If you want to be like Australia don't run your cricket like Zimbabwe

Interviews
If you want to be like Australia, you can't run your cricket like Zimbabwe: Chappell
TIMES NEWS NETWORK / Sumit Mukherjee
PrintCommentMail

/photo.cms?msid=1868088
Check out Guru Greg's Team India

How would you sum up your 22-month tryst with Team India?

It has been a huge learning experience for me. As a coach, it was easily one of the most challenging assignments one could ever hope to have. I have had only two 11-day breaks and a slightly longer one during this period, apart from one or two minor ones. But I have loved every moment of it, planning, strategising, analysing etc before every tour or series. It's a big high for a coach to watch the players pick up the cues and apply them successfully in match situations.

How did they react to your views and ideas in general?

Individuals react differently to different ideas. In some cases, the reaction time is longer whereas some others pick up the ball (cues) quickly and run with it. I have enjoyed challenging them to get better and better all the time.

Is this a better Indian team that you are leaving behind than the one you inherited?

Team building is a never-ending process. You have to keep at it all the time. We are a much better side than what our results have shown in recent times. Some of the junior players are not finished products yet. It's important that their development continues so that they are ready to take on bigger challenges.

But they may be lost forever in a divided Team India?

I came here to do a job that I have done to the best of my ability. I do not have any vested interests in Indian cricket. I have briefed the BCCI about the issues facing Indian cricket. One of them is youth development. It's up to the BCCI to act in the best interests of the game in the country.

What went wrong with the seniors?

I don't want to get into senior-junior issue again. Look, as a player, you have to keep challenging yourself. When that stops, it's time to do a quick reality check and take a few hard decisions. Unfortunately, it doesn't quite happen that way in many countries. So, in Australia we now have a system in place which will reject you the moment you slip below the mark.

Would you put it down to bad attitude?

Bad attitude is like bad habit, hard to get rid of. Greg Blewett started off with two successive Test centuries, Matthew Eliott had more talent than Matthew Hayden or Justin Langer and Stuart MacGill should have played more often for Australia. If they didn't it's because they failed to fit into the team fabric. They were rejected by the system.

Do you advocate such a system for Indian cricket?

You don't have to replicate the Australian system, but it is absolutely important to have a model in place that is similar to the one they have Down Under. It will entail making sweeping changes to the existing system and changing mindsets.

Isn't that a tall order...?

If you want to be like Australia, you can't run your cricket like Zimbabwe. The BCCI must adopt, may be, a 10-year plan, spelling out the aims and objectives and go about attaining those goals in a professional manner. Any half-measures or cosmetic changes at this stage would be like putting band-aid on cancer.

Have you spelt out your vision for Indian cricket to the BCCI?

I have given them the picture, highlighting the areas of concern. The BCCI must realise that a strong Indian team is a must for the games overall good. If India drops the ball now, it will be a tragedy for world cricket.

Changes would certainly mean a new look at our selection process?

It should be right there at the top of the agenda as it's critical to the team's performance. I still maintain that if we had Sreesanth in Pakistan (instead of three left-arm pacers), we would not have lost the Test series there. They must have, may be, four full-time selectors with an excellent background in the game and they should be paid to do the job. Along with the coach, they should be made accountable. The coach and the captain must also have a larger say in selection matters.

OK, so you didn't quite get the team you wanted for the World Cup. But can you say with any certainty that India would have fared better if you had the players of your choice?

I think we should have done much better in the West Indies with the squad we had. We batted poorly against Bangladesh, but we should have still squeezed out a win. You may point to the 1983 World Cup final, but history says India's record in defending low totals has been quite poor. We could have done with a few young legs, but I believe that we still had the ammunition to at least reach the semis.

With Woolmer sadly gone, we need to latch on to Greg Chappell, as a National Cricket Structure Development Consultant. He has been exposed to the sub continental problems that need to be resolved to march forward.

We need also a strong Chairman to ensure his advice and recommendations are carried through and no Salim Altaf / Zakir Khan type idiots can obstruct progress.

Apart from being an excellent analyst, like Woolmer was, Greg will also be immune from the carping and destructive criticism from the usual Pakistan ex- great suspects that will inevitably follow

Well, if he comes to 'Our' team he's going to quit next day after reading this new article on cricinfo by PJ Mir:

Mir complained that the players devoted more time to praying and preaching than to the game itself. "The boys were up against the most challenging task of proving their skills in the prestigious tournament, but I am sorry to say they had no drive for the game and were much more active in preaching and praying."

Mir argued that the religious influence had gone "beyond limits. I told the committee that Pakistani players, rather than pray privately, tried to make it a public spectacle."