With Graham Ford's declension of the BCCI's offer of being the coach of the Indian team, the BCCI has again made a laughing stock of itself. While Ford may have any number of reasons for refusing the offer (the short contract, the BCCI's choosing of his support staff for him do not seem very attractive propositions, but I will not enter into those issues here), the modus operandi of the BCCI especially for the last few years has only too often left a lot to be desired, and indeed one wonders whether the position of the coach would interest capable candidates from within and outside India any more at the present moment. The BCCI's way of (unofficially?) wooing Dave Whatmore before rejecting his application, and the subsequent hullabaloo stirred up about Graham Ford, and the sudden induction of John Emburey into the race all together suggest a most unprofessional way of going about the whole business of appointing a coach, and perhaps indicate continuing internal bickerings as well. Starting with the leaked email in September 2005, the BCCI has been regularly in the news for all the wrong reasons. There are bound to be differences of opinion among any large group of people, but the recent fiascos lead one to wonder whether the board, especially in its current prescriptive mood--draconian even--about the conduct of players and coaches alike, should not also determine for itself formal procedures beyond its electoral and constitutional affairs, for going about things that it must do periodically, and preferably, without blundering: it will have to appoint a coach through a proper selection procedure once in a while, and talk to the media before and after. Just as there is a long way for the team to go to get back to winning ways, there is a lot the BCCI needs to do stop looking stupid.
Graham Ford's statement on the Kent County Cricket Club website
Wishing you health and happiness in the new year
2 years ago
14 comments:
I was just about to blog on this...Good post ! Zara hat ke from previous posts but that is we want, variety !
Thanks for visiting, Dharitri. Go ahead and blog, I would be interested in your take on the issue too.
Thanks for breaking the stereotype that cricket (beyond rahul dravid's looks) is something that only men like to talk about. So ... if you are serious then let me say this. Why not an Indian coach? Are we (aka Sandeep Patil, Ravi Shastri, Mohinder Amarnath, Kapil Dev and Sunny Gavaskar hismelf) any less than the people we bring in (not to say that they are any less). If we can't rely on a coach who can steer us towards victory, how are we ever going to rely on our players to do so?
Thank you for your comment. The point is to have a coach who is up-to-date with coaching and physical training techniques in international cricket and of course, as you seem to imply, eligibility should not be restricted by nationality. But to be fair, a solid plus point that I think a foreigner would have would be not having any pre-existing quarrels with anyone involved with Indian cricket--important for the job given the way the BCCI functions!
true ... but look at Greg Chappel .. didnt have a quarrel with anyone when he started and when he left ... didnt have anyone with whom he didnt have one ... so ... anyway ... lets see who they choose ...
Yes, right. But he is a class apart in everything! Who would have known he would start coaching from his first press conference. I don't think anybody who wants to go about the job in his way--ofwhatever nationality--would approach the BCCI now. Hopefully they will find someone who is both a good coach and can manage players effectively. Let's see what happens.
Hi Durba and Hopelesly Libran (hope you shalls ee this),
I do not think very strongly about this but maybe I would welcome the idea of giving an India coach some preference over other international candidates. It is like extending the search beyond India only after it is confirmed that no Indian can occupy the position appropriately. (On lines of US Companies having to prove why they hired a foreigner over an American)!
I agree with HL's argument. If the team has to be INDIAN why not the coach ?
Though this is not at all what my original post was about, I shall make one last comment on the issue since the discussion has begun as an offshoot of my post.
For my part, I do not know what the BCCI or the current players have in mind, and given the recent antics of the BCCI, the less they are talked about the better. But I do not see why either an Indian or a non-Indian coach should be privileged on grounds of nationality. I think the question is one of expertise, and all competent coaches should be welcome to an interview which should be conducted by a panel with an open mind. Appointing someone as coach is only formally entrusting that person with the responsibility of training the team, and as followers of the game you would have noticed that informal imparting of tactics go on between former and current players regardless of nationality. For example, with Wasim Akram around at any tour, there is always an interest in whether the Indian fast bowlers get to talk to him, or with, say, Geoffrey Boycott around, there is interest in whether any batsman experiencing technical difficulty gets to talk to him. Such exchange does not also indicate any deficiency on part of the current coach--it is just that a former player can often suggest a unique solution, that may ocur only to him, and such uniqueness has nothing to do with nationality. Reading memoirs of cricketers anyone would notice that they look forward to such exchanges. After all, they are all playing or have played the game out of their love for it. What I am trying to emphasize is that arguing on the basis of nationality in matters of expertise doesn't go too far, especially where sports are concerned.
If some fifteen years hence, Rahul Dravid is urged by some other country's board to be their coach, would you be against his taking up the appointment? Extending both your arguments to their logical conclusion, you would. It is this same frame of thinking that makes it impossible for any Indian to ever consider (or to be considered for) coaching Pakistan and vice versa. As someone deeply persuaded by postcolonialism, I have ideological problems with nationalism, and particularly such fanatic brands of nationalist sentiment. I reiterate that I think the question is one of EXPERTISE. And that is NOT the same as endorsing whatever irrational agenda the BCCI has. And, both of you, like anyone else, are entitled to hold your own respective opinions.
I am new to blogging ... but is it a norm to speak and refer to each other in aliases especially since we all know each other personally??
I wouldn't mind being addressed by my name, since I have chosen to display it. But I guess, when people choose a particular display name, they want to be addressed by it. For that matter, I 'know' you only by your display name!
Really? I assumed that it displays my real name through the google account ... anyway ... this is Shiladitya ... hope it rings a bell ...
Tai bhabi California-y bose ke amay chine felechhe! Bolle biswas korbe na, ekkhuni tomar kotha bhabchhilam, Orkut-e notun chhobi dekhe. Jai hok, blog dekhar opekshay roilam.
shotti bishwash kora shokto je amar kotha bhabchhile ... obishwasher karonta oboshshyo ujjhyo rakhlam. achho kemon?
tomar shathe alaap hobar por-pori tomar blog aami regularly follow kori ... pori ... montobbyo kori (of course mone mone) ... ebar tumi bolbe bodhoy je "bishwash hochchhe na"
Thik Thik... Achhi ekrokom. Bhaiposthaniyo lokjon khonj ney na. Bhaipo-boura ney jodio.
Post a Comment