured atleast in the present circumstances

[sgusa]

ACtually, I dont see why the players owe the fans anything. They didnt ask you to watch, to support them. They are obv happy if you do so and will take your ad money. But they didnt go around asking you to ... ( ok Ganguly did in that Pepsi ad )

So if the fans to choose to give this GAME so much importance, well it was their mistake. The players just do their jobs - play cricket.

[ruchir]

1. At this point if BCCI decides to hire an Indian coach, we need someone with good cricketing acumen. Someone who can design brilliant game plays while the match is happening. I don't know if Sandip Patil has that quality or not. Certainly Madan Lal, Arun Lal, Amarnath, Gaekwad and Wadekar don't. The last 2 gentlemen have been away from coaching for about 6-7 years, and game has changed a whole lot in this time. It's pace has increased considerably. India has scored 400 runs. I'm sure last 2 gentlemen have not kept themselves updated on the latest coaching, fielding techniques, lastest physical preparations etc. Amarnath has no experience at all. For someone who doesn't know how to operate a laptop (pun intended), we don't know what his knowledge of current/modern coaching system is. We need to move on from the old coaches. We don't need to go back to stone ages.

2. SMG and Shastri will not take the responsibility because of commercial reasons.

3. Another thing I feel is that if BCCI DOES hires an Indian coach, he will not be under pressure from the "World famous in India" stars of the team. They will not be able to push him around with taunts like "how many run have you scored", or "how many tests have you played". Why? Because he can always turn around and say "how many runs did you score in WC07", or "how did you perform in WC07".

4. My personal preference will be to get JW back again. He is a moderate personality. Not extreeme like GC, or meek like say Gaekwad. How ever, I give my preference with a condition. He needs much more powers this time, than what he had earlier. He should not be in a position where a ZK can allegedly slap him or VS can push him. He will need more selection powers. He may not be able to bring a person IN the team based on his preference, but he should have the VETO power, to veto a selection based on adequate reason given by him. Give him such powers and I feel he will do great.

5. I can also consider giving GC another chance. Don't get angry yet. Our fielding and running b/w wickets in WC07 has proved one thing, you may be good in batting or bowling, but if you are not fit in EVERY aspect of the game, you WILL lose to better teams. It doesn't matter how well ZK and MP bowled, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. It doesn't matter how well SG, RD, VS batted, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. Dropped catches and missed run outs.... Imagine, if every catch had been taken and 75% run-outs had been effected, results of BAN and SL games would have been different. GC's process was to replace old guys with younger guys. He found some replacements, but some didn't work out. His process was to have COMPLETE players in team. Players who can bat/bowl, field, run b/w wickets, not get tired. That was his dream. He was not able to fulfil it because, at the critical juncture, before WC07, Management panicked by the failure of some younger guys and reverted back to the selecting people based on "reputation" rather than current form. GC's vision was not wrong. He could not implement it well. Partly because his selections fell out of form and partly because management panicked. GC can be given another chance, but ONLY AND ONLY if BCCI is now determined to carry his vision through. Younger guys NEED to be given repeated exposure at international level. If not, they will never be able to prove themselves and learn how to tackle the pressures of international cricket.

6. If we don't go with GC then JW needs to be called back.

[Prafulla]

See - let us assume Sandeep patil , gaekwad or Amarnath are contenders for the position. Can they really speak for removal of seniors? In most talk shows - when asked about, dropping Sachin - each one avoided the reply or at the max..commented that it has to be Sachin's decision. So are we heading for weak coach, who can not decide about team composition !!!

[achutank]

1. At this point if BCCI decides to hire an Indian coach, we need someone with good cricketing acumen. Someone who can design brilliant game plays while the match is happening. I don't know if Sandip Patil has that quality or not. Certainly Madan Lal, Arun Lal, Amarnath, Gaekwad and Wadekar don't. The last 2 gentlemen have been away from coaching for about 6-7 years, and game has changed a whole lot in this time. It's pace has increased considerably. India has scored 400 runs. I'm sure last 2 gentlemen have not kept themselves updated on the latest coaching, fielding techniques, lastest physical preparations etc. Amarnath has no experience at all. For someone who doesn't know how to operate a laptop (pun intended), we don't know what his knowledge of current/modern coaching system is. We need to move on from the old coaches. We don't need to go back to stone ages.

2. SMG and Shastri will not take the responsibility because of commercial reasons.

3. Another thing I feel is that if BCCI DOES hires an Indian coach, he will not be under pressure from the "World famous in India" stars of the team. They will not be able to push him around with taunts like "how many run have you scored", or "how many tests have you played". Why? Because he can always turn around and say "how many runs did you score in WC07", or "how did you perform in WC07".

4. My personal preference will be to get JW back again. He is a moderate personality. Not extreeme like GC, or meek like say Gaekwad. How ever, I give my preference with a condition. He needs much more powers this time, than what he had earlier. He should not be in a position where a ZK can allegedly slap him or VS can push him. He will need more selection powers. He may not be able to bring a person IN the team based on his preference, but he should have the VETO power, to veto a selection based on adequate reason given by him. Give him such powers and I feel he will do great.

5. I can also consider giving GC another chance. Don't get angry yet. Our fielding and running b/w wickets in WC07 has proved one thing, you may be good in batting or bowling, but if you are not fit in EVERY aspect of the game, you WILL lose to better teams. It doesn't matter how well ZK and MP bowled, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. It doesn't matter how well SG, RD, VS batted, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. Dropped catches and missed run outs.... Imagine, if every catch had been taken and 75% run-outs had been effected, results of BAN and SL games would have been different. GC's process was to replace old guys with younger guys. He found some replacements, but some didn't work out. His process was to have COMPLETE players in team. Players who can bat/bowl, field, run b/w wickets, not get tired. That was his dream. He was not able to fulfil it because, at the critical juncture, before WC07, Management panicked by the failure of some younger guys and reverted back to the selecting people based on "reputation" rather than current form. GC's vision was not wrong. He could not implement it well. Partly because his selections fell out of form and partly because management panicked. GC can be given another chance, but ONLY AND ONLY if BCCI is now determined to carry his vision through. Younger guys NEED to be given repeated exposure at international level. If not, they will never be able to prove themselves and learn how to tackle the pressures of international cricket.

6. If we don't go with GC then JW needs to be called back.

i am sick of these innuendos from people like you, show me which catch SG has dropped in this WC or some sure runout he missed. why are you clubbing his name by default with the real culprits. is it because your darling RD is currently gunnign for th world record on runouts (as in he is i think only behind inzi now in runouts) or because he has continued with dropping catches a habit he picked up in the england tour to india. and dhoni as wicketie the less said the better.

PLEASE BE OBJECTIVE. OK.

[Libran]

5. I can also consider giving GC another chance. Don't get angry yet. Our fielding and running b/w wickets in WC07 has proved one thing, you may be good in batting or bowling, but if you are not fit in EVERY aspect of the game, you WILL lose to better teams. It doesn't matter how well ZK and MP bowled, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. It doesn't matter how well SG, RD, VS batted, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. Dropped catches and missed run outs.... Imagine, if every catch had been taken and 75% run-outs had been effected, results of BAN and SL games would have been different. GC's process was to replace old guys with younger guys. He found some replacements, but some didn't work out. His process was to have COMPLETE players in team. Players who can bat/bowl, field, run b/w wickets, not get tired. That was his dream. He was not able to fulfil it because, at the critical juncture, before WC07, Management panicked by the failure of some younger guys and reverted back to the selecting people based on "reputation" rather than current form. GC's vision was not wrong. He could not implement it well. Partly because his selections fell out of form and partly because management panicked. GC can be given another chance, but ONLY AND ONLY if BCCI is now determined to carry his vision through. Younger guys NEED to be given repeated exposure at international level. If not, they will never be able to prove themselves and learn how to tackle the pressures of international cricket.

Suddenly wondered if this site was redirected by default to Rediff...thanks God for small mercies...

Now...when will the ostrich syndrome leave us ?? Why..Oh...why...can't some people face the reality of life...GC Sucks and Sucks Big Time....

We need to be rid of the guy and pronto.....If BCCI carries his Vision ( more apt individual specific tunnel vision)...we might as well sell BCCI and all its affliated associations, the stadiums,players et al to one of our neighbours

[ruchir]

i am sick of these innuendos from people like you, show me which catch SG has dropped in this WC or some sure runout he missed. why are you clubbing his name by default with the real culprits. is it because your darling RD is currently gunnign for th world record on runouts (as in he is i think only behind inzi now in runouts) or because he has continued with dropping catches a habit he picked up in the england tour to india. and dhoni as wicketie the less said the better.

PLEASE BE OBJECTIVE. OK.

Thanks for reminding that you are sick of my posts.

I made a point. I was talking about fielding. I was SPECIALLY talking about the fielding of elders of our team. I was making a point that just being able to bat or bowl is not enough. In making the point, I clumped all the elder batsmen together and all the bowlers, who are poor fielders, together. I was not going to single out which catch RD dropped or how many singles were converted to twos when ball went towards SG. I wam making a point that fielding efforts of our senior citizens, SG included, and some of our bowlers left a lot to be desired. And that if our efforts in catching (no neccessarily SG, but all senior citizens) had been better, our throwing accuracy had been better, the results of SL and BAN games would have been better.

Does it hurt you when I say that our senior citizens of cricket are bad fielders? That includes RD, SG, VS. I am leaving SRT because he is not as bad a fielder as others. Does it hurt you when I say that ZK and MP are horrible fielders? If it hurts ONLY because I included SG here, then I can't help you.

[ruchir]

Suddenly wondered if this site was redirected by default to Rediff...thanks God for small mercies...

Now...when will the ostrich syndrome leave us ?? Why..Oh...why...can't some people face the reality of life...GC Sucks and Sucks Big Time....

We need to be rid of the guy and pronto.....If BCCI carries his Vision ( more apt individual specific tunnel vision)...we might as well sell BCCI and all its affliated associations, the stadiums,players et al to one of our neighbours

GC may suck big time or small time. It doesn't matter. I was giving my opinion. If you have nothing else to counter my opinion, then saying GC sucks big time, or BCCI might sell the stadiums etc. then what can I say?

Elsewhere I gave MY reasons for us losing against BAN and SL. Here I am saying GC's vision was not wrong, it was carried out incorrectly. I am wanting JW to be the new coach. I am saying if BCCI is bold enough to carry out GC's vision to the end, THEN ONLY he should be re-hired.

And you think I am an "ostrich"? Can you give better reasons for your statement?

[achutank]

i am sick of these innuendos from people like you, show me which catch SG has dropped in this WC or some sure runout he missed. why are you clubbing his name by default with the real culprits. is it because your darling RD is currently gunnign for th world record on runouts (as in he is i think only behind inzi now in runouts) or because he has continued with dropping catches a habit he picked up in the england tour to india. and dhoni as wicketie the less said the better.

PLEASE BE OBJECTIVE. OK.

Thanks for reminding that you are sick of my posts.

I made a point. I was talking about fielding. I was SPECIALLY talking about the fielding of elders of our team. I was making a point that just being able to bat or bowl is not enough. In making the point, I clumped all the elder batsmen together and all the bowlers, who are poor fielders, together. I was not going to single out which catch RD dropped or how many singles were converted to twos when ball went towards SG. I wam making a point that fielding efforts of our senior citizens, SG included, and some of our bowlers left a lot to be desired. And that if our efforts in catching (no neccessarily SG, but all senior citizens) had been better, our throwing accuracy had been better, the results of SL and BAN games would have been better.

Does it hurt you when I say that our senior citizens of cricket are bad fielders? That includes RD, SG, VS. I am leaving SRT because he is not as bad a fielder as others. Does it hurt you when I say that ZK and MP are horrible fielders? If it hurts ONLY because I included SG here, then I can't help you.

you are the person who needs help mate as far i can see. till now you had a mantra that was GC-GC now that has failed and now your mantra is fielding-fielding. point is in your hurry to make a point you start taking a name that will obviously get you your support from your coterie of yes-sayyers mate. that si teh problem with your posts. even i saw the matches and there was real no lack of  commitment from SG. over the last two series many commentators have remarked how much effort Sg has put into his fielding. but on the other hand your dear darling RD has gone from bad to worse in his calling, his fielding and his catching.

so instead of acknowledgiing that someone inspite of "age" is puttint in the effort you instead drag down that person's name just becasue you know there will be your regular quorum of sg-bashers . that is what your posts are all about. if you want to take names why don't you take the names in a way that does not drag effort takers into the muck. try it. it is not that diifcult. of course your mob will not let you do .

[Cover Point]

Achu, screw the effort! I would have said beep the effort but that would get beeped!

So let me say it openly. I have only seen parts of the lanka game ... but seems like SG was fielding at longoff for a while and everytime the ball went to him the bats would run 2. They replaced him with ZK ... same result.

SG while batting just cant run quick singles. Same is true with most of our oldies. RD drops catches. Misfields. SRT also isnt quick.

When SG scored those 66 of 129 balls that lost us the game (Yes that lost us the game along with RD, SRT ) within that knock we had a chance of getting atleast 20 additional runs with better running. On the field with a better fielding side ... do u think we could have saved 25 runs?

Add the two and we get a defendable total.

Same with SL. A better fielding side.. who can hit the beeping stumps would have had SL done for around 200. A better running side would have scored an extra 20 runs and guess who would have won the game!

So no not just picking on individuals. But I am picking on that attitude of yours and others who keep repeating ... we can handle scoring the extra runs with our bat. Now we can take that bat and park it you know where!

[Prafulla]

Achu, screw the effort! I would have said beep the effort but that would get beeped!

So let me say it openly. I have only seen parts of the lanka game ... but seems like SG was fielding at longoff for a while and everytime the ball went to him the bats would run 2. They replaced him with ZK ... same result.

SG while batting just cant run quick singles. Same is true with most of our oldies. RD drops catches. Misfields. SRT also isnt quick.

When SG scored those 66 of 129 balls that lost us the game (Yes that lost us the game along with RD, SRT ) within that knock we had a chance of getting atleast 20 additional runs with better running. On the field with a better fielding side ... do u think we could have saved 25 runs?

Add the two and we get a defendable total.

Same with SL. A better fielding side.. who can hit the beeping stumps would have had SL done for around 200. A better running side would have scored an extra 20 runs and guess who would have won the game!

So no not just picking on individuals. But I am picking on that attitude of yours and others who keep repeating ... we can handle scoring the extra runs with our bat. Now we can take that bat and park it you know where!

Correct - but we went into WC, with the conscious awareness of the fact. and Onus was on batting to make extra 30 runs. It was batting failure, which became suicidal.

[arjun]

I have one question for GC advocates . Till the SA ODI series at least, GC had got the team he wanted- a team filled to the brim with young athletic fielders. What did he achieve with it? If runouts and great catches would have done the trick, why did India do so badly in the champion's trophy? And was fielding so significantly better at that time?

[Cover Point]

Achu, screw the effort! I would have said beep the effort but that would get beeped!

So let me say it openly. I have only seen parts of the lanka game ... but seems like SG was fielding at longoff for a while and everytime the ball went to him the bats would run 2. They replaced him with ZK ... same result.

SG while batting just cant run quick singles. Same is true with most of our oldies. RD drops catches. Misfields. SRT also isnt quick.

When SG scored those 66 of 129 balls that lost us the game (Yes that lost us the game along with RD, SRT ) within that knock we had a chance of getting atleast 20 additional runs with better running. On the field with a better fielding side ... do u think we could have saved 25 runs?

Add the two and we get a defendable total.

Same with SL. A better fielding side.. who can hit the beeping stumps would have had SL done for around 200. A better running side would have scored an extra 20 runs and guess who would have won the game!

So no not just picking on individuals. But I am picking on that attitude of yours and others who keep repeating ... we can handle scoring the extra runs with our bat. Now we can take that bat and park it you know where!

Correct - but we went into WC, with the conscious awareness of the fact. and Onus was on batting to make extra 30 runs. It was batting failure, which became suicidal.

Ofcourse the batting failed but this conscious awareness bothers me! Were we happy with the crap fielding we got?
I will make a prediction.... heck it is the same thing GC said 2-3 years ago. The team that wins the 2007 WC would be one of the fittest and better fielding teams in the tournament.

Guess what two teams have been eliminated and their fitness levels?

Nothing would get better until we keep accepting this crap that poor fielding is ok and we can make up in batting and bowling.

[LosingNow]

1. At this point if BCCI decides to hire an Indian coach, we need someone with good cricketing acumen. Someone who can design brilliant game plays while the match is happening. I don't know if Sandip Patil has that quality or not. Certainly Madan Lal, Arun Lal, Amarnath, Gaekwad and Wadekar don't. The last 2 gentlemen have been away from coaching for about 6-7 years, and game has changed a whole lot in this time. It's pace has increased considerably. India has scored 400 runs. I'm sure last 2 gentlemen have not kept themselves updated on the latest coaching, fielding techniques, lastest physical preparations etc. Amarnath has no experience at all. For someone who doesn't know how to operate a laptop (pun intended), we don't know what his knowledge of current/modern coaching system is. We need to move on from the old coaches. We don't need to go back to stone ages.

2. SMG and Shastri will not take the responsibility because of commercial reasons.

3. Another thing I feel is that if BCCI DOES hires an Indian coach, he will not be under pressure from the "World famous in India" stars of the team. They will not be able to push him around with taunts like "how many run have you scored", or "how many tests have you played". Why? Because he can always turn around and say "how many runs did you score in WC07", or "how did you perform in WC07".

4. My personal preference will be to get JW back again. He is a moderate personality. Not extreeme like GC, or meek like say Gaekwad. How ever, I give my preference with a condition. He needs much more powers this time, than what he had earlier. He should not be in a position where a ZK can allegedly slap him or VS can push him. He will need more selection powers. He may not be able to bring a person IN the team based on his preference, but he should have the VETO power, to veto a selection based on adequate reason given by him. Give him such powers and I feel he will do great.

5. I can also consider giving GC another chance. Don't get angry yet. Our fielding and running b/w wickets in WC07 has proved one thing, you may be good in batting or bowling, but if you are not fit in EVERY aspect of the game, you WILL lose to better teams. It doesn't matter how well ZK and MP bowled, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. It doesn't matter how well SG, RD, VS batted, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. Dropped catches and missed run outs.... Imagine, if every catch had been taken and 75% run-outs had been effected, results of BAN and SL games would have been different. GC's process was to replace old guys with younger guys. He found some replacements, but some didn't work out. His process was to have COMPLETE players in team. Players who can bat/bowl, field, run b/w wickets, not get tired. That was his dream. He was not able to fulfil it because, at the critical juncture, before WC07, Management panicked by the failure of some younger guys and reverted back to the selecting people based on "reputation" rather than current form. GC's vision was not wrong. He could not implement it well. Partly because his selections fell out of form and partly because management panicked. GC can be given another chance, but ONLY AND ONLY if BCCI is now determined to carry his vision through. Younger guys NEED to be given repeated exposure at international level. If not, they will never be able to prove themselves and learn how to tackle the pressures of international cricket.

6. If we don't go with GC then JW needs to be called back.

i am sick of these innuendos from people like you, show me which catch SG has dropped in this WC or some sure runout he missed. why are you clubbing his name by default with the real culprits. is it because your darling RD is currently gunnign for th world record on runouts (as in he is i think only behind inzi now in runouts) or because he has continued with dropping catches a habit he picked up in the england tour to india. and dhoni as wicketie the less said the better.

PLEASE BE OBJECTIVE. OK.

Just for the record(not criticizing SG or applauding RD's fielding efforts), SG misjudged (dropped in the opinion of some) a catch when he was fielding in mid-wicket. I do not recall which game...but it was an important catch and the bowler gave him the look. We discussed this in Chat at that time..and were wondering what is he doing fielding in mid-wicket.

[arjun]

I have one question for GC advocates . Till the SA ODI series at least, GC had got the team he wanted- a team filled to the brim with young athletic fielders. What did he achieve with it? If runouts and great catches would have done the trick, why did India do so badly in the champion's trophy? And was fielding so significantly better at that time?

I have not got an answer to that one.

[Vick]

1. At this point if BCCI decides to hire an Indian coach, we need someone with good cricketing acumen. Someone who can design brilliant game plays while the match is happening. I don't know if Sandip Patil has that quality or not. Certainly Madan Lal, Arun Lal, Amarnath, Gaekwad and Wadekar don't. The last 2 gentlemen have been away from coaching for about 6-7 years, and game has changed a whole lot in this time. It's pace has increased considerably. India has scored 400 runs. I'm sure last 2 gentlemen have not kept themselves updated on the latest coaching, fielding techniques, lastest physical preparations etc. Amarnath has no experience at all. For someone who doesn't know how to operate a laptop (pun intended), we don't know what his knowledge of current/modern coaching system is. We need to move on from the old coaches. We don't need to go back to stone ages.

Factually wrong. Gaikwad has been coach of Gujrat team since couple of seasons.

[TheWall]

5. I can also consider giving GC another chance. Don't get angry yet. Our fielding and running b/w wickets in WC07 has proved one thing, you may be good in batting or bowling, but if you are not fit in EVERY aspect of the game, you WILL lose to better teams. It doesn't matter how well ZK and MP bowled, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. It doesn't matter how well SG, RD, VS batted, they let a lot of runs leak in the field. Dropped catches and missed run outs.... Imagine, if every catch had been taken and 75% run-outs had been effected, results of BAN and SL games would have been different. GC's process was to replace old guys with younger guys. He found some replacements, but some didn't work out. His process was to have COMPLETE players in team. Players who can bat/bowl, field, run b/w wickets, not get tired. That was his dream. He was not able to fulfil it because, at the critical juncture, before WC07, Management panicked by the failure of some younger guys and reverted back to the selecting people based on "reputation" rather than current form. GC's vision was not wrong. He could not implement it well. Partly because his selections fell out of form and partly because management panicked. GC can be given another chance, but ONLY AND ONLY if BCCI is now determined to carry his vision through. Younger guys NEED to be given repeated exposure at international level. If not, they will never be able to prove themselves and learn how to tackle the pressures of international cricket.

6. If we don't go with GC then JW needs to be called back.

i am sick of these innuendos from people like you, show me which catch SG has dropped in this WC or some sure runout he missed. why are you clubbing his name by default with the real culprits. is it because your darling RD is currently gunnign for th world record on runouts (as in he is i think only behind inzi now in runouts) or because he has continued with dropping catches a habit he picked up in the england tour to india. and dhoni as wicketie the less said the better.

PLEASE BE OBJECTIVE. OK.

Disclaimer: Now, this is going to hurt.

Are you asking for a senior citizen discount in fielding? I wonder why 

[ruchir]

I have one question for GC advocates . Till the SA ODI series at least, GC had got the team he wanted- a team filled to the brim with young athletic fielders. What did he achieve with it? If runouts and great catches would have done the trick, why did India do so badly in the champion's trophy? And was fielding so significantly better at that time?

I have not got an answer to that one.

In ICCCT, India lost 2 games, against WI and AUS.

vs WI:
It wasn't as if we lost that game like we did against SL in WC07. We batted first and set WI a target of 224. This game went down to the 4th ball of the last over. The pitch was a 275+ pitch, per curator. India did not score enough, but still gave good fight to WI. If you think it is very easy to defend 224 runs, okay then. BTW, this was the time when IKP was in terrible bowling form but was being played to give him chance to get his form back. Inspite of that, this game went to the last over. Some excerpts from Cricinfo:
They came in large numbers to see India win, did not get that, but saw a nail-biter of a cricket match. West Indies sealed a semi-final spot by the skin of their teeth, making what should have been a walk in the park an incredibly tight finish, reaching their target of 224 with three wickets in hand and only two balls to spare.


vs AUS:
We scored 249 runs batting first. Against a team like AUS, this is not a decent target. BTW, SRT scored a 10, and DM scored 18 in this game. The pitch was batting pitch, par score was 275 again (NZ has defended 274). So, playing a team like AUS, SRT/DM fail in batting, not enough runs scored, playing with one bowler out-of-form, what are you gonna do? Blame GC for SRT being a choker against AUS?

[ruchir]

1. At this point if BCCI decides to hire an Indian coach, we need someone with good cricketing acumen. Someone who can design brilliant game plays while the match is happening. I don't know if Sandip Patil has that quality or not. Certainly Madan Lal, Arun Lal, Amarnath, Gaekwad and Wadekar don't. The last 2 gentlemen have been away from coaching for about 6-7 years, and game has changed a whole lot in this time. It's pace has increased considerably. India has scored 400 runs. I'm sure last 2 gentlemen have not kept themselves updated on the latest coaching, fielding techniques, lastest physical preparations etc. Amarnath has no experience at all. For someone who doesn't know how to operate a laptop (pun intended), we don't know what his knowledge of current/modern coaching system is. We need to move on from the old coaches. We don't need to go back to stone ages.

Factually wrong. Gaikwad has been coach of Gujrat team since couple of seasons.

Oh... Gaekwad coached Gujrat!! Didn't know that. Good catch and thanks. BTW, how has Gujrat performed in Ranji since Gaekwad took over?

[ramshorns]

1. At this point if BCCI decides to hire an Indian coach, we need someone with good cricketing acumen. Someone who can design brilliant game plays while the match is happening. I don't know if Sandip Patil has that quality or not. Certainly Madan Lal, Arun Lal, Amarnath, Gaekwad and Wadekar don't. The last 2 gentlemen have been away from coaching for about 6-7 years, and game has changed a whole lot in this time. It's pace has increased considerably. India has scored 400 runs. I'm sure last 2 gentlemen have not kept themselves updated on the latest coaching, fielding techniques, lastest physical preparations etc. Amarnath has no experience at all. For someone who doesn't know how to operate a laptop (pun intended), we don't know what his knowledge of current/modern coaching system is. We need to move on from the old coaches. We don't need to go back to stone ages.

Factually wrong. Gaikwad has been coach of Gujrat team since couple of seasons.

Oh... Gaekwad coached Gujrat!! Didn't know that. Good catch and thanks. BTW, how has Gujrat performed in Ranji since Gaekwad took over?

Actually in the one game I followed the game they played against Hyd., I did see he did well and beat Hyd. in Hyd. on a seaming track this past season.  During the time I read an interview in the local daily when they played Hyd.  He came out as an insightful guy atleast the way he answered some of the questions pertaining to Indian cricket, as opposed to say the way a More speaks or a Kapil Paaji speaks depending on the which way the wind is blowing.  But then coaching a state team as opposed to a national team can be a tough proposition but atleast is in touch with the latest trends in Indian cricket.

[arjun]

I have one question for GC advocates . Till the SA ODI series at least, GC had got the team he wanted- a team filled to the brim with young athletic fielders. What did he achieve with it? If runouts and great catches would have done the trick, why did India do so badly in the champion's trophy? And was fielding so significantly better at that time?

I have not got an answer to that one.

In ICCCT, India lost 2 games, against WI and AUS.

vs WI:
It wasn't as if we lost that game like we did against SL in WC07. We batted first and set WI a target of 224. This game went down to the 4th ball of the last over. The pitch was a 275+ pitch, per curator. India did not score enough, but still gave good fight to WI. If you think it is very easy to defend 224 runs, okay then. BTW, this was the time when IKP was in terrible bowling form but was being played to give him chance to get his form back. Inspite of that, this game went to the last over. Some excerpts from Cricinfo:
They came in large numbers to see India win, did not get that, but saw a nail-biter of a cricket match. West Indies sealed a semi-final spot by the skin of their teeth, making what should have been a walk in the park an incredibly tight finish, reaching their target of 224 with three wickets in hand and only two balls to spare.


vs AUS:
We scored 249 runs batting first. Against a team like AUS, this is not a decent target. BTW, SRT scored a 10, and DM scored 18 in this game. The pitch was batting pitch, par score was 275 again (NZ has defended 274). So, playing a team like AUS, SRT/DM fail in batting, not enough runs scored, playing with one bowler out-of-form, what are you gonna do? Blame GC for SRT being a choker against AUS?

Ruchir, I expected better of you.

Regarding the India-WI match : Against 223, WI was 218 for 4 at one stage. They had paced the chase beautifully, and victory was just a matter of few more balls, when in typical WI style, they stumbled, and later huffed and puffed to victory.

Now why did India score 223 in a 275+ pitch if GC had got his ideal brigade in? You refer to SRT's low score, what did the coach's fav boys like Raina do? How much did he score? He scored a 37 (yes, 37) ball 19. Dhoni also began very slowly scoring only 18 runs for 46 balls at one stage, but of course later he accelerated and topscored with 51. And what did the other fav boy, Pathan, do? Scored a duck, and gave away 34 runs in 5 overs. Raina also dropped a catch off Gayle, so much for fielding.

In the India-Aus match, again, with India winning the toss and getting to bat in helpful conditions stumbled to 249. At one stage India were 186 for 4 at 40 overs, and then they lost Dravid and Kaif in quick succession, and thereafter lost the plot entirely. Dravid scored a 63 ball 52, should not he have stayed on and helped India reach at least 280? SRT again failed, but Raina scored 19 ball 13, Kaif scored 43 ball 30 and Pathan scored 7 ball 10. The bowling was equally pathetic, and Aus won with 26 balls remaining.

Now my question again is this : when the coach had got his ideal combination, why this pathetic performance? (Actually this was the kind of performance which allowed cancers like Ganguly and Zaheer to creep into the team.) Why could not Dravid, Raina et al stay on in the aus match after a slow but steady start and help India win( partcularly since ganguly was not there to do his slow act?)? Why could not they restrict aus rampage with their brilliant young fielding?

May I have the answers now, please.

[arjun]

Bump...and still waiting for the answer!

[Prafulla]

They could not, because they played badly. Same again in WC 2007 - they could not - because they played poorly. It is simple and but - with youngsters, at some stage of team building - we may end up with better team. These two events are not comparable. Here, experienced were picked up for their ability to play pressure matches. Oh ..I forgot - most of our seniors are seldom good for pressure matches.

[ruchir]

Bump...and still waiting for the answer!

I think we are in different time zones. So please bear with me for late replies.

Ruchir, I expected better of you.

Thanks for having high expectations. Will try to match them.

Regarding the India-WI match : Against 223, WI was 218 for 4 at one stage. They had paced the chase beautifully, and victory was just a matter of few more balls, when in typical WI style, they stumbled, and later huffed and puffed to victory.

Now why did India score 223 in a 275+ pitch if GC had got his ideal brigade in? You refer to SRT's low score, what did the coach's fav boys like Raina do? How much did he score? He scored a 37 (yes, 37) ball 19. Dhoni also began very slowly scoring only 18 runs for 46 balls at one stage, but of course later he accelerated and topscored with 51. And what did the other fav boy, Pathan, do? Scored a duck, and gave away 34 runs in 5 overs. Raina also dropped a catch off Gayle, so much for fielding.

IKP -- I already wrote that he was going through a drop in form those days. He was being played to give him a chance to come back in form.

SR / MSD -- Why was they slow to begin with? If you notice, YS and RD were BOTH out in the same over, 31st. 2 wkts in one over, that left MSD playing with SR. Both were new to crease. Don't you think it is but natural for them to make sure that no more wkts fall since after them there were only bowlers and still 20 overs are to be batted?

This is how SR was out:
41.6 Samuels to Raina, OUT, fired in fast into the blockhole outside off stump, Rania tries to back away and make room but gets beaten, Baugh is quick to whip off the bails, it's a tight call for the third umpire to make, he has to decide is any part of the foot was behind the line, the third umpire rules that the foot was on the line and Rania is out

Tough decision?

In the India-Aus match, again, with India winning the toss and getting to bat in helpful conditions stumbled to 249. At one stage India were 186 for 4 at 40 overs, and then they lost Dravid and Kaif in quick succession, and thereafter lost the plot entirely. Dravid scored a 63 ball 52, should not he have stayed on and helped India reach at least 280? SRT again failed, but Raina scored 19 ball 13, Kaif scored 43 ball 30 and Pathan scored 7 ball 10. The bowling was equally pathetic, and Aus won with 26 balls remaining.

Now my question again is this : when the coach had got his ideal combination, why this pathetic performance? (Actually this was the kind of performance which allowed cancers like Ganguly and Zaheer to creep into the team.) Why could not Dravid, Raina et al stay on in the aus match after a slow but steady start and help India win( partcularly since ganguly was not there to do his slow act?)? Why could not they restrict aus rampage with their brilliant young fielding?

MSD, SR, IKP all came to bat in slog overs, after 40th over.

SR got out hitting: (can't blame GC for SR getting out hitting in slog overs, can you?)
47.1  Bracken to Raina, OUT, Gone! Caught at long-on. Raina swings a low full-toss at the throat of Watson.

IKP got out hitting: (can't blame GC for IKP getting out hitting in slog overs, can you?)
48.6  McGrath to Pathan, OUT, Banged in short again, it's not going to a yorker every ball from McGrath, Pathan pulls but straight to Martyn at deep midwicket. Martyn almost fumbles it but holds it in the end.

SRT failed. Can you blame GC for SRT failing with bat?

RD did not stay till the end. Again, was GC batting for RD in the field? Did GC had any control over what shots RD played? Can you really blame GC for RD getting out when he was all set? If yes, then you must blame EVERY coach whenever a well-set player of his team gets out. Right?

And as for fielding, if JUST good fielding could win matches against AUS, then SA, NZ, SL would be defeating them regularly.



I will say one thing again, that I have said many times, and LN put it right:

You can take a horse to water, you can't make it drink.

GC can TELL player what to do, he can lay out game-plays for them, he CAN'T make the adhere to it. On the field, it is up to players to carry out the stratagies, coach can't go out in the field and carry it out for them.

[Prafulla]

Ruchir - perhaps GC was projected as Avatar, who will bat / bowl / field for all 11 players. May be 12th man as well. So - but he turned out to be a Ghost. Sorry again - I do not believe on Ghosts.

[arjun]

Bump...and still waiting for the answer!

I think we are in different time zones. So please bear with me for late replies.

No problem. Understand that.

Ruchir, I expected better of you.

Thanks for having high expectations. Will try to match them.[/quote]

I know you can.

Regarding the India-WI match : Against 223, WI was 218 for 4 at one stage. They had paced the chase beautifully, and victory was just a matter of few more balls, when in typical WI style, they stumbled, and later huffed and puffed to victory.

Now why did India score 223 in a 275+ pitch if GC had got his ideal brigade in? You refer to SRT's low score, what did the coach's fav boys like Raina do? How much did he score? He scored a 37 (yes, 37) ball 19. Dhoni also began very slowly scoring only 18 runs for 46 balls at one stage, but of course later he accelerated and topscored with 51. And what did the other fav boy, Pathan, do? Scored a duck, and gave away 34 runs in 5 overs. Raina also dropped a catch off Gayle, so much for fielding.

IKP -- I already wrote that he was going through a drop in form those days. He was being played to give him a chance to come back in form.

SR / MSD -- Why was they slow to begin with? If you notice, YS and RD were BOTH out in the same over, 31st. 2 wkts in one over, that left MSD playing with SR. Both were new to crease. Don't you think it is but natural for them to make sure that no more wkts fall since after them there were only bowlers and still 20 overs are to be batted?

This is how SR was out:
41.6 Samuels to Raina, OUT, fired in fast into the blockhole outside off stump, Rania tries to back away and make room but gets beaten, Baugh is quick to whip off the bails, it's a tight call for the third umpire to make, he has to decide is any part of the foot was behind the line, the third umpire rules that the foot was on the line and Rania is out

Tough decision?[/quote]

My point was by the time champion's trophy was held, GC was well into his second year of coaching, and he had been given his ideal combination of players. So in those ideal circumstances ( there was no DV to scuttle his vision then), why did his team falter? And why were his fav players failing consistently? And how can he ( and his brigade of admirers) then claim that because he was not given his choice of players, the team did not do well in the WC?
Also, as you mentioned, SR/MSD had to be careful because RD/YS fell together at around the 40th over, isn't the scenario uncannily similar to what happened against Bangladesh? So Ganguly by his slow scoring did not exactly leave his team in the lurch, did he? There was scope for the latter batsmen to play as the pitch demanded and progress to 230-240. That they did not, and could not even bat through the entire 50 overs cannot be pinned on Ganguly, right?

In the India-Aus match, again, with India winning the toss and getting to bat in helpful conditions stumbled to 249. At one stage India were 186 for 4 at 40 overs, and then they lost Dravid and Kaif in quick succession, and thereafter lost the plot entirely. Dravid scored a 63 ball 52, should not he have stayed on and helped India reach at least 280? SRT again failed, but Raina scored 19 ball 13, Kaif scored 43 ball 30 and Pathan scored 7 ball 10. The bowling was equally pathetic, and Aus won with 26 balls remaining.

Now my question again is this : when the coach had got his ideal combination, why this pathetic performance? (Actually this was the kind of performance which allowed cancers like Ganguly and Zaheer to creep into the team.) Why could not Dravid, Raina et al stay on in the aus match after a slow but steady start and help India win( partcularly since ganguly was not there to do his slow act?)? Why could not they restrict aus rampage with their brilliant young fielding?

MSD, SR, IKP all came to bat in slog overs, after 40th over.

SR got out hitting: (can't blame GC for SR getting out hitting in slog overs, can you?)
47.1  Bracken to Raina, OUT, Gone! Caught at long-on. Raina swings a low full-toss at the throat of Watson.

IKP got out hitting: (can't blame GC for IKP getting out hitting in slog overs, can you?)
48.6  McGrath to Pathan, OUT, Banged in short again, it's not going to a yorker every ball from McGrath, Pathan pulls but straight to Martyn at deep midwicket. Martyn almost fumbles it but holds it in the end.

SRT failed. Can you blame GC for SRT failing with bat?

RD did not stay till the end. Again, was GC batting for RD in the field? Did GC had any control over what shots RD played? Can you really blame GC for RD getting out when he was all set? If yes, then you must blame EVERY coach whenever a well-set player of his team gets out. Right?

And as for fielding, if JUST good fielding could win matches against AUS, then SA, NZ, SL would be defeating them regularly.[/quote]

Exactly. Just good fielding don't win matches. That's why players like Kaif, Raina - if they can't hold their own in batsmanship, do have to yield their places to the likes of SG who may be a relatively inferior fielder, but is a far better batsman. And that's why if a coach wants to fill his team with young, athletic fielders at the expense of batting strength, then his vision can at  best be called blurry. ( admittedly we did not do too well in the WC even with a potentially better batting lineup, but then one has to pick the best 15 available and hope for the best)

Also, the excuse of slog overs for those players getting out is laughable. Slog overs are for slogging, for scoring quick runs, and players have to find ways to do so without falling cheaply. If they can't do it, it's their failure. Excuse of slog overs just won't wash.



  [/quote]I will say one thing again, that I have said many times, and LN put it right:

You can take a horse to water, you can't make it drink.

GC can TELL player what to do, he can lay out game-plays for them, he CAN'T make the adhere to it. On the field, it is up to players to carry out the stratagies, coach can't go out in the field and carry it out for them.
[/quote]

True. But if a coach fails to bond the team and motivate it to implement his strategic vision, then what is his value as coach? If he cannot deliver in 2 years time, if he leaves the team in even poorer position than when he took over, he is a poor coach. Pure and simple.

[ruchir]

My point was by the time champion's trophy was held, GC was well into his second year of coaching, and he had been given his ideal combination of players. So in those ideal circumstances ( there was no DV to scuttle his vision then), why did his team falter? And why were his fav players failing consistently? And how can he ( and his brigade of admirers) then claim that because he was not given his choice of players, the team did not do well in the WC?

Also, as you mentioned, SR/MSD had to be careful because RD/YS fell together at around the 40th over, isn't the scenario uncannily similar to what happened against Bangladesh? So Ganguly by his slow scoring did not exactly leave his team in the lurch, did he? There was scope for the latter batsmen to play as the pitch demanded and progress to 230-240. That they did not, and could not even bat through the entire 50 overs cannot be pinned on Ganguly, right?

GC's favorites (IKP, SR) were failing. I have already blamed him for not doing everything possible to help IKP. I have no idea what the deal has been with SR.

This is for the BAN game:
Fall of wickets: 1-6 (Sehwag, 2.1 ov), 2-21 (Uthappa, 6.4 ov), 3-40 (Tendulkar, 14.6 ov), 4-72 (Dravid, 24.1 ov), 5-157 (Yuvraj Singh, 42.4 ov), 6-158 (Ganguly, 43.2 ov), 7-159 (Dhoni, 43.5 ov), 8-159 (Harbhajan Singh, 44.2 ov), 9-159 (Agarkar, 45.1 ov), 10-191 (Patel, 49.3 ov)

I will show you the difference between game against WI in ICCCT and BAN game in WC07.

In WI game, 2 wickets fell in 31st over (not in 40th as you wrote). There was NO powerplay going on at that time. Field was spread in and out, meaning close fielders to stop singles and on boundary to stop 4s. MSD / SR were the LAST recognised batsmen, both new to crease, 20 overs still to go.

In BAN game, 2 wkts fell early within 7 overs. Still, Powerplay was ON, fielders were IN, SG would have got his eye set in 7 overs. In World Cup, you HAVE to be aggressive. If you can't make FULL use of Powerplay overs in World Cup, then I don't know when you will score runs, how will you give direction to your inning. Not just in World Cup, this is true for any ODI. Powerplay overs are there to be made use of. In BAN game, at the end of 20 overs, India was 60/3. Ganguly had faced 67 balls for 25. When the 2nd wicket fell in 7th over, Ganguly had faced 21 balls for 3 runs. I'm sure you will agree that in those 21 balls he must have had an idea of pitch, bounce etc. Yet, inspite of being set in Powerplay overs, he remained comatose till he got out. 66 from 129 balls. He was there during the entire 20 overs of Powerplay. He faced more than half of the balls and scored less than half of the runs scored. If only.....

Exactly. Just good fielding don't win matches. That's why players like Kaif, Raina - if they can't hold their own in batsmanship, do have to yield their places to the likes of SG who may be a relatively inferior fielder, but is a far better batsman. And that's why if a coach wants to fill his team with young, athletic fielders at the expense of batting strength, then his vision can at  best be called blurry. ( admittedly we did not do too well in the WC even with a potentially better batting lineup, but then one has to pick the best 15 available and hope for the best)

Also, the excuse of slog overs for those players getting out is laughable. Slog overs are for slogging, for scoring quick runs, and players have to find ways to do so without falling cheaply. If they can't do it, it's their failure. Excuse of slog overs just won't wash.

I have never said that Kaif and Raina should have been in WC07 team, I have been saying Powar should have been there in place of Kumble.

I agree, every player should be selected first on their primary skill - batting, bowling, keeping. But todays cricket is not just about primary skills anymore. Teams like AUS, SA, NZ have COMPLETE players. Players who are not only good at their primary skills, but also good at other things, like fielding, catching, divind, running b/w wkts, hitting stumps. McGrath is without doubt, slowest AUS fielder, but have you seen him ESCORTING the ball to boundary (la SG), or ball going between his legs (la ZK, MP), or dropping catches (la RD)?? THAT, my friend, is the difference. If players like SG, RD, ZK, AK, MP can bring their fielding even upto the standar of GM, I will be happy. I am not eve talking about Ponting, Symond standards.

True. But if a coach fails to bond the team and motivate it to implement his strategic vision, then what is his value as coach? If he cannot deliver in 2 years time, if he leaves the team in even poorer position than when he took over, he is a poor coach. Pure and simple.

GC's first year was spectacular, going strictly by results. Even you would agree to that. World records chases, 19 wins in 22 ODIs... Test series win against ZIM, SL, WI.

As for his leaving the team in a poor position, therefore him being a poor coach... Same could be said about JW too. But you wouldn't consider JW a poor coach, would you? And JW had 4 years to work with. When JW left, team was as broken as it is today, as unmotivated. We had stopped winning during his last few series. Remember PAK in India, ICCCT in ENG, Natwest in ENG....