Saturday, May 19, 2007

The more things change..

Why we Lose

The disaster down under proves natural talent cannot hide the hopelessly antiquated Indian cricket system

By Rohit Brijnath

If cricket evolves into a contact sport, where lips cut open and blood run down noses, the Australian would die with a smile on his face. But even he, this Australian who early morning brushed his teeth with a glass of beer, was ready to hold your hand. For, like an actor arriving for a Broadway show every evening having forgotten his lines, the Indian team was an embarrassment. If there was laughter it had died down, if there was glee it had vanished, for to heckle the handicapped seemed uncouth. In the Herald Sun, Robert "Crash" Craddock, reflecting a national need to resuscitate the Indians, wrote wonderfully: "Come on India. Get angry. Get aggressive. Shake a leg. Fight back. For goodness sake, do something." The taxi drivers, the hotel receptionists, even the bloody chambermaid all said every morning: "You guys going to win today?"

How could you tell them that full-grown, world cricket travellers, were still being told at nets that if they moved their heads while throwing, the direction went awry?

How was it possible to explain, as a player said, "that what 13-year-old Australians know about backing up at the wicket is taught to the Indians when they arrive in the national team"?

How did they know that Kapil Dev actually told Javagal Srinath, after he batted like a man in a coma against Pakistan in Hobart, "What's the point of giving you batting practice at nets anymore?" And later said wearily, "Common sense is missing?"

It meant that when the chambermaid looked at you for an answer to India's chances that day, the word "yes" stuck like a fishbone in the larynx.

Then 66 days after it all began sometime in late November -- after losing to Queensland and the Prime Minister's XI and all three Tests and the first four one-dayers -- as the church bells in Adelaide echoed across the ground to signal that even an impartial God was moved to intervene, India beat Pakistan. It was like a dying man given a breath of oxygen, and there was something both tragic and uplifting in the forgotten smile that came to rest on Sachin Tendulkar's face.

Twenty-four hours later, savaged by Australia by 152 runs, the grimness had returned.

India arrived in Australia with three batsmen with a Test av-erage of over 50. In the Test series Tendulkar averaged 46.33, Saurav Ganguly 29.50 and Rahul Dravid 15.50 (Justin Langer, Ricky Ponting, Steve Waugh, Adam Gilchrist all averaged over 50). It would seem uncommonly arrogant to call this the best batting line-up in the world ever again. The bounce rested in India's subconscious like a restless demon. But if Devang Gandhi -- and he was not alone -- was made to look more like a boxer evading punches, a fellow player responded: "In India he's never played a ball that's bounced so high." Domestic cricket is played on sham wickets where batsmen close their eyes and play on the front foot; it breeds a mediocrity so apparent here, but so deep is the BCCI's stupor they are committed not to change. If pace undid us, what further stupefied Mark Taylor was India's reluctance to challenge Shane Warne: "Why didn't you try to take him on and jump out, he's still bowling with a round red thing when I last noticed?"

Caution, that seemed tattooed even on Tendulkar's forehead, seemed to be some invisible rein, perhaps conscious as India were, said a player, "that the team doesn't have the depth to absorb the failure of Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly". Even in the one-dayers. Indeed, as Abdul Razzaq hit Glenn McGrath for five successive fours and Azhar Mahmood sent Robin Singh up to kiss the clouds, and Andrew Symonds and Shane Lee hit the ball with all the fury of lumberjacks felling trees, India's second-level batsmen seemed to be playing some foreign game. Pinch-hitter Samir Dighe had scores of 6, 3, 2, 11 not out and 25; V.V.S. Laxman 9, 2, 2, 7; Kanitkar 0, 6,and 0; Srinath 0, 5 not out, 2, 4 and 0. Even Don Quixote would have played for another team, I mean what sort of tilting at windmills was this?

For the bowling, two stories suffice. The first was about Glenn McGrath. On his first tour to England, hammered in the opening Test, he asked himself: "If I was a young academy bowler what would I have been told? The answer, keep your line and length. I did that and got eight wickets the next Test." Moral of the story: discipline. While McGrath kept his ball in the channel, the Indian fast bowlers, though menacing in patches, seemed to drift off, no one fine spell ever replicated. The second story is Ian Chappell standing in a bar one night, cold beer in hand, and asking, "Mate, why the hell aren't you going out and finding spinners? You're clever, cunning people, that's your style." Kumble had taken 5/450 in three Tests and though he found occasional form in the one-dayers, leg spinner and Warne-mentor Terry Jenner moaned: "He disappointed me. Our pitches are different in each centre and I expected more flexibility, but Kumble bowled the same everywhere."

And here's what's truly frightening.

DOWN AND OUT

»Vs Queensland Lost by 10 wkts
»Vs New South Wales Won by 93 runs
»Vs PM's XI Lost by 164 runs
»Vs Australia, First Test, Adelaide Lost by 286 runs
»Vs Tasmania Drawn
»Vs Australia, Second Test, Melbourne Lost by 180 runs
»Vs Australia, Third Test, Sydney Lost by innings and 141 runs
»Vs Pakistan, Brisbane, (ODI) Lost by 2 wkts
»Vs Australia, Melbourne, (ODI) Lost by 28 runs
»Vs Australia, Sydney, (ODI) Lost by 5 wkts
»Vs Pakistan, Hobart (ODI) Lost by 32 runs
»Vs Pakistan, Sydney (ODI) Won by 48 runs
»Vs Australia,Adelaide, (ODI) Lost by 152 runs

This is the list of players who haven't played for Australia this summer: Darren Lehmann, Adam Dale (played one one-dayer), Andy Bichel, Jason Gillespie, Simon Katich, Matthew Elliot, Matthew Hayden, Matthew Nicholson, Stuart Law, Ian Harvey (first played in Australia's second-last one-dayer), Colin Miller, Tom Moody. It is why Symonds says, "I've got a long way to go, I need to play well every innings because look at the guys out there."

This is the list of players who didn't play for India: Ajay Jadeja.

The team we brought is the best we have. There is, believe it, no one else. No fast bowler, no spinner, no opening batsman waiting on the bench.

To crucify Tendulkar for his captaincy, rubbish the batting, scorn the bowlers, sneer at the fielding, is to see this tour and this team in dangerous isolation. A fragile history abroad suggests a flawed team is but an offspring of an incompetent system. In a professional world, we seem to preen in our amateur status, steam engines puffing wildly in a jet age. When Steve Waugh says, "I have so many players to choose from, I might as well pick names from a hat", he's acknowledging not some bizarre cricketing gene pool but a substantive system.

To follow Waugh's team is to wander into a modern sporting machine. Coach John Buchanan, who carries on his gangly frame the air of a philosophical Oxford don, starts with his computer. Pictures from television flow into it, and a technician records every ball, where it lands, the length, where it went, how the batsman plays it. So at lunch time during a Test if McGrath wants to see those deliveries that beat Tendulkar, or Ponting after a one-dayer wishes to note the short balls he missed, the computer can immediately display those exact deliveries. Buchanan, who airily suggests that this present computer system is "second class" compared to the one he used when he was Queensland coach, confirms that every Australian state has one.

The Indian team is left with only dinner-time conversation posing as analysis. If Tendulkar, with Kapil, must play technical adviser, he is resident nursemaid too. Asked once what his batsman lacked, he admitted, "It's self belief." For the Aussies, fear and insecurity find a harbour in the Scottish ear of sports psychologist Sandy Gordon. He is a reflection of Steve Waugh's understated reputation as a thinking man. As he once said, "If cricket is 80 per cent mental then why do we place so little emphasis on it?" Gordon meets the players at the start of every series, working with them for an hour individually, "helping them identify what makes them tick, letting them speak about issues both in cricket and outside, assisting them in setting goals". Always, he stresses, there is a need for "positive mental momentum". In contrast the Indian team struck Mark Taylor as quite the opposite: "You've got to think win, win, win. But I didn't see that, I saw draw, draw, draw."

But where cricket has evolved the most, and India stands as Neanderthal man to Australia's Homo sapiens, is in the peripherals of cricket. Indian trainer Andrew Leipus says players still feel lifting weights will make them stiff -- ignorance in a world where even fluid golfers pump iron. The running between wickets is a comedy of "yes", "no", "damn" -- Ganguly learnt nothing after failing to ground his bat in Melbourne and being run out, for in Adelaide against Pakistan though not in any danger he again failed to slide his bat into the crease, grounding it only inside. India seemed to require six standing stumps to manage a direct hit in run-outs, the Australians, off balance, managing to hit a single one with laser-guided regularity. The Indians' distinct unathleticism warrants a session with human-movement expert Bernard Savage, who says, "The way they move and their general speed needs improvement." Savage works with cricketers from the Commonwealth Bank Cricket Academy (CBCA), teaching them how to run "more efficiently", by developing simple exercises. He places three markers on the left, right and in front of a player; then as a player walks in, as if during a game, he screams "right": and watches how quickly a player changes direction and manages to accelerate into a full sprint. Considering more than 50 per cent of the Aussies have been tutored at the CBCA, his method is working.

Australia's secret does not lie in vegemite but in the simple commandment of good facilities, practice and a ruthless fitness regime. All Australian grounds have 5-10 practice wickets, all outside the main stadium; in Hyderabad the Indians said there wasn't even one. Australian players are given an off season fitness programme, are tested for strength, flexibility and fat in a lab at the start of a season and fined for being overweight. At practice, routine is accosted by fun. This season they rowed in the Yarra river, had a mock Ironman triathlon on Sydney beach, went cycling, and had an egg-throwing contest to see how far they could throw an egg to each other without it breaking. If it exercises different muscles it's also competitive, Buchanan splitting them into teams, like country boys versus city slickers, and in net sessions, grouping them in fours with each team supposed to look after and encourage each other.

All this also incorporates a fine sense of team, diverse warriors -- Warne and MacGill don't speak to each other -- welded together by a common cause. Every evening that bond is celebrated; it may be a cigar and beer to herald the arrival of McGrath's first child, or to have in attendance a bevy of guests -- champion swimmers or women hockey players or Aussie Rules footballers. It is dismaying then they see India more concerned with individual accomplishment. Taylor who wrote in his autobiography, Time To Declare, that subcontinental fans were bemused when he declared at 334 not out last year in his team's interests rather than chase Brian Lara's 375, tells an interesting tale. On the day when Tendulkar scored his Test century in Melbourne, a huge crowd of Indian fans gathered outside the hotel, and as Taylor says, "Sure it was a great century but you were just about to lose a Test."

The implication of all this is obvious, the BCCI is an inept outfit, content to leave Indian cricket stagnant, collecting money by the bushel, but leaving it in some unknown safe deposit rather than invest in the national game. Much like hockey, Indian cricket is being left behind, plodding ahead as the rest of the world sprints. To walk into the South Australian Cricket Association (SACA) and into the friendly handshake of Grant Wyman, the coaching and development manager, is to understand India's remoteness from reality. Wyman, unlike any Indian counterpart (coaching and development manager in the Delhi and District Cricket Association, that'll be the day) is paid and thus accountable. He hands you a 100-page brochure on which is written "Vision Statement", and Sunil Gavaskar flipping through it later points at the word "Vision" and says, "That's it, what we need."

Wyman must oversee an under-13, under-14, under-15, under-17, under-19, SA Academy, Second XI and state teams. Everywhere there is the smell of professionalism. The state team, coached by Greg Chappell, has a fitness consultant, two physiotherapists, an assistant coach, sports psychologist. Such is the intensity of state cricket here that New South Wales requiring its young batsman Michael Clark urgently, recalled him from Sri Lanka prior to Australia's semi-final at the under-19 World Cup!

The thoroughness of their organisational ability is evident in the squeak of a mouse, for Wyman can pull out of his computer a file of any player from any team that rates the player's skills, physical levels, mental make-up, tactical ability, competition record, home life, social interests. Each of his players is videotaped every month, and they are broken into spin bowling, fast bowling, wicketkeeping squads where a 13-year-old quickie and Jason Gillespie will train at the same net, under the visiting guidance of Dennis Lillee. The pyramid goes even lower. Clubs organise primary-school cricket, then pick the best of the youngsters for their club teams, which are under-14, under-16, under-17 and A, B, C and D elevens. The best of this lot is grabbed by Wyman. If a player shows exceptional ability he is kidnapped by the CBCA, where Ian Chappell arrives for a week to teach captaincy and batting, where young kids are taught not just cricket, but public speaking and even umpiring and coaching courses should their careers not go the distance.

India waits, still, year after year, for its cricket academy; India won't invite Sunil Gavaskar for nets, or Bishan Bedi; India's state and junior teams have no modern-day qualified fitness trainers. India waits, one supposes, for a miracle.

There is a lethargy that has embraced us, a belief that such is our karma. That if we beat the visiting South Africans our glory will be restored. It is a fallacy. We forget that in almost every sport we count for nothing, that cricket alone has been our sporting passport.

But for how long?

7 years later, what has changed?

23 comments:

Kartikeya Date said...

Plenty...

Homer said...

Kartikeya,

Care to elaborate?

Kartikeya Date said...

John Wright, Greg Chappell, Andrew Leipus, Greg King, Andrew Kokinos, Test wins in England, Australia, South Africa, West Indies, Pakistan, Sri Lanka (none of this had been achieved in the 14 years prior to the year 2000), change in the Ranji format, world cup final etc etc etc

A brash young generation of talent emerging from the smaller centers.....

Plenty has changed... much more needs to change, but post match fixing things have been moving in the right direction.

Kartikeya Date said...

Even in the year 2000, i would have considered that article ill directed.

Cricket is about being able to bat and bowl - all this stuff about attitude etc etc is peripheral. In 2000, we couldn't bat and more importantly, we couldn't bowl at all. Srinath and Prasad were disasters with the ball.

Homer said...

Kartikeya,

The proliferation of cricket in the smaller centers followed the expansion of television nationwide.

The emergence of talent happened in spite of the BCCI, not because of it.

Granted that we won more than we did 14 years prior but our cricketing infrastructure has not changed. Our wins came more because of individual brilliance and the occasional instances when the team played out of its skin.

But nothing has been done between then and now to sustain this momentum. Everything is left at the doorsteps of the players.

In 2000, Australia had in place a sophisticated system for talent identification and development.

In 2007, have we even started in that direction?

Andrew Leipus, Greg King, Andrew Kokinos may be fine.. but has that translated in our players getting fitter and more agile?

Has having a support staff in place led to an attitudinal change in the way we approach the game?

Chandan said...

Agree with Homer. And more importantly, isn't the present regime taking our cricket backwards? We took good strides under dalmiya but Sharad Pawar has been a disaster and i'm afraid to say that we've gone backward in last two years.

I don't entirely agree with Brijnath though.

Chandan said...

And who is this Andrew Kokinos, guys?

Kartikeya Date said...

I disagree that proliferation happened inspite of BCCI and not because of it - it is here that most people take BCCI for granted in my view.

It happened because BCCI has the network to identify and bring this talent to the fore. It happened because BCCI remains an organization which has managed to keep its constituent associations together. It happened because BCCI has shown a willingness to change.

The TV revolution happened because of the way Dalmiya steered not just Indian cricket, but international cricket.

Most people think BCCI begins and ends with the annual elections - its not quite as simple as that - every association has its own constituent cricket clubs - now, these may be run with varying degrees of professionalism and intensity, but the fact remains that the election keeps everybody in the loop and keeps everybody interested.

As for our players being fitter and more agile - is todays side better than the 1999 side? It definitely is. Is it going to be as good as the Australian or New Zealand sides? No - because Cricketers in India are not natural athletes and in most cases, Cricket is the only sport they play. They don't enjoy the same outdoor life that kids in Australia and SA enjoy (i know they don't in Bombay, i have no reason to believe it is otherwise elsewhere).

Very practically - and im trying to introduce a strong dose of realism here - amongst our best batsmen and best bowlers are Rahul Dravid, Anil Kumble, VVS Laxman and Sourav Ganguly - are they fit cricketers? Yes of course they are. Are they fine cricketers? Yes of course they are. Are they natural athletes in the way that an A B deVilliers or Andrew Symonds or even Mark Waugh was a natural athlete? To a man - they are not.

But could they bat all day? Yes they could and they do. Could Kumble bowl 45 overs in a Test match day? There is little question that he could....

The discussion about "fitness" is therefore illgrounded. If i understand what is being meant by fitness by you homer - then i would venture that with any degree of realism, it would take a whole generation or more - which would have the opportunity for endless outdoor sporting activity in its formative years, which would give rise to a culture like this.

Until then, we will have to make do with Yuvraj Singh and Mohammad Kaif - very hardworking, reasonably quick movers, but not in the class of de Villiers or Symonds or Clarke....

and i havent even gone into the area of genetic make up even though i understand that research shows that it contributes to how athletic
an individual would be....

Seriously - even God wouldn't be able to turn Ganguly, Dravid, Laxman and Kumble into great fielders and athletes (in the classical sense of the word) - BCCI has however supported them and enabled them to become great cricketers - which is what its brief is in my view.

I think that the Brijnath article is inspired by a large dollop of disappointment at having watched what was essentially India's worst Test series performance since the 1974 England tour.

Kartikeya Date said...

Andrew Kokinos was the first foreign trainer hired by BCCI.

Chandan said...

I partly agree and largely disagree with you Kartikeya. BCCI has helped dravid or Gabguly or Sachin or Kumble to the players they are?

No. They've become what they are on their own. Or if BCCI is helping them, what happened to Pathan, Balaji, Kaif and innumerable other cricketers who've been extremely bright in the beginning? and now munaf is on the same path!!

Chandan said...

I think the first trainer was Adreon Le Raux. He is SA's trainer since 2003.

Why couldn't BCCI keep him and give him a contract? Ever since he has gone, the injury problem has mounted in the team.

Was board very professional there?
A BIG NO.

Homer said...

Kartikeya,

The BCCI has not, to date, launched any program to promote cricket anywhere in India.

The BCCI has yet to standardize the coaching standards in India.

Given this premise, the only mechanism for popularizing cricket was the spread of television, not because the BCCI planned it that way.

Television for the BCCI is a tool for revenue generation, not a tool for propagating cricket.

Chandan said...

When will you accept that BCCI is the worst working cricket board, Kartikeya?

In few years from now, I expect even Bangladesh to be ahead of us, the way they are moving and the way they are working hard to streamline things professionally!!

Anonymous said...

Chandan your comments sound very pessimistic. When you say BD would be ahead of us, then its just not sane.

Players like Kaif, Pathan, Balaji, Nehra got plenty chances to redeem themselves. They couldnt redeem , thats another issue.

Abt the talent hunt program, BCCI runs a TRDDO program, which has its head in Dilip Vengsarkar untill recently and the NCA in Banglore is doing good jobs too.

After all India u-19 stars are coming good too.

One bad world cup doesnt make India a bad team and at that worse than BD.....

Homer said...

superunknown,

When Kaif went off the rails what is the support system that the BCCI had in place to rehab him?

The BCCI expects players to go back to Ranji and sort out their problems for themselves.

The BCCI pays the players and they play. But does BCCI's responsibility end there?

As regards the TRDO, even if they did unearth talent, what is being done to nurture this talent?

the NCA operates for 3 months a year - enuf time to put players thru their paces?

BD is in the process of putting in place a structure that monitors and mentors players through the age group levels.

Why is it that Dilip Vengsarkar asks if journos can name him a leggie when queried on replacements for Kumble?

Anonymous said...

Homer

If Kaif has a problem with his batting, he had the supercoach at his helm, he had Shastri, Gavaskar and other batting experts when he suffered slump in SA. BCCI is a wild cat, but its not fair to blame it for player's failure.

Likes of Kaif were given plenty of chances to redeem himself, but he didnt grab them. His list of failures had grown since Pakistan -06 series.

What support system do you expect ? There are clubs who do the job of unearthing the talent, there is a sports hostel (not sure of name) in Lucknow which has unearthed players like RP, Raina, Chawla etc. Few years back we couldnt have expected players to come from places like UP, Jharkhand, Kochin, Baroda.

If you are aware of 80s and 90s teams, then Karnataka and Mumbai had dominance in the team. Now hardly any player seems to be coming from this 2 major powerhouses (leave aside established players from this 2 teams).

There are enough levels where the player can go and sort his problems, but if he s unable to do it in today s age of advanced technology, then its just not in him to make it big.

Homer said...

Superunknown,

What levels re available to the plyer realistically?

Either work out the problems themselves or go back to the domestic grind and fall back on whatever support systems are there in place in the Ranji Team setup.

Harbhajan has lost his loop - yes he has to work it out himself or take the initiative to talk to Pras or someone else - where is the BCCI in all this?

Chandan said...

Thats what I was saying too, And my comment about BD is not a pessimistic but a realistic one. Did you read the article which Homer had put two days back about how professionalised BD board is becoming, with the help of CA?

If they streamline the processes like Australia does, why won't they be ahead of us because BCCI is snoring all through these years?

Anonymous said...

If Bhajji has lost his loop, he should go on his own to Prassana and consult, who has stopped him ?

Dint Pathan go to variety of fast bowlers -- Roberts, Akram, Thommo, Hadlee and many more. Did BCCI object him ?

For BD, it would take years to come to the grips of real international cricket. Just aligning with CA or getting few foreign coaches wont help.

Homer said...

Superunknown,

The question is not whether anyone stopped Bhajji, the question is whether the BCCI facilitated such a meeting

Homer said...

Here is a Board that makes its displeasure known because Manoj Tiwary chose to consult a doctor not appointed by the Board.. so much so that the CAB fears that it may impact his selection chances..

What does it say about the Board?

Anonymous said...

Its not BCCI s business to arrange meetings between ex and current player. BCCI dint arrange a meeting between Sachin and his coach Achrekar before this meaningless tour began. And its none of its business.

Chandan said...

But it has to look after the players. It just can't afford to lose talent just because they're not getting right guidance.

Everywhere the guidance is given. BCCI doesn't give and hence bright talents go down the drain. And they do not need to meet ex players, but qualified coaches who can help them!