BCCI takes one step forward and one backward

[chanakya]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Only winner i see from this is Zee. They just have to get it right.

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Here is the BCCI statement in full: April 7, 2007 Full text of the press release issued by the BCCI following its Working Committee meeting Mr. Niranjan Shah, Honorary Secretary, BCCI, has announced decisions taken at the Working Committee meeting of the BCCI held on April 7, 2007. 1. With a view to strengthening domestic cricket, efforts will be made to ensure that all Test / ODI Cricketers play Irani, Duleep, Challenger and some Ranji Trophy Matches. 2. Every Association will be directed to prepare fast and lively wickets for domestic tournaments. 3. The BCCI will do away with home and away rotation and allot venues for Irani Trophy, Duleep Trophy, Deodhar Trophy, Ranji Trophy semi-finals and finals and one-day all-India knockout. 4. It was decided that all affiliated units should start their own state academies by April 2009. These academies would be linked to the National Cricket Academy for the purpose of uniformity in coaching. 5. It was decided to scrap the present zonal representation in the senior and junior selection committees. BCCI will appoint selectors on a full time basis based upon the eligibility criteria which would include stature as a player, selection experience etc. They will be remunerated suitably and appointed for a two-year term. The BCCI will take steps to propose necessary amendments to the Constitution to give effect to the above decision. 6. Regular and frequent Under-19 and India A tours to Australia / England / New Zealand / South Africa / West Indies will be undertaken. 7. The Working Committee has directed the Selection Committee to send a young team to Bangladesh under an experienced captain. The selection committee, after discussions has appointed Rahul Dravid as captain for India's tour to Bangladesh, Ireland and England. 8. BCCI will appoint a permanent manager for the Indian team for a two-year term. The Board will also appoint a permanent Media Manager for a two- year term. 9. Notice will be issued to Sachin Tendulkar and Yuvraj Singh under Rule 38 of the Memorandum and the Rules and Regulations of the Board asking for an explanation for their comments made to the media. 10. Working Committee approved the Performance-based Payment to the players and decided to do away with the present gradation for Retainership. Apart from the payment, the following points would form a part of the contract. *A player will endorse not more than 3 sponsors / products *No Sponsor can contract more than 2 players. *The players will not be allowed to do any sponsor-related events 15 days before the tour and also during the tour. *Before every tour, all the contracted players have to undergo a fitness test and only those who fulfill the benchmarks will be considered for selection. *No player shall have exclusive contracts with electronic or print media. Only the captain can write a column or talk to the media but not exclusively. *The players shall take prior approval of the Board before signing any endorsement contract and will submit a copy of the agreement to the Board. All the players shall submit a copy of the existing contracts with sponsors to the Board. *All the players will have to play a stipulated number of domestic matches when not playing for India. *In the event of injury to the player, the Board will compensate him the match fees that he would have earned for a maximum period of six months. 11. The Working Committee decided to form a Cricket Advisory committee consisting of the following ex - captains: Kapil Dev, Sunil Gavaskar, MAK Pataudi, Chandu Borde, Ravi Shastri, Krish Srikkanth and S Venkataraghavan under the Chairmanship of President [sharad Pawar] and will include all the Office Bearers. 12. The working committee appointed Ravi Shastri as Cricket Manager for the India's tour to Bangladesh. It was further decided that Venkatesh Prasad will be the bowling coach and Robin Singh, the fielding coach for the tour. ------------------ There are so many things which one can't understand here. If the contract system has been scrapped all together which contract is BCCI talking about? (Apart from the payment, the following points would form a part of the contract.)

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Here is an article which has partially touched my concerns: In Board of control, money fair for self, foul for others Pradeep Magazine April 08, 2007 First Published: 02:23 IST(8/4/2007) Last Updated: 03:10 IST(8/4/2007) First, there was disaster. And now, we seem headed for a calamity. Typical of an effete polity whose only agenda is to survive and wreck everything around them, the Indian Board?s reaction to the World Cup disaster puts even logic to shame. Mr Sharad Pawar and his band of men have absolved themselves of all responsibility and put all the blame on the players. And their solution to please the base common denominator, the fan is to cut off all avenues from which players make legal money, even cut their match fees, but leave themselves free to do what they want. First things first. There are many things in the working committee?s recommendations that need to be commended. No question about that. Many reforms, like abolishing the zonal system, needed to be done. More importantly, what needs to be done is to de-link the Board?s vote politics with the appointment of selectors, even if they happen to be players of repute. Unlike now, when office-bearers of a state association are selectors. What beats me is that the same coach whose team did not even enter the top eight of the World Cup has been rewarded with one of the most important jobs in Indian cricket. He is being offered the job of grooming and guiding youngsters at the National Cricket Academy. If Greg Chappell is thought to be so good, then why remove him as coach of the team in the first place? And worse still, Chappell gets away with all the leaks, all those SMSs to journalists in which he has abused his players, without even a reprimand, but Sachin Tendulkar and Yuvraj Singh are pulled up for going to the press with their grievances. If the Board says they want proof of what Chappell has done, there are enough people who still have his emails and smses intact those that, in many ways, led to the wrecking of this team. I would have thought that the Board, at least now, was regretting condoning the coach?s public humiliation of Sourav Ganguly, his public humiliation of the Kolkata fans remember the finger (sorry, the injured finger)? But no, now they have condoned his insinuations about the senior players and have humiliated one of the greatest cricketers India and the world has seen. No, I would not want to be a Tendulkar today. And then, the Board itself can make any amount of money through its television deals, force the players to play any number of matches for the benefit of sponsors and television but it won?t want the players to endorse more than two or three products? What is the logic and rationale behind this? Sure, if sponsorship deals, advertising and other such things are affecting the players? performance, a rational solution must be found. But no one can arbitrarily take away the rights of the players to earn money legally. Remember Packer and the fallout from it? The players won that battle and here too there is every danger of this fight now spilling over to the courts. And what does one do about the criticism that the same cartel of sponsors and agents influences player selection? I was thinking that what Subhash Chandra and his TV company are doing by launching a rival cricket league went against the spirit of cricket. But not anymore. If money is the name of the game, then let the one with more money win the match. ----------------------------------------------------------------- All those fans who hate the players endorsing various products: what do you have to say?

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward No reply again??????

[Guest BossBhai]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward -- Removed on request of the user --

[Gambit]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward This part about endorsements. The innuendoes about the players not performing well, because of the time spent modeling for products! This has to be left to market forces. Potential advertisers will refrain from offering lucrative contracts to the Tendulkars and Dravids, the moment their performance wanes. The players also know this, and so under no circumstances would they ever pursue their advertising assignments, at the expense of the game. But some people would rather believe in the rumour mills because Indian cricket is just a tamasha for them(Star News being the prime example).

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward

This part about endorsements. The innuendoes about the players not performing well' date=' because of the time spent modeling for products! This has to be left to market forces. [b']Potential advertisers will refrain from offering lucrative contracts to the Tendulkars and Dravids, the moment their performance wanes. The players also know this, and so under no circumstances would they ever pursue their advertising assignments, at the expense of the game. But some people would rather believe in the rumour mills because Indian cricket is just a tamasha for them(Star News being the prime example).

how very true. But Indian cricket is not just a tamasha for us fans. Then why the majoriry of fans fail to understand the simple fact that you've stated?

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward So let us pause for a second and see what are the problems that ail Indian cricket: Rot runs deep in Indian cricket; deeper malaise stems from different factors Former Test cricketer Yajurvindra Singh Bilkha feels that the BCCI needs to look beyond the WC collapse and address the deeper malaise in the system. Indian Cricket has had many ups and downs, but never has it plummeted to a low like now. Sharad Pawar?s reaction was typical of a politician ? let?s have an Enquiry Commission and then bring out an action report ? he has invited some of the most distinguished cricketers of India. But are they the right people to carry us forward and give us the correct solution? Except for Dilip Vengsarkar and to some extent Sunil Gavaskar, none of them would have in-depth knowledge of the system that is prevailing in the various state associations. The deeper malaise in Indian cricket stems from different factors. Top stays silly Rich individuals head associations who have very little knowledge of cricket but still indulge in selection and cricket-related activities. A prime example of this is Ajay Shirke from Maharashtra. A man who has one ambition and that is to ensure that the team Maharashtra comprises of players only from Cadence, his academy. Similarly, there are several other such individuals who control the future of each aspiring and established cricketer. Will this be discussed and documented? No. Because each one of them is the vote that will determine the next cricket committee of BCCI and the ones that will have the final say in any matters that need a constitutional change. Selection committees Most of India only knows of the national selection committee. The problem that is faced emanates from the junior levels. Being the Chairman of the Maharashtra selection committee in the past, I speak from personal experience. Various influences other than merit count. The new Ranji format has made the zonal selection committee a farce. With the two divisions and two more sub divisions the selectors do not get the opportunity to see all the concerned zonal players. This leads to horse-trading while selecting a side that is just below the national one. An independent paid selection committee from the zone reporting to the BCCI would be the best alternative. Similarly, the National selectors should be paid and should be a part of the Ranji and zonal committee. Training woes Physical fitness and fielding regime should be similar from the junior level to the top. This is the area that India is weak in and need immense improvement. We should get a top-level consultant to chart out the programs and train people from each and every association. The maximum importance should be put in this direction as it has become a mandatory ingredient for cricket victories and will play an even greater role in the future. Overseas tours Apart from BCCI sending teams to play abroad, state associations should send their teams to play against county sides in England, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa etc to get acclimatized to conditions there. Money is not a problem with most state sides as the BCCI is assisting them for their development and most of them have local sponsors. These tours could filter down to junior levels as well. Coach conundrum The best solution at present would be to have an Indian coach who will act as a father figure. The team is bruised and hurt and more than technique and processes, it requires nursing and confidence building. The best future solution would be to have foreign cricket consultants for batting, bowling and fielding and they should be there for a short term. ?Yajurvindra Singh Bilkha holds the joint record for taking seven catches in a Test match along with Greg Chappell ----------------------------------------------------------- How many of these problems are getting attention of the BCCI? The team is bruised and hurt and what the the board do? Hit the players below their belt when they are down!! Oh well!!

[Gambit]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward I agree most with the 'Training woes' part in that article. Our fielding will never improve until we have start producing naturally athletic cricketers. Oz, NZ and RSA cricketers are amazing in the field because they have grown up on a diet of Rugby, Cricket and other outdoor activities. BCCI/ State associations need to do the same with young cricketers during their formative years.

[yoda]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward While I agree that limiting endorsement numbers/player is a poor idea, it is wonderful that player contracts are being scrutinized for "performance" clauses which can be detrimental to team causes like being paid for milestones including 50s, 100s and time spent at the crease.

[Bumper]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Great article from Yajurvindra Singh, Chandan. Thanks for posting this. "Top stays silly" is a very crucial aspect of our problems. We can make all the improvements we want at the junior level, but with politicians ruling at the top, all efforts would be ground to dust

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward An interesting article here: A golden chance to revamp Indian cricket missed... By Vijay Mruthyunjaya I'm in a quandary. Because I'm not sure who are more pusillanimous, the Indian cricketers who were knocked out of the World Cup by Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, or their bosses who have let go of a golden opportunity to revamp an obsolete system. At another level, I suspect, the politicisation process of Indian cricket is gathering pace with the president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India Sharad Pawar typically preferring populist options rather than practical solutions. One can be pardoned for mistaking the two-day brain storming session following India's World Cup debacle for a political sideshow before any parliamentary elections. There was no shortage of drama and suspense and double-speak, and at the end of the day there was only an empty feeling. By opting for short-term solutions instead of outlining a long-term salvation plan, the Indian cricket bosses have once again exposed their impotence even when the situation was ripe for some hard-hitting decisions. I think more time was taken to find out ways to please all aggrieved parties rather than probe the real reasons behind the abysmal World Cup performance. As a result, Greg Chappell gets to keep at least part of his $300,000 per year salary. The stars have nothing to complain either as it is clear to even a layman that most of the decisions taken with regard to their endorsements and match payments will not stand for long. By limiting the number of endorsements for each player, the board may be increasing the demand for the same cricketers. Increase in demand means increase in stakes involved, and for all we know the cricketers may laugh all the way to the bank not before long. Meanwhile, the short-gap arrangement of giving Ravi Shastri the coach/manager job will keep the more vocal of former cricketers quiet at least for the time being. There is no doubt about Shastri's cricketing knowledge, but is he willing to give up his lucrative television commitments for the tension-filled and almost thankless job of a coach? Shastri's fickle love-hate relationship with Indian cricket fans is another contentious factor here. More glaring is the naming of the bowling and fielding coaches when we all know that the main reason for India's dismal run has been India's agonisingly poor batting. This comes following a spate of bowling changes made in the team (Kumble for Harbhjan or vice verse) when all the time the batting cried for fresh blood! Perhaps, the only positives of the two-day meeting were the decisions to change the zonal selection process and retaining Rahul Dravid as captain for the tours of Bangladesh and England. I still have doubts about the change in selection process, because the need is to change the mindset of the selectors more than the zonal method. All in all, Indian cricket gets another cosmetic nose job done when the need is for a brain surgery. ------------------------------------------------------------ It is quite amusing to see how the author believes that this endorsement-limit would work in players' favour in the end! But almost everyone is unanimous in thinking that scrapping of zonal system in national selection is the best step taken by BCCI, IF it materialises!!

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward I found a very good piece by G.Rajaraman who gives his opinion on the steps taken by BCCI in the aftermath of the WC debacle; Promise turned into farce for Indian Cricket :BCCI decisions aimed to quell criticism The Board of Control for Cricket in India made whole lot of decisions at the working committee meeting on April 7. A vast majority of people have been led to believe that the Board has come down heavily on Team India. I am not sure I can even begin to subscribe to such theories since I think much of what has been said is to quell the criticism. An attempt has been made to tell us that the failure in the World Cup was because India does not have fast and lively pitches. The twin batting failures came on sluggish tracks in Port of Spain and had nothing to do with the fact that India does not have too many strips that can be branded lively, let alone fast. There are some other decisions made in the meeting in Mumbai that defy comprehension and come across as hurried and not well thought out. For instance, the Working Committee has accepted that a change in the manner in which the selection commission is formed and the need to pay the selectors for their efforts. Of course, this has been a long standing demand but to time it with the World Cup debacle is to cast aspersions on the selectors who did a good job of picking the best possible side (Ramesh Powar, Mohammed Kaif and VVS Laxman would only have been warming the benches, you see). This is also a clear attempt by the BCCI mandarins at populism. There has been so much talk about how the players have focused on making money that the Board has felt the need to hurt players? incomes. There has been a section in the Board which has sought to cut the players to size, by tightening the purse strings. It should not be long before some player ? or even a sponsor ? takes BCCI to court. At this point of time, players may be too shell shocked to even react to the diktat that players cannot enter endorsement deals with more than three corporates at a time. Or, to the directive that more than two players cannot endorse a product. I am disappointed that the selection committee was rushed into naming Rahul Dravid as captain for the series in Bangladesh. There has been no analysis of his less than imaginative captaincy in the World Cup. On a pitch on which Bangladesh used three left-arm spinners to stifle India, Dravid?s handling of the bowling left a lot to be desired. His reluctance to use Virender Sehwag?s off-spin until Bangladesh needed just 32 runs was as striking as his decision to employ Sachin Tendulkar in a seam-up rather than spin bowling mode. And in the game against Sri Lanka, Sehwag was not pressed into service at all, shocking when you consider how the island team stacks left-handers in its line up. Obviously, with coach Greg Chappell having indicated his desire not to seek extension of his stint with the Indian team, the Board did not want to rock the unsteady boat too much more. But if cricketing decisions were made with a bit more thought rather than as knee-jerk reactions, the Indian team may have emerged from the depths it has sunk to. There has to be a deeper reason ? and it has to do with lack of application and a mental strength. These are issues relating to player insecurities that need to be dealt with. There must be some thought into how players have apparently worked against coaches like John Wright and Chappell. Above all, I see no bid to ensure that the team concept is ingrained in the minds of India?s cricketers from the junior level. Often we see players place themselves and their ambitions ahead of team needs, however subtly. There is an urgent need to ensure that all players, big and small, understand that team has to come before self. If this is not implanted in young minds, there is no chance that it can be achieved when players make it to Team India and establish themselves as individual stars. --------------------------------------------- What do you all say?

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward BCCI draws flak on ensorsements issue And it seems as though the climbdown has begun: Board, players heading towards a dialogue on endorsements But only after some vague threats: Sponsors may take BCCI to court

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward And this is Ashish Ray's article: Not surprisingly, Rahul Dravid, speaking on behalf of his colleagues, has voiced concern about the payment system and restrictions on players' endorsement incomes arbitrarily and unilaterally declared by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) after its two-day conclave. Clearly, the emerging theme of the meet was to make the unsuccessful representatives on the field scapegoats for India's unexpected early exit from the World Cup, and raise a red herring of cricketers' remunerations being the cause of it. Some members of the Indian squad that went to the West Indies are unquestionably responsible for the abysmal failure and must pay for such non-performance. Given the suspicions that have been raised, their commercial contracts also need to be closely scrutinised. But a blanket dilution of fees and restraint on extraneous earnings would be unfair and unjust. Reading between the lines, the BCCI's working committee attempted to attribute their decision to recommendations received from seven former captains invited to the conference, who have apparently distanced themselves from such advice since. Now BCCI officials seem to be divided on whether to insist on their proposal or listen to the players' point of view. A productivity-based disbursement structure is propitious. But to dispense with retainers is debatable and may create insecurity. Also, rigid restrictions on cricketers' general proceeds could be unworkable under Indian law, if the players refuse to sign such an agreement with the BCCI. At the end of the day, it's the players' presence on the green that lays the golden egg. A potential biting of the hand that feeds the BCCI is yet another instance of this organisation being incapable of thinking through important decisions. The wholesale gag on players also militates against freedom of speech as granted by the Indian constitution. It is common sense that if a player makes unacceptable statements, disciplinary action can be taken against him. As expected, the BCCI's introspection has proved to be essentially an exercise in futility. It failed to address fundamental issues, such as the transfer of executive powers in the board and its affiliated associations to fulltime, caring, knowledgeable and professional persons. Instead, in a typically populist style of fooling the Indian people, it papered over cracks, that, too, clumsily. Akin to Rip Van Winkle, the officials have woken up to the fact that international players should compulsorily be playing domestic tournaments, that subsidiary associations should "prepare fast and lively wickets" for such competitions and India under-19 and "A" teams should be touring overseas more frequently to gain experience of foreign conditions. That the world's richest cricket board had not been implementing the last mentioned is a tragic reflection of its ineffectiveness. The BCCI wildly stated that all associated units should start their own academies linked to the National Cricket Academy (NCA). Would it not have been more sensible to initially have zonal institutes, while sourcing talent from the innumerable privately owned coaching camps that exist in most provinces? It emphasises the medieval state of the BCCI that it will take six months to ratify a change in its constitution before selectors can be appointed on a fulltime, remunerated basis. Besides, it's shocking that the working committee has "directed" the selection committee to send a "young team" for next month's tour of Bangladesh. This is naked interference in the remit of selectors, who are supposed to pick a side purely on merit. Youth for the sake of it is a ludicrous policy. While it's wise to encourage younger players, they must deserve inclusion. It makes sense to prepare for next year's Champions Trophy tournament with younger legs, but it could unduly jeopardise India's prospects if replacement of senior exponents is not undertaken in a phased manner. The same should also apply in test matches, but even more judiciously. What's welcome though is the retention of Dravid as captain and the appointment of Ravi Shastri as interim cricket manager, Venkatesh Prasad as bowling coach and Robin Singh as fielding trainer. It will also be a boon for Indian cricket if Greg Chappell is recruited for an authoritative and meaningful role at the NCA. But more critical is the choice of long-term coach and the assistants around him.

[omf52]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward

All in all, Indian cricket gets another cosmetic nose job done when the need is for a brain surgery.

Fantastic line. Yeah and hes right too. We do need 'brain surgery' in that the top level people dont seem to be interested in winning cricket games, rather they are more interested with earning the $$$. This is cricket, not business, and especially not politics.

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Here is one Indian cricket fan who seems to have lost hope. Let?s face it, Indian cricket will always remain Indian It has almost become a ritual with me to get up and search Google for cricket news back home. More so when on tour for it is not often possible to call for regular updates. For the past three days I have followed my routine but with utmost reluctance. Every day the number of news items swell and these range from the frustrating to the ridiculous. Just check the range ? the Board Secretary who has no business to comment on team selection and captaincy pledges his support for Rahul Dravid as captain. National selectors who have no business to criticise the secretary in public openly come out and declare that if the secretary is calling the shots on captaincy their position is compromised no end. The coach, Greg Chappell, perhaps the best dramatic persona of all time in India?s cricket history, who has no business to send SMSes and make statements to the media/BCCI informally on players roles calls senior players ?mafia?. Refusing to draw a line, he, who has absolutely no business in encouraging further speculation, states that sections of the Board are out to tarnish his image. Indian cricket, post CWC?07, is a sad tale. A case of ?I don?t know anything and will not say a thing, just suffice to say so and so is the real villain.? A very fundamental reminder ? in each World Cup there is just one winner and one runner up. In CWC 2003 for example, South Africa, one of the favourites, did not make the super six. New Zealand too, despite having a fairly formidable side, did not make the semi-finals. Even England, generally the haven of over-the-top-reaction, accepted failure and tended to look forward to the Ashes and more. In India, however, nothing of the like will ever happen. Indian cricket is bordering on lunacy. A commercial red cherry, its attraction is its downfall. Every administrator wants to be in the news, as does every former player. And with all the fifty odd 24-hour news channels hungry for more and more exclusives, the game is a rot from which, chances are, it will never recover. There is already a buzz in some sections of the media to label the Bangladesh series a Revenge series. The question is revenge against whom? Bangladesh? Have we become as prone to sensationalism as to call this series the revenge series? And more, will the country?s billion cricket fans agree with this labelling and switch on their TV sets once more? The common refrain everywhere is that Indian cricket is facing its worst crisis. Crisis sure but worst or not needs to be debated. Experts who have been called to give their views hardly won India matches consistently. We lost eight Test matches on the trot in 1958-59 and won our first away series in 1967. These were far worse in terms of real lows. CWC 2007 is perhaps Indian cricket?s worst crisis in this mega spectacle age, the worst since the time Indian cricket became strong enough to hold the nation at ransom. Among the former captains called upon to deliberate on the Teams performance, how many matches has a Chandu Borde won for India? And if the former captains agree that Chappell is the answer to India?s problems, what role do they leave the selection committee with? Why should former captains be summoned in the first place ignoring the five wise men of Indian cricket? And where does Dilip Vengsarkar, himself a former captain and also Chairman or Selectors, stand in all of this? Are we then agreeing that the selection committee is useless and ought to be replaced? Yet another common refrain in the media is that it is a time for hard introspection and then some real hard measures. May I please ask what hard measures are we talking about? Sri Lanka, for example, lost to India miserably in December 2005 and is now in the reckoning for the World Cup. What real hard measure have they adopted since December 2005? Have they fundamentally reorganised their cricket? Has the Sri Lankan establishment adopted the Australian model overnight? Australian cricket too had its period of lull in the mid 1980s before Allan Border won them the Reliance Cup. Even then they were hardly the best in the world. What radical step did the Australian establishment take then to redress the situation? Indian cricket, the cardinal truth is, will always remain Indian. A team sport based on individuals who have the talent and the mettle to stand up and deliver in difficult circumstances. Like, when Saurav Ganguly was captain we had an aggressive individual at the helm and some outstanding individuals who stood out as performers. The 2001 fairytale against Australia would not have happened without the Dravid-Laxman jugalbandi; CWC 2003 would not have happened without Sachin; Pakistan 2004 would never have occurred without a Sehwag and Australia 2003-04 was due to the combined efforts of Dravid, Laxman, Sehwag and Ganguly in batting and Agarkar and Kumble in bowling. Interestingly, never did all of them click together. It was always one or two individuals who did the job. At Adelaide where we won it was Dravid and Laxman in batting, Kumble in the first innings and Agarkar in the second. This is the essence of Indian cricket and this is the answer for the future. Indian cricket will have to rely on exceptional talent. With its entire infrastructure the US has no answer to Roger Federer. Similarly in football, giants like Brazil or Argentina and even Portugal continue to rely on individual talent. They never attempt to become a Germany or an Italy, teams where individualism is subsumed under the rubric of team effort. Under Chappell, the aim was to do away with a Tendulkar and create 11 men who simply represented India. A laudable aim where the team would be a machine and the 11 players the machine?s various parts. My question is have the Brazilians tried to suppress a Ronaldinho or have the Argentinians done the same with a Mesi or a Riquelme? The bottomline is that Brazil and Argentina continue to be powerhouses who people love to watch. Indeed there?s one fear in depending too heavily on individual talent. Chances are your team will never be as consistent as Australia. But isn?t that better than being consistent losers? ------------------------------------------------------------------ Oh well!!! Is this resigning to the poor system?

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Just another BCCI comedy DNA/Agencies Monday, April 09, 2007 23:34 IST MUMBAI: After the bumbling, comes the retraction. Different voices emanating from the BCCI suggest that the Board seems to have figured out that it bit off far more than it can chew -- forget swallow - as far as the endorsement issue is concerned. BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah added further weight to Ratnakar Shetty's assertion that existing contracts would not be tampered with when he told PTI: "I can't understand the hue and cry on the issue. The existing contracts of the players are still running." As it turns out the Board is now waiting for a representation from the players! As if the absurdity of the whole deal becomes apparent only after a formal request is made to examine it! "No proposal from the players has been received so there is no question of any date right now. First let there be a representation from the players, then BCCI Chief Sharad Pawar will decide what to do," Shah said to further queer the pitch on just what the final shape of the whole endorsement rigmarole would be. The BCCI Working Committee, which had met on Saturday to review India's disastrous World Cup campaign, had decided to limit the endorsements to three per player and scrap the graded system of contracts under which senior players were paid more than others. The drastic measures by the BCCI had caused a stir among the players, their business managers and sponsors. Shailendra Singh of Percept is certain the Board is backtracking. "Imposition of these clauses is a practical impossibility. This appears to be a diversion to deflect attention from more pressing issues. The moot point is that unless BCCI comes up with a solution fast, money will begin to flow away from cricket. After all how long is India going to be a one-sport nation?" he stresses. Shailendra, whose company manages Sourav Ganguly and Yuvraj Singh, fears for dilution of the brand Cricket. "BCCI needs to protect its property and I see a practical way out of this very soon." Shailendra may be optimistic but the Board appears to be quite confused. BCCI vice president Shashank Manohar is categorical in denying any possibility of a roll-back in endorsement-related clauses while the secretary is looking forward to a dialogue with players. ----------------------------- The board has made itself a laughing stock because of its ridiculous measures!!

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Now questions are raised on the decision which I thought was the only positive from this BCCI meeting: Will paid selectors solve the problem? Some measures look attractive, but will they yield results, asks Makarand Waingankar. In the history of Indian cricket, there have been controversies that forced the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to convene emergency meetings, but never has such a meeting usurped the prerogatives of others, as did the BCCI working committee meeting held last week. Possibly the aim was to win back the trust of the emotional cricket lovers of the country. And apart from a few points, the overall measures decided on by the working committee and the former captains were impressive. But instructing the selectors to retain Dravid as captain and to select a young team for Bangladesh showed a total lack of respect for the national selectors. If Dilip Vengsarkar and his colleagues in the selection committee have agreed to toe the line of the working committee, the day is not far when the working committee in another such crisis may even select the team and ask the selectors to endorse it. There have been instances of the working committee or the President of the BCCI interfering with the selections of the Indian team. India captain Polly Umrigar was told to pick a player not of his choice for the Madras (now Chennai) Test in 1959 against the West Indies by the then BCCI President R. K. Patel. Umrigar's request for a batsman A. K. Sengupta was turned down by the President who insisted off spinner Jasu Patel be played. Umrigar resigned the captaincy on the morning of the match but Vinoo Mankad who led the team managed to get Sengupta included. In 1965, Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) toured India and was thrashed by our strong team in two unofficial Tests. The working committee then instructed the selectors to pick a young team for the third Test. Not only did India lose the match by four wickets but was bundled out for 66! Good decision Appointing paid national selectors is a good decision, but how will zonal teams be selected? If the existing pattern of zonal selection continues, the National selection committee will get to watch players selected by the committee consisting of members who have clout in their respective associations. Representatives of the State associations select the zonal team of 15 from 75 ? or in some cases 90 ? players who play for their respective states, and totally 75 play for five zones, thereby restricting the option to select 15 top players for the country from 75 players. Haven't we heard of India players not getting picked for their state and zonal teams? Ajay Ratra of Haryana scored a century against the West Indies and for the past three seasons has not found a place in the list of probables of his state team. Weren't Sunil Gavaskar and Ashok Mankad dropped in 1974 from the West Zone team against South Zone? The majority ? Maharashtra, Gujarat and Saurashtra ? got together in the selection committee, and neither Umrigar nor Mamasaheb Ghorpade could do anything to prevent the selection of Madhu Gupte (Maharashtra) and Niranjan Mehta (Gujarat). Will paid selectors solve the problem? Analysing the number of matches played during the season, one observes that ten paid selectors will not be able to do the job if they are not assisted by the TRDOs who are now designated as Match Referees. Out of 532 matches, 325 are played in the junior and 207 in the senior category. Presuming five selectors each in the senior and junior selection committees are full-time paid selectors, can 532 matches be watched by ten selectors in a vast country like India? Is it possible for each selector to watch all the matches? The solution could be to ask the Cricket Advisory Committee to select state selectors and 30 Match Referees by interviewing them so that good experienced retired first class cricketers without close ties to the state political clout are not missed out on. On paper, some of the measures look attractive but unless the process is monitored and analysed, there is no guarantee it will yield results. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Hmmmm................ Had not gone this deep into the matter but I always doubted if BCCI could change the system at top without bringing any change at the domestic level. I doubt if we'll be able to make the selectors, paid or honorary, accountable, EVER..!!!

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward There are many questions still unanswered on the non-player centric steps taken by BCCI, which raises a doubts if these steps can be implemented ever: Unanswered question Sidharth Monga April 11, 2007 Last Saturday, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) announced a slew of measures aimed at revitalising the domestic game. Those decisions went largely unnoticed as the spotlight fell on the more high-profile decisions surrounding the national team, yet they deserve discussion. The measures announced suggest a giant waking from a slumber yet, though the BCCI has tried to address some of the serious issues, many important ones remain untouched. The decision to "ensure that all Test/ODI cricketers play Irani, Duleep, Challenger, and some Ranji Trophy matches" aims to cure just one of the symptoms of a larger disease - the scheduling. However, what the statement does not mention is whether the Board will sort out the flip side of the problem: the plethora of international matches every season. "Whenever there is so much as a seven-day break, the board arranges a tri-series tournament," VB Chandrasekhar, the then national selector, had said last October. Case in point: The Ranji Trophy semifinals this past season coincided with the Indian team's return from South Africa. With several international players available, the stage was set for a grand finale to the season, which would be telecast live on TV. Yet the BCCI planned two ODI series, against West Indies and Sri Lanka, running at the same time, robbing the Ranji semifinals both of the big stars and the TV coverage. And one of those matches, against West Indies, caused an important Ranji match in Chennai to be shifted from Chepauk, which would stage the ODI, to a school ground. So will the BCCI be prepared to compromise on the millions it makes out of a cramped international season? If yes, then one can believe that the availability of international stars will improve domestic cricket. It doesn't end there. The Duleep Trophy, supposed to be the highest-level first-class tournament, is robbed of gloss because of its timing. An inter-zone tournament should have the best performing players of the season participating but, by being staged at the the season's start, the selections are based on the previous season's numbers. Also, the Duleep Trophy was the step between the Ranji Trophy and international cricket, and was a prize of sorts for doing well in the Ranji; instead of diluting the identity and character of the Duleep Trophy it's better to scrap it and make the Ranji season a bit less cramped. It's probably that last point that's behind the proposal to reduce the number of teams in the Elite league to 10. This could be a good step but it does throw up certain questions: Where will the other five teams go now? Will they increase the number of Plate League teams to 18 or will there be another tier? If so, will the BCCI be able to manage three leagues? One possible solution, as yet unexplored, is to restrict each state to one team; Gujarat and Maharashtra each send three teams to the Ranji Trophy, of which only three are top-notch. A reduction here will lift the level of competition and solve half the problem. Yet perhaps even that won't work unless the points system in Ranji cricket is changed. The current system awards four points for an outright win and two for the first-innings lead, but those two points are docked if the game is subsequently lost. That prompts captains to play it safe and play for two points. Another related issue yet to be touched on is the standard of umpiring in first-class cricket. It is not a coincidence that India is unrepresented on the ICC's panel of Elite umpires, and has been so for the past couple of years. The simple reason is that umpiring, as a component of the game, gets short shrift from the powers that be. Australia have three umpires on the Elite panel; those umpires come from a system that has a central umpiring officer and six umpiring coaches (one for each state) to groom and develop officials. They watch every ball bowled in domestic cricket, and use video footage to maintain a log of every decision taken. In India, by contrast, just one match in every round was televised this current season, and not the semifinals. Also, umpires' appraisals still depend largely on the reports filed by team captains, which is hardly the most objective approach. The decision to direct every state association "to prepare fast and lively wickets for domestic tournaments" has perhaps been taken with the best of intentions yet is, to be charitable, ambiguous. The difference between a good and a fast wicket is blurring in India; does Indian cricket want to move away from its traditional strength, the spinners? Does the BCCI want Australia-like wickets? The spinners' marginalisation in India has already reached famous proportions; there is, for example, no replacement for Anil Kumble. In 1995-96, spinners took 67 per cent of all wickets in the Ranji Trophy; exactly a decade later that figure was 42 per cent. One reason, according to some players and state administrators, is the host associations' penchant for preparing substandard wickets to suit their own teams. A neutral enforcing committee is a much better option than "directing" the state associations. While on the subject of pitches, spare a thought for what the bowlers have to bowl with. The SG ball used for Ranji Trophy matches has trouble lasting in Indian conditions and is anyway not the ball of choice in international cricket. Last season Kookaburra balls, which are standard use elsewhere, were tried but, typically, too few were ordered with the result that players were practising with the SG balls a day before an important Duleep Trophy match.. There is no doubt that Indian domestic cricket needs a revamp, and there is probably no doubt that the decisions announced on Saturday represent a small step in that direction. Yet it is just that - a small step on a long journey. The rut has resulted from years of neglect; it won't go in a day of high-profile decisions. ----------------------------------------------------- This is what I've been worried about. Most of the directives don't seem practical till we address it from grass-root level. Many of the fans are happy that BCCI has thought about these issues but BCCI is also famous for making hollow promises and apart from clipping the wings of the players, I don't see any of these directives being implemented for the betterment of Indian cricket. We'll stay where we are. In fact I suppose we'll decline further because nobody will be able to produce the high class of batting and bowling immediately which Sachin, Rahul, Saurav, Laxman, Kumble and Srinath presented collectively for at least 2 years.