|
Indian Cricket - Going the Foreign way! |
A Special Feature
by Pradeep Ramarathnam
 In
1991, when India finally ended the license raj
and liberalized its business environment, there
was resistance from all quarters. The hegemony
of local players would end with the advent of
foreign players. The results are there for all
to see.
The comparison of the advent of globalization in
India with the recent furore over foreign
coaches for the Indian cricket team is not
without a solid tripod to base it on.
Globalization brings with it best practices from
abroad , reduces inequality, forces local
companies to shape up and in the end is aimed at
providing the best deal to the consumer.
Parallely, the argument is that foreign coaches
bring with them best practices from abroad, they
most definitely force local coaches to raise
their competencies, and in the end provide the
best deal to the consumer( The cricketers in
this case. )
 Obviously
there are two sides to the coin; numerous Indian
luminaries have cried themselves hoarse over the
fact that India does not need a foreign coach.
According a noted cricket journalist, who did
not wish to be named “It all depends on the
culture ... an English coach may work in
Australia or South Africa (all three countries
have more or less the same culture) ... but
India, Pakistan, West Indies etc need a coach to
understand the mindset of the players,
administrators, media etc . A Greg Chapell might
soon get tired of politicking in the Indian
administration.”
So, how come John Wright was a success? The
answer is pretty simple. “Wright was more of a
back seat driver. A Chappell or a Rod Marsh for
exa mple
wouldn’t be like that. They would like to be
more vocal, more front seat. “
M.R.Baig , who coached the Indian Under 19 team
in 1981, and has tutored Azharuddin , Laxman,
Sadanand Vishwanath and Sivaramakrishnan among
others, has more piercing views on the subject
.The crux of the matter is “our cricketers do
not need foreign coaches, advisers and
physiotherapists. Many good performers have not
been able to play due to fitness problems, which
have not been treated properly for early
recovery. Those who are performing well were
declared unfit after injuries, then why has the
physio been taken to that tour. Batting,
Bowling, Fielding and Keeping, faults have not
been corrected or rectified for a long time”
says Baig. A case in point is Sourav Ganguly. A
whole nine summers of international cricket
later, Ganguly still cannot play the short ball
and still does not ground his bat. So what is
Wright doing wrong?
 Barrington
Rowland, another bright promising opener on the
fringes of national limelight says “A lot of the
technique is ingrained in the individual. It is
very difficult for a coach to come in and make
major changes to a person’s game”.
In which case, the definition of coach as junior
cricketers know it has changed radically. The
coach today is a strategist. He is a manager
whose sole job is effective utilization of
resources. It is almost like a computer game,
where the player skills, fitness, abilities are
quantified and just don’t change no matter how
many times you play it.
Strangely, foreign coaches work like a charm in
their games like football. Remember Guus Hiddink,
who was awarded Japanese citizenship after the
2002 World Cup?
Look deeper. Foreign coaches work in soccer
because clubs themselves are multinational.
Arsene Wenger can have his Thanksgiving dinner
somewhere near Highbury and still have his
countrymen Henry, Pires etc to come home.
Another key issue is that countries like Japan,
South Korea etc who are last off the blocks in
soccer need foreign expertise to further their
game. In Cricket, similarly Bangladesh and Sri
Lanka have no qualms about getting foreign
coaches. But does the Indian team need one?
Can you imagine the chaos in Brazil if Mario
Zagallo, Carlos Alberto etc were bypassed and
Some Argentine was made the national coach?
 Karnataka
Ranji Captain Sujith Somasundar concurs, “I
think a few years back, Indian coaches were
definitely in the dark with regard to new
techniques. Now you have the Level 1 Coach,
Level 2 Coach etc. This gradation is a step
towards more scientific coaching methods. Also,
an Indian coach would probably be better off at
understanding the Indian psychology and thought
processes. “Sujith himself accedes to the fact
that there has been a sea change in the coaching
dynamics from the time he played for India (Madan
Lal was the coach then) to the present.”
The above theories have been very well
accentuated in our neighbouring countries. Dave
Whatmore, probably the symbol of this whole
movement, was the first to make a dent. His
fairy tale adventure with Sri Lanka started with
the 1996 World Cup. He did not try and change
Kalu’s or Jayasuriya’s game. He did not teach
Wickremasinghe to bowl bouncers. He just
utilized the resources effectively- adding more
meat to the author’s argument.
In Pakistan, Richard Pybus was swallowed by the
massive egos in Pakistan Cricket. Miandad only
had to open his big mouth once and inhaled Pybus
like a Mint-O Fresh in summer. Enter Bob Woolmer,
a man who has done it before. Javed Miandad is
presently watching saas-bahu soaps in Pakistan.
Not a word out of him.
Sujith adds “It is all about the capability of
the coach. Great Ex players do not necessarily
make good coaches.” John Buchanan, Bob Woolmer,
Whatmore, the list could go on.
As the piece is being written, the business
section of the papers scream “FDI in retail is
good for India- Says World Bank. “
The BCCI has decided to make a Foreign Direct
Investment, in Chappell, or Moody or whoever. In
the long run, competitiveness can be the only
form of self-help for the Indian coaches. In
1990, Bishen Bedi, the then Indian coach said
not know Azhar was going to bowl first at
Lord’s. Gooch made 333. Azhar, in his second
tour as captain, was left in the lurch by Bedi,
whose only contribution on the tour was to take
the Indian team for two rounds of the stadium.
Today, Venkatesh Prasad, just retired, sat with
Bob Woolmer in the Bangalore test to pick up the
latest dope on coaching techniques.
Obviously, the opposition to foreign coaching
will be clouded, subliminally or otherwise, by
nationalist sentiments. But right now, the key
is to look at the issue professionally. The new
coach is going to be looked with highly
discerning eyes. Whether he performs or not is
going to be measured by the Team’s performance
and the players’ feedback. The Indian coaches
can go back to the drawing board and try to
scale up. The rest of us can just sit and watch.
May the best man win.
Top of the Page |
