Wednesday, June 13, 2007

What next, Mr Gavaskar?

I sort of anticipated Sunil Gavaskar would trip up Whatmore (What more do we want?), given his antipathy towards Australians ever since his playing days, when Lillee's abuse got under his skin and almost made him abandon a match. But what happens now? Do Gavaskar and Shastri take the responsibility for the fiasco that the coach selection has turned into? No, and that's the problem in our system. There are any number of people influencing decisions, but when it comes to fixing accountability, there's just no clarity. And perhaps that's the way the board likes it.
Look at the coach selection committee. If Chappell turned out to be such a disaster, how come the same experts - Gavaskar, Shastri and Venkataraghavan - are called to select the next coach? What do Gavaskar, Shastri or Venkat have to lose if the wrong choice is made? The board needs full-time, paid counsellors and selectors, not part-timers who have other pre-occupations.
On top of that, Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid want to have a say in the appointment. I can understand Dravid being given a hearing because as captain he takes the rap for the team's performance as much as the coach. But Tendulkar is an interested party, because one of the difficult tasks for a new coach will be to watch the performance and fitness of Tendulkar, Ganguly, Laxman and Kumble, and decide if they're contributing enough to winning and team-building.
With so many fading stars, anybody willing to take hard decisions will not be welcome, and yet that's just the sort of coach and selectors that India needs.


Homer said...

Homer for Coach!!!!

Homer said...

ps:- welcome back

Anonymous said...

I would do the Sandy Gordon part!!!! LOL

Chandan said...


What I don't understand is how we derive the conclusions!

Sachin is an interested party: so whats the gurantee that the coach will dance on Sachin's tunes just because he was recommended by him? Did Chappell dance on Ganguly's tune or would Ford have done so for Dravid had he accepted the job?

Besides where does Sachin say that only he wants to have a say? He had said that the board should consult the players before finalising the coach, not him specifically! Players means all the players who are willing to give an input.

Why do you look at every tiny window for conspiracy theories?

Media-persons like you should indulge in criticism but that should be a constructive one. And it is YOUR DUTY TO EDUCATE THE READERS TO RESPECT THEIR HEROES, NOT BELITTLE HIM for reasons whom they are not sure about!

Are you doing your duty??

Rita said...

Absolutely - Accountability has to be one of the most important factors. All these so-called know-alls have do vested interests -

Sumit Chakraberty said...

chandan, the point i was making is that gavaskar and sachin take no responsibility for running or building the team and yet they have a big say in team matters. this is unusual, whether in cricket or any other field, and it can't be good for the team.
i admire both gavaskar and sachin for their game, but am trying to outgrow hero worship. the thing is the game gives us a lot of joy, but i feel mismanagement, selfishness and poor accountability are eating away at that. it's not often we can pinpoint instances of those, so every "tiny window" of opportunity should be seized. as such, the administrators hardly get exposed, because after every tiny victory all is forgiven and forgotten by us committed fans. do you really think india, with the kind of resources its board has, and the interest and advertising support there is for the game, should be performing as badly as it has been over the past two to three years? i think that is the context in which ricky ponting asked gavaskar to lay off the aussies and introspect instead on the performance of the indian team, and how much he had contributed to its development as an advisor.
and finally, this is a personal blog, nothing to do with my job, even if i choose not to be anonymous. cheers.