Does India need a coach?

[Ram]

Correction - foreign coach. If we can get a low-key non egotistical fellow like Wright, then it helps the team. Otherwise someone like chappell -shudder- can wreak havoc.

If i had asked you the same question to you in late 2005/early 2006 , when we won all the matches , what would your opinion on foreign coaches be ? The same ? One fused bulb doesnt make the entire shipment worthless. One bad foreign coach doesnt mean all foreign coaches wont fit for India.

[Ram]

And you guys have to kidding if say our team needs no coach ( or foreign for that matter) The coach is like the fatherly figure in the team, the guy who keeps the group in good shape. As much as Dravid , Sachin et all can handle net sessions , it is the coach that has a MAJOR role in strategy , selection and team dynamics. And in a team so many super-stars , there are bound to be inflated egoes. Imagine what would happen if selection decisions get attributed to induvidual players ( Like say sachin preferring Agarkar over Sreesanth for a crucial match ) . If the selection doesnt work out , there is bound to be bad blood within the team. If there was a coach , he will invariably take responsibility for bad mistakes , thus easing the pressure on the team. Those who advocate a Coach-less India have obviously no clue about professionel team-sport dynamics.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[King]

And you guys have to kidding if say our team needs no coach ( or foreign for that matter) The coach is like the fatherly figure in the team, the guy who keeps the group in good shape. As much as Dravid , Sachin et all can handle net sessions , it is the coach that has a MAJOR role in strategy , selection and team dynamics. And in a team so many super-stars , there are bound to be inflated egoes. Imagine what would happen if selection decisions get attributed to induvidual players ( Like say sachin preferring Agarkar over Sreesanth for a crucial match ) . If the selection doesnt work out , there is bound to be bad blood within the team. If there was a coach , he will invariably take responsibility for bad mistakes , thus easing the pressure on the team. Those who advocate a Coach-less India have obviously no clue about professionel team-sport dynamics.

Come on mate, you can't make such **** sure sweeping comments. I'll tell you what, you give a list of things the coach does and let's see you need a head coach (that is what India are looking for what with so many support staff already available).

And in a team so many super-stars , there are bound to be inflated egoes. Imagine what would happen if selection decisions get attributed to induvidual players ( Like say sachin preferring Agarkar over Sreesanth for a crucial match ) . If the selection doesnt work out , there is bound to be bad blood within the team. If there was a coach , he will invariably take responsibility for bad mistakes , thus easing the pressure on the team.

Sounds a fairy tale. Majority of international teams go with the captain. Coach only has inputs he won't select the team. The team management (captain is the one that takes the final decision of course) carries the responsibility of selecting the team not a coach.

[Ram]

about 70+% of ODIs and Test matches played to-date had no role for the coach ... it only started getting prominence in the mid 90s.

Probably the 80% of those games you refer to belong to the once gentenmanly game called cricket, where players turned out on the morning of the match , had a cup of tea , played the match and caught the local train back home later. This is different sport we are talking about today, whose complexities in preparation have increased a million times. Ricky Ponting said that , Australia's preparation for the Ashes reclaiming started immeditely after they lost the ashes in 2005. Thats an amazing 18 months preparation time. Some of match preparation , player analysis , psychological conditioning that go into intnl cricket matches today is mind-boggling. Only , we never come to know of those. Under such circumstances , You would want the BEST to coach your team ( esp if you are the richest board in the world), doesnt matter if he is Indian, Aussie or even a fckin martian. And now , to suggest that we dont need a coach is almost laughable , to be honest..

[King]

BTW I'm not against support staff or a coach but previously there was only a single coach (asst coach in Greg's time) and it was a bit too much work for the captain to organize everything. Now this team has a fielding coach, bowling coach, tech support, team manager, media manager and now you tell me what area is uncovered?

Some of match preparation , player analysis , psychological conditioning that go into intnl cricket matches today is mind-boggling. Only , we never come to know of those.

You think player analysis is done by a coach sitting in his room. Not a chance. Also do you think a coach with a laptop logs every ball, nope he doesn't there is a person entitled for it. Now the player analysis and the tactics is discussed in the team meeting prior game. It includes the entire team along with the coach and the support staff. In fact it is the other way around, despite all this technology cricket is played on the ground. Eventually it is the skill, experience and mental fortitude that comes into play. If I will have to put down a coach's contribution to a team it will be not anything more than about 10-15%

[Ram]

I'll tell you what, you give a list of things the coach does and let's see you need a head coach (that is what India are looking for what with so many support staff already available).

Ravi , I am extremely willing to answer the question you have asked in TOTAL detail , because if i have the cheek to make such bold statements , i better have pucker to back it up with facts/reason too. Before we go on to that , I would like you to answer just one simple question. Could you ( or for that matter anybody in this forum ) name one modern day championship winning team ( In any sport ) that didnt have a coach ? The peopl spending millions to recruit the best coaches in the field obvously knew what they were doing.

[Ram]

Now this team has a fielding coach, bowling coach, tech support, team manager, media manager and now you tell me what area is uncovered?

If a team sport coaching is about ONLY arranging fielding drills , batting and bowling net sessions and attending press- conferences , then what you say is fine. But coaching a team is much more than that. As I had mentioned before earlier, He is actually the boss of the squad ( Anybody remember Alex Fergusson being referred to as the boss of M. United ? ) He is the one who makes the running in the team , keeps everyone on their toes. Now India does have all the support staff you have mentioned about. But will anyone of them have the courage the stand up to a senior player and argue against him ? ( which happens a lot btw in intnl cricket - I am pretty bloddy sure there was lot of discussion over the selection of Sehwag for the world cup , though ultimately Dravid prevailed). Imagine Prasad walking up to a senior player and advising him on his previous selection decision , he would probably get a very curt answer , something along the lines of -- " You are the bowling coach arent you ? , stick to it ". And there has to be a central figure in the team taking all the presure for the mistakes. The captain cant do it , he has enough responsibilites already.I can go listing a million reasons to prove why i think we need a head coach, but i think i will stop here. There HAS to be a head coach, in ANY professional team.

[King]

Believe me I've spoken to so many top class players about a coach's role, none of the players have acknowledged the type of importance you are giving to a coach in your posts. Something you need to remember is that cricket is a physical game, it is played outdoors. I've been part of many cricket teams where there has been even a paid domestic coach had coached our team. Our team hit nadir when the domestic coach took over. The coach is useful to run the training and give captain a bit of support. These days you have coaches for everything including the technical support staff, media managers and tour managers. All I'm saying is when you have so many staff to support the players the coach doesn't really have much to do. The role then becomes over rated.

[King]

If a team sport coaching is about ONLY arranging fielding drills , batting and bowling net sessions and attending press- conferences , then what you say is fine. But coaching a team is much more than that. As I had mentioned before earlier, He is actually the boss of the squad ( Anybody remember Alex Fergusson being referred to as the boss of M. United ? ) He is the one who makes the running in the team , keeps everyone on their toes. Now India does have all the support staff you have mentioned about. But will anyone of them have the courage the stand up to a senior player and argue against him ? ( which happens a lot btw in intnl cricket - I am pretty bloddy sure there was lot of discussion over the selection of Sehwag for the world cup , though ultimately Dravid prevailed). Imagine Prasad walking up to a senior player and advising him on his previous selection decision , he would probably get a very curt answer , something along the lines of -- " You are the bowling coach arent you ? , stick to it ". And there has to be a central figure in the team taking all the presure for the mistakes. The captain cant do it , he has enough responsibilites already.I can go listing a million reasons to prove why i think we need a head coach, but i think i will stop here. There HAS to be a head coach, in ANY professional team.

I think you have missed my comments above. The coach does not select the team, you are quite mistaken about that one. Why should Prasad walk up to a player and say you are dropped? There is the captain that takes a decision and he will mention to him. What is wrong with that? Chopping and changing is a part of the sport. Just because there is a coach a player doesn't take it easy being dropped. I'm not sure you know what Laxman's response to Wright was when Laxman was left out of the WC2003 squad. The central figure you speak of had to face hard ships managing players in the Indian team. The inflated egos did not die down just because you had a professional coach did it? Similarly with Greg as a coach (so called highly professional coach) was he able to control flaring tempers in the team? The boss in a cricket team has never really been a coach. The buck starts with and ends with a captain. Your description is ideal but not realistic. When Blewett and Slater had to be dropped for Langer and Hayden, it was not the coach that had to mention to them. It was captain Steve Waugh that had to convey the message. You cannot compare soccer with cricket and over rate coach's role. It's like comparing apples with oranges.

[Ram]

The coach is useful to run the training and give captain a bit of support. These days you have coaches for everything including the technical support staff, media managers and tour managers.

If that is what my coach does in exchange for the millions he gets paid nowadays , i will fire him the next day. And if at all you have doubts what roles coaches do play in intnl sport ( and specifically team sport) , you should go through history and recollect some of the roles played by Bob Simpson ( Aus was at its nadir then , Simpson literally laid down the vision for Aussie cricket for the next 20 years ) , Or Bob Woolmer ( he was instrumental in changing a talented S.A team into a bunch of world beaters ) or Buchanan ( you should read some of ponting's comments on his role after he stepped aside after the world cup). Do you think Robin Singh or Venkatesh Prasad or for that matter Mr.Borde are capable of doing such things ?

[Ram]

I think you have missed my comments above. The coach does not select the team, you are quite mistaken about that one. Why should Prasad walk up to a player and say you are dropped? There is the captain that takes a decision and he will mention to him. What is wrong with that? Chopping and changing is a part of the sport. Just because there is a coach a player doesn't take it easy being dropped. I'm not sure you know what Laxman's response to Wright was when Laxman was left out of the WC2003 squad. When Blewett and Slater had to be dropped for Langer and Hayden, it was not the coach that had to mention to them. It was captain Steve Waugh that had to convey the message. You cannot compare soccer with cricket and over rate coach's role. It's like comparing apples with oranges.

coaches dont have a role in the selection of players in cricket ? Are you sure ? It was common knowledge that Geraint Jones and Ashley Giles were kept in team despite the fact they had better replacements JUST because Duncan Fletcher insisted so. And i didnt mean to indicate as though it is the coach that convey the selection issues to players. I was trying to say that , the responsibility/accountablity for selection issues is shared/handled better if there is a coach to support/oppose the captain, surely

[King]

You can quote Simpson, Woolmer, Buchanan but that doesn't take away who the boss in the team was. The decisions were taken by the captains, nothing more nothing less. The problem is you keep missing the fact that those days there was only a captain and a coach. There were no concept of fielding coach, bowling coach and the rest. You are not really giving it a good thought Sriram. You are mixing up roles of bowling coach, fielding coach and the captain. Why should bowling coach be worrying about tactics other than bowling? Similarly with fielding? They are appointed to execute certain responsibilities and their focus is just that. You don't expect Prasad to take responsibility for lack of batting improvement in the team do you? If I were BCCI I wouldn't bother looking around the world for a Mr.Ford or Mr.Buchanan, I would look for a local X-Cricketer and send him as a team manager. In short I would replace Borde with say Amarnath. That should take care of the things. We all know what Mr.Woolmer was able to achieve in his recent stint, the best ever cricket coach.

[King]

coaches dont have a role in the selection of players in cricket ? Are you sure ? It was common knowledge that Geraint Jones and Ashley Giles were kept in team despite the fact they had better replacements JUST because Duncan Fletcher insisted so. And i didnt mean to indicate as though it is the coach that convey the selection issues to players. I was trying to say that , the responsibility/accountablity for selection issues is shared/handled better if there is a coach to support/oppose the captain, surely

Coaches do have a say in the final XI but in the end the decision rests with the captain. A coach doesn't have a vote in the selection BTW in the Indian set up. All I want to say is there is not enough evidence of coaches making huge difference to the team. Don't quote the Aussies, they have performed under every coach and I don't give the coach more than about say 10-20% credit for the winnings. The likes of Woolmer, Chappell, Whatmore and the rest have come a cropper at times. Even Fletcher couldn't inspire the team to draw consistent performances. This is why I say the coaches are way too over rated.

[Ram]

You can quote Simpson, Woolmer, Buchanan but that doesn't take away who the boss in the team was. The decisions were taken by the captains, nothing more nothing less. The problem is you keep missing the fact that those days there was only a captain and a coach. There were no concept of fielding coach, bowling coach and the rest. You are not really giving it a good thought Sriram. You are mixing up roles of bowling coach, fielding coach and the captain. Why should bowling coach be worrying about tactics other than bowling? Similarly with fielding? They are appointed to execute certain responsibilities and their focus is just that. You don't expect Prasad to take responsibility for lack of batting improvement in the team do you? If I were BCCI I wouldn't bother looking around the world for a Mr.Ford or Mr.Buchanan, I would look for a local X-Cricketer and send him as a team manager. In short I would replace Borde with say Amarnath. That should take care of the things. We all know what Mr.Woolmer was able to achieve in his recent stint, the best ever cricket coach.

I can understand what you say when you indicate i am actually mixing up the roles of the batting/fielding coaches etc , which seems to be true. BUT, You have be fair in admitting that you also dont seem to realize the role a coach should play in team ( apart from doing drills and backing captaincy issues). I would love to answer all the questions you have posed in the above post, but i have an assignment submission due in 2 hours.. :cry_smile: I shall finish that and get back to this , i promise. :regular_smile:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[King]

BUT' date=' You have be fair in admitting that you also dont seem to realize the role a coach should play in team ( apart from doing drills and backing captaincy issues). [/quote'] I can put in writing everything a coach does in a cricket team. I was just wanting to make sure if we both have good grasp of that otherwise we will just be posting without much headway. I've said I've been part of a team where we had a domestic coach tried to weave magic on us folks. Alas he could. I go with my experience and what I've heard from a lot of players that's played heaps of international cricket. I'm sure you can research an international captain's perspective of a coach and convince me otherwise or make me realize my experience or the players I've spoken to haven't been honest.