Fletcher's excuses

[GautiMaan]

Duncan Fletcher, the India coach, said it was difficult for his side to follow-up a successful World Cup year with the same "intensity", citing India's lack of home fixtures in the past year as the reason for their poor form, after the 4-1 ODI series win over Sri Lanka on Saturday. Fletcher has had a tough first year since taking over from Gary Kirsten after the 2011 World Cup, with the team losing eight consecutive away Tests, four each to England and Australia. He said England faced similar problems of relaxing after a successful phase and that the win would provide India with confidence ahead of home matches against New Zealand and England. "It is always difficult after you have had a very successful year like that when you have won the World Cup," Fletcher said. "I have been involved with another side [England] that did the same thing and afterwards, after having had a successful series, to maintain that sort of intensity is quite difficult because sides tend to sit back a bit. "One must also consider that since then we have only had one series in India. We haven't played [much] in India which is where they are very strong like any side is. I have seen other sides go away from home lately over the last two-three years and they have all struggled. We have only had that one series [against West Indies] where we played some very good cricket in India. "Beating Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka is very difficult. Not many sides have been able to do it. Hopefully this gives the side a lot of confidence. When we get back to India we have some difficult tours coming up and hopefully we can play the good cricket that we know we can in India." India closed out games from tight situations in the series, and Fletcher said that was something they had been working on. For instance, today Sri Lanka needed 45 from 48 deliveries but Irfan Pathan struck thrice in two overs to seal the game for India. "There have been problems on previous away tours [when] we have had the opposition in trouble and have not been able to make sure that we maintain the pressure on them and take advantage of that. It is something we spoke quite a lot about - making sure when we get ourselves into a situation that we maintain our concentration levels. I think it is mainly a concentration situation where they think the game is really in the bag, and with cricket today with batting orders going down all the way down to No 9 and 10, there is no way you can take your foot off the pedal until you have bowled a side out. There have been occasions here where we have had a bit of scare, where the opposition have come back at us. But it is nice to see that they [indian team] have held their nerve and maintained the discipline that we require of them... .

http://www.espncricinfo.com/sri-lanka-v-india-2012/content/current/story/575637.html I dont think India needs a coach to win at home really,not all the players in the test team were part of the WC win but they still failed,he's not admitting the faults just like the BCCI

[Crookbond]

How many overseas Test matches did we play under Gary Kirsten? How many Test matches did we win?

[GautiMaan]

^ We toured SA and NZ,we were'nt whitewashed Im not saying that the entire blame must rest on Fletcher,but he has not taken a proactive role imo

[Crookbond]

^ And you can make out he's not "pro active" by 3-line media statements?

[GautiMaan]

The results speak for themselves,is strategising not part of the coach's job? We keep criticising Dhoni for his defensive tactics but doesnt fletcher have any say?

[Crookbond]

Wait - first you decide what you are blaming him for. First you say not being "pro active" for which is quite a gray area. Now you say - strategy. Mind you, we don't know what's going inside that dressing room. Probably, strategies may have been laid - may not have been laid. Probably, there are strategies but aren't implemented well. Here's my point - blame Fletcher and he will take a part of the burden but you are attributing more weight to a coach than required. He's not that important.

[Jersey #10]

What's the point of having an international coach when we continue to suck away? We are good in the SC conditions to start with. Having said all that, the role of a coach is rather unimportant in the Indian cricket team. Save the money, feed the poor instead

[vvvslaxman]

Stephen Fleming rejected coaching role. He would have been nice. A good strategist especially when your team has some limitations. I guess they can try Martin Crowe if he is willing. I am not sure about his coaching credentials. But he was a great batsman against pacers in his era. Atleast would be a good batting coach. This Fat F*** is probably the worst coach India ever had.

[Lord]

^ Steve Waugh would be an excellent coach.would make our boys commited n mentally tough

[vvvslaxman]

^ Steve Waugh would be an excellent coach.would make our boys commited n mentally tough

India has to do a complete overhaul.. selection committee, coach etc.. Employ players with a bit of vision and those who care for Indian cricket. Everyone is going to make some money. But atleast install someone who can also do something while earning it. Anil Kumble, Dravid, Kapil dev they have lot more to offer to Indian cricket than Srinivasan Moron.

[vamos_rafa]

Atleast he spoke in the media..

[vvvslaxman]

Atleast he spoke in the media..

but he was nowhere to be seen after England/OZ series or after Asia cup. It is fine and dandy to show up when you beat a side that is not exactly world class.