"Undefeated after Chappell," bellowed a hack shortly after India's historic series win at The Oval. Following Greg Chappell's exit after the World Cup debacle, India have won two Test series - one of them admittedly against Bangladesh - and six one-dayers. A solitary defeat against South Africa in the first match of the Future Cup remains the only blemish.
Victory no doubt brings its own aura, but this India side looks like a team. The "divisive" senior players are nowhere in sight. What instead has been on view is camaraderie and a unity of purpose. It is early still to pass judgment on the coaching abilities of Venkatesh Prasad and Robin Singh, but it can be said that they have been matey, almost soothing figures compared to Chappell who was strong and dominating. There is a relaxed and open air to the dressing room now.
Both Prasad and Robin were part of the team until a few years ago. Both played under Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Gangly and have immediately caught the pulse of the team. Both, players feel, know the extent to which they can push each cricketer and understand the pressures of playing for India. The bowlers' workloads were carefully handled in the series so far - India, remember, had only three frontline seamers and couldn't afford injuries to any. Greg King, the trainer, has gelled well with Prasad and Robin, while the venerable Chandu Borde, the manager, has chipped in with the odd piece of advice.
When he was standing at mid-off to the fast bowlers, Rahul Dravid had sounding boards in different parts of the field. Ganguly has been relied upon to assess pitches. Tendulkar, the vice-captain; Ganguly, the former captain; and VVS Laxman, the man who might have made a good captain, have chirped away in the slips. Anil Kumble, who has been strangely forgotten in the captaincy debates, has voiced his thoughts from gully. Dravid hasn't wasted the wealth of experience around him; he has solicited advice and weighed up options.
What happens in a couple of years' time, when India may have to do without five of their big guns? Don't they need someone who can get the next generation up to speed?
Insiders admit it has been a while since they saw the older players so chipper. Throughout the last year the seniors in the side were divided over Chappell, but his exit has had a healing effect.
Youngsters have been carried along. Not only have the senior players weighed in with their performances, they have also taken up mentoring roles. Dinesh Karthik has spent evenings with Tendulkar, the "greatest cricketer" he has seen; Sreesanth, overawed on the first morning at Lord's, has been "inspired" by Ganguly.
Inevitably this has prompted the question: do India really need a coach? Does any international team? The longer India's winning sequence lasts - and they start favourites for the seven-match one-day series against England - the louder will be the calls to stay without one. There is a view that the current set-up could deliver consistent success, and that an outsider coming in would mess up plans - which is a different tune from the one the players seemed to be unanimously singing a couple of months ago.
Current success will back up the argument, but the immediate present should not be allowed to obscure the big picture. While it will be tempting to maintain the status quo, the recent run of success won't have changed a few ground realities. The Indian administration and the team will do well to ask themselves a few questions.
Are India completely aware of the requirements of the modern game? Do they possess the creativity and vision needed to build a team for the future? Does the captain need someone to share his burden with? Do the current coaches need someone to guide them along?
It's one thing to bask in the present but one needs to keep an eye on the future. A relaxed atmosphere is important but is there a risk of it getting too relaxed? Also, what happens in a couple of years' time, when India may have to do without five of their big guns? Don't they need someone who can get the next generation up to speed? Where does one look for leadership then?
Dravid himself, as ever, takes the measured view. "We've had some good success on this tour, but it will be too simplistic to say it's because we haven't had [a coach]," he said. "There are other factors that have gone into us playing well. You can't just focus on the coach.
"Sometimes you're in the team and looking at it from one perspective. People from outside can look at a team and see the direction it's going in. They must provide some intelligence and input as well."
India likely don't need another Chappell, who thought rocking the boat was the best way to steady it. But they perhaps need another John Wright. A quiet back-room worker, in tune with the requirements of modern game, strongly wedded to work ethic, who can be both friend and guide. Cricket will remain a game where the captain is the central figure, but the pressures of the modern game require him to have a sounding board, and someone to share the responsibilities and the attention. Particularly when things are not going well.
The captain knows what he expects of his bowlers, the bowling coach knows what they're capable of. RP Singh shouldn't need to go to Leicestershire to find out what his technical faults are; the problem should be diagnosed back home. A technically sound head coach to liaise between the two would serve the purpose. The position must be filled by a professional who prefers not to be seen but is a trusted man-manager. He needs to understand the players, yet crack the
whip. It's hard to say if there is anyone who meets all these requirements, but if he does exist, India need to grab him. The earlier the better.
Comments
Posted by: Senthil Kumar on 08/21/2007
Coaching need not come from one individual called "the coach". If experience and youth and an abundance of talent come together like they seem to have in this Indian team, then the coaching can also come from different quarters, and not necessarily from a "head coach".
Undoubtedly Dravid is carrying some responsibilities, but it is his way of bringing in Sachin, Sourav, Laxman and Kumble into the scheming of things that also makes them all feel more responsible and collectively available to the team's cause.
That kind of kinship is something a coach will find hard to imbibe into any team. All said and done, the Indian team is made of intelligent, articulate individuals, capable of communicating and jelling with each other. Let them be. The experiment might well work in the long term.
Posted by: arunpregash on 08/21/2007
I dont think the current indian team is in need of a coach. i've seen zimbabve coach houghton playing while he was the coach too. So if some one like sachin, sourav and Rahul put together cannot make any difference, i dont think a coach is going to make a huge diff. On top of that you have got robin and prasad taking their respective jobs. So my thought is atleast for he next couple of season, this indian team doesnot require any coach. May be after all the big guns bow out, this question becomes a real question.
Posted by: Senthil on 08/21/2007
Yes, I think India need a head coach, if not to improve the performance atleast to be a part of teams selection process. There should be some neutral person involved in the selection process. Dravid or anyone in the team can be subdued by our selectors and therefore they might fail to spot a much needed talent. Coach will also play a supportive role and advice the captain when things are not working his way and so he will get a morale boost. for instance, I thought if india have had a coach he would have advice dravid about enforcing and followon to produce a result which was very much to India's favour but dravid didnt enforce the follow on and lost a what would have been a very big achievement.
Posted by: Kartik Sivaraman on 08/21/2007
I do feel that India needs a head coach. Invariably he'll be looking into the batting department, since there are already coaches for Bowling and Fielding; Venky and Robin have done a good job given their limited coaching experience. The role of the new head coach should be more of a strategist than one who supervises fielding drills. I am sure many will agree with me when I say Dravid's batting has declined ever since the additional burden of captaincy has been thrust on him. His over-defensive approach in Oval and in the last test of the 2006 South Africa series point out that he is not tackling series deciding situations with the calmest of heads. Perhaps the glut of suggestions from all the Selectors, Former Players, Media managers and senior players in the Oval dressing room cluttered his thinking process. It is this concern that the Head coach should address more than anything else.
Posted by: Viswanathan on 08/21/2007
I feel that there should not be any head coach for at least two more years. With the fabulous four in the side they know what their roles are and I am pretty sure they will bring up young guns like Kartik and Dhoni who are willing learners. Both Venky and Robin Singh have done a decent job so far and they should be persisted with. Give them longer duration and they will produce the results. The manager of our team, when touring abroad, should go to thinking cricketers only. I do not agree with many people airing their views that Dravid should have enforced follow-on to get 2-0 verdict in the recently concluded series against England. If it had back fired? Dravid adopted the safer route of, "A Bird in hand is better than Two in the bush."
Posted by: Mahendra on 08/21/2007
Isn't it funny that most of you guys in the media rediculed the great Kapil Dev when he said that ( at the time he was the coach of India) Indian team does not need coaching as such, they need a big brother, a friend and a guide. At that time all the media guys were ga ga over a lap top coach with tremendous power point presentations and streamlined processes ....how come suddently after one win you are singing Kapil's tune. No wonder he won the World Cup, he kept things simple, unlike the media people who work too hard in getting the degrees and can't believe that sport is a sport first and not business processes.
Posted by: Phil on 08/22/2007
India need a head coach. The team have done very well without one - so far. It may not do well hereafter as India's gruelling schedule until March 2008 takes its inevitable toll.Forward planning will be one aspect which could be forfeited if a head coach isn't appointed. This would leave the team exposed to ambushes.Besides, the captain must have support and whilst the seniors have performed admirably they need to concentrate on their own games too- witness the absence of a single ton from the batting lineup this summer. India must ensure, however, that the head coach is an acceptable individual and not one who is likely to destroy the current unity within the team.
Posted by: Ashish on 08/22/2007
The success achieved in the test series in England has been as a result of the gritty performance put in by the entire team who have perhaps been able to draw upon the experience of the senior players. However grit will not be enough to do well in the shorter format of the game and India will be found out in one day as well T20 cricket. Thats where you will need fresh inputs and innovative thinking for which you need someone with a broader perspective. Test matches are like running a public sector organization where you can still get away with the traditional methods but for the shorter version of the game the team will need to be run like a private sector organization which the current set-up will not be able to sustain.
Posted by: Ashraf Ali Siddiquei on 08/23/2007
There was a suggestion on this from Mr. Rajan Bala sometime ago and was very rightly called that we do not need a foreign head coach. He has suggested the name of our ex-skipper Mohammed Azharuddin for this prestigeous job. Though he was sacked on account of match fixing, which till now is not proved. So if he is selected he will be a very good coach for both batting & as well as fielding as he himself was a very good and stylish batsman & a very hight class fielder. And most important thing is that he is quite young for the job & can last very long. If BCCI can forgive his past & appoint him, it will not only good for him but will be very very good for the development of our team.
Posted by: T Karnmakar on 08/24/2007
India does need a coach albeit someone whose ability would not be media savviness but who can be entrusted with a high work - ethic & backroom advice for the team. While we still have 5 senior players with loads of experience, there will be a time when they wuld call a time & at that point the younger players & a younger captain would need lots of mentoring. Indian or foreigner, he should be able to gel with the team & also gel the team together & more importantly understand the tactics, strategies & demands of modern day cricket. Understandably, the appointment should be done sooner than later.
Posted by: Prakash Nayak on 08/24/2007
Recent events niether prove whether India needs a Coach or not but it certainly proves that NO coac is better than a bad coach
Posted by: Raja Gopalan on 08/26/2007
Sure, we should have a coach when the seniors retire and the seniors should be the coaches (perhaps Dravid as head coach, Tendulkar as batting and Kumble for bowling)
Posted by: jjvazha on 08/26/2007
What is the aim of this discussion , we want to put all the blame on chappel for the loss in world cup and escape? Chappel was a strong. W just had a seriesagainst england whose front line bolwres were nursing injury. WE just escaped the first test from lass due to bad waether. Able to win just 1 test match. And we were too timid to enforce the follow on on england, But soem how escaped and was able to hang on. So suddenly all senior players beocmes so favourite and their existence does not even require a coach. Let us wait till we go to Austarlia. It is tim e for groom up team for 2011.
Posted by: jay on 08/26/2007
Yo Sid,
Currently, the team is gelling well and the seniors are performing well. The moment their performance goes down, there may be a tendency for them to protect their places and there may be a lot of bickering and in-fighting initiated, just like during the final days of Wright and early days of Chappel. So we DO need a good head coach. He should be a behind the scenes guy and a good Human-manager. Board should KEEP AWAY from selection. Regionalism has the nasty habit of showing its head up from time to time. Captain and coach should have a LOT of say in selection and they should be held accountable for the team performance. Agreed that there may be days when the team does not perform, but these should be reduced to a minimum.
We need a coach who motivates and may be reminds that there is a whip option (rather than exercising it). The discipline has been a weak spot in Indian Cricket. In that sense, there should be a lot of professionalism displayed. Good that Sehwag got the stick for being lax. People should be motivated to be professional and dedicated that giving the stick becomes a rarity.
Yes, we need a great coach... Question is who!
Posted by: chandrasekhar on 08/26/2007
I think India needs a Coach.
While Indian cricketers are skilful enough to win matches for the team there is no denying the fact that they are not the fittest in the world. In a cricket crazy nation where competition is toughest to get in to national team , where one has to pull the strings , do things which are politically correct, and then perform well on a consistent basis, cricketers are under tremendous pressure to learn the skills to perform. Fitness is a forgotten word where no one is too fit anyway. Faster bowlers are not as fast as their counterparts from subcontinent, let alone from the westernworld, and batsmen often get cramps once they are into 80s and 90 s. Most famous of the batsmen do not go on and on after making a hundrend (instead go for a allmighty swipe and get out,) what do all these tell?
There are problems to be solved and there needs some help to these mostly non-cerebral cricketers.Paid coaches from the westernworld , who have good understanding of nuances of game,who take immense pride of their trade, who are fit themselves, who do not take part in team politics, who have an eye for spotting and promoting talent are needed.
Do we have one like that in the world scene? I dont know. But India for sure needs one who will have a say in team selection, and who will promote talent with out fear or favour.
Also, the coach needs the support team like a nutritionist, trainer-cum-physiotherapist, and a computer analyst. With good support and an attitude change in the players (Hit out or get out) India should become a force in International cricket. JaiHind
Posted by: Ramesh Joshi on 08/27/2007
We need a good team for the 2011 world cup but more than the team we need the infrastructure in place to produce such a team. India is the richest cricket body in the world but the best stadiums and facilities are in england,australia and elsewhere so more than room at the top we need room to play.
What happens in a couple of years' time, when India may have to do without five of their big guns? Don't they need someone who can get the next generation up to speed?
Web Feeds
