Ravi Shastri can only talk, Rahul Dravid can deliver, writes Kirti Azad

[Gollum]

The Indian team oscillates between brilliance one day and mediocrity the next. How else can one describe the inexplicable loss by Virat Kohli & Co on Saturday? While Dinesh Chandimal's brilliant 162 ensured that Sri Lanka won a remarkable match, what went wrong for India? Plenty, I would reckon. India had dominated for three days and let it slip away in a space of four sessions. At lunch on Day Three, Kohli let the initiative slip and Chandimal made him pay. The wicketkeeper's partnerships with Lahiru Thirimanne, Jehan Mubarak and with the tail ensured that Sri Lanka turned a huge 192-run deficit into a 176-run target for India. The Indian batsmen stumbled against the guile of Rangana Herath, giving away a 1-0 lead to Sri Lanka. This is the second time that India have lost in pursuit of chasing a target of less than 200. The first instance was against the West Indies in Barbados in 1997, where India were bowled out for 81 while chasing 120. It seems that Ravi Shastri, the current team director, was there too. Rohit Sharma is an enigma. While nobody doubts his potential, he like Suresh Raina, who has taken years to mature and deliver the goods. Getting him at No. 3 was never a wise decision, particularly if the contingent has Cheteshwar Pujara, who has a far better and tighter defence. Sadly, after the retirements of Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman, who used to shepherd chases around themselves, this young team seems to be at a loose end. Sachin Tendulkar's record in fourth innings chases was never particularly good, and it was left to Dravid to knit valuable rearguard action in the company of Laxman. Both of them could tackle the conditions and bowlers with equal equanimity. Shastri is a great talker, but talking alone does not deliver results. It is not surprising why the cricketers want Shastri to continue as mentor cum coach, and are not interested in a hard taskmaster as their coach. The stage was set by the players of the previous years. Sourav Ganguly was a superstar and never really accepted a coach who had a mind of his own. We Indians are a pampered lot -- what with the cricket lovers treating cricketers as next only to God -- and this attitude has probably gone into the heads of cricketers these days. Great achievers amongst former India players like Madan Lal, Bishan Bedi and Kapil Dev have all been dumped by cricketers who consider the past heroes as antiquated and outdated. Shastri's attitude is congenial and he allows a lot of freedom, which probably other seniors don't. And therein lies the problem. Greg Chappell became unpopular because he tried to instil discipline and demanded hard work ethics from all, including the seniors, which many of them were not willing to put in. Chappell was looking to build a team for the future with an emphasis on fitness, which was probably seen as a threat by the seniors and the resultant stories about Chappell do not make for a happy reading. India's opposition to DRS is equally puzzling. Former BCCI president N Srinivasan and his ward, MS Dhoni, were hell bent on not allowing it. But this adamant and obstinate position of not using DRS has been hurting India consistently. Chandimal would have been dismissed twice before he crossed double figures had India agreed to use DRS. Back to the coaching. What is the BCCI doing about finalising the head coach? I understand that the five wise men have met only once -- the shoe, it seems, is on the other foot. The current team does not want to settle for anybody other than Shastri. But, what are they doing? Dravid's fine run with India 'A' should make him a front runner for the job, and the appropriate choice. On Independence Day, it is an apt reminder that the BCCI and the five wise men have to exhibit guts and show a larger relevance rather than being goody goody. They have the stature to do it, and they should do their duty fearlessly, in cricket's long-term interest. Dravid is the best choice amongst Indians and he can straightaway be given the job. I hope that you all agree.

Finally at least 1 ex cricketer making good points. http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/column-ravi-shastri-can-only-talk-rahul-dravid-can-deliver-2114915

[cricket.fan]

Great article..hitting the nail

[vayuu1]

Hope bcci, appoints someone who instill discipline in this lot, who thinks of themselves as superstars, while a lot of them aren't fit to tie shoes of the previous era players, koi in ko aukat main laao aur inka khumaar utaaro.

[kosingh]

Why did Kirti have a fallout with BCCI? Wasn't he the guy who wanted Dhoni removed a couple of years ago, and Don Sri intervened?

[vamos_rafa]

Why did Kirti have a fallout with BCCI? Wasn't he the guy who wanted Dhoni removed a couple of years ago' date=' and Don Sri intervened?[/quote'] That was Jimmy paaji I think.

[Brainfade]

WADR to Kirti Azad, Greg Chappell was a punk. John Wright and Gary Kirsten were taskmasres who succeeded. Kirti conveniently forgot about them.

[MechEng]

Is there a Ranji player who scored many runs or took many wickets for his domestic team but never got an opportunity to play for India and has retired ? If he still has passion for the game, he can make a great coach in my opinion. Instead of going for established great cricketers, BCCI can look for someone who still has huge passion for the game and wants to contribute to it.

[Deleted_User_1]

Is there a Ranji player who scored many runs or took many wickets for his domestic team but never got an opportunity to play for India and has retired ? If he still has passion for the game, he can make a great coach in my opinion. Instead of going for established great cricketers, BCCI can look for someone who still has huge passion for the game and wants to contribute to it.

Yeah like these pampered a-holes will take that person seriously!!!

[Bigg Brother]

When Ravi shastri suggested to include Raina in tests after century in England odi, I knew that we are doomed.

[Scarves]

WADR to Kirti Azad, Greg Chappell was a punk. John Wright and Gary Kirsten were taskmasres who succeeded. Kirti conveniently forgot about them.

Doesn't matter though. Greg had the right idea, just didn't work because of the clashes.

[Brainfade]

Doesn't matter though. Greg had the right idea' date=' just didn't work because of the clashes.[/quote'] A good coach must be able to manage people. If you are an a-hole, people will eventually tune you out. Has GC had success anywhere as a coach? I haven't seen it. It's not like he was able to manage everyone but the Indian team. He just didn't have it in him.

[gattaca]

Doesn't matter though. Greg had the right idea' date=' just didn't work because of the clashes.[/quote'] Looking at history of Greg Chapell and his behavior during the Kim Hughes captaincy period. It was pretty dumb of BCCI to appoint him as coach. He had issues in past. He never grew out of it.

[Laaloo]

yeah sure Rahul Dravid has cure for cancer and for AIDS as well. #overrated

[kosingh]

yeah sure Rahul Dravid has cure for cancer and for AIDS as well. #overrated

No, that would be:

[maniac]

Looking at history of Greg Chapell and his behavior during the Kim Hughes captaincy period. It was pretty dumb of BCCI to appoint him as coach. He had issues in past. He never grew out of it.

Still I would say despite being part of one of Indian cricket's most controversial period,he also laid the foundation of what would go on to be India's brightest period as well from 2007-2011. Gary Kirsten is overrated....Did nothing and collected a paycheck. John Wright was the best coach we ever had though all round