Will greg leave? If so, then whose next?

[Woodster]

My point was about the players themselves, their attitudes and what impact a coach can have when dealing with said characters.

The point was that there is a cricketing culture in place that doesnt prepare properly and work as hard as other nations. The players are too powerful (at least one of the potential reasons)

I think this is a very good point, the players seem to be bigger than the game in India. It is absurd, however, to think these players do not work as hard as other players when they are getting paid ridiculous amounts of money. Just to be a professional and represent your country should be all you need to give 100%!

 

[viktor]

TBF, after the Ganguly case, everything Chappell did was under scrutiny. However that was the media's doing. I don't recall any instance of a player actually making an issue of whatever Chappell did.

 

[Pratters]

My point was about the players themselves, their attitudes and what impact a coach can have when dealing with said characters.

The point was that there is a cricketing culture in place that doesnt prepare properly and work as hard as other nations. The players are too powerful (at least one of the potential reasons)

Having the support of the board doesnt mean a coach can talk to player how he might like to or be able to put the systems he would want to have in place.

Players with apparently wrong attitudes like Nehra, Harbhajan and Zaheer Khan were dropped. Only when they showed improvements were they brought back and Nehra was not brought back.

The point you made regarding players not listening has been a problem in the subcontinent but it can only be a coach who can change it with the support of the board and captain. Some one like Whatmore was able to do it and with the support of Dravid and the board Chappell enjoyed, I do not see why he couldn't have gone for improvement in processes. Processes take time to change but at least Chappell did have genuine opportunity I think.

Also, the point you make regarding India and Pakistan players would have been very valid for India earlier but now as much now. Chappell brought his own fitness man if I am not wrong and Chappell had the opportunities. Cultures can all not be instantly changed but I doubt that barring Tendulkar or Dravid, any one could refuse listening to Chappell or follow him without falling into trouble - that was how much freedom Chappell enjoyed.

 

[Goughy]

Chappell brought his own fitness man if I am not wrong and Chappell had the opportunities. Cultures can all not be instantly changed but I doubt that barring Tendulkar or Dravid, any one could refuse listening to Chappell or follow him without falling into trouble - that was how much freedom Chappell enjoyed.

Admittedly only once, but I watched Chappells coaches in action. They were made to wait on the field for a relatively long time and then when the session started the effort and application from the players was pathetic. They went through the motions and pretty much messed around.

It was a complete waste of time and almost like they didnt need to work hard.

Again, I raise my point. Its not who coaches or how good they are but how the players apply themselves and what they deem to be the appropriate actions.

Compared to how the SA players prepare, they are light years apart in what the players are prepared to put themselves through.

 

[JaiMurugan]

I think it is actually an attitude problem (probably cultural but Im not knowledgable enough to pinpoint it) that both India and Pakistan have.

By far India and Pakistan appear to have the most out of shape and unathletic teams. Especially when compared to another Asian team like Sri Lanka.

I do not think the players take fitness and prepartation seriously. SS (Manan) do you remember when I posted about watching India's bowlers and fielders warming up for a game against SA? It was embarassing in how poor it was and how it lacked in effort and the fact they made the coaches wait 10 mins on the field twiddling their thumbs.

I dont think the coaches have enough power to tell the players to pull their ****ing socks up and get with it. The players are too powerful and have too much public support.

.

Therein lies the biggest problem in Indian cricket. There is no accountability - if you are a well established "star", you can get by with one or two good performances amidst a whole string of mediocre ones beacuse no one is willing to sack you.

It's not the BCCi that's powerful....it's brand names like Tendulkar, Dravid, Sehwag. It's unlike in Australia where if you don't pull you socks up, you're gone no matter how big a player you are.

And this "star" culture is of course to the detriment of the Indian team.
There are plenty of youngsters I think who are good enough to play for India but I doubt if they will get their chance at the right time simply beacuse the BCCI are unwilling to drop some of the senior pros.

 

[JaiMurugan]

Admittedly only once, but I watched Chappells coaches in action. They were made to wait on the field for a relatively long time and then when the session started the effort and application from the players was pathetic. They went through the motions and pretty much messed around.

It was a complete waste of time and almost like they didnt need to work hard.

Again, I raise my point. Its not who coaches or how good they are but how the players apply themselves and what they deem to be the appropriate actions.

Compared to how the SA players prepare, they are light years apart in what the players are prepared to put themselves through.

Goughy, I have my doubts about how good Greg Chappell really is as a coach....the fact he isn't all that well regarded a coach in Aussie cricketing circles is something worth pondering - but I do agree with you on this, if players don't have the right attitude and the innate desire to succeed, it's just ludicrous to blame the coach.

 

[Pratters]

Admittedly only once, but I watched Chappells coaches in action. They were made to wait on the field for a relatively long time and then when the session started the effort and application from the players was pathetic. They went through the motions and pretty much messed around.

It was a complete waste of time and almost like they didnt need to work hard.

Again, I raise my point. Its not who coaches or how good they are but how the players apply themselves and what they deem to be the appropriate actions.

Compared to how the SA players prepare, they are light years apart in what the players are prepared to put themselves through.

Every thing will not be perfect. There are loads of other problems in Indian cricket right from the grass roots. A coach which comes in cannot change the system instantly but has to learn to work within the system while bringing in changes to the system in the process he can. You mentioned how Sri Lanka are fitter and a key reason, as I mentioned earlier, was Dav Whatmore.

The fitness regimes Indian players go through today are far great compared to 10 years back (as former players themselves say). It cannot be expected to be at the level of the best but it is improving. India is a fast developing nation for example but it cannot be expected to be at the level of US instantly.. it takes time but that does not mean players do not listen.

In any case, your initial point that coaches do not have enough power right now to tell players to pull their socks up is far from what happens right now.

 

[Davey]

Throw massive piles of cash towards Moody and hire him away from SL. At least I wish Pakistan would do that!

Nope Moody is ours buddy

he likes it, and our ppls dont go crazy if we lose either

not that im saying anyone else does

 

[Goughy]

Goughy, I have my doubts about how good Greg Chappell really is as a coach....the fact he isn't all that well regarded a coach in Aussie cricketing circles is something worth pondering - but I do agree with you on this, if players don't have the right attitude and the innate desire to succeed, it's just ludicrous to blame the coach.

TBH, Im not knowledgable enough to make a comment on how good a coach he is. It could be that he is poor, could be that he is good. I dont know.

I never liked him before he became coach of India but I will not hold that against him. I just think that even if he is a very good coach, his chances of success would be minimised by the reasons I mentioned above.

If he is a bad coach then he had no chance. However, you cant coach if people dont listen or work as hard as you would want and I think that is the key.

Talent has never been an Indian cricket issue (apart from quickies) so it must be something else.

I mean even the young quicks coming through the system look to lack fitness and strength and they are nowhere close to the 'big' names in the team or have their influence.

 

[Goughy]

Every thing will not be perfect. There are loads of other problems in Indian cricket right from the grass roots. A coach which comes in cannot change the system instantly but has to learn to work within the system while bringing in changes to the system in the process he can. You mentioned how Sri Lanka are fitter and a key reason, as I mentioned earlier, was Dav Whatmore.

No doubt Dav made a difference but I have played with many, many cricketers from all over the sub-continent (often being the only non-asian national of a particular team) and even at levels below FC and Test (though Im including a few in there) Sri Lankans have had far better attitudes to hard work and maximising their athleticism. I can honestly say the 2 best fielders I have ever played with have been Sri Lankan. As an outsider I have noticed differences in the approach to the game.

 

[Goughy]

The fitness regimes Indian players go through today are far great compared to 10 years back (as former players themselves say).

Agreed. but so have everyone else. India have improved but they started at a level below a number of other countries and have not improved as much as they have.

So despite improving, the fact other have made giant leaps means that they have gone backwards relative to the overall standard of world cricket.

Everything is relative and rather than comparing to 10 years ago they must be benchmarked against other current teams

 

[Pratters]

No doubt Dav made a difference but I have played with many, many cricketers from all over the sub-continent (often being the only non-asian national of a particular team) and even at levels below FC and Test (though Im including a few in there) Sri Lankans have had far better attitudes to hard work and maximising their athleticism. I can honestly say the 2 best fielders I have ever played with have been Sri Lankan. As an outsider I have noticed differences in the approach to the game.

Not going to argue on this with you because I will have to talk on many things with you one by one then but going back to the Chappell point - given that Chappell would have so many differences and would not be suitable to change cultures within the Indian setup, even like a Whatmore, Chappell was probably wrong to coach Indian cricket even if we go by your line of reasoning.

 

[viktor]

No doubt Dav made a difference but I have played with many, many cricketers from all over the sub-continent (often being the only non-asian national of a particular team) and even at levels below FC and Test (though Im including a few in there) Sri Lankans have had far better attitudes to hard work and maximising their athleticism. I can honestly say the 2 best firlders I have ever played with have been Sri Lankan. As an outsider I have noticed differences in the approach to the game.

There is undoubtedly a culture to shirk physical work in India. This was the case even in the National team. John Wright umm, writes, about it in his book.
However, atleast early on, Chappell seemed to have the clout to dictate what the players did or did not. Zaheer Khan's dropping is a prime example.
Things may have happened since then to erode this authority.
Also, in recent times, what has really been a problem for India has been the non-performance of its batting. The bowling, has by and large done okay. I do not see how that can be explained away just based on the players attitudes towards hard work, though I am sure that played a part.

 

[Davey]

i think the indian team has way too much reliance on their batting and need to get in some genuine quicks into their team

 

[Pratters]

Agreed. but so have everyone else. India have improved but they started at a level below a number of other countries and have not improved as much as they have.

So despite improving, the fact other have made giant leaps means that they have gone backwards relative to the overall standard of world cricket.

Everything is relative and rather than comparing to 10 years ago they must be benchmarked against other current teams

I am pretty sure the fitness improvements are not that bleak in the teams comparable. See India fielding in the 1992 world cup compared to the South Africans. See them fielding now compared to the South Africans.

Benchmarked against current teams to see how good they are compared to world standards, yes. But to gauge improvements, you have to assess how your setup has improved over the years internally as well like I stated..

 

[Goughy]

Chappell was probably wrong to coach Indian cricket even if we go by your line of reasoning.

That could very well be the case and one if true I wouldnt argue with.

The core of what I am saying is that sacking a coach or dropping certain players are short term fixes to problems that are more deep seated.

 

[Pratters]

The core of what I am saying is that sacking a coach or dropping certain players are short term fixes to problems that are more deep seated.

Yeah of course. If you want to improve a nation's cricket, the over all structure has to improve.

However, players and coach should not be exempt from being analysed just because there are flaws in the cricket structure in a nation.

 

[JBH001]

Throw massive piles of cash towards Moody and hire him away from SL. At least I wish Pakistan would do that!

I hope SL holds on to Moody.

Besides, I wonder if Moody does not think that not getting the Indian job was now a blessing in disguise. IIRC John Wright had to climb mountains to even begin to get the processes he wanted in place (and he had an able captain for that task in Ganguly) but eventually did not totally succeed. I also believe that mental exhaustion was one of the reasons he called it quits earlier than he may have wanted to.There is only so much you can take.

The point is that a coach is only one half of the equation. The players have to want it too, every day, every hour, in training, and of course in the field. I am not sure if the Indian players approach their basic drills with the same degree of intensity that players from other sides too, and that is something that comes from within - coaches have little control over player desire. Going through the motions simply does not cut it.

In this regard Sri Lanka and Bangladesh do far better than either India or Pakistan - though maybe not as much as Australia or South Africa. In either case, the culture of both of the smaller subcontinental side reflects a greater desire from top to bottom, senior to junior, that is rarely seen in the big two - especially India. Whether this is to do with culture, or environment, or perception of oneself as small and thus having to constantly prove oneself, or a combination of these and other factors I do not know. But it does exist, and is a problem for India that will always militate against it doing justice to its talent.

[Edit] I see Goughy has already touched on and expanded on what I have suggested.

 

[Tim]

John Wright = next NZ coach.

 

[Richard]

Good luck to him with that.