Bowlers – and we have in fact produced world-class bowlers, from the spin quartet through the Kapil Devs and Javagal Srinaths down to the Kumbles – have till very recently come up despite the system, not because of it in much the same way plants grow in the desert, their will to live triumphing over the conditions.

There was a time when the West Indies in pace, and India in spin, had world beaters sitting on the sidelines unable to break in, because there were even better candidates ahead of them in line. Both nations presumed, at the time, that the well would never dry up, that they could dip the bucket in at will, and haul it up brimful. Both nations, now, are struggling to produce decent performers in what was regarded as their traditional strength.

That should tell us something – in an era where cricket is a high-profile industry into which many other industries are plugged in, you cannot depend on chance, on happenstance, to create your product. It needs thought, planning, sustained work.

We need to realize there is no magic bullet; nothing you can do that will translate into results next week. With that in mind, a good starting point would be to implement and fine tune a pyramidal coaching structure, with the schools, colleges, maidans and local leagues as the broad base, and age-limit, district and state-level teams the stepping stones to the top.

Today, systematic coaching begins only at age-level cricket, or later, by which point you've learnt all the bad habits anyway, and you've left the coach nothing to do but tinker.

Against that, consider a system where there is one national coach. Under him, and interacting with him on a regular basis, the state coaches; under this second tier, the district coaches; under each district coach, assistant coaches in charge of school, college and league-level cricket.

The benefit of such a system is in uniformity – since each tier works in close cooperation with the one immediately above, players working their way up the ranks won't find themselves spun around in circles, encountering new methods at every step.

The obvious add-on to that is continuity. The direction of a national coaching academy cannot be a political favor handed out in return for votes; surely it is ridiculous that the NCA has, since its inception, had its chief changed after every BCCI election? The director needs to be a paid professional, appointed for a specified duration, given a clear brief, and the authority to carry it out; with that responsibility comes its corollary, accountability.

The academy needs to be a year-round enterprise – a school that functions for a fortnight or a month in a year is not likely to throw up scholars of any quality in any discipline; cricket is no exception to that rule.

The national academy needs to plug in to the others dotting the countryside. Coaching today has been turned into a cottage industry by former players, all lobbying their respective state governments for land and facilities, setting up their own little operations and doing their own thing irrespective. Which is fine – but a national academy at the head of a loose confederacy of such private enterprise could be the logical next step.

You brought up the question of the new crop of bowlers. Even as recently as ten years back, the national lament was that a nation of non-meat eaters would never produce fast bowlers, remember? And a decade before that, a certain Kapil Dev was being told by his coach that an Indian fast bowler was an oxymoron, that taking up pace was a mug's game.

Now there is one popping up every other day, each capable of hitting the 140s. The moral of the story –- and this speaks to your question -- is, it can be done, if we want it done. In this department, we have progressed at startling pace – from producing one quality quick per decade, to producing a few every other year. I'd back the trend to continue – if only because success spurs emulation.

Our real problem is we don't have patience – as a team, or as a country. After every game, we start and keep up a drumbeat of criticism, very little of which is analytical; most of it is on the lines of 'Drop X, bring back Y, eviscerate Z'.

To an extent, selectors too have been victims of the malaise. Take for instance the case of Akash Chopra. After years of lamenting the lack of an opener, the John Wright-Sourav Ganguly combine unearthed the Delhi right-hander. They assigned him a role based on his strength – a role, happily, that the team needed filled.

He was told to be the anchor that counterpoints Sehwag's bludgeon; the result was a series of partnerships in Australia that held the new ball bowlers at bay, cushioned the middle, and created the platform for India's outstanding performance in that series.

He seemed to have most of his ducks lined up – tight defense, compact play, good eye for the single and with it, an ability to rotate strike and relieve pressure. It was a building block in the right place – so what did we do? We went 'Oh, yeah, well, the guy only gets 40s; he doesn't convert them; he doesn't score quick enough…'

So, on the back of far fewer failures than the 'stars' have had, out he went; in came the presumably quicker-scoring Gautam Gambhir – who, having learnt from Chopra's example, took to getting off the blocks like a scalded cat, looking to play shots at pretty much everything… he is now out, and we are back to looking for the next great brown hope.

Team building doesn't work that way – especially in the longer form of the game. The management – and to me that has to comprise coach, captain, selectors and the BCCI – has to have a goal, a vision, and the willingness to think long term.

From that base, they need clarity – and unanimity – about the sort of player they want filling each role in the team; they need to then identify the players who fit, or come closest, to those criteria, pick them, fine-tune them, set them goals – and keep the faith.

It will take time, and patience, and will – but in the end, it will achieve lasting results, where the chop and change policy we have relied on through our cricketing history will produce the odd win based on once in a lifetime individual performances, but nothing more.

Bang on target!!
Nice article Prem.
Ours being the richest sports body in the world, should invest in NCA and other academies/foundations.
Things look bright with current bunch of board officials; but who knows how long they'll continue.

India has now gotten into the habit of going one up in a test series, only to surrender the last test to draw,or in some cases lose,the series.It started in australia in 2003.And one more thing,people ,including cricket commentators,keep saying that we are good players of spin.I beg to differ.We once were ( the best player of spin i've seen is Navjot Sidhu) but nowadays we dont play spin too well.Players like shahid afridi,Murli,Ian Blackwell (of all people!), Danish Kaneria ,Vettori ,even part timers like Russel arnold- all of them succeed in putting the brakes on our scoring rate in the middle overs of the one-day game,as well as in tests.This has to be addressed. We also find it difficult to put away rank loose balls from spinners.This issue also has to be addressed.

Pretty much the same that i had been thinking for a while. Akash chopra did brilliantly for us, but we did not have patience.
Brian Lara did not start very well in test cricket, but west indies stuck with him, we are not, which is sad.

The only thing that i wanted to say was that the system that you are proposing for the coaches, can get bereaucratic too after a few years.

What we need is talent scouts. Guys who go to different places and are good at unearthing gems. There are many players who get triple centuries but are not good enough at the highest level.

Good Work Prem !!! A well thought out write up..... The mushrooming of acamedies at every nook & Corner may not help the Long term vision unless streamlined properly.... And yes the case scenario of Akash Chopra shows us in poor light( a good reminder for all us).... If Marvan Attapattu was within our system, he would have been history before he got of the blocks.....It is time we learn to plan ahead and work forward with loads of patience.

You make some good points, Prem. But I'm not entirely down with your argument about Chopra. First of all, as opposed to the a few years ago, players are getting more than a handful games to prove their worthiness. Ever been to an acting audition, Prem? Not doing well at the audition doesn't make you a poor actor. You could turn out to be quite good if the director persisted with you. But the chances of finding a really good actor go up dramatically when you go with somebody who's nailed the audition. It's harsh, but it's the way of life. Chopra had his run, and he didn't do that well (regardless of what you claim). Those partnerships you mention were in no small part due to Sehwag being in the form of his life, and us facing some mediocre bowling on the flattest of pitches. Against quality bowling, where his doggedness was needed most, he failed miserably. Gambhir was given plenty of opportunities in the ODIs as well. After his century against Sri Lanka (he nailed the audition), the team management vested some faith in him. Unfortunately, he's failed to deliver and now it's time to look elsewhere. Gambhir, meanwhile, will have to go back to domestic cricket and build up a reputation that would earn him another chance. Chopra can do the same. Their careers are not over by any measure.

In a country of a billion people, you can't afford to be patient with everybody. Just a fact of life.

Pratik
http://yorker.wordpress.com

Excellent article! So I wonder what are the other articles for, if at the first place we know that we need more patience than those smart talks of changing Indian cricket by overnight revolution!

Good article, Prem. Very focused in thought, well articulated and topped with a healthy dose of reality.

With projected revenues greater than all other world cricket boards combined, the BCCI certainly has the funds to implement the kind of long-term program that Panicker is advocating. Whether they are inclined to worry so much about the long term is another question.

In my mind, the main area for reform is at the level right below the Test squad. First class cricket in India is remarkably poorly funded and organized given the vast resources that have been available at the top level. Despite recent improvements, it is still difficult for the first class cricketer to make a decent living as a professional. A skeptic might claim that it doesn't matter, since the best talents will automatically be slotted into the academy and the A team, thus bypassing the first-class level. However, this argument assumes that it is always possible to separate the wheat from the chaff at an early age. However, cricket is not a sport where potential can so easily be measured, as is confirmed by the number of under-19 India internationals who have been washouts as adults. Unless a wide range of players are given the opportunity to develop their game over time without worrying about their future livelihood, many potential stars will have dropped out of professional cricket before their time.

Nor is much attention paid by selectors to performances in Ranji and Duleep Trophy matches. This hardly provides players much incentive to improve their abilities. How else to explain the total snubbing of Pankaj Dharmani, perhaps the most consistent run-scorer in domestic cricket over the past 10 years? Granted Dhoni's current hold on the wicketkeeper position, why has Dharmani has been ignored in favor of backup wicketkeepers (Karthik, Patel), whose domestic averages in the longer form of the game are barely over half of his 51.23? If attention is paid, it is only the most haphazard of ways, where good performance in a single match when a selector happens to be present is more important than sustained excellence over an entire career.

Good article. I feel there is nothing like specialist opener and things like that in todays cricket. Quite often we see the one down batsman coming in and playing in the first over. Most of the time Dravid comes in that position and succeeds. So it is better to try and make him as a opener (whoever has a very good technique should open) along with shewag and try others in some other slots, instead of always keep changing the openers every now and then. With things like flexibility being the trend in current indian team, players should be able to play in any position.

Hmm Prem very interesting that you have mentioned about Akash Chopra .After being dropped his confidence somehow took such s dent that he failed to score enough runs even in domestic tournaments.Gambhir has never really impresses me coz he tends to play too much across the line leaving him open to lbws.As far as NCA being all year program.I think the way its going now its fine.The only thing that I will do is reduce the no of matches.If it means removing the Duleep Trophy so be it.The season being short would basically mean that the players would be under pressure to perform.Once the seasons is done,the best players should be contracted ,sent off to NCA for a month long camp.Here their weakness ,strenghths should be analyzed and work done on them to improve it.This should be followed by a single A Tour either abroad or here.If here then under no circumsatnces should the pitches favour spinners!!Once they come back from the A tour rest and then begin the fresh season with Irani .

Prem...I find a contradition in your article. The first part highlights the prevelant culture of not encouraging bowling as the viable option in a cricket career. And therefore, you suggest the multi-layered coaching structure etc.

And then, later on, you say that in recent times we've had enough talented bowlers popping up. And that we need to be patient for the results. But if we have so many talents coming up, and so regularly, now, then why do we need that elaborate network? I'm not saying we shouldn't...just that this reason is not convincing enough. Surely, you're not saying that all these new finds are 'exceptions' ?

While one can keep chasing for the "absolutely perfect" team, the 15 that have been chosen for West Indies ODI's seem about the right lot. Let us not forget that our bench strength today is one of the best in recent times; and the strategy of trying many youngsters for various functions, while flying in the face of convention, will eventually separate the men from the boys.

There is a deep correlation between the Indian economy, the current trends of the Indian society and Indian cricket. in the desperate need for new heroes we hype the hell out of initial sparks…. Look at Indian cinema…. It took Kamal Hassan and Rajinikanth years of hard work to be named super stars….. But, today, it takes one hit film to be named a super star…… Cricket is the same thing…….. One good series, and you are the next Sunil Gavaskar….. did we not say that of SS Das? Does anyone remember him now? Prem’s article is spot on with its analysis and recommendation to build 'sustainable development' programs... be it the economy or our cricket, we seem to be banking on natural talent and sparks of glory to put us on the remarkable trend we are seeing recently.... cricketers like Sachin Tendulkar are a gift... someone like Rahul Dravid is our Godsend message... If we can concentrate on processes and religiously stick to sustainable practices, we can build a great colossus in the midst of talented genii like Sachin Tendulkar.... The watchword in India should be 'Sustainability'.. Infrastructure is expensive and human resources are invaluable... building the two so that every generation have their Vishys, Kapils, Azhars, Sachins, Souravs (for his flamboyant captaincy) and most importantly the Dravids, Kumbles and Gavaskars endlessly should be the answer to most of the issues.... the former being the list of flair players and the latter being the method players…. Please notice that I have not included Sehwag, Yuvraj, Pathan, Dhoni or Laxman with these names….. they have not done enough yet to be included among those names……

Good points made and I totally agree

Patience is the Key!!

See you after World Cup 2007.

Good article Prem, if a little over-idealistic. Sure it would be good to have such a huge talent development factory but is it really practical? Considering what I know about Indian cricket and its administration, what you seem to be writing is the recipe for a huge bureaucratic white elephant. For example do you really think appointments of coaches in your lovely 'pyramidical coaching academies' will be done on merit or like every other quasi-governmental position in India become avenues for granting favours? I certainly wouldn't trust my son to one of these academies. Competition and chaos (i.e. the current structure) are a lot better at producing talent than regimented uniformity.

Some minor form of regulation would be useful though. There are coaching badges for managers in football. Perhaps something could be considered for cricket in co-operation with the ICC. Coaching for coaches as it were. No compulsion to get the badges but they would definitely be status symbols and soon people would be wondering if their coach was qualified.

I do agree with your other points though. The need to achieve some consistency - both in selection as well as appointments.

I dont think the entire blame for Akash Chopra should goto Selectors. Ganguly was equally responsible. In the 2004 Pakistan tour, Ganguly had to miss a test (2nd I think) due to injury and Yuvraj singh took his place and performed well. While still in India I remember Ganguly commenting that Yuvraj Singh might open once he returns and thats exactly what happened when Ganguly returned after injury and Akash Chopra had to sit out. Sitting out in that test seemed to have dented his confidence and eventually Akash Chopra was chucked out.

I disagree - well partially ..for that matter few other players also need to have the stickfast glue removed holding their places in the Indian team and others need to be given a chance . We could've still persisted with Parthiv Patel for example and never seen Dhoni,with such criteria . Instead of giving 10 chances at a stretch and dropping them thru the big black hole , they can be "rested " and given more chances after some time. They'll come back more hungry and more likely to perform to potential. They should do that to "seniors" too..not only will it keep them on their toes,but also keep opponents guessing,and less prepared in this laptop cricket age.I really like that they started to do it in one-dayers lately. It doesn't matter if any xyz cannot play in a certain match..earlier it was a discussion for parliament.
Might as well mention - isn't it time Harbhajan is taken out of the team ( and can be brought back again ) - what is he , a favourite of journalists or something ? how come no one talks abt his non-performance , and his name and picture is plastered if he takes one wicket . And also we need better pictures,esp of Harbhajan - in desi context they may be ok, but these "dosti" photos on and off the field are fairly embarassing

I wish we had a system, atleast we dont have to bear Kumble as our spinner !!!! He goes overseas.. fails.. comesback to india gets 10 wickets and he is back... Play him in only overseas tests and you will realize his so called greatness..
That dude is blocking a sinner's spot. And the new kid CHawla is taking lessons from him...Only god can help...

Well said Prem.I think part of the problem is also to do with - Not moving on. If we select a candidate for being strong 3 strong points and one week point he gets picked saying that the one week point is not a hinderance. Then when the person is finding it tough to score, we drop the player for that one weak point.If we decide to ignore that one weak point and player continues to do go or atleast not forget his 2 strong points then we should continue to move on.
The other thing, is sehwag always wanted to be a middle order bat.So dropping his from test will be unfair , for he sacrficed under the unwritten contract that his lack of form opening the innings will not be used against him.If he is failing as an option,and gambhir(our own Slater) is good, then i think chorpra and gambir should be good.Now if sehwag finds it tough to compete with a VVS and choses to be an opener, he should be looked into and treated much the same way an opener would be treated!!!

It may be a bit out of context, but I agree 100% with Sandip Bhaskar on the claims of us being the best players of spin bowling.

To his list I would add lesser bowlers like Giles, Clarke and Shoaib Malik.

The best way to play a spinner is to attack him early on - 2 steps out of the crease and smack him over his head.

After Sidhu, we haven't found a cricketer capable of doing it with much effect. Sachin used to do it, but he only manages to hole out these days, if at all he decides to come down the track.

Sehwag and to some extent Dhoni are the only 2 people who can do it.

As Dravid correctly said, we seem to be loosing our home advantage. Lack of quality spinners, other countries adapating to Indian conditions and lack of quality players of spin bowling are the 3 primary reasons.

I agree with your comments about systmatic approach to building up the infrastructure. After being in new york for the past 10 years I also feel there is big difference in how sports is handled here versus in India. The people I work with, played sports during their high school or college and then now as they have kids going to school seem to spend a lot of time coaching the school teams etc. I dont know how it is in India now a days but at least when I was growing up , participating in cricket (or any other sports ) by a significant number of 30-50 year olds was not very common. This creates a bottoms up process where every school kid gets exposed to the game in a systematic manner.

When will the selectors learn?
How can they prefer Kaif, Uthappa, Rao over Laxman? This was a great opportunity to bring Laxman back and get him some practice for the WC.

Same goes for Kumble. There is no reson to ignore him. He should be in the ODI team too.

Laxman, Kumble are a must in ODI team if we want to make a serious run for the WC. I would add Tendulkar to the list hoping he is fit and back in ODI form by end of this year.

There are just too many inexperienced players in the team right now to take on heavyweights like Australia especially.

It is a pretty temting argument when you talk about fast bowlers on the Indian subcontinent. We have fast bowlers at present that clock in the 140s but we do not have a Wasim Akram or a Glenn McGrath who could be a matchwinner for us every game or atleast threaten the opposition enough so that the other bowlers could benefit around him.
Fast bowling has been the area of concern for India and I think that it will be another 5 to 10 years when we can actually produce a quality fast bowler. If we want to match up with the likes of Australia and S. Africa we will need a good combination of bowlers. We have the batting line up to score 300 runs every time we take the field but it is useless if we cannot defend that kind of a score. We saw earlier in the year that Australia posted 434 and still lost because they did not have Glenn McGrath to stem the flow of runs and take crucial wickets.
The soul reason that we lost the World Cup in 2003 was the lack of a quality fast bowler. We allowed Australia to score 359 and the match was over right then and there. If we even had a Makaya Ntini it would have made a world of difference. I hope that we could produce a group of talented bowlers for the 2007 World Cup so we could repeat what was done in 1983 as well as take a step forward in the right direction.

Just to give an idea how the idea Prem is sugesting would work, check this out:

A major league team's Director of Player Development determines, in coordination with the coaches and managers who evaluate their talent, in start of season training. Players both from the major camp and minor league winter camp are placed at end of the training season by the major league club on the roster of a minor league team.

The Director and the General Manager usually determine the initial assignments for new draftees, who typically begin playing professionally in June after they have been signed to contracts.

The farm system is ever-changing: Evaluations of players are ongoing. The Director of Player Development and his managers will meet or teleconference regularly to discuss how players are performing at each level. In addition to personal achievement, injuries, and high levels of achievement by players in the classes above and below all steer a player's movement up and down in the class system.

If you read it and if it sounds familiar - That's how farm leagues work in Baseball in the US. I just copied it straight from Wikipedia on Farm leagues and removed a couple of words.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_league_baseball

What we are mainly missing is the professionalism

-harish

I agree with the article except with analysis on Akash Chopra.
The last three matches that Chopra played i.e. 6 innings, he just didn't go into double digits and we lost all three matches. His average was in the 20s and strike rate in 30s which was being overlooked and now he wasn't even staying at the wicket and even if he stayed around for 30 balls we were still losing the match. So obviously he wasn't being effective or not providing any purpose unless his close-catching was the reason. Since Chopra couldn't convert those innings into long ones it was a matter of time till he got chucked out. Just like Manjrekar, kept wasting all the initial hard work. Spending tons of time at the wicket and nothing to show for.

Prem, As always a nice article - incisive and objective.

I reckon you have been a bit too generous on Akash Chopra - sure, he did a decent enough job down under in 2003-2004 against a second rung pace attack that was taken to the cleaners by Sehwag anyways - all he needed to do was put his bat on the straight ball for a dot or a single at best - good swinging ones would miss him and go to Gilchrist - as they say, it takes to be a good batsman to get out to swinging ones !

Sure Ganguly scripted Chopra's obituary but I believe it was much needed - you cant have a stroke-less wonder in the side just for his short leg catches ! Give the devil its due- Ganguly had this uncanny ability to spot and back talent and weed out the mediocre - Indian cricket owes him a big deal for the courage and conviction he had on the likes of Sehwag, Harbhajan, Yuvraj, Kaif, Pathan and Dhoni ( lets not forget who promoted Dhoni to the Number 3 position during the Vizag ODI against Pak, that truly launched the 'Dhoni Dhamaka' brand ) - these are the men who are making the Chappel/Dravid combo look invincible.

cheers

Chopra is an interesting case - I maintain that his record of 2 fifties in 19 innings merited the selector's decision. A quality player will always bounce back from being droppped...Chopra has done nothing in domestic cricket since...I dont think he is cut for Test cricket.

India will continue to flounder in Test matches unless we find a *GENUINE* fast bowler. Medium-pace trundlers hitting 145 two balls out of six, wont do the trick. How many times over the years have we wished that an indian bowler would just bowl those lethal yorkers and turn up a match-winning performance ?

If you take a look at the stats, Kumble has been the *ONLY* consistent match-winning bowler to win tests, home or abroad,and that too to an extent - which brings the question, After Kumble who ? Harbhajan is at best a containing bowler, when we play overseas. Pathan - promising but too early to say. If he can become half as lethal as his mentor Wasim Akram, he would do us proud.

Bowling and Bowling alone has been India's bane all-along. Always we have the occasional test, where our "world-class batsmen" score a few tons and try and make a match of it. But when that decisive test comes up, our batsmen AND bowlers dont do well. Be it Barbados/ Jamaica/Karachi/Mohali/Harare

Even if you take a country like New Zeland, you have bowlers like Shane Bond/Franklin and batters
like Fleming/Oram who can win matches for their team. They may not have the aura/hype of the Indian players but they have won matches for their country.

This is not to belittle our team's last performance in Aus/Pak, but I think we were all lured into a false sense of supremacy when we drew the tests in AUS and won in PAK. AUS did not have their two best bowlers Mcgrath and Warne. Can we draw a series at home without Kumble and Pathan ? No way.

The selectors instead of indulging in mud-slinging excercises and filing affidavits and counter-affidavits should step out of the comforts of the Taj's/Sheraton's and tour the villages of our country and try to unearth fast bowlers.

funny.

Laxman, Sachin and Ganguly as described by their fans are living in their dreams.

reality has passed them with Ganguly outing .

they should be out too.

Akash Chopra stroke less wonder play for India , wont Indian fans die of boredom.

so what if we loss tests.

its time for Kaif , Venu to get into test team with Yuvi .

openers who ever provides solid opening , veeru , Akash, Gambhir, wasim . dhoni and Yuvi never, not if you want them performing for India.

Dravid open . you have to be dreaming in test . every captain and coach would love the news. the best player offered on platter. only Indian fans can think such wonders.

Dravid bats slowly at 3 , you should thank your lucky stars that he dose, otherwise there would be non of the tests we won that you all are so proud of.

ever wonder why 100 by other batsman ends in defeat or are made on flat great batting wickets ending in draws.

close catching , wait till West Indies series then see Dravid, Kaif, Yuvi, Venu taking great catches if you want the team to win there . you better start wishing these cricketers are playing in the team.

Posted by: Vishy at April 20, 2006 04:05 AM

Do you really think that Sehwag, Tendulkar, Dravid, VVS Laxman and Yuvraj are the top 5 batsmen.
With Sachin averaging just around 25 from his last 30 odd test matches, how can i team playing 5 batsmen afford to give him that cution, even sehwag is not in best of his form. Dont you feel that we need to give some chances to yongesters and help them blossom. As Yuvraj has grabbed the opportunity by replacing the man how was no where near his best.

Posted by: Amit Goel at April 20, 2006 04:31 AM

Kumble a Matchwinner abroad!!!!!!!!
You got to be kidding me !!!!!!!

Hi
what u mentioned is ok.but it happened to dravid too.he was scoring runs slowly.but he improved his batting and today he is our most valuable player.people mentioned a lot about dravid,sachin and laxman,one thing i want to tell u sachin played 16 years for us and with laxman's 281 only saved ganguly from losing his captaincy.what ever the matches india won under ganguly most of them are because of dravid only,
his strike rate is not one of the best,but consistancy made him one of the best batsmen in the world. It’s easy to blame others. I am still wondering why people are thinking bad about our players.

Good article Prem. However a hierarchical structure to Indian cricket is easier said than done. It would require a complete overhaul of the current system and a huge investment on organizational and managerial tasks. Not impossible but would require as you aptly put it - "patience" (would definitely not happen overnight). One area i feel that can be visited more is giving more autonomy and power to local state cricket boards. That would ease up some on the beauracracy with a truly top down system.

Akash Chopra. I beg to disagree on his performances. If he were making his 40's consistently patience would have been the name of the game. However if you look at his scoring - he did well initially (well meaning in the 40's) against an undermanned Australian attack (In Australia so have go give him due credit there), and against a up and coming Pakistan side playing on flat pitches. He was also assisted by the fact that Sehwag was playing in a trance then and did the bulk of the scoring. So it was Sehwag with his blistering attack taking the shine away rather than as you put it, Chopra's excessive blocking. In any case he was given enough chances (19 innings to be precise) and after those initial few 40's didnt cross 25 too many times. He might've matured later if we persisted but with so many talented players our there time and tide waits for none. Also he's not that old for his career to come to a screeching halt. He can go back to first class cricket and prove himself all over again if need be. Lets wait and see !

Good one again, Prem. I concur and supplement. Biologically, our basic nature is to be instinctive and spontaneous in our actions. Patience is not a natural quality in men. If it were a basic necessity for existence, we would have all evolved to be patient. It is but an important and essential appendage to the other virtues of the “inquisitive”, the “ambitious” and the “visionary”. It makes sense only to those that have purpose for it. It is like the oxygen tank to the mountain climber or a deep-sea diver. Common-man, who is happy to just exist (without the excitement and thrill for mountain climbing or deep-sea diving) will/need/can not begin to appreciate its value. As a society, we (Indians) are closer to being a common-man than to being an ambitious achiever (so far). There is nothing wrong with it, but that is just the fact.

Sportsmen require patience. Most of sub-continental cricket is about instinctive sportsmanship. Apparently, (at least until recently), there has been little (or no signs of) method, long-term goals, or perspective – all of which require patience for realization –among our cricketers (or our cricketing community). Hence, in the absence of such methods, we have never been able to call our shots – there is an instinctive fear of awakening the devil in the opposition. That is why the dozens of our wins over half a decade (at home or outside) fail to appeal enough to us and seem like chance happenings rather than planned achievements – there is always self doubt. The contemporary Australian team is probably the only team that seems to own their victories because they seem to be patiently persevering and realizing a method. Their management agreed on a vision in the late 80’s; proposed the methods to achieve the vision; and observed patience to implement their methods. No other team has been able to do that yet, though a few are on their way.

Come to think of it, it has taken more than 5 decades for a rotating (Indian cricket) team of about 25 members to learn to set goals and realize the importance of patience as an essential tool – thanks to the coaches John and Greg; the captains Kapil, Saurav and Rahul; and those that “put” them there. Thanks to the 1983 Prudential World Cup victory, it has taken only 5 decades – otherwise it could have been much longer. Now imagine how long it will take for a team(?) of 1 billion (and growing) to realize the same! It cannot happen by chance (in spite of the system). If it does so, it cannot sustain – like the Windies of the yore. We need the GCs and JWs at all (from schools to the highest) levels to set up a virtuous and evolving system that will help us in rekindling the visionaries and patient methodologists in us! THEN, the growth can be logarithmic rather than linear; THEN we can hope to see our successive generations walking our talk. All said and done, the quest for virtues like patience (at least in sports) cannot be instilled in our mass unless the culture of playing sports is made integral to our daily lives.

By the way, I am just curious about – who we are writing to? In the absence of feedbacks from the original authors, I feel like a vociferous spectator watching ODIs at shade-less Indian grounds, reacting to radio commentaries. It would be nice if (we know that) our suggestions are being read (criticized or appreciated) with similar indulgence as our. Hoping that I am being read, I request the author to acknowledge my reply to his previous post – where I had extended a similar thread of points as his.

One thing that people fail to mention sometimes is that how good a close in fielder Aakash Chopra was.

Prem, Magnificient analysis!
You have grown up from a writer in the late 90s who was more opinionated towards only criticism/bashing to being a balanced journo. Maybe your stay in the west influenced that change. But one thing for sure, if Indian cricket(which has the talent) is to become truly consistently world class over a period of time both home an away, then PREM PANICKAR or like minded guys need to be at the top, instead of the greedy bueracratic politicians like DALMIYAs and PAWARS.

Nobody has taken up the case of Akash better than Prem Panicker. It was gross injustice to him by the way the selector sidelined him. I think it is his curse that India has not done well in tests since he was dropped for no fault of his.

On Aakash Chopra: Prem was referring to the way he was dropped initially, not whether it makes sense to put him back on the team now. The way he was handled was criminally bad man-management. He had done everything that was expected of him, yet was dropped. Yuvraj had come into the side as an injury replacement for Ganguly, had scored a century against Bangladesh, and then was retained in preference to the incumbent Chopra once Ganguly was fit again. The argument was that since Yuvraj had just scored a century (even against Bangladesh), he could not be dropped, and Chopra had to go, even though he was at that time averaging in the high 30s and had managed to see off the new ball in nearly every innings he had batted.

Anyone with an eye to the long-term development of the team would should have thought about the consequences to the respective psychological development of each player. Yuvraj had not expected to play, and knew he was coming in as a substitute against a relatively weak side. It would not have been unreasonable, and hardly devastating to his confidence, to tell him that he should continue to develop his game before gaining a regular place on the team. Indeed, the decision to give him a regular place backfired, and a string of poor performances saw him dropped shortly thereafter. On the other hand, one can imagine what was going through Chopra's mind when he was told that he no longer belonged despite meeting, or exceeding, all expectations for an extended period of time. I cannot think of anything that can be more devastating for a player's peace of mind or self-confidence. It is no wonder, then, that he was played with extreme tentativeness, and thus failed, when he was finally brought back into the side much later.

amit

I wouldn't call Kumble a matchwinner abroad either. But it seems his overseas performances are starting to pick up. In his last 20 overseas matches, he's taken 84 wckts at 35. Contrast that with an overall overseas record of 50, 185, 37. Obviosly he's starting to do something right.

All this experimentation will be exposed when India will tour England. The real test will be against England and Australia. Recently Gillespie scored a double century, will Australians experiment with him, I think they won't. India needs to learn a lesson from it. India needs batsmen with good technique rather than make shift players. I never understood the logic of sending Pathan up the order. When you have good batsmen why dont you give them the opportunity to play rather than some like Pathan who is not a regular batsman.
The current system is producing good players,under 19 team being an example, its the wisdom of the coach which needs imporvement.

I can distinctly remember that Akash Chopra was probably a prodigy fielding at those dangerous close-in positions. We all saw on TV how he was heads and shoulders above the rest, now we see a Kaif doing his jump stance every now and then.

Coming to your article we should probably stick with Wasim Jaffer for as long as we could, for he too seems an elegant player with a compact defense.

Yuvraj these days is entering a form that Sehwag was once in and thanks to bringing him into the test team in Pakistan, it triggered a career climb for him. Of course, he edged out Ganguly in terms of team value in that series.

Finally, if we choose to drop jaffer someday.. Lets hope we can fill in that role with Chopra. Chopra can do himself a lot of good in England, by being as consistent and rake out hundereds like he used to. All the best to him!

Posted by: Sachin at April 20, 2006 03:28 PM

I wish we had a system, atleast we dont have to bear Kumble as our spinner !!!! He goes overseas.. fails.. comesback to india gets 10 wickets and he is back... Play him in only overseas tests and you will realize his so called greatness..
That dude is blocking a sinner's spot. And the new kid CHawla is taking lessons from him...Only god can help...

saikrishna: has this guy seen a mental hospital, cause he called a gentleman who has taken over 400 wickets in tests a failure, called Kumble.
plz somebody help sachin he needs to c the mental clinic soon!

another Indian writer talking about Indian cricket for the umpteenth time. id rather read about zimbabwe's cricket politics than india's 'pace' prospects!!!

Marcus:
Overseas should not include Bangladesh, Kenya, Zimbabwe. Then see his record.. It would be like 125 wickets abroad and 350 in subcontinent.. Even in Pakistan and Sri Lanka he gets mauled. Even vettori bowls well and Mr Kumble is still learning to spin the bowl..
Yo Sai Krishna, I dont need mental clinic . But maybe you need a doctor. I am sorry I called your gentleman "boyfriend" a test failure. Dont get so defensive. Go analyse his overseas record in detail and his record on Indian cracking pitches

Panicker - how about this for a terrible approach:

1) Your and Cricinfo's obsession with "matchwinner". Cricket is actually a team game. I accept Tiger Woods and Phil Taylor as matchwinners though. Cricket is about the team and until u guys realise that, India will never be the mark of England or Australia.

2) DS Jadhav is best opener in India. Yet More criticised his approach. A man who was middle order bat averaging 30 and made himself into an opener averaging 60! Laughable comment from More.

3) Why isnt Amit Mishra picked - a genuine turner of the ball who should do well abroad?

Hi Prem
Good article- Indian cricket definitely needs more courageous men like Ganguly who would fight for the right talent and cut thru the zonal quota system - what Ganguly did in the last 5 years has been remarkable in terms of setting up a meritocratic selection criteria.
India should adopt the aussie domestic model to bring the talent to the forefront.

bye

Amit

Again, I agree with you that Kumble is not a matchwinner abroad. My previous post just highlighted that Kumble is starting to improve overseas-a little late, mind you, but it's still happening. By the way, I just checked the overseas records of Bedi, Prassana and Chandrasekhar. Bedi averrages 33 abroad, Prassana 33 and Chandra 34. If overseas performance is your main criteria for greatness, does it not follow that these spinners aren't great either? At least they had each other's company, as well. How much has Kumble had?

Nicely done. You have stated a very important fact...team building cannot happen in the short term. This is exactly why I believe that Greg Chappell's long-term vision has done nothing wrong to the Indian team.

As far as nurturing good bowlers is concerned however, I refuse to believe that this has happened because of our badly-structured system. You're not telling me that the system across the border in Pakistan is any better? They tend to rely more on raw talent, almost literally yanked out of tape-ball cricket. However, I'm not suggesting it has worked out for Pakistan, because sometimes their talent is too raw and undisciplined. I'm not too sure whether this is the point of the discussion either...I'm guessing the question is simply why we don't produce as much bowling talent as much other countries do.

Of course, this in no way means that we shouldn't reform the system as you have said. Better to have a well-structured system that nurtures talent, however scarce it may be.

Patience is a virtue. It helps you build a copious wealth of resources to help you get to throne of excellence, to conquer the ultimate frontier. Does it truly apply in sports?

Vince Lombardi once said, winning is not everything, It is the only thing. You get on the field with only one thing in your mind, if you are a sportsman, to WIN. You play for pride, to score that strike, goal whatever it takes to establish yourself and your team as the better ones that day, that’s the essence of sports.

Does losing really justify anything? To prepare for a victory in future is hardly an excuse for losing today. How many loses will it take to ensure we field the best 11 for World cup? Fielding the best 11 that gives you the best chance to win today may be the best way to ensure you are ready when its time to march for the opening ceremony.

Now how do we make sure that we field the best 11 from the billion that we have, half of whom are crazy over cricket, may be a quarter of billion who must have turned their arm over or pulled off that exaggerated swing of the bat, whether being in a real game or that fantasy game played in your mind? How often have we suddenly seen ourselves turning our arm over while walking in our house and the imaginary ball crashed the wickets of Ricky Ponting? Or if our slog sweep with out the bat cleared the ropes for a six?

Cricket is nothing short of an enigma that fills our heart and minds with emotions, those that swing wildly with a victory or loss. You want a parallel? Look at soccer in Brazil. With the passion we have for the game and the base we have playing it, how do we ensure we play the combination that gives us the chance to win every game that we play, and of course the ones that we will remember for ever like the world cup?

Its true our farming system leaves a lot to be desired. Our sports selection system grows in parallel with our education system , the players are selected in schools and universities and these act as feeder system for district and state wide selection panels. I personally seen corrupt practices being rampant in this evolutionary methods, now even if we were to ignore these and assume that the best will come through, there is a major resource of talent that we are ignoring here, the ones who never go to the universities, the ones who are not so blessed to adhere to the common growth cycle that most of us evolve out of. I remember playing this game in the remote village of kerala that I belong to, we had college cricket captains, their team mainstays playing with Lungi clad village boys, school drop outs mixed in teams who are aligned based on local boundaries. Very often I see that local talent obliterating the more polished application from the well coached talents from universities or college teams. Now how do we establish a system were these talents can be recognized and given the right opportunity and guidance to maximize their potential? Any one remember Jeff Thomson, once the fastest bowler in the world, the main architect of body line series?, Wasn’t he a mine worker who ended up in the cricket field by sheer chance? How do eliminate chance and establish a system were these raw talents can be unearthed?

I believe the answer believes in introducing professionalism at a local level in cricket through proper marketing of the game. Again to draw a parallel, if a Carmelo Anthony born in the crime infested outskirts of Baltimore can make it to the top echelons of Basket ball in USA, we should be able to design a path of progression for these guys as well. If we can provide a means of gaining livelihood from proving your talent in the local fields , if BCCI or any government bodies can encourage marketing of local games that there is some sort of interest developed in them which can be translated to money for the organizers and players, we would increase our talent pool many fold.

Now once we have the real crème battling it out for the honor to represent the country, and of course the money that comes with it, sky may be the limit for what we can achieve in this game. May be akin to what brazil had achieved in soccer. Just imagine what it can do for out psyche.

Dear Amit Varma,

It would be for the general good for all of us, participating in this commentary if you codul moderate the kind of comments being made by your namesake

Amit made his point against Anil Kumble, which I personally find sad. It wodul have helped if he had read the excellent cover story of last month's Cricinfo to know what not just Indian fans, but Kumble's peers such as Inzamam and Murali feel about Kumble's skills

But then, Amit like all of us, was entitled to his remark. Now, he is making it again and again. We seem to be losing track of the discussion which I presume is about how India fares in BOTH of the forms of the game

And now we are spending wordbytes on Kumble. This is no different from the earlier wastage of space discussing Ganguly vs Chappell

It would help if you can allow comments that are relevant to discussion and disallow personal remarks such as those made by Sai Krishna and Amit

The plan sounds like Nehru's plan for science and research in India which unfortunately is stuck in a rut! Its going no where and this "hierarchical" aspect of the plan is going to cause more problems than offer any solutions!!!! Also the pyramidal structure being talked about is like the pyramidal marketing scheme, it won't cut!
As for solutions patience read 1000 years sure will get some fruits ala SRT!!!!

Is there any thought on making the domestic system more competitve? Harsh Bhogle had held eloquent on this for a long time now, and the fact-of-matter is our first-class system is just not good enough to actually test the mettle of players.

Zaheer Khan was in the form of his life in the domestic circuit when he went to Pakistan, yet what happened. It is okay to have inspired selections once-in-a-while (for instance Michael Clarke was on for Australia), but yet to have a team of consistent world-competitors if not beaters, we surely need players with a more proven record. Lalit Modi in his opposition days had a good idea of a city-based league, does anyone think having a nine-city league (our test centers) will provide a good alternative to the huge and at times rather meaningless Ranjji Trophy currently?

Marcus:

I haven't seen the other spinners play so I dont know their greatness. I can only compare him with current lot of spinners (Warne, Macgill, Vettori, Murali). For me he is like Debang Gandhi, who can score in India but nothing abroad.
BTW Mr. Rajnikanth,who made you the censor board chief. I dont need to form an opinion on any player based on what other players say. Maybe you cant think on your own and need help. BTW this group was discussing problems with Indian test form. The main problem is lack of quality bowlers and overdependence on one Mr. Kumble, who usually needs 50-60 overs or a cracked pitch to get them. And we win ODIs because it is a batsmen's game. And if you dont understand it, then I am sorry for you.

Now is the time when we have to get off our obssetion of experimenting new talent. Lets push the talent we have in sreesanth, power and patel and stop expermanting venus and uthapas because Its Do or Die for WC untill it will be too late to decide what's our right squad and we wont get off the band wagon of experimenting even in the WC. Because at this point i still think our team is still significantly weaker then Australia who has Gilcrist, katich, ponting, martyn, clarke, symoynds, hussy, lee, braken, clark, hogg

decide our WC squad until its too late because permanant players still needs to get uses to each other.

Players who i would prefer, Sehwag, Sachin, Dravid, Yuvi, Raina, Dhoni, Pathan, Powar, Bhajji, M Patel, Agarkar, Gambhir, Kaif.

Now sachin is only playing cricket for WC. He is our hero. He wants to leave cricket with the best reward. We cant forget that. I know dravid has done tremendous job but 2 years b4 Sachin was the heart and soul of our batting lineup who produced match winning scores at a very good pace. In Pakistan tour he proved why he is still the best opener and that's where he should be.

On the comment why our spinners are not like of old days...
Its due to rise in our Pace Talent. In old days we didnt have n e pace talents. All we had was Sreenath and prasad. Because of todays game which is more tilted towards fast bowling due to Power plays we are experiencing dry market in spinning when comparing to old days. To me, its good news. Art of fast bowling is harder then of spinning. Fast bowlars take more wickets and are more lethal.

How can we do better...
I suggest take out RP singh, VR singh and agarkar and put in Munaf Patel. Because this guy can develop into very good player due to its pace and its ability to reverse swing the bowl. Agarkar is piece of $h!t. All he throws is good length bowls and yorkers. He is not good in one perticular area which is wat we need. He gets lucky all the time unless he is getting low order bowlers out. RP singh cant swing the ball at all and its too late to develop VR Singh for WC.

That's all for now. Give me more comments

It is intresting to note that Akash Chopra was dropped brilliantly(pun intended) from the team for performing consistently. Everyone complained ,he was scoring just 40s or 50s. But those scores were worth their weight in gold because the new ball was seen off and players like Akthar,Mcgrath and others threw back the ball to the wicketkeeper in frustration. That was a victory of sorts because the bowler was demoralised and eventually the opposing team.

Sehwag blossomed because of the suport he got from Akash Chopra because he did not have to worry about collapses and he just bludegeoned the opposition. But why was he dropped? To accomodate Ganguly who wanted to return to test matches once the series aginst powerful teams was seen off. If Greg found it suspicious ,it was not really a revelation.

Agarkar is once in 20 match bowler. It would be better to try five bowlers in his place because atleast they will bowl better than him more consistently.I was a fan of Agarkar once, but off late he seems lost.

Then we have Kaif. Always droped when he was in form.I believe it was to accomodate Ganguly again.

That reminds me,If one looks back at the golden captaincy days of Ganguly,one will notice the main contributors were ususally Dravid,Laxman,Sachin and Yuvraj and Sehwag. Compared to them his contribution,atleast in matches that mattered was never ever match winning.
One will argue ,that they were the team so they had to perform but hey as a captain you can perform atleast 20% of what they do.

Dravid has already made match winning contributions in his short term as captain than Ganguly has in his whole career.

Hey Milind:
Whatever you say, India performed well under Ganguly.
They haven't yet under Dravid in Test arena.
And except for Pakistan ODI series, we haven't won any other tough series. So lets wait and watch.

Amit