Jump to content

Chandan

Members L2
  • Content Count

    7,869
  • Runs

    4,750 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2
  • Time Online

    6d 5h 16m 42s

Chandan last won the day on April 4 2009

Chandan had the most liked content!

About Chandan

  • Rank
    .

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. https://goo.gl/puQy7a Rahul Dravid – When the Ball Has a Slight Advantage Over the Bat, it Produces Exciting Test Cricket SPECIAL | Rahul Dravid – When the Ball Has a Slight Advantage Over the Bat, it Produces Exciting Test CricketOver the last couple of years, as coach of the India A and Under-19 teams, Rahul Dravid has been preparing the country’s second tier of players for the demands of international cricket. Under his watch, several exciting young players have made their way, each acknowledging the role he has played in their development and progress. In this wide-ranging interview with Network 18 Group Editor (Sports) Gaurav Kalra, Dravid reflects on his role besides offering his insight into India’s series loss in England, the quality of Test batting around the world, the importance of practice matches before an overseas tour and more. Q) One of the things you do with your life right now is take care of young men at U-19 and India A level. On a personal level, just when you see a Hanuma Vihari or a Rishabh Pant graduate to Test level, a Prithvi Shaw at 19 already become part of the Test setup, as coach do you sit back and think...I am doing a few things right? A. No, I don't actually, it is their journey. I just feel privileged to be a part of it for a period of time. And I think it is actually a very critical period of time. Having been through this myself, the sort of transition period from being a successful first-class cricketer and then there is that period where there is that level of uncertainty, you sort of want to break into the national team, it can be quite a difficult period as a young cricketer, because there is a lot of fear, doubts....'will I make it, am I good enough, not good enough', there are lots of things happening at that stage and I have been through it myself. I just feel privileged to be a part of that sort of stage in their lives in someways and get a chance to contribute to their journey in that sense and share some of the ideas and experience that we have, try and create a very good environment for them that allows them to be the best that they can and that is just all that we can do. It definitely does feel nice when they are able to achieve their potential. And it is not just the guys who get selected, obviously, the guys that get selected are the names that come out, but there are other guys who actually perform at our teams who I feel as proud of. Even though they are not as close to national selection as somebody else but, you have made some kind of a significant impact or contribution in their career as well. So, it is not just about individuals or any individual name that excites you, it is about the programme and the kind of people we have been able to get and a lot of it is teamwork. We have got some great people in both the A team and the U-19 setup, backed by the NCA, backed by the BCCI, the background team at the BCCI as well. I think fair to say, we have been able to create a very good programme over the last two-and-a-half to three years at the A team and U-19 level which is giving these boys an opportunity to express the talent they already have. Q) Whenever you have spoken about the A set-up, it is one of the key things that you mention, that it is about exposure and creating opportunities and creating a competitive environment in which they flair as cricketers so that this is a stepping stone for greater things that they go ahead to. Has that really been one of the focus areas being on trips to England, playing also in Bangalore for instance against South Africa A, Australia A, playing against top-class international competition, or just the level below of those countries. Has that made a big difference? It has and I think that has been a focus to expose them to as many different conditions as possible and to give as many boys as possible the exposure and I have said this a lot - I don't really focus on results at this India A level. I mean we try and rotate the squad as much as we possibly can, we give more boys the opportunity because I genuinely believe there is no best XI at the India A level, it is a squad, 15, maybe sometimes more than a 15 that the selectors are looking at and they are all performers at the first-class level. So we try and give them as many opportunities as we possibly can, and expose them to different conditions, even in places like Bangalore or wherever we play, even in India, we try and get wickets that are different to what they might expect with their first-class teams or Indian wickets and as much of foreign exposure as we possibly can give them. So, it is a whole package, it is a whole process really that is important. Q) But there is got to be sense of some sort of fulfillment when you see a Rishabh Pant make that 100 or when you see a Hanuma Vihari come through a tough patch against Broad and Anderson when it looked like it wasn't a stage that he belonged to, then coming onto his own and really fighting it out.... just the little things like that must give you a lot of satisfaction? It does, and it would even do when I was not a coach. When you see a young kid come through and perform the way they do, Rishabh does what he does or a Vihari did what he did, or young Khaleel Ahmed the other night. You know, you feel happy as a former cricketer because you have been through that before, you know what it is to be a young man and sort of starting your first steps in international cricket, it is not an easy time, it can be quite tough and can be quite difficult. To see some of them come through and the joy it brings to their faces and affects not only them but it affects their friends and so many things, it gladdens your heart so I might be a coach, but I am a fan in that sense of the word as well. When you see a young Indian talent come through, you feel good about it. Q) I know you are a fan and obviously you are a coach, and in a sense the feeder system into the main team, yes good performances, yes there seems to be a lot of depth in Indian cricket, yet when you look at a series score-line, it still reads 4-1. It was 4-0 in 2011, 3-1 last time, 4-1 this time, several of these players on their second trip to England especially the batsmen, from your vantage point Rahul, as someone who has done it as batsman, succeeded and failed in these conditions, what's missing from an Indian perspective and why is India not succeeding as a batting unit in overseas conditions? Firstly, the point I would like to make is that there were pretty tough conditions (in England). I mean, I know it is very easy to be critical about people, but those were not easy batting conditions in England this time. Other than Virat Kohli, who was head and shoulders above everyone else, both teams found it difficult. Having said that I think that the team would feel that this was an opportunity missed because of how well the bowlers were bowling. I mean we put together a bowling unit as good as I have ever seen before. Some of our bowling in that series was stuff of dreams. So, I think they will look back and feel that if we had batted a bit better in some key situations or maybe push through and scored a few more runs, we could have won this series and it will seem for the boys like, and even for us who are involved, and involved in India cricket in some ways, we will look at this slightly as an opportunity missed. Four years is a long time. To go back to England in four years, you never really know what'ts the team like, who is fit, do you have the same bowling attack. From my own experience, four years can be a long time, it could be a completely different bunch of boys going there for you. So, for these boys who were there and part of it, they will feel it was an opportunity missed. In spite of playing some very good cricket and having a really good bowling attack, taking some really good catches, we fell short. Q) You touched upon this in your previous answers so I think it is worth exploring with you a little bit. As one of the doyens of Test match batting and batting in general in the modern era, do you feel like the standard of Test match batting, forget India, overall in the world is dropping. It seems as if every time you get good bowling conditions, or reasonable bowling conditions batting lineups around the world seem to crumble. We saw even in South Africa, even the South African batting lineup was crumbling to this Indian attack. Do you sense Test batting, because of the way cricket is now, just stagnating or suffering a little bit? To some extent, yes. Just the amount of white-ball cricket that the boys are practicing, maybe they are not practicing as much red-ball cricket as they probably were in the past and that is bound to have some level of impact when conditions get a bit more difficult, get a bit more challenging, whether it is swing or seam or spin or it could be anything. For example, we went to England on the A tour and some of the boys had not practiced with a red ball for seven months, because when the Ranji Trophy finished in December the teams which got knocked out early they had no chance because there was a domestic One-Day competition, there was a Mushtaq Ali followed by the IPL, so when we assembled in England they hadn't hit a red ball for seven months - now that is a long time. If you go back a generation, that would have never happened in my time, because we were playing a lot more red-ball cricket. Even our domestic one-day cricket was played with a red ball, so that can have an impact. The boys do play a lot more shots now, they are a lot more attacking, they play a different brand of cricket. So, yes I think Test match batting has become slightly more different and sometimes when you do come up against different conditions, we sometimes see that teams do struggle and we see more results. So, it depends whether you see that as a good thing or a bad thing in the sense that not seeing too many draws is, maybe, not a bad thing. Q) But, would you like to see some sort of balance restored in favour of batsmen in Test match cricket, sometime now with the kind of batting performances we are seeing? I like challenging wickets, whether it does a bit of swing or seam or spins, I think that provides the most exciting Test match. I mean, even in England I know we lost 4-1 but there were a couple of those Test matches where the difference was some 30 runs or thereabouts. They were close Test matches, a little bit of luck here and there and one or two things going your way and who knows that result could have been different. It kept you at the edge of your seats, those four Test matches in particular. I remember the first four, and even the last one actually, the last day - every day you got up thinking, it was an exciting Test match day to be a part of. Look, I really enjoy that, I enjoy when the ball has a slight advantage over the bat and I think that produces better Test cricket. Q) I wanted to ask you about Virat Kohli. You touched upon his batting and obviously who has seen cricket can tell that he is far and away probably the best batsman in the world right now. There is a point of view out there though that as captain not quite the finished product, perhaps impulsive at times, perhaps the decision making, team selections sometimes seem to get into conversations a lot. Is that a view you share that as captain he needs to take a step up? I think he is learning all the time. Captaincy is a lot about learning. There are a lot of positives, you know, what he has done. He definitely takes the game forward, he moves the game forward and he is definitely taking the team forward, no doubt about it. But like with anything else, captaincy, a lot is dependent on the performances of the team and the kind of team you are able to put together. So, I think he keeps improving, he keeps getting better, he keeps learning and I am sure that is what he wants to do with his captaincy. Captaincy is a little bit of luck as well. One of the things that he can really do is learn how to win the toss. You lose five out of five, that needs a bit of improvement - winning the toss! That is the tough part of captaincy, sometimes you need a few breaks, sometimes you want a little bit of luck to go your way, and it didn't seem to go his way in England. Q) Is this the best Indian team in the last 15 years? Look, I think it is a blown out of proportion comment, I think the media is blowing it out of proportion. Ravi (Shastri) has rocked up there and said something I don't think he meant it in a way he said it - my view. But, I think that is not really the important issue. I think that is not really the point that we should be discussing, really doesn't matter whether the team is the best or not. I think what are the lessons that we can learn from England is more important to me, so I don't think it is worth focusing on. What we should be focusing on is some of the stuff we have spoken about earlier which is, how do we improve our batting in difficult conditions? How do we keep our bowlers as fit as they've done? What are the plus points? What have we learnt? Obviously, we have done something right with our bowling attack, how do we keep doing that? How can we get our spinners bowling better in overseas conditions? How do we bat better, because we are going face such wickets, teams are going to do this. I think those are the questions that are more important to me rather than worrying about a few other things. Q) But, one of the issues that you have brought up about how India can improve and the issue that gets talked about is practice matches. How much should you practice before you enter the first Test match of a series, it has become a running theme. Problems in South Africa, then again in England in the first two Test matches lost. There is a talk of these practice matches, the team worries about whether they get good enough practice matches. What's your view, Rahul, going into a series in Australia, should India be playing two strong practice matches before they play the first test match? Ideally, they should. They should be playing that and it should be planned. And it is not an Indian issue, I think it is a world game issue. I remember Trevor Bayliss taking about it last time the Ashes were held. I think they had a similar problem in Australia, where because of the kind of schedules and the reluctance, I think of first-class teams now to put their best players out for visiting teams than in the past, because first-class teams are playing more cricket now. Q) This is something that you have always advocated, you have always believed there should be some solid practice before a first Test match? Yeah, there should be, I mean I benefited a lot from it in my career, playing solid first-class games when I first started and when we went on tours it was a done thing that you practice and you play first-class cricket. It seems to happen less and less nowadays and not only for India, it is less and less for any country. But, definitely something India needs to look into talking from an Indian perspective. But, even other teams need to co-operate on their behalf. For, example if Australia can guarantee India two solid practice games when we go there, we should be able to do the same for them when they come here. So, like anything else, it has to be reciprocal and we have to work with other boards because nobody wants to see one-sided overseas results, you want to see close, exciting Test matches. Q) Finally, you expect Pakistan to play better against India in the Sunday encounter? That first one was surprisingly one-sided. I hope not! I hope we can have another one-sided game. Let us just win it one-sided, man. Sometimes, we get too greedy. No, I just would like us to win, I don't care how! Q) You look at the one-day unit and you feel like it is a settled unit, going into that World Cup now? I think our white-ball team is exceptional, we have got a really good backup as well. We are playing really well, I think it is coming together nicely. Q) I was talking to you about this before we started the interview. A couple of years ago I remember asking you, would you consider the India job and you said, no, no I have got enough with the India A job. But, it seems like India A is keeping you as busy as the India job, so may as well consider it? No, it doesn't keep me as busy as the India job for starters. And, no! I am happy with what I am doing. ------------------------------------------------------------- Barring that one question on Kohli's captaincy, he gave wonderful replies to every question. Must compliment Gaurav too for asking relevant questions. What a sad thing it is now for Indian cricket that guys like Dravid will never join the senior cricket set up after what happened to Kumble.
  2. Then why have the problem not resolved in tests? Its Kohli who is terribly incompetent as captain. Nothing to do with Dhoni.
  3. Chandan

    How Shameful is this??

    Did we lose any match then? Holland didn't get any sniff: https://goo.gl/65mXkV Here is the entire ODI history of Holland: https://goo.gl/m9Vchi
  4. Chandan

    Post Mortem of Pataudi Trophy

    Even when asked what went wrong in the series, skipper Kohli thought like a batsman Kohli: https://goo.gl/GatJS9 "Asked where exactly India went wrong in the ongoing series against England, Kohli pointed out two crucial phases — the second innings chase at the Edgbaston (1st Test) and the first innings at Southampton (fourth Test). "Sitting right now, two things — the second innings at Birmingham and first innings at Southampton. Sitting here, I am not thinking of anything else. The key was to make the team win and twice I could have contributed more." Not for a moment he paid attention to his decisions as captain and only thought what more he could have done as a player! Unfortunately, only playing at a very high level is not enough to be a good leader. You need to have the ability to take good decisions, take the entire team with you and when things are not moving in positive direction on field, have the tactical nuance to trump the opposition! Kohli lacks all these. And sadly there is no one who can make him realise this!
  5. Chandan

    Post Mortem of Pataudi Trophy

    Now about the coaching staffs post Pataudi Trophy: https://goo.gl/ui5zdw Team India’s victory tally puts up question mark on coaching standards The Indian Test cricket team has lost more matches than it has won this year, making one question the efficacy of the coaching. Does India have proper coaching staff? The question has to be asked. On paper, the Indian cricket team has Ravi Shastri as its head coach, with Sanjay Bangar as his assistant and Bharat Arun and R Sridhar to look after bowling and fielding. India has played eight overseas Tests this year—three against South Africa and five in England. The scoreline reads 6-2—six losses and two wins, one of them in a dead rubber at Johannesburg. With all due respect to Sir Neville Cardus, the scoreboard doesn’t lie. When George Nathaniel Curzon became the Viceroy of India in 1899, he received a piece of advice from one of his teachers at Eton: “Try to suffer fools gladly”. On the face of it, a comparison between Lord Curzon and Shastri, a politician and cricketer, is somewhat irrelevant. But the head coach’s table-banging press conferences in England served a faint resonance… “I can’t see any other Indian team in the last 15-20 years that has had the same run in such a short time, and you have had some great players playing in those series. So the promise is there, and it’s just about getting tougher mentally. You have got to hurt when you lose matches because that’s when you look within and come out with the right kind of answers to combat such situations and get past the finishing line. One day you will, if you believe,” Shastri had said after England took an unassailable 3-1 lead in the five-Test series at Southampton. Laughter sometimes could be the best medicine when the chips are down. Over the past 20 years, Sourav Ganguly’s India drew Test series in England and Australia (Steve Waugh’s invincibles), and won in Pakistan. Rahul Dravid’s team had beaten the Poms in their lair and also secured a series victory in West Indies, a Caribbean side that had one Brian Lara in their ranks. Anil Kumble’s team came close to winning a series in Australia and might have trumped Ricky Ponting’s side in 2007-08, but for the ‘one-bounce dismissals’ at the SCG. MS Dhoni’s India drew a Test series 1-1 in South Africa in 2010-11. So either Shastri tried to suffers fools gladly, or he chose to be very clever, ending up being too clever by half. The Indian cricket team, led by Virat Kohli and guided by his favourite coach, have won nine Tests overseas and three series—against West Indies and twice in Sri Lanka. Those were lame duck series victories, given the quality of the opponents. Even after losing six Tests inside nine months, India top the ICC Test rankings with 115 rating points. In his indomitable style, Geoffrey Boycott tore into the ranking system on the BBC Test Match Special. The English batting legend put things in perspective—you have to win in England, Australia and South Africa to be called true champions. Not that the other teams are adept at conquering the overseas conditions. England received a hiding in the Ashes Down Under last winter. Australia lost in South Africa. And India make every team bite the dust at home. The truly great sides won everywhere—Clive Lloyd’s West Indies, Imran Khan’s Pakistan and the Aussies under Waugh and Ponting. With the proliferation of white-ball cricket and the franchise-based T20 leagues, it’s unlikely that we will see an all-conquering Test side in the near future. All the teams are tigers at home and paper tigers abroad these days. But then, stop belting out stuff like: “We take pride in performing wherever we go and we want to be the best travelling side in the world…” India have a top-class fast bowling attack alright, but to win Tests you need to put runs on the board. Save Kohli, the Indian batting is bereft of quality and/or consistency in challenging conditions. The batting part takes us back to the coaching staff. Over the past 10-odd months, almost every top-order batsman, except the skipper, has regressed. Murali Vijay had been looking iffy before he was dropped. Shikhar Dhawan has been guilty of repeating mistakes, his footwork being non-existent. Cheteshwar Pujara, too, has become inconsistent, notwithstanding his wonderful hundred at Southampton. KL Rahul looked a walking wicket before he scored 149 in the second innings at the Oval. Ajinkya Rahane was the biggest disappointment. For a batsman of his class, it felt like he was putting too much pressure on himself. The travails of the batting group put the coaching staff under the scanner. Kohli’s ‘reservations’ had forced Kumble to resign as the head coach last year. The great leg-spinner was reportedly a little overbearing. While recommending Shastri’s appointment—return to the fold rather, as his successor—the BCCI’s Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC) comprising Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman had chosen Dravid and Zaheer Khan as the batting and bowling consultants, respectively, for the senior team’s tough overseas tours. Shastri, however, wanted to have his own coaching staff and, for some reason, Dravid and Khan weren’t taken onboard. Dravid continues to mother-hen the clots and the India A team players. His presence with the senior team in England surely would have helped the Rahuls and the Rahanes. The constant chopping and changing also didn’t help. Rahane had been dropped for the first two Tests in South Africa. Pujara inexplicably was left out of the playing XI in the first Test in England. India played an extra spinner on a damp Lord’s pitch and then went with only one spinner on a dry Ageas Bowl deck, where Moeen Ali outspun Ravi Ashwin. The BCCI is now helmed by the Committee of Administrators. The five selectors have played only 13 Tests between them. Little wonder then that player power is on the rise. ---------------------------------------------------------- Not just the coaching staff, but huge question-mark on the captain too who has who has proved that he is an excellent batsman but a terrible captain with no tactical sense.
  6. Chandan

    Post Mortem of Pataudi Trophy

    It is very clear that players are not being allowed to play their their true game. Maybe the batting coach is insisting them to play certain type of game and captain & head coach see to it that it being followed. Because it was very clear the moment Rahul started playing his own game, he came into rhythm and was successful. Maybe his this approach might not have brought him 100% success, but even Kohli wasn't successful in every inning. We have already seen how much pressure Pujara has to go through because he plays slow inning. This way, this team management is stopping the players from growing and destroying the career of many.
  7. Chandan

    Post Mortem of Pataudi Trophy

    We are good enough and this series was there to be be won. We didn't win was because of poor guidance, preparation, failure of learning from previous mistakes and of course the worst captaincy because of which we kept on choosing the wrong personnels too. Many senior experts agree with me: https://goo.gl/zn66WQ Vasu: A Flawed Team was Ripe for Picking Yet India leave England Wondering What Might Have Been And so, it ended, in the dying moments of the fifth day of the fifth day of the fifth Test, the scoreboard finally confirmed what it thought of India’s performance in England. The verdict was 4-1 in England’s favour, but, it was not a fair reflection of how competitive Virat Kohli’s team had been. It’s a bit pointless to say that it might have been 3-2, or even better, but the scoreline is especially cruel to India’s fast bowlers. All through the series, Mohammed Shami, Ishant Sharma and Jasprit Bumrah, backed up by Hardik Pandya had England on the hop. Here’s also what the scoreboard and scoreline do not reflect. England had one opener who did not know whether he was coming or going, in Keaton Jennings, another who did not find his best touch till he announced that he was retiring, an under-performing middle-order stocked with batsmen batting outside preferred positions, an all-rounder who had to step away mid-series to face charges in court, a leg-spinner who had not played four-day cricket all season and then did not bat or bowl in one of the Tests and a part-time off-spinner who was recalled after he scored a first-class double-century. Phew. If this was not an opposition team ripe for the picking, it’s hard to imagine what is. India had the potential to beat this England team in England, and yet they lost 1-4, which is what has left fans deeply frustrated. As if to pour fuel on the fire, Ravi Shastri, the coach, and Virat Kohli, the captain, continuously talked up their team, occasionally being disrespectful to past Indian teams who had toured England and achieved so much more. If the fast bowlers were consistently excellent and Kohli magnificent with the bat, scoring 593 runs, just why does the scoreline read 1-4? For starters India continued to get their selection wrong. Leaving Cheteshwar Pujara out at the start of the series was a blunder, playing two spinners on a wet Lord’s pitch after a day had been washed out went against all conventional wisdom, not playing two spinners in Southampton was questionable and dumping M Vijay mid-series was just rude. Also, what, if anything is Karun Nair supposed to make of being in England for two months as reserve batsman only to see Hanuma Vihari take the field ahead of him? And what message does this team management decision send to the selectors, who had picked Karun as the reserve batsman in the first place? The lack of support for Kohli, especially early in the series, was costly, if not fatal. The decision to truncate the tour match ahead of the Tests, and not play more serious, competitive fixtures, has already been questioned. While Kohli might be the kind of player who needs little or no acclimatisation time, his mates are made of more mortal stuff. The likes of Vijay, Pujara, Shikhar Dhawan and Ajinkya Rahane deserved the chance to prepare more properly for the Tests, but the fashion with this Indian set-up is to put practice ahead of matches. The logic that tour-game fixtures are often played by weak teams on pitches not similar to the Test strips has merit, but clearly, the alternative the Indian team has chosen, is not delivering the desired results. The other problem with not playing old-fashioned three or four-day matches where eleven play eleven, is that it becomes impossible for players to stake a claim for a place in the XI. You can be bowled five times in a net session, but no scoreboard records that, as opposed to working hard to avoid that one ball that sends them back to the dressing-room in a tour match. India were also hurt by the fact that R Ashwin, after beginning the tour in style, clearly fell away as time wore on. Harbhajan Singh, on commentary, said that Ashwin had told him he was carrying a hip niggle, while the management insisted that Ashwin was fit. In the fourth Test, Ashwin was out-bowled by Moeen, and from the manner in which Ashwin was finishing his action, it was clear that he was far from 100% fit. The effort was there but the body was clearly not executing the instructions the brain was sending. Whose fault is it that an injured Ashwin was played in a game where bowlers’ footmarks and rough was forecast to play a major part in the latter part of the game? The gains from the last Test were strikingly obvious. KL Rahul finally justifying the faith the team management have in him and Rishabh Pant sticking to his guns even in a crunch situation. Rahul’s runs came from using a more aggressive approach, evident even in the first innings, and Pant will be Pant. But aggression is not a one-size fits all solution. The forward press, the showing of intent, the fearless self expression work for some players, but to expect everyone to bring that to the crease is setting yourself up for failure. Allowing batsmen to be true to themselves is far more important than trying to play some unified brand of cricket. Shastri had said emphatically that his team were not in England to draw matches. Of all the utterances before and during the tour, this is perhaps the only occasion where the team kept their word. Which begs the question, is it better to thump your chest and lose four Tests, or stay a little humble, and draw a couple. Is a 2-1 loss better than a 4-1 loss? Most people seem to think so but the team begs to differ and unless that mindset changes, the gap between how the team sees themselves, how the world sees them and what the scoreboard shows will never be bridged. ----------------------------------- Also how can a senior player like Kohli mistake white practice as good enough for red ball practice? He himself might be a genius, might not need much adaptation, but the rest of the players are not so, and they need ample red ball practice before going into the tests. If he hasn't realised that even after playing 6-+ matches, that's really sad.
  8. https://goo.gl/jqaGfY Arrogance over acceptance For reasons not hard to explain, the focus has now shifted from Kohli, the run-machine, to Kohli the captain. By Pradeep Magazine Express News Service India’s inability to capitalise on England’s vulnerable top order and their own batting failures is now history, with a scoreline of 4-1 that will haunt Virat Kohli for a long time, given the pride he takes in his team’s performance. For reasons not hard to explain, the focus has now shifted from Kohli, the run-machine, to Kohli the captain. Failure has its own price to pay and if the captain and his coach continue to live and speak the language of a runaway winner, then they are bound to face a barrage of uncomfortable questions from disappointed fans and a large number of cricketing experts. No one questioned coach Ravi Shastri’s claim before the series that this lot has the potential to be the best ever Indian team. The fans were willing to believe, even after failure in South Africa, that their team is potentially a rich side and can thrash England in their own backyard to stake a legitimate claim to being among the best. This assertion, after the conclusion of the series, is now a mere boast that should by now have embarrassed the proud owner of these words. But no, it appears the team still believes that they are the best ever in the last 15 years. The skipper even ticked off a journalist who merely wanted Kohli’s opinion on whether he still believes in what his coach had said. Are these answers, that mock the person asking a genuine question, a sign of arrogance or the response of an immature mind getting carried away by his own personal achievements, and inexhaustible self-belief ? Kohli, if proof was needed, did show the world that his batting prowess is as special as anyone in the past or present may have possessed. But even this expression of greatness displayed against one of the greatest fast bowlers in the world — Jimmy Anderson — did not help India overcome its weaknesses. For a man whose very mobile face displays all the myriad emotions of someone impatient with any resistance coming his way, this collective failure must be galling. It is good that he still retains faith in his team, but that faith would have a greater meaning if it acknowledged its weaknesses as well. And, if a team loses four of the five matches, the shortcomings have to be many. They need evaluation, a realistic self-appraisal and not childish responses that can create unnecessary divisions, within and outside. There are many valid questions being raised that point at the failure of leadership. From team selection to strategic moves on the field, there are a host of issues to be assessed so that they are not repeated in similar situations. It would be unwise for Kohli to get so deluded by his own batting strength that he starts believing he can take no wrong decision as a captain. Captaincy is a difficult art that requires, among many other things, understanding of the men you lead and providing them the right environment to flourish. This is easier said than done. The greatest danger to a person’s growth is to believe his privileges are the result of his inherent wisdom. Captaincy is a learning curve and being aware of one’s shortcomings, even hunting for them, can help in the curve going upwards. Kohli has by sheer hard work overcome many shortcomings as a batsman to become the phenomenon that he is. As a captain he has a world to conquer and a bit of humility and self-assessment can help. And may be he requires a coach, who in the best interest of the team, tells him not what he wants to hear but what he needs to listen. ------------------------------------------------------------------ After two overseas series losses now these expert cricket writers are are raising these points but were these not obvious even when Kohli was winning at home or SL? Home series, he was helped by Kumble by Kohli was not at all good at field placement, bowling changes etc. Neither was he humble.
  9. Chandan

    Marks for India

    When so many many catches will dropped, you think bowlers are supermen or something to keep taking wickets? With this poor catching unit, whatever wkts they took was bonus!
  10. I don't know whether you read or or not, but a senior journalist GS Vivek was defending Kohli after his arrogant act in the PC and then many senior as well as young journalist flocked to reply and explain to him how his act could not and should not be defended! Anyway, point is, even in the PC, Kohli refused to accept whatever the real issues were which became the main reason for India's defeat. 1. Number one issue was lack of lack of preparation for the red ball cricket before the test cricket. They had felt it as a major factor in SA tour, but didn't learn anything from it. 2 Faulty selections in almost every test: 1st test they needed Jadeja and Pujara in XI but as per Kohli's thought, to play aggressive cricket, he didn't need a person who scored slowly and another spinner. Result--narrow loss. Lords had a damp track and needed seamers, but Kohli went with extra spinner. Result--hammering. 4th test--Ashwin was not fully fit and Jadeja could have been chosen easily but no, result--series loss. 3.His problem has been since SA series: Keeping proven performers in the bench or out of the squad and continuing with out of form players on reputation. 4.Instead of accepting, where they went wrong; the coach saying how he coaches the best Indian touring team in history and then losing a record 6 tests in a calendar year. 5.Saying YoYo scores are more important than runs or wickets. When earlier team lost the series away, they had one handicap. They didn't have an attack that could take 20 wkts. Its not so with this team. Yet the results are the same. One entire series of 5 tests passed by but the coaches and tactitians could not give bowlers one solution of how to get the tail out. What are the back room staffs for? Bowling coaches for, who Shastri thought was better than Zak? And then Kohli expects not to be asked any hard questions?
  11. It was Kohli who wanted Shastri as coach and board has to give whatever the skipper is comfortable with. But as to why Dravid and Zak didn't come with team Ind is a mystry. Shastri had said he wanted his own support staff and assistants to help him to give results. https://goo.gl/AJzQiZ https://goo.gl/foFJ4d
  12. Link? Not even one credible newspaper/outlet reported this news. He was backed by Gavaskar on news channel: “Ravi was the one who started the turnaround in 2014, the work ethic changed under him. He is the right choice for the coach,” said Sunil Gavaskar to NDTV on Tuesday. “Ravi is 100% committed. His professionalism is worth seeing,” Gavaskar added. But it remains to be seen whether the CAC, that had rejected Shastri for Kumble last year, agrees with Gavaskar’s views and gives Kohli the coach he always wanted.
  13. Still I've read it a number of times on ICF that Shastri got appointed only because he had Sachin's backing. I'd like to see where that information came from because I'm an avid follower and read closely. How did did I miss this news?
  14. Can some post even one article which shows that Shastri was selected because of Sachin's backing? I haven't read any! https://goo.gl/Dfgskx Ravi Shastri named Indian cricket team’s head coach, Zaheer Khan bowling coach Ravi Shastri has been appointed as Indian cricket team’s head coach. Zaheer Khan has been named the bowling coach while Rahul Dravid will serve as batting consultant for overseas Test tours. CRICKET Updated: Jul 11, 2017 23:16 IST HT Correspondent Ravi Shastri has been appointed as Indian cricket team’s head coach. Zaheer Khan is the new bowling coach. (AFP) Ravi Shastri was confirmed as India head coach after a 48-hour long drama late on Tuesday. Former India pacer Zaheer Khan will be the bowling coach while Rahul Dravid, who is also the India A and U-19 coach, will be batting consultant on overseas Test tours. (Read | Ravi Shastri - Indian cricket team’s ultimate comeback man) The term of the appointments will be till the World Cup 2019. (Read | Why Ravi Shastri is better than Anil Kumble, reveals Indian cricket team insider) The confirmation is surprising as earlier in the day acting BCCI secretary Amitabh Choudhary had rubbished reports that claimed Shastri had been appointed coach. Choudhary had said the CAC was still deliberating and “until they apprise us of the decision, I cannot comment on this matter.” (Read | Sourav Ganguly says Virat Kohli needs to understand how coaches operate) This came a day after Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC) member and former captain Sourav Ganguly sought more time to decide on the issue at a press conference at BCCI’s Cricket Centre in Mumbai originally scheduled to announce Anil Kumble’s successor. (Read | Murky drama over Ravi Shastri as BCCI says no decision on Indian cricket team coach yet) As candidates, Virender Sehwag and Tom Moody had strong backing and credentials going into Monday’s meeting before the press conference but it seems like Shastri’s comfortable rapport with India captain Virat Kohli has trumped all that. View image on Twitter Twitter Ads info and privacy “Ravi Shastri has been the Team Director in the past, and brings with him a wealth of experience, both as player and as coach,” BCCI’s press release stated. “Zaheer is a contemporary cricketer who assumed the mentoring role to a young fast bowling unit even during his playing days with India. His inputs will be of immense value to our young fast bowlers, who have shown tremendous potential in the last couple of years. (Read | Ravi Shastri leads race to return as India cricket team coach) “As the Indian team is to play Test cricket overseas in the next two years, Rahul Dravid’s expertise as batting consultant will be immensely helpful for youngsters. “The Board appreciates the contribution of the Cricket Advisory Committee – Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman for recommending these appointments which will take Indian Cricket to greater heights.” Initially, Shastri had not applied for the post but when the BCCI extended the deadline for applications till July 9 , the former skipper jumped into the fray and became the hot favourite. (Read | Highlights – India cricket team coach: Ravi Shastri, Virender Sehwag interviewed but decision on hold) India were without a head coach after Anil Kumble withdrew from the application process post the Champions Trophy, citing his relationship with the skipper as ‘untenable’. Ravi Shastri was Indian cricket’s team director from their tour of England in 2014 to the 2016 ICC World T20, where India lost to eventual champions West Indies in the semi-final. Shastri – a veteran of 80 Tests and 150 ODIs – was also team India’s manager during their Bangladesh tour in 2007.

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×