BCCI takes one step forward and one backward

[gator]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward very hard to catch up with ur posts, chandan.... it will prolly help, if u posted each article as a thread, and we can reply to tht.... it is very difficult for me to catch up and read 10 articles in this thread, before i can post something meaningful.... but all credit to u, for diggin up a wealth of information and posting it.... extremely meticulate poster...

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Gator, I hate starting the thread as an article. I'd rather choose a topic and post the articles that I get and at the same time posting my views on the topic as well. If you're interested, you can find out some time and read the posts and connected articles. I do not go for speculative articles which aim to discuss sensational rumours only. I'd like if you can give time and give your constructive view. Cheers!!!

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward How should BCCI have approached the problem: Emotions and sentiments don't necessarily put one on the path to success, writes Makarand Waingankar Going by the history of reports submitted by coaches and managers, nothing special is likely to emerge. But if the tone of Chappell's report is similar to that of his leaked e-mail, then whether he is sacked or not, Indian cricket will be shaken. Sanjay Jagdale, amiable but knowledgeable, was part of the selection committee that picked the team and saw the team not performing from close quarters. Objective assessment is what he is known for. As a conscientious cricket lover, Jagdale should put the entire performance in the right perspective. No matter what precautions are taken, past manipulations are a strong indicator that the reports will be smartly leaked, possibly before the Working Committee, thereby drawing the entire cricket crazy nation into an aimless, illogical and emotional debate. The move to invite former Test captains of India may have defused the situation to some extent, but one is not too sure whether the views expressed by them will be implemented. Improvement panel In the Seventies, a Cricket Improvement Committee was formed with several former Test captains. When none of their recommendations were implemented by the Working Committee, the Chairman of the Cricket Improvement Committee, the late Fathesinhrao Gaekwad, enquired about the status of the report. One Working Committee member instead promptly proposed the committee itself be dissolved and the motion was seconded by another member. It took not even a minute to negate the work of nearly a month. Hopefully the members of the committee now appointed by the BCCI will get their heads together and recommend a process which should be implemented by the BCCI. But do we really believe that cricket's politics will permit any such process to be implemented? In corporates, issues are discussed and a process is formulated. Once that is done, the entire management backs that process. That is the professional way, in which formulation of a process has worth only in its successful implementation. Major drawback Unfortunately, the BCCI being a body of elected members has had the major drawback of frequently formulating processes without being genuinely interested in the successful implementation of those processes. When Greg Chappell made a presentation to the BCCI on the process he had formulated to take Indian cricket to the next level, the decision makers of the BCCI approved. Three former India captains were part of the committee that recommended his name after that presentation. That presentation was also unanimously approved by the Working Committee. However, the media and the cricketing fraternity have both started shouting from the rooftops that Chappell's process failed despite unstinted backing. Fearing backlash against itself, the BCCI backed the process only in fits and starts. For a process to succeed at the international level, it takes not less than four years as was proved by the South Africans when the unknown Graeme Smith was appointed captain at the age of 22. But here in India, the entire nation was hysterically and obdurately keen to get non-performers and unfit players back in the team as it was felt only experience could win us the World Cup. Where was the necessity to change the selection committee five months before the World Cup? Emotions and sentiments don't necessarily put you on the path to success. By this week-end, we will know whether the committee of former captains and the Working Committee too have toed the line of the emotional nation or have suggested some radical changes. But if the changes too are not backed, Indian cricket will continue to suffer. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Now one has to admire how well many of the journalists know BCCI's working way. It doesn't matter whose regime it is, but the lines toes in the name of improvement of cricket are the same, be it in 1970 or 2007!!!

[chanakya]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward

But here in India, the entire nation was hysterically and obdurately keen to get non-performers and unfit players back in the team as it was felt only experience could win us the World Cup.

So he means to say we should have taken non performers but fit players. Makes sense at least we could have stopped the runs.

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Have you read this thread, Bumper? Please go through it and see why most of the BCCI promises won't materialise!

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward No Frazer?s edge: Board dumps asst coach Vijay Tagore Tuesday, April 17, 2007 01:50 IST MUMBAI: Greg Chappell may have gone but not all his support staff. Indian team?s physical trainer Gregory Allen King and physio John Gloster will continue to be associated with Men in Blue. Ian Frazer, Chappell?s Man Friday will however have to stay put in Australia even as his mentor mulls over his options of coming back as consultant for the National Cricket Academy. The Board of Control for Cricket in India has decided not to renew the contract of Frazer, the team?s assistant coach. Like Chappell, Frazer?s contract was up till the World Cup. Frazer joined the Indian team in June 2005. In the aftermath of Indian team?s World Cup debacle, a lot of mud was slung on Frazer with many Board administrators calling for his head. Chappell, however, said his deputy was of immense help to the team. BCCI secretary Niranjan Shan, however, refused to comment on the charges against Frazer except for saying that the Board has decided not to renew the assistant coach?s contract. The 43-year-old Aussie, who joined the team as a bio-mechanist following Chappell?s appointment in June 2005, had a $5000-a-month contract with the Board till the World Cup. Shah also confirmed that Gloster and King will stay with the Indian team, till December at least. Gloster?s contract ended with the World Cup but the Board has decided to extend his tenure up to December, when King?s term ends. ?They will remain with the team for the time being. We?ll take a call in December,? Shah told DNA. Gloster, who was a physio to the Bangladesh team, joined the Men in Blue in February 2005 after being recommended by Andrew Leipus who went on a sabbatical to Australia. King?s stint with the Indian team is longer. The South African fitness trainer was recruited by the BCCI in August 2003. He came in place of compatriot Adrian Le Roux who joined the South African team. Both King and Gloster were recruited by the BCCI during coach John Wright?s time but they had a good working relations with Chappell. -------------------------------------------------------- This is a good move by board. I don't think Ian frazer will be of much use in the absence of Chappell. And it was sensible to keep back the physio and the trainer because they are working with the team since Wright's stint.

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Right men, wrong time Selectors must pick Test, ODI sides while watching Twenty20 Anand Vasu in Mumbai April 18, 2007 Rahul Dravid cracked a half-century, playing some well-timed shots, and Karnataka came closer to qualifying for the final of the Twenty20 championships as they brushed aside Orissa by a margin of 44 runs, but India's captain will have more on his mind than giving the ball an almighty whack. In less than two days Dravid has to sit down with India's selectors, and their new cricket manager, Ravi Shastri, to pick the Indian team for the tour of Bangladesh. The selectors' job is not made easier by the fact that they are watching domestic cricketers in Twenty20 cricket and looking to select a Test and one-day team. It's hard to see how much can be read from performances in this frenetic and rather lacklustre tournament. On the one hand it gives teams the chance to blood youngsters who may not otherwise have got a look in. On the other, it thrusts cricketers who are nowhere near mature into a form of the game that can be punishing, and not afford them the time to put the right habits in place early on. There are two broad strains of whispers, relating to the selectors' thought process, doing the rounds. One school of thought believes that, barring Rahul Dravid, none of the senior Indian cricketers who were in the World Cup squad are certainties. The other believes that the change, if any, will be cosmetic. As is so often the case in Indian cricket, the truth is somewhere in between. The selectors have a tough balancing act to perform, with the working committee of the Board of Control for Cricket in India announcing publicly that it had asked them to pick a "young team" under an experienced captain for the tour. This was interpreted in some quarters as a move to drop Sourav Ganguly, Sachin Tendulkar, Virender Sehwag, Harbhajan Singh and usher in the next generation of Indian cricketers. However, despite the likes of Manoj Tiwary and Rohit Sharma being touted as certainties, it's almost impossible to see the selectors making wholesale changes to this team. If they are to drop Ganguly, who has been criticised for his slow scoring in recent one-dayers, then they will be forced also to seriously consider the selection of Sehwag and Tendulkar. In all this there still remains one unknown, and that is Shastri. The selectors may have their ideas, and Dilip Vengsarkar, the chairman of this panel holds strong opinions, but they will have to work with what Shastri and Dravid want. The concerns for this committee are larger than they seem. This is a team in transition, and the problem is not so much with the personnel but what they are doing. The time has come for the likes of Yuvraj Singh, Zaheer Khan, Virender Sehwag and Harbhajan Singh to take their game to the next level. They have not taken their game to the level expected or shown the leadership and responsibility that was called for. To expect Dravid, Ganguly and Tendulkar, all on the wrong side of 30 and with more than a decade of international cricket already under the belt, to be the custodians of the team's fortunes going forward may be asking too much. With the selectors been given the directive to pick a young team it is likely that Mumbai's Rohit Sharma, 19, will get to tour Bangladesh ? International Cricket Council But, as Vengsarkar has indicated in the past, there is little "exceptional talent" in domestic cricket. It is not as though there are strong contenders pushing for places in the national team. The lack of spinners is a real worry, and needs to be addressed, with Anil Kumble retiring from one-day cricket and Harbhajan playing more of a restrictive role than one of a spinner leading an attack. There's Ramesh Powar, who is an automatic selection, but whether he has it in him to lead the attack - he has bowled well when a Kumble or a Harbhajan has tied one end down - remains to be seen. Whether Murali Kartik has done enough to win a recall is an issue the selectors must address. They also have to find someone to fill the role that Irfan Pathan once played, with bat and ball. So, it's not so much of a question of who will be picked, and who will not make the cut, but whether the selectors and the team management are on the same wavelength. While the selectors, appointed by the board, may not be averse to making some drastic changes, the team management will be more keen to see how they can fix the problems they have with existing personnel. ------------------------------------------------------- Can anyone tell me what the author is trying to say here and what was his point in mentioning Rahul's performance in T20 yesterday??

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Robin Singh enjoys coaching Vijay Lokapally I do consider this a start, and an honour NEW DELHI: He has remained an unsung contributor. When playing as an all-rounder, he rarely got credit for his excellent work on the field and now as a coach too he has preferred to remain in the background, allowing his students to do the talking. "Although a very specific appointment, but undoubtedly in an important area, I am ready for the challenge. I do consider this a start, and an honour," was Robin Singh's modest reaction to being handed the job of a fielding coach with the national team for the forthcoming tour to Bangladesh. He stopped playing in 2002 and shifted to coaching. As an under-19 coach, he worked hard with the national team, travelling to England, Pakistan and Bangladesh. "I think my performance at the NCA coaching clinics was very encouraging, and having already experienced the U-19 tours, my transition (from player to coach) was very natural. "I found I was enjoying coaching under-19 teams and consequently the `A' team tours." For the last three years, Robin, 43, has devoted time and experience to training cricketers in Hong Kong as the national coach. "Working with the Hong Kong national team has been a rich learning process and given me invaluable exposure too." Well versed with modern techniques and having played at the highest level with innovative ideas, Robin has a few plans in mind as he prepares for the most challenging assignment of his career. Of course, he knows there is a specific role for himself. Raise standard "I would like to raise the standard and performance a good few notches and impress upon all who play the game that fitness and fielding go hand in hand. And that hard work and commitment towards this aspect of the game can go a long way in further enhancing batsmen and bowlers into complete cricketers," said Robin, whose experience of 136 One-day Internationals and one Test backing him in this new venture. Known to be a flawless fielder in any position, Robin understands the significance of a fielding coach, or for that matter, the support staff that travels with the team these days. "I think having coaches for specified areas is definitely a step in the right direction, especially with the amount of cricket played these days. This way the onus is not on one main coach, but a team that shares responsibility, not in an ambiguous but specified manner." The soft-spoken Robin has spent enough time on the cricket field to read the state of the game in the country. He is very optimistic too when assessing the state of Indian cricket in terms of talent. "Clich?d as it may sound, there really is no dearth of talent in this country. My coaching stints with India junior teams have seen the likes of Irfan Pathan, Suresh Raina, Robin Uthappa, Dinesh Karthik, V.R.V. Singh, R.P. Singh come through the ranks. I think that speaks for itself." It does. And it also speaks for the credentials of Robin Singh, who can surely be an asset to Indian cricket in any capacity. ------------------------------------------------------------------ This is one of the right steps taken by the board and I hope Indian players learn useful things in fielding from Robin Singh!

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Wrong step?? Did Shah back of aher Biswalrow? Selectors said they would choose their team, secretary spoke ofno-confidence motion Kadambari Murali New Delhi THAT THE BCCI and the national selectors are at odds with each other has been evident for a while, but on Friday, things reportedly almost reached a crisis in the selection committee meeting in Mumbai. If Board officials are to be believed, there was a big argument during that meeting between BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah and national selector from the East Zone, Ranjib Biswal, over the Board's diktat to the selectors to pick a young team. After Shah reminded the selectors about the Board's wishes, Biswal reportedly asked him what he meant by a 'young team' and why the selection panel, an independent body, should be dictated to by the BCCI. Shah apparently then reacted by threatening the selectors with a "no-confidence motion" if they did not heed the Board's wishes, to which Biswal retorted by telling him to go ahead and do that. He apparently added that he "knew how to deal" with him (Shah) "in a year's time". The protagonists in this alleged drama could not be reached for comment but if it is true, it is a sorry reflection on the BCCI, for trying to bul- ly what should be an independent selection panel into taking illogical decisions merely to pacify the public and hardline factions within its own organisation. If Biswal did really stand up to Shah, then hats off to him for actually daring to question what to many is fast appearing a completely draconian body The current BCCI regime, dominated by its radical faction, is perhaps best summed up by that Shakespearean phrase made famous by the Queen of Hearts in Alice'sAdventures in Wonderland: "Off with his head!" Anyone who opposes their oft-warped worldview of how cricket should be run must perish. kmurali@hindustantimes.com ------------------------------------------------------- It indeed pastes a very very concerning situation where people who have no knowledge of cricket try to dictate and influence the independent faction such as the selection committee, just to tread over the players and keep them down to maintain their power! I can see Indian cricket going down further!!

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Quo vadis? K Shriniwas Rao Posted online: Sunday, April 22, 2007 at 0000 hrs Indian cricket stands at the crossroads, probably confused, and definitely insecure when the talk is about change. Now, suddenly, after the Australian has left, Chappellway seems the right direction.Whatever the shocks in the tour team to Bangladesh, the general perception in Indian cricket remains: there can be no replacement for Sachin Tendulkar, or for that matter, Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly or even Virender Sehwag. The problem is, it is very true. They have remained the pillars of Indian batting for the last seven-eight years. Tendulkar, in particular, has been the bulwark of the team for over 17 years. The four have an aggregate of 40,358 runs in one-day cricket and 29,432 in Tests. That alone is enough to toast their contribution to Indian cricket. So, whenever you ask ? so often in recent times ? whether these greats should be replaced on form, you also have to ask: where is the replacement? Brings to memory chairman of selectors Dilip Vengsarkar?s remark of last year, about ?no exceptional talent? in Indian cricket. He knew what he was referring to. India managed to get rid of Greg Chappell. Now a certain board official shares this view: ?But Indian cricket will eventually realize what the Aussie had been trying to put forth, his idea of building a young Indian team.? In the given scenario, it is obvious that India cannot afford eleven fresh faces to take charge. But what is more worrying is that they cannot even think of playing international cricket without the big names. Hence abandoning the gradation in the existing contract system, slapping show-cause notices and ?resting? players instead of dropping them. The official is as clear as he puts it: ?We?re just too scared, just about of everything.? Consider this: If Manoj Tiwary, the newly selected middle-order batsman from Bengal, fails to get going on the tour of Bangladesh, is the Indian board willing to give the 21-year-old another chance? What if Piyush Chawla, another 21-year-old, a leg-spinner from Uttar Pradesh, returns wicketless? The selection committee has already gone on record saying that Tendulkar and Ganguly will be back for future tours. No harm, we say, but will the youngsters be continued with is the big question. Is it not logical to question how the board allowed Virender Sehwag to play, despite the Najafgarh opener having played 61 matches without scoring even a single century. For the record, he broke the jinx with a knock of 114 against the listless Bermuda. In April 2005 he had scored 108 versus Pakistan in Kochi. In deciding to pursue with bowlers like Rudra Pratap Singh and VRV Singh, and not trying out Ranadeb Bose or Joginder Sharma ?domestic cricket?s highest wicket-takers?the selection committee has already taken a step back. Two years ago, the newly appointed coach Greg Chappell held a camp in Bangalore where Bose had got a call-in among the 30 best of the country. Then what? Baroda?s Yusuf Pathan has been impressive with his all-round abilities but still has to remain under the shadows of an unfit Ramesh Powar. The fact that Rajesh Pawar, the left-arm spinner from Baroda has been given his due in the Test format is only an indication of what can be done. The question, though, as former India captain Srinivas Venkatraghavan puts it, is India willing to pursue with these players even if success doesn?t come immediately? Chappell, before he left, had said on record that for Indian cricket to come to terms with the existing international competition, a good seven to eight years will have to be spent on restructuring domestic cricket and giving youngsters the opportunities at the international level. Given India?s natural affinity to stick to the tried and tested, Chappell?s words seem as foreign as possible. There is a history of wayward decision-making in India. Players have been picked and sacked, not until they?ve been found exceptional in the first couple of performances, or if there?s been no particular choice available. Railways all-rounder Jai Prakash Yadav, no exceptional talent himself, is an example. ?When I was dropped?that was more than just once or twice?I was never given a reason. Nobody came and told me, look, you just can?t score runs or see, you are not taking wickets, you don?t field well. I was just not in the next team list,? he says. ?Not that I could dispute it, but I deserved a reason at least, somebody to tell me where I was lacking.? Yadav is one of the many examples. Maharashtra opener Dhiraj Jadhav had once come as close to making it to the Indian team as he could and yet, that one final leap always eluded him. ?I just thought I was unlucky. At that time, I just didn?t know what else I could?ve done,? he says now. And Mohammad Kaif is a current player to have been meted out that fate time and again. One can only hope this isn?t the case for the ones in reckoning now. That Vengsarkar happens to be the chairman of selectors is the best possible news for the performing youngsters at the moment. If there?s a talent, says Vengsarkar, he?ll definitely play. The problem, though, is not about the talented youngster. It?s whether India has come to a point where it needs to take a few courageous decisions. ____________________________________________ Why is there so lack of communication between the board and the player? Why are the players not told why they were dropped? What were they lacking and on which areas should they work to come back into the team? No wonder talent like Pathan are going down like nine pins in our country!!! :mad:

[chanakya]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward er pathan went down after being in the team.

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward So? Has he been told what he is lacking at? What he has to work on to get back into the team? Will team use him as an all-rounder or a strike bowler? I just couldn't get the point of your post. The article is discussing that players are not given reason by selection committee for being dropped.

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Oh. Here you know the dirty board politics, from The Weeks: Board games Selectors succumb to pressure from the BCCI On April 19, a day before the Indian team for the Bangladesh tour was picked, Board of Control for Cricket in India secretary Niranjan Shah sent a written directive to chairman of selectors Dilip Vengsarkar: "This is to remind you of the decision of the Working Committee to send a young team to Bangladesh under the experienced captainship of Rahul Dravid." For the first time in India's cricket history, a working committee dictated terms to the selection committee, an "independent committee" as per the BCCI's constitution. Officials insisted that they took such unprecedented decisions "keeping in view the public sentiments after Team India's World Cup debacle". For a cricket board whose entire system is ambiguous, it was yet another chance to stir up things. To top it all, Shah publicly claimed that the "working committee is supreme". The selectors, in a bid to calm things down and because they wanted to see how the team fares in Bangladesh, denied having received the note. A reported exchange of words between East Zone selector Ranjib Biswal and Shah in the BCCI office on April 20 forced both the board and the committee to draw their battle lines. Biswal asked Shah to define 'young' and asked him whether the board wanted the selectors to pick an under-19 team. Shah insisted that th-ey had to go as per the working committee's decision and pick a young team to which Biswal retorted, "Next time please call the junior selectors for the meeting." An angry Shah pointed out that the board had the power to sack selectors who didn't toe its line. Biswal, also the president of Orissa Cricket Association with the power to vote in the BCCI elections, replied: "I know how to get back. I will see you at the annual general body meeting." On the other hand, board president Sharad Pawar reportedly told Vengsarkar to "go ahead and choose the team you want to send to Bangladesh". Pawar assured him that "there was no pressure on the selection committee". The powerful men in the BCCI may have thought that they had finally won the battle after ensuring that Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Ganguly were 'rested' for the One-Day Internationals. The selectors, however, made a mockery of the board's 'young legs' policy by recalling 30-year-old Dinesh Mongia for ODIs and 27-year-old Rajesh Pawar for Tests. Said former India player Mohinder Amarnath: "Going by their choices, the selection committee looks confused." He was upset that someone as senior as Vengsarkar had to succumb to the board's pressures. The decisions to opt for three specialist openers for three ODIs-Gautam Gambhir, Robin Uthappa and Virender Sehwag (though it was later clarified that Sehwag would bat at number three)-and just one for Tests, Wasim Jaffer (Dinesh Karthik as the makeshift opener), were baffling. Vengsarkar's predecessor Kiran More termed the decision as a "step backward". The decision to sack Sehwag for Tests and retain him for ODIs was equally confounding, as his 'form woes' were restricted to the ODIs (though he showed a semblance of regaining his touch in the World Cup). In the last three years, he has averaged 54.44 in Tests, and has played a key role in India's Test victories. If the selectors or the board felt that he no longer fitted into the 'young' scheme of things, he should have been directly told so. Resting Ganguly and Tendulkar does not answer the board's 'young legs' criterion. More so because it is preposterous for selectors and Dravid to select a team without them and Sehwag for the challenging tours to Australia and England. The selectors' decision not to appoint a deputy for captain for the Bangladesh tour indicated that they are unwilling to depose Tendulkar or keep him out of captaincy forever. Dravid reportedly wanted Yuvraj Singh as his deputy, but a selector told THE WEEK: "We want a permanent vice-captain and would rather wait before the start of the England tour to see who fits the bill." It means that the selectors want to see Dravid's future stance on Tendulkar and Ganguly before deciding on his possible successor. A positive development is that the selectors owned up the decision to "rest" the big two. Vengsarkar's statement, "I have spoken to Tendulkar and Ganguly and they were fine with our decision", was clear enough. If they had announced the decision as a 'collective' or a 'unanimous' one-which meant even stand-in manager Ravi Shastri and Dravid were keen to drop the duo-the blame would have fallen on Dravid. It would have added to the angst in the team, and further damaged Dravid's relationship with other players. The tussle of who's in and who's not will continue in what portends to be an eventful season for Team India. As of now, the give and take has resulted in a draw. These are not far-reaching changes and can only be described as minor sorting and sifting. The outcome of the next selection committee meeting will indicate which way the Indian team is heading. It is, however, a rocky start. Can Team India override it and come out better? _---------------------------------------------------------- Sould the BCCI bosses too be made more accountable?

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Extra Cover To Silly Points: Board Games BCCI insiders give Shantanu Guha Ray a sense of the pervading mess in the Indian cricket establishment The team for the Bangladesh tour that Sachin Tendulkar and Saurav Ganguly couldn?t find a place in was chosen in a room of the Wankhede Stadium over a four hour-long slanging match between top office-bearers of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (bcci) and selectors. It?s bitter aftertaste is still palpable in the ramshackle bcci office in Mumbai?s Nariman Point. ?Many felt changes will now flow into the bcci after Pawar ended Dalmiya's supremacy from indian cricket in 2005 but the Board continues to grapple with problem after problem,? remarks former skipper and commentator Krishnamachari Srikkanth. Agrees Yashpal Sharma, Srikkanth?s teammate in the 1983 World Cup squad: ?Touch the Board anywhere and you will find it riddled with holes. Power politics continue to dominate Indian cricket.? They should know. Seconds into the meeting that ? among other issues ? was also supposed to discuss a detailed report that former coach Greg Chappell was going to hand over explaining what he called ?serious crisis points in Team India?, selectors fought a pitched battle with top bcci officials that insiders claim reflects the chaos within the Board. ?Indian media is constantly looking for spice and sensation,? bcci Secretary Niranjan Shah told Tehelka, brushing aside the criticism. His detractors, though, call him the leaking tap and the mother of all troubles in the Board since India crashed out of the World Cup, triggering nationwide discontent. After arguing for two hours, the selectors could not decide who would be the deputy to Rahul Dravid for the Bangladesh odi series. Eventually, chief selector Dilip Vengsarkar suggested that flashy wicketkeeper Mahendra Singh Dhoni be appointed vice-captain. ?What if he goes the Yuvraj way?? asked a selector. ?We will react if that happens,? retorted Vengsarkar. To which Shah said, ?And since you all are in constant touch with the players and keep informing them about the Board?s plans, why not warn Dhoni that this cap can go if he does not behave or perform?? Selectors? interaction with players had been common during Dalmiya?s time, but in the past year-and-a-half the new selectors have been informing only a particular set of players of the details of selection meetings. Many felt Shah?s remark was aimed at East Zone selector Ranjib Biswal who had met Ganguly. An enraged Vengsarkar intervened and asked Shah not to make insinuations against selectors. ?I am not going to discuss what happened in the meeting. The most crucial part for the media was about Sachin and Saurav?s omission and I can tell you they have been rested. There was no pressure to drop them. So this overreaction is a little out of place,? Vengsarkar told Tehelka, adding: ?We could even have Tendulkar as the vice-captain for the Tests but the decision has not been taken as yet.? Insiders claim that the selectors were divided on the issue of Sachin and Saurav. ?It is not enough to say they have been rested. What if the juniors perform well in Bangladesh? Will these two remain on the sidelines? Such was the bitterness in the meeting that once Dravid offered to sit out some matches,? says one selector. ?There was a strong section of selectors who felt it would be worthwhile to change the leadership and experiment with a new captain, say Tendulkar, for sometime.? The selector, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Tehelka that there were serious arguments over resting key players in 45 one-dayers and 15 Tests that India will play over the next year. ?If we take that criteria, then Dravid (31) and Virender Sehwag (27) have played more odis last year than Tendulkar (22) and Ganguly (10). So why not rest Sehwag? But we were overruled by the chief selector who cited Sehwag?s performance against Bermuda and the captain?s continued preference for him!? What prompted the selectors to drop Yuvraj Singh when the Board was said to be grooming him for odi captaincy, some selectors asked. But Vengsarkar took out a note from national selector Sanjay Jagdale?s report book that said Yuvraj?s nightlife and romantic escapades were a bad influence on the side, especially in the West Indies. Dravid, throughout this exchange, remained silent. ?It is important for the captain to talk on such issues. He is the man on the spot,? says a middle-rung bcci official. Shah offers to douse the crisis. ?My directive to the selectors was to pick a young side and they have done so. I agree there have been arguments but that?s a natural process.? How does that explain the selectors? picking 30-year-old Dinesh Mongia? ?He has been treated unfairly and needs another chance,? says Shah. Sources say Mongia?s selection was debated. Shah was cornered by the selectors who asked him to mention his age preference for a youthful side. ?The only support Mongia got was from North Zone selector Bhupinder Singh and Manager Ravi Shastri,? says the selector. Vengsarkar refuses to acknowledge the serious differences that marred the meeting. ?There were some suggestions from the Board but the ultimate decision was ours,? he says. Vengsarkar also remains silent on the report Chappell was to submit. Shah told members that Chappell refused to give the report saying the bcci might leak it to the media. The selectors blasted Shah for not insisting on a detailed report on the World Cup debacle from the coach. ?Since he did not wish to submit a report, we did not press for the same,? says Shah in his defence, also refusing to discuss why the Board chose to show-cause Sachin and Yuvraj and not its Vice President Dayanand Narvekar who had alleged that players had late-night parties with women companions in the West Indies. ?This shows where bcci stands. First we saw a no holds-barred battle between bcci and Chappell, followed by constant leaks from the bcci of what it intends to do about Chappell and the players after the World Cup disaster, and then we see this strange team for the Bangladesh tour that is leaving with a lot of questions unanswered,? says advocate Rahul Mehra who filed a pil against the bcci seven years back. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Persons who've read my article on the home page of this site would know who Rahul Mehra is and what he has been doing for Indian cricket. This article shows the complete mess which our board is in at the moment and there is no surprise there if the Indian cricket is going down so rapidly. Our BCCI President is trying his best to pass the buck to the players instead , hoping that no one would question him at all what has he/his regime done to take the Indian cricket forward in last 2 years! And to my astonishment, there are many cricket fans who are even buying his argument and are content in blaming the current set of players for the failure without giving it a thought that there are no worthy players who can even replace them. Why??? Why do have such a dearth of talent suddenly? Because the board has been busy in making money all these years and has forgotten that we need to produce players to play cricket and compete with the international sides!!!

[yoda]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Why doesn't the board send this bunch of selectors packing? Ever since this bunch came, it has been disaster after another both in terms of selections and results. We all thought Kiran More was bad and then came Vengsarkar...

[Cricketics]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward chandan in future.. would u please bold or change the color of the text u feel or think is important in the article.. that way ppl can read the important part of the article and can ignore the other non useful part if there is any..

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward But critetics, I thought the whole article was worth a read. Tehelka is known for its findings especially during the match fixing days. So a cricket article on that...one has to pay attention. If you thought certain parts were useless, please tell me which ones, so that I take a lesson for articles which I post in future! :hic:

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Contracts before Bangladesh tour: BCCI May 01, 2007 21:26 IST The Bangladesh-bound Indian team members will have to sign contracts with the Board of Control for Cricket in India before departing for the short tour later this month. "The drafts of the contracts are already with the players. They will have to sign them before leaving for Bangladesh," BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah said from on Tuesday. The players' contracts have been hanging fire for a long time now because of their reservations over some clauses. The cricket Board later cracked the whip on players' endorsements by limiting them to three per head at its last working committee meeting in Mumbai. Shah will be in Kolkata on the last two days of the team's conditioning camp, which starts tomorrow. ------------------------------------ Now the next article will give you an idea of the mess the board is in!

[Chandan]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Board lays down contracts ultimatum... Or have they? Niranjan Shah says players have to sign before Bangladesh tour, but another official says final contracts aren?t ready yet. Mumbai: Another round of confusion and chaos is taking shape in the corridors of the BCCI. And this time it?s over the handing over of fresh contracts to the the Bangladesh-bound Indian team members. Yesterday, two key members of the board were singing different tunes regarding the contracts yesterday. While one member said that the players will have to sign the contracts with the Cricket Board before departing for the short tour later this month, the other member said that the contracts commitee has not even met to finalise the contracts. BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah, on his way back from West Indies, said from London: ?The drafts of the contracts are already with the players. They will have to sign them before leaving for Bangladesh.? But MP Pandove, a BCCI joint secretary, told Mumbai Mirror that the committee was yet to meet. ?I have no clue about it. The committee is yet to meet and finalise the contracts. Shashank Manohar (one of the BCCI vice-persident and head of the committee) had prepared a contract draft earlier and that might have been shown to the players. But to the best of my knowledge, the contracts are yet to be finalised, so how can they be signed?? But according to sources, what might actually be happening is that the board might make all the players on the tour sign a document stating only the amount of money they will get for each one-day and test. The document is also expected to have details about the bonus they will earn from the series win. The players? contracts have been hanging for the time being because of reservations over clauses relating to players? endorsements. We?re now waiting for a denial from one of the parties. ------------------------------------------- So?

[Predator_05]

Re: BCCI takes one step forward and one backward Instead of being contracted for a year, why don't they sign up players on a series by series basis instead. That way you can regulate performance