Convinced that Indian cricket was strong enough, he was willing to plunge it into chaos for he believed that real clarity had a better chance of emerging from confusion rather than denial. When he wrote that scathing six-page email to the BCCI on Ganguly, knowing full well it could be leaked, he precipitated a change of captaincy that was clearly needed - Indian cricket needed the coach and captain to reading from the same page, and that happened with Dravid's elevation. Yet it should escape no one's attention that he had put his job on the line in doing so, standing for the principles he believed in.

The transition was messy - private arguments became public wars - leaving Dravid with a poisoned chalice. Therein came what is seen as Chappell's second flaw, and ironically Dravid's greatest strength. For the two, some things were non-negotiable. They made it clear that players would pick themselves - not be artificially propped up by selectors or the team management - and, apart from just runs and wickets, factors like a constant urge to improve, a hunger to excel, to do things the right way, would play a part.

There were some players whom the two probably felt had slipped into a comfort zone, did not display these attributes, and got the axe. But their young replacements, who had the right attitude - the Suresh Rainas and VRV Singhs - simply did not do enough to validate the theory that doing the right things would bring the right results.

What some players saw as a single-minded commitment to an ideology, others saw as a reflection of how inflexible Chappell was as a person, how fixed he was in his ideas and views, schoolmasterly in his approach. Chappell could counter that by pointing to a group of cricketers who were unused to being told what to do, were left untouched in success and failure, and largely believed they already knew all they needed to about cricket. And it's no coincidence which group, the youngsters or the seniors, were doing the most complaining, even in private.

'Chappell pushed the players harder than they ever had been, physically and mentally, and some didn't take too kindly to this' © Getty Images

The flashpoint of Chappell's tempestuous tenure was the dropping of Ganguly, the premise of which was that a Ganguly free of the burden of captaincy would emerge a stronger batsman. This was proved right when Ganguly returned from 14 months in the wilderness, before which his batting had fallen away to the point that even his loyalists in the team had lost faith in it. With Ganguly away, India won a record 18 one-day chases, and it was only much later, after the youth policy caved in, that the "experimentation" failed, the "process" was summarily discarded and the old guard recalled for the World Cup, leaving Chappell's hands all but tied.

Chappell pushed the players harder than they ever had been, physically and mentally, and some didn't take too kindly to this. The players were also enraged by the fact that Chappell was talking about his apprehensions, in confidence, to a variety of journalists - something his friends constantly warned against - but the damage was done when these tales reached the players.

That Chappell repeatedly failed to learn from these incidents was a serious error in judgment and cannot be glossed over. But that the players should take such umbrage, and blame this alone for destroying the harmony of the dressing-room is laughable, for they are past masters at manipulating the media to achieve their purposes, as the most recent sordid episode amply demonstrated.

Chappell leaving is not a tragedy. Someone will take his place, Indian cricket, and life, will go on. It is sad, though, that that things hadn't worked out between Indian cricket and Chappell. When a relationship breaks down and a dream dies, what really hurts is the fact itself, not whose fault it was. Perhaps the sceptics were right all along - Indian cricket and Chappell were just not meant to be -but an honest person would admit that it couldn't have failed solely because of one man's flaws.

Saddest part of the story is, neither the coach nor the team(rather Indian Cricket) gained anything during this 22-23 months tenure. It is at the same position, if not worse, where John Wight left. Back to square one? I believe it is back to square 'minus one'. Waste of a lot of money and time. Not theirs, ours.

Chappell was good for Indian cricket and if he had the right support and a longer stint then he would have done wonders. But tad unlucky that the younger players didn't come through well in his tenure. Good luck to him in all his future endeavours.

Greg Cheppell was a great professional and a great
coach. And the Indian senior players did not
perform their duties and now they are compaining
about Greg Cheppell. They have to be professional
every day and should demand best from themselves
every game. Captain and coaches are just the guides and advisor. Try to learn from World Cup debacle and move on.

Nice article. I feel good riddens. I do not agree that a coach who isn't flexible is no good.I agree that a coach should have considerable control on the team, but should always be aware of that thin line between flexibility and being adamant. Success is achieved when one strikes the right balance between the two and I think Greg failed miserably at that. The way he handled the whole Ganguly issue was the starting point of his failure. I am sure the new coach coming in has a good amount of 'lessons learnt' and hopefully will strike that real balance.

It is sad indeed. But a mentioned also should be made about the 'great' indian public who treat our cricketers as 'Gods' on the day indian wins and as 'Shit' when India looses. The reality is something in between. We will build a winning team only when we stop being binary.

Added to public sentiments is the way of life in India. We all want everybody else to be efficient, but ourselves. Our cricketers, administrators, goverment officials, political parties, comman men and women believe in only others doing their job right.

I am surprised that people are shocked by the results. This keeps on happening all the time in the team sports played in India. There will always be one Amritraj, one Jeev and Sania who would reach the everest on individual efforts (but not because of system). When it comes to team sport, where system plays a crucial role, India stands no chance till we change our attitude towards life.

Thanks!

Greg's tenure with the Indian cricket team did not go as well as we, the fans, had expected. Was this Greg's fault...I think absolutely not. Could he have been a better people-manager...perhaps. However, the fundamental problem with modern-day Indian cricket is the absolute lack of professionalism, team-work and accountability. I am a big, big fan of Sachin Tendulkar and always thought that he was the consummate professional. However, I was extremely disturbed by his recent comments. He says that he gave 17 years of his life to Indian cricket and consequently nobody has the right to question his commitment. What about the 17 years of adulation, hero-worship, sponsorships and earnings that Sachin got from his loyal fans? After giving him all this, do we not have the right to question his performance or lack thereof. It is obvious that Sachin is not the only Indian cricketer to have failed us...the others need to be held accountable as well.

Cricket is a team game with some room for individual glory. But the team must always be bigger and greater than any individual. There are some indications that Ganguly repeatedly ignored leadership's request to accelerate scoring during the WC games...this and other such accounts must simply not be ignored. The Indian cricket board needs to adopt and enforce a code of professionalism and accountability immediately. If this actually happens (although I doubt it will), there is a remote possibility that the next generation of Indian cricketers will be fun to watch and follow. While you and I, the loyal fans of Indian cricket, cannot afford to ignore such codes of conduct and performance in our real worlds, why should we pardon our highly-paid cricketers when they repeatedly violate these fundamental codes. Sachin, while I do not have the right to question your commitment, I have the right to demand performance and accountability from you and every other cricketer whose face I see every time I turn the TV on and whose products I buy partly because of the endorsement.

Greg Chappel may have been a great result oriented coach. But obviously his wave length with the Indian team did not match. While the initial things he [ and Dravid] did were laudable, such as the player will pick himself, and no prop ups et ... I think the World cup was the acid test for the team as well as Chappell.

Here then was the scenario: Chappel was happy with the team selected. the team, especially the seniors, were under tremendous pressure due to the media Hoop la. Take this with complacency or overconfidence or whatever and comes the defeat against Bangaladesh.

At the stage of India's ouster in the First round, Chappell seems to have decided that his time was up. His selective leak of his report designed not only to upset the Seniors but to create a serious rift within the team were acts which had no turning back written on them.

The question is if Chappel had decided to go anyway, why write such divisive comments? Or did he really believe they were for the good of the team?
All in all, this is best for Indian cricket, they must pick the pieces and move on with the new coach.

Dear Mr. Vasu, You have said that hinting to the media about dressing room was wrong. I disagree. Indian public deserve to know what is happening in the dressing room. It is common knowledge that Saurav Ganguly is not fit enough to complete 3 rounds of a stadium, has serious eye problems (Remember being bowled by a straight ball from in Bangalore). Why are these hidden from public? Has not Harbhajan declined? He even throws more these days. For an old fashioned cricketer like me, it was obvious that Ramesh Powar was a better pick any day. Fact remains that this coterie exists. Rahul Dravid is not above par either. In a press conference in West Indies he said 'Veeru is not a Ramadin'. I wonder who is eating 'unspeakable things' now - Veeru or Ramadin. The sad part for me is lack of Dravid's cricket knowledge. Sonny Ramadin is a great name in West Indies and Mr. Dravid needs some big lessons. This is the captain who defies his coach. Sachin feels hurt that his coach ticked him off. Who else is supposed to tick him off after his performance? The parliament?
What all I feel is that the Indian board blew an opportunity to genuinely ressurect Indian cricket for the next 10 years. Well, in sport, there is no compulsion that you support only your national team, especially when it has no hopes of revival?
Thanks Greg. Though we could never meet, it was wonderful to have you in Bangalore. You saw what the others did not for they were blind. Some day, the whole motely crowd will realise this.
Regards
Prahlad

It's simple - if your strategy for preparation of tournament is wrong then THAT's where the problem is. In the 2 months after the SA tour, did we play even a handful of matches in the 2 one day series, on green-tops? We would have better prepared ourselves if we did - win or lose and beaten the minnow in our group.

Secondly where is the faith in Kaif & Pathan. Kaif had a good run in WC03 & is known to perform under pressure. Pathan is the allrounder, and it's percentage cricket to have atleast ONE in the team. How can you choose Uthappa who has far fewer one day caps than Pathan?? Hasn't Pathan succeeded in Australia?

No wonder I'm not surprised by India's debacle, and Chappel was not astute enough to see this.

I really dont get it why south asian teams wont hire coaches from their own country. Since, we have produced so many great players that in my opinion we dont need coaches from Australia or Engalnd. Do we really need their help to make us a better team? I dont think so! We have different attitude towards the game. Tendulkar,Ganguly,Dravid they all are great players. Just let them play and get somebody from India who will understand their sentiments.

I know Greg very Personally enough to say, that Greg was the best thing to happen for BCCI and the Indian Cricketers in 21st century. The BCCI and the boys lost the opportunity of having him with them as guide. Greg is the kind of personality the Indian cricket needs to be world beater. BCCI may have money but they do not have correct management. Therefore, the Indian cricket will remain the same way it was since independence. I would say the Saurav issue was very methodically handled by Greg. It's pure BUS 101. Saurav and few others are cry baby and spoil brat, that kind will never be an athalete if they were here in western countries. What have Saurav, Sachin done for India, other than creating huge records? How many of their good performances lead to a victory for India? The percentage could be less than 5%.

Therefore, the Indian Cricket has no right to say anything adverse about truly a Cricket management scientist. That is what Greg is, if you know him personally.

P.K. Guha
President & CEO
PMI International
Troy
Michigan
USA

Ex. Vice President
United States Of America Cricket Association

No Indian sportsmen are truly professional. That is why they are not world Champion on any team or Individual sports (Other than Chess, which is not a sport).

As MR SANJAY MANJEREKAR Said ' Mr Chappell showed the mirror to the Indian Cricket , really sad to miss a man like him , who was frank & clear in his attitude , his comment about seniors are 100% correct

I once read an article by the current coach of Arsenal Football club Mr.A.Wenger as to what makes a successful coach.
The essence of what he said was that the neck of getting the best out of a group of players from diverse brackground,even different countries and culture,of various levels of egos/populariry and making them function successfully on the field AS A TEAM.Did Mr.G.Chappell achieve that ?

I would agree with your observations. I would have however add though if Chappel is such a straightforward person, then he may have taken a firm stance and not admit the failure of the "young uns" experiment and pursued with his beliefs. Wasn't that the premise on the first place. In caving in to selectin and training issues was there a likely desire to retain his position (and plum salary)? If so I think he did a disservice to his own integrity and to the team.

I still think and feel that Greg Chappel was the best thing that happenned to Indian cricket. The only caveat is that the board and the captain's committee which is called for a special meeting, read Greg's report in great detail and abide by most of his recommendations. It is high time that the mentality of our cricketers is changed so that our cricket does not die the same death as field hockey. Indian hockey died because we were slow in adapting ourselves to the new surface the game was switched to. Indian cricket will die if we do not adapt ourselves to the 'Power cricket' requirement which requires fitness as much as talent. Gone are the days when just talent could get us in the last 4 teams of the world cup.

It is sad that Indian team didnt perform at their best level. But hey, this is a sport. One shouldn't take this too serious and start hating the players or even the coach. I must say that, it is wrong to just blame Ian Chappel for all this what has happend. It is not Chappel who is out there in the pitch to play, it is the players who are been given the task to win the match. So, some blame must also be given to the players for not performing well.

Sad indeed! Let's examine the facts - India, traditionally a strong batting team, with quite a few senior batsmen, a not so strong bowling unit, a poor fielding unit, essentially in need of a TEAM, rather a group of individuals. This I would say is Chappel's biggest failure, that he failed to get the TEAM through. This whole debate about who's fault it is has been far too biased for my liking, an indication of Tendulkar's commitment is that he has taken up the role of the 5th/6th bowler without any qualms (to give one example). Every batsman goes thorugh some bad phases, that doesn't mean he is not committed. I don't think there is anything worng with the Chappel vision, I think it needs to be implemented from bottom upwards rather than from top downwards. That is what Australia did as well, in the 80s, when they needed to do a revamp. I think it was arrogant of Chappel to assume that all his changes were for the good, and that they would yield results here. Man management has to be a very important part of the role of coach, and it is scarcely believable how bad he is at that. Vaughan on the other hand, appears to have the knack of saying just the right thing to get the best out of people, and inspiring them to overperform rather than underperform, which is what happens when you feel the coach is not behind you.

It is extremely disappointing for every cricket lover that players like Ganguly, Tendulkar and Dravid will retire without ever having won the World Cup. That I think is the biggest travesty of it all. Maybe, this era will end like the 3Ws did for West Indies - leading to glorious summers in the future.

Can I also point out that since India were playing much better cricket a few months ago, to now turn around and say that India is 5 or 10 years behind, is inappropriate.

Shirish

It is really good for Indian cricket that chappel resigned. He had provided controversies and nothing else.We see results . Under wrights reign there many memorable wins and chappels so called 18 chasing wins maximum r in India and against 3 rd string countries. He should hav gone 1 year bfor the world cup. Anyways what happens is for good

Thanks and regards

Sandip

I think a lot of the reporting and analysis after India's World Cup debacle has become melodramatic and hysterical. Most of the discussions are based on assumptions and perceptions, rather than facts and don't seem to have much to do with reality.

What seems to be the consensus among experts and analysts is this: Greg Chappell came to the scene almost two-years ago with a radical plan to revolutionize Indian cricket and put it on a path towards glory and excellence. But the system he had to work with, especially the team of players he had to coach was so non-cooperative that despite best efforts by Chappell and captain Dravid, who more or less agreed with the Chappell method, the results have been disastrous. So, the conclusion is: Chappell is not to blame, after all his plan was good. It's just that the players were not good enough to implement his plans and face up to the challenge he threw at them on a daily basis. This analysis looks good and acceptable, except it's only so much theory. To get the real reasons behind the sad state of affairs, we have to stick to reality.

Now, what is the so-called Chappell method that every one is alluding to? Did Chappell come in with a document that outlined and detailed what he was going to do in the period he was contracted, and get the opinion of all those concerned? No such thing happened, as far as the public can tell. What Chappell seems to have asked for is a free hand in doing things his own way, and going by how he succeeded in sending Ganguly out, and also how he influenced selection matters, he did get a free hand. But, except perhaps Dravid, did any of the players really understand what was the so called Chappell way? It's one thing to tell the players that they cannot wallow in their comfort zones, or else they will be out of the team. But that has to be complemented by efforts to bring the best out of players. This sort of carrot and stick policy would have worked better than the disruptive, order-out-of-chaos method that Chappell seems to have followed.

We have to recognize that, although the team was on a downslide when Chappell took over, none of the players can be termed worthless, either then or now. Chappell had a choice: either to get the best out of the players, without being unnecessarily disruptive or destructive, or to communicate to the selectors that new talent was to be sought and found. In any case, his mandate was to do everything to make the situation better, not worse. He has ended up doing the latter. No coach can dream that he will get a player exactly the way he would like. If that were the case, coaching would become very easy. The job of a coach is to manage a team of players so that they have more strenghts than weaknesses, and that they collectively perform to win more often than lose. A coach is not supposed to be like a psycologist, who will expose them to their darkest or weakest sides or aspects. A coach should demand and support, keep the players alert about their weaknesses, but at the same time cinfident of their strengths. It seems Chappell only understood one part of his job, that of a tough taskmaster, uncompromising in his demands. He has failed to do the other part, which is to help the players inderstand how they can deliver on those demands, without unravelling themselves. May be, Chappell will learn his lessons from all this. But, we should not take it for granted that he did nothing wrong, and only the players are to blame. The lesson for the future is that it's better to adopt realistic and executable plans, and achieve steady and incremental progress, rather than look for hyped up, grandiose plans that sound exciting, but whose practicablity is never proven. We should all call for commensense, and a sense of purpose combined with realism. No need for chaos or revolutions. We have had them enough already.

True, Chappel was not an astute coach, but he is as erudite as they can get in this sport. Sad that the team did not understand the benefit of the process. Today, we mock his process; tomorrow, it will be remembered as the turning point of India cricket.

Blaming Chappel is a hobby today. About time, the non-performers in the side put their hands up and admitted that the team failed because of them.

And, that includes Dravid, who is a failure as captain. When the chips are down, he has to think differently - and do so consistently. How often does he do that?

The captain must also draw the line between non-performers and performers. While non-performance in 2 innings cannot be a barometer for failure, you also cannot let a non-performer hang on for 20 innings hoping that some day he'll turn a corner. It sends the wrong signals to the team.

I would like to see a wiping out of the current senior brigade (Sehwag, Tendulkar, Ganguly, Agarkar, etc). Let is build a team for the next World cup...bud the team with fresh talent and youngsters.

We may not win many for the next one year or two, but if that can help grow a bunch if hardy cricketers, then it's a worthwhile sacrifice to make in pursuit of the elusive second title.

Good riddance!
Of course my knowledge is limited to what the media tell me, but Chappel seems like a slimy, manipulative guy. No wonder he was at the heart of so many controversies. And now he has left the Indian team in a state significantly worse than when he took over the mantle.
Remember, Greg Chappel is the same guy who instigated his brother to bowl underarm. That is the kind of guy he is.
I am really happy that he is gone!

Ah, of course, the loyal ones are there till the end. Chappell removed Ganguly from the team using the worse possible scheming and manipulative tactics that would do Ektaa Kapoor's tv protagonists proud. And now we have Mr.Anand 'Chappell' Vasu noting "the dropping of Ganguly, the premise of which was that a Ganguly free of the burden of captaincy would emerge a stronger batsman". Yeah sure. Chappell did not know when to eat crow. That was his biggest fault. Good riddance.
But what do I know? I'm just a parochial Bengali who can't see beyond Saurav Ganguli.

I disagree with Anand Vasu's assessment of Chappell.
It is not true that Chappell is a great coach who
whose style and technique was incompatible with
the Indian system. Chappell is a bad coach. Period.

He will be a disaster as a coach at any
level and anywhere.

Mr Vasu lays the blame on Greg for backmouthing the cricketeers thru his contacts in the media. I do not think this is entirely correct. Greg wrote a confidential e-mail to the BCCI secretary on Saurav issue and it became public knowledge instantly. Greg tells a board member in confidence and next day it is public knowledge. Closed door BBCI meetings do not have any secrets from the public. Most recently, the coach's report is flashed all over and analysed a week before the BCCI meeting. All this goes on to show that we do not have a culture and an organisation that strives for the best. A person like Greg, who constantly challenges everyone and everything to improve continuosly, would have found it exceedingly difficult to work in such an atmosphere that caters to mediocrity. Unfortunately, we need an excellent cricket organisation run professionally for us to become world class continuously. We have never had a culture of being among the best for a continuous period of time despite the two world beating wins. This kind of culture continuously brings out the best in everyone and everyone feels that they will get their just due. Remember, in Australis, one of their best keepers in the modern era, Ian Healy, was going to play his next test match at his home ground with a world record of 395 dismissals under his belt looking to complete 400. A week before that, he got a polite phone call from the selection committe: Ian, you are no longer in our plans. You can choose to retire, or you will not find a place next test. Gilchrist is too good to be kept in the sidelines. Ian retired without any much hullaballoo. Ever heared that happen in Indian cricket? Goodbye to all that! Come September I'll come back. "He deserves a better exit" etc are the words that are memorable in our culture. Most think he is good for another innings, just a handful of our erstwhile greats have chosen to exit when the question was why? rather than why not? Sanjay Manjrekar being a notable exception, but I suppose he got out before the match fixing culture and mafia got their tentacles into the system.

I agree with what Mr. Guha said. Chappel is not the reason for India's elimination they just did not deserve to be there. All these super starts think it is another Boliwood film. Since Chappel has not seen those BS but a great cricketer he tried to do things that are not in Boliwood films. The result is all Indian cricket team cry babies winging about the coach!

I am a sri lankan and here is my suggestion to get Indian cricket on the map (or some where within 100 km of the map). Hire Arjuna Ranathunga and give him a free range as the coach. All your cry babies wont last a month. He will get some street cricketers and make a great team. That is what Indian cricket needs not a bunch of cry babies

Cheers

Being an arden cricket fan for over 50 years, Greg Chappell was absolutely a disaster and should never have been a coach for any team, any time. India was the only team, after the last world cup, who had the potential to challenge the mighty Australians. Chappell, being an Australian himself, came with only one mission and vision....how he can destroy Indian cricket. So, it is not surprising, that he used the media to degrade Indian cricketers and played politics to the hilt to malign a very popular sports in India. Cricket brought joy, and laughter, bonding and love to the entire nation, during good times and bad times, to people of all ages. The elderly over 65 yrs, enjoyed looking forwrad to a day watching cricket on television.

Greg Chappel created more unwanted problems, because of his ego, and challenged the same players who plays more cricket than he ever did in his career in his lifetime, more travel, from continent to continent and more variations in the game,viz: Test cricket and ODI cricket.

If anyone needs coaching in culture, human psychology and astuteness,Greg Chappell needs to go through such coaching before he embarks upon destrying cricket in another country.

Personally, I cannot express enough joy and happiness in his his departure! Good riddance to absolute rubbish of a coach from down-under. He may be a great player, and should have followed his brither Ian to the broadcsating booth, rather than on the field as a coach!

Cricket in India is bigger than life and it will survive. We will see many more of Sachin's Ganguly's, Dravid's coming-up soon. It will survive on its own merit, but we don't need over aggresive, super-egotistic, culturally and morally backward individuals trying to be coach of a Great Nation.

It is strange that Greg Chappell and Rahul Dravid, who so readily bought into his philosophy or Vision 2007 or whatever, continued to work with the team which was obviously not of their choice. Stranger still that Mr. Chappell did not raise these points before the team selection for the World Cup. Not just that, there were no 'leaks' to the media, no reports from 'undisclosed team sources', regarding the 'mafia' in the team. If Mr. Chappell was forced to work with his hands tied behind his back, then considering his tremendous integrity and forthrightness, that Ian Chappell and Cricinfo never cease to remind us, he should have resigned. Or are we to believe that he behaved as a true professional and waited till his contract was over and he had earned his considerable remuneration, before saying goodbye. Well then, did Greg Chappell continue as coach 'for the right reasons', and 'what does that mirror tell Mr. Greg now - that he is a bad coach'. Well, it seems Greg Chappell has been honoured to be Coach of Team India, and we have been similarly privileged to have him as coach. I would like to believe Chappell did his best, but I am not so sure. If Chappell and Dravid put up with so much nonsense and injustice from the 'mafia', then they are as much to blame, because they did not protest at the right time. As for Ian, Manjrekar and Cricinfo, please spare us the pious platitudes and take a good look at that mirror yourselves, and if you find an honest one, lend it to Greg Chappell for a day.

I hope when you said in italics, "Indian way" doesn't mean Bollywood way of playing cricket - all drama and no substance ever? If that is what Chappel attempted to change, it is time the selectors wake up to the fact that we need change. Aussies are known for pushing the envelope - the Steve Waugh style of fighting back against all odds. Think about a world cup match under pressure Aussies 5 down for 100 odd on the board, walks in Mr. Symonds scores 135 before opposition blinks their Eye and guess who wins?

Replace it with India 5 down walks in Mr. Young King of the Indian cricket - Yuvraj, scores 24 and gets out. Duh..

I was, is and will be a big fan of Sachin's cricketing abilities. But champion stuff is seen delivered (like the one ball final over against RSA) against all odds was, is and will be rare from Sachin. I would bet Kaif and Karthik to do more such herioc rescue acts with Yuvraj and the likes than Sachin. Dravid is the bridge and he deserves a decent run. I would appoint Kaif or Karthik to be the vice Captain of the team which would then send the right signals - the same way that RSA baptised Grame Smith - by fire.

Sincerely

Krish

May be my comments are not relevant here but I wanted to mention these somewhere:

One of the things the Board or the officials should make sure now is to have a set of written committments from the Coach. The progress should be measured against those committments. This will help in the future assessments too. There should be a process to track those committments regularly. And the committments should be measurable in time, there should be accountability for each committment and tasks that will be performed to achieve those should be understood. For example, fielding will improve by 20% in 6 months where accountbility is that misfields reduced by avg 5 runs. Can bowl yorkers consistently - say 5 per fast bowler in each match. And similarly the players should be accountable on same terms because we know the coach doesnt play it there. SO the committments should be from the team as well as individuals. And each indivdual can have stretch goals too - mentor others, score extra runs (more than avg) etc etc. Ofcourse level of expectations should differ based on experience level and skills. I believe having some standard process will hold people accountable of their actions. And then the decision is easy to keep them or not.

Vasu,
You are absolutely right about your comments about the Indian Cricket. I thing Greg was a wonderful coach who tried to bring some professionalism and Passion to Indian Cricket. But it looks like the Seniors in the team know how to manipulate the media, board and the team to have their way so that they stay in the team forever. Ganguly should never have been bought back to the Indfian team. I guess the Cricket Selection COmitte is the one that needs to be blamed most and most of all the Politican need to be kept out of cricket and mind their own business. I hope the Board selects another coach who could really install some passion into the team.

I do not think that all is lost yet. Greg Chappell may be the best thing that may have happenned to Indian cricket. This is the first time that all the flaws of Indian cricket is presented formally in writing.

I, personally, as an Indian cricket fan, would demand Greg's and Jagdale's report to be made public. If I am planning to spend my precious time watching Indian cricket in future, I would want to know what is wrong with our cricket and what is being done to fix it?

I agree with Mr Vasu. Good article . Hope the selectors and the BCCI are reading it. Drop senior players completely, Ganguly, Sachin and Sehwag.

What was Greg Chappell's credentials as a coach prior to Indian stint? He was the coach ofSouth Ausralia and was a failure there. His methods, if there were any, were unsuccessful in Ausralian set up, and he has destroyed the Indian team, irrespective of the experience level of the players concerned. Sehwag, Harbhajan, Irfan Pathan, Mahendra Singh Dhoni, to name a few, have all suffered under him and all their performance have deteriorated under Chappell's regime as a coach. Even the youngsers like Raina lost their touch after showing initial promise. He even tried to change Sreesant's bowling action but was unable to as Sreesanth complained to Dennis Lilee who shut Chappell down.
Calling Greg Chappell a good coach is just the result of the blind servile attitude we have as we treat the white Caucasians as our great overlords. All Chappell did in his tenure was to show off his superiority complex to bring down everyone around him and he very cleverly played with the media and used the divide and rule policy to exploit the regionalistic fractures in our society to showcase himself. His reign will be remembered as an era of leaks, from e-mails to SMS, he strategically leaked fodder to the media and the so called journalists lapped everything up, overlooking the facts.
Chappell as a coach was unsuccessful in Australia, and Steve Waugh very rightly had warned against appointing him as the Indian coach.
It is really sad to note how conviniently our so called learned journalists choose to overlook the facts and paint a sorry wrong picture just because their initial perceptions and expectations didn't work out correctly, but they are still trying to justify themsleves by calling Greg a good coach! Learn to accept your mistakes and look at facts.

While the plethora of off-the-record player bashings to the media is something not expected of a national coach, I hope the BCCI takes cognizance of the message Greg Chappell is trying to deliver.

While it's very hard to imagine Sachin being less than fully committed to the cause, I hope the BCCI keeps two things in mind before taking any decisions. i) Gavskar has gone on record to claim that senior Indian players have abused John Wright to his face towards the end of his reign and ii) Ganguly has repeatedly mentioned that he feels senior players shouldn't be forced to play in the Ranji to prove themselves. (after they've been dropped). I think these two instances hint at an attitudinal problem amongst some team members. I'm hoping the BCCI looks into this and doesn't conveniently push the issue under the carpet. (as is its wont)

i like to suggest,after the worldcup dissaster i like ask a question why the bcci dont want to drop tendulkar and ganguly out of the team, there is no point to keep them in the team for nothing,they are enjoying the life without doing nothing