India in England Jun-Sept 2014

[PokerAce]

Finding test oriented coaches, ODI oriented coaches is next to impossible to find. I dont think a coach needs to be classified like that. A successful coach is one who ensures that the players stick to their basics, keeps encouraging them to perform up to potential and lifts them whey they are down, among other things. Test based skills don't necessarily come into play here. Its mostly resource management and motivational skills at play.

Well I get your point. Even Kirsten coaches MI, but he has had all kinds of success in other formats too.

The point against Banger is that he has only done well in IPL. As far as I know he has not even much experience in domestic cricket in the longer version of the game. His only experience as far as I know atleast, is only the IPL. Nor does he have a lot of Int'l experience of various conditions to draw upon. Sure he had an invaluable knock of 68 at Edgebaston on that tour to England, but still its not a lot of experience. So in light of these short comings, I am not sure he should be a front runner for the post.

 

[grkrama]

Yes, Bangar is not as big a player as Fleming. But I have heard that Bangar is specializing himself in cricket coaching. Heard that he has taken courses to master himself in coaching. And obviously his stint with Punjab in the IPL has boosted his resume. Fleming would be the better choice, but there is also this idea that an Indian coach would be able to better communicate with the Indian players. There, Bangar scores.

Bangar is again more in the molds of fletcher, a mediocre player getting specialized in coaching and building his resume with club coaching.

fleming is in the mold of kristen had a fantastic career, played all around the world, a think tank, club coaching is just a bonus there, even if its a first stint for him i think he will be very successful cause he has the knowledge to guide players on how to deal in overseas conditions which is exactly what we are lacking and i doubt bangar is any expert in that area no amount of book knowledge will help there its not just technical stuff but the mindset preparation foresight etc, the other thing is Fleming will command more respect and also kno w where to draw the line with players, this may sound biased against bangar, but indian coaches have a bad habit of forming sort of groups inside the team and being to invested in that group to let go, so if you make a wrong choice at start you stick with it for too long, im talking of before john wright time. So we need some one talented, at the same time a bit detached to the team but at the same time attached to the job he is meant to do, if that makes sense.

All said and done i think bangar cant do worse than fletcher.

 

[LiveLoveABD]

I agree with a lot of the points you have made, but India is not a limited overs country. The fans love test cricket, as much as ODIs. If anything T20 is still the most irrelevant of the three formats. I also don't think India are the best ODI team in any conditions. Sure we are generally much better as an ODI side, than a test side, but defeats in the ODI series in SA, NZ, kinda disagree with that. Yes, I do agree though as an ODI side we can compete anywhere in the world, unlike test cricket.

I agree Dhoni is not central to this crisis, but I do think the coach is. He is responsible for a lot of things that he is not helping. Kohli and Pujara got out to identical dismissal so many times and so little changed between the 1st and the 5th tests tht you do have to wonder if the coach was doing anything. Similarly the reading of the pitch in the 4th test was so atrociously wrong that it defies logic. That Cook would have also batter first after batting is hardly any consolation. Fletcher should have read that pitch right. Its well and good to talk about application, but on that pitch batting first is a poor decision.

Fletcher I am afraid has been rather ineffective.

I don't believe in T20 cricket either. I feel it's a franchise oriented format and T20 internationals barring the World T20 is meaningless. It simply has no effect in the development of a nation as a cricketing power. I feel it's an entertaining brand for the masses and to draw people, you don't need a country vs country flavour other than the World Cup, a bit like football. I'm also a test loving person. ODI's are good, but again, barring the ICC events they mean as much as cow dung. However, we are not among the massy cricket lovers. India in general, has a massive appetite for limited overs cricket and the statistics prove it. If the BCCI was making more money off tests, India would be playing at least 15 tests a year. It's not the case.

As for India in ODI's? I rarely go by score lines in bilateral series. If you're to pick one team that is dominant at home in ODI's and can beat any team in their own den consistently in ODI's, it would be India. It's why I feel that this outrage against the players in tests is a bit of an over reaction. Limited overs is all about batting and tests demand a really good attack. India is a batting nation. A lot of Indian bench strength in the batting department would walk into other national teams, just like test bowlers from other nations would walk into our test attack.

I understand your point, I love test cricket more too, but as long as the masses keep demanding limited overs cricket, the board will keep feeding them that and when you don't play enough test cricket you will always be behind the eight ball in overseas conditions. You can change as many captains and coaches as you like, it won't change the result.

 

[LiveLoveABD]

If a captain should not be blamed, why have a role of "captain" in a team? For the toss, you can send out any designated player (a player for each game). For field placings, each player stands wherever they want to in the field. After all, its the players only right?

All this is nonsense. The captain is like the head of the ship. He will be blamed (and rightly so) if the ship is sinking. He uses his management and leadership skills to keep the ship afloat. The role of the captain across all nations is the same. If people like the player who is captaining, they will obviously defend saying "A captain is as good as his team". Well, the captain also makes his team, so if the team is not good, the captain should take blame for it.[DOUBLEPOST=1408479340][/DOUBLEPOST]

What I meant to say (about him hailing from a poor family), Indian members here will better understand. I never tried to insinuate that all poor people are immature.

The 'Captain' is a leader. He's meant to set an example, lead by example and try and be ahead of the game. He's not there to play for the others. Don't be stupid about it with the field placements and toss etc. etc. comment. Not once, did I defend Dhoni's tactics in these tests, but fans like you always need a reason to play the blame game and sway with the wind. By your logic, MSD should have been showered with garlands after the Lord's test because it was him who went with the idea of bowling short. TEAM sports don't work like that. You win and loose as a team. Of course there's a leader of the ship, but his role is often magnified more than it should be. MSD's wicket keeping has tapered off, very clearly, he's still safe but I don't think he's test level. Why? For god's sake show me one cricketer that has his kind of work load in a calendar year? It's not making excuses, it's stating facts. He was our best batsman on the tour as far as consistency went and though his tactics were shoddy, no captain in the world is going to win tests when his team is getting bundled out within 90 overs in 2 innings. It's nonsense on your part to expect the captain and coach to keep the 'ship afloat.' The captain leads, the others follow and the coach supports. India was simply spent after the first three tests to even compete further.

I don't care what the media, journalists and articles read. Michael Clarke got hammered in India, but it doesn't mean he isn't the best captain (tactically) in the world. He made runs in India, but for all his worth, he didn't have an attack, his batsmen were falling like nine pins and all his captaincy prowess went in the gutter. Enter Mitchell Johnson and Ryan Harris at the top of their game in the Ashes in Australia? He's a hero all of a sudden.

I repeat, this is not tennis where you can blame an individual or a coach for poor performances. This is a TEAM sport where everyone contributes to success and failure, otherwise all world cup winning captains would get to keep the trophy with them, not with the board. By your logic, if the captain is the head of the ship and all success and failure is due to him, I'd like you to take a look at MSD's achievement as captain crossing all formats and if you find one cricketer with those accomplishments, I'll eat humble pie.

 

[grkrama]

mcgrath chimes in
India Cricket News: India could face 4-0 loss in Australia - Glenn McGrath | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[lion100lion]

Ridiculous! He is getting paid to play for India. What else does his father want? He can always give the bottle to his teammates who drink. Bhuvi's dad doesn't sound very mature enough (probably they hail from a poor family?).

What ?? Poor family ??
Even beggars drink alcohol.

 

[grkrama]

whatever family you are, when someone awards you a token of appreciation, whether you like it or not, you take it with a smile and not be too choosy about it.

He could have always pass it on to vijay [HASHTAG]#oldmonk[/HASHTAG]

 

[PokerAce]

I don't believe in T20 cricket either. I feel it's a franchise oriented format and T20 internationals barring the World T20 is meaningless. It simply has no effect in the development of a nation as a cricketing power. I feel it's an entertaining brand for the masses and to draw people, you don't need a country vs country flavour other than the World Cup, a bit like football. I'm also a test loving person. ODI's are good, but again, barring the ICC events they mean as much as cow dung. However, we are not among the massy cricket lovers. India in general, has a massive appetite for limited overs cricket and the statistics prove it. If the BCCI was making more money off tests, India would be playing at least 15 tests a year. It's not the case.

As for India in ODI's? I rarely go by score lines in bilateral series. If you're to pick one team that is dominant at home in ODI's and can beat any team in their own den consistently in ODI's, it would be India. It's why I feel that this outrage against the players in tests is a bit of an over reaction. Limited overs is all about batting and tests demand a really good attack. India is a batting nation. A lot of Indian bench strength in the batting department would walk into other national teams, just like test bowlers from other nations would walk into our test attack.

I understand your point, I love test cricket more too, but as long as the masses keep demanding limited overs cricket, the board will keep feeding them that and when you don't play enough test cricket you will always be behind the eight ball in overseas conditions. You can change as many captains and coaches as you like, it won't change the result.

I feel that T20 is best left at club or domestic level. T20 is not serious enough cricket to be played at Int'l, and definitely not important enough to warrant an ICC event (World T20). I also agree that outside of a tournament ODIs don't really mean much, and bilateral ODIs for the most part serve as friendlies to test preparations for the big ICC events. Sure winning is important as it shows u are on the right track, but that is about all.

ALso when you say that ODIs are more popular because BCCI makes money, you are equating merchantability for popularity. T20 and IPL probably make the most money, but T20 is the least popular of the three forms in India. Similarly ODIs are more sellable because the work culture in India is that leaves are at a premium and frowned upon by the bosses. So unlike England where watching test cricket is like a family day out, a sort of a picnic, India cannot get those crowds on all five days. Sure towards the end of a good test match on the 4th and 5th days its jam packed.

So even though ODIs are more sellable, Test Cricket is still very popular, topped only by ICC ODI events.

Also for all the lashing the IPL gets it has two positive effects which are undeniable, one it gets youngsters to work with the top players around the world, and indeed some very good coaches. What each player makes of that engagement is upto him, but that the opportunity is there cannot be denied. Look at Bhuvi for instance, after parterning Steyn for an IPL season, his bowling has definitely gone up a few levels. Similarly Rahane has put in a decent shift in SA, NZ, and Eng and no doubt, working along side Dravid at RR has helped.

Another definite effect is that it has pushed up the fielding levels no ends. Sure Slip fielding is an area which still requires a lot of work, but in general outfield fielding, India has gone up many notches, in ODIs.

I do agree that we are over-reacting about this test series result, greatly so infact.

With the kind of inexperience that there was in the squad, that it was not 5-0 is in itself something to take a lot of joy from. Sure the wheels came off towards the end, but with one of the most inexperienced squads ever, Ind won a test on the tour is a much bigger positive and all the negatives.

Apart from MSD and Ishant this was the first Test tour of Eng for everyone else. They both did well, and this shows that experience counts a great deal. If you look at the fast bowling, then if you take Ishant out, all the five fast bowlers combined had played a total of 17 matches. We fans need to learn how to gauge expectations. A side cannot win every series, and we need to keep expectations rational. For such and Inexperienced side to go and produce one of India's best overseas test wins is more than enough to ask of them.

Even in Aus, the expectations have to be reasonable. Yes there was the one tour to Aus where Ind drew (not even won), but that is an exception. Ind have traditionally gone and lost in Australia as indeed has everyone (mostly). Even England who did so well and won this series, went an bent over last year in Aus. Yet this Indian side will be expected to win !! Its ridiculous. If they don't again the Captain will be called into question. No one will even pause to think for a second whether it is even realistic to expect them to win !

 

[Skater]

As for the IPL, I watched the first match in 2008 when McCullum whacked 150, but since then I haven't been able to stand watching it for more than 5 minutes. The whole thing is so grotesque. Calling sixes 'DLF Maximums' makes me want to kill.

 

[greymatter776]

As for the IPL, I watched the first match in 2008 when McCullum whacked 150, but since then I haven't been able to stand watching it for more than 5 minutes. The whole thing is so grotesque. Calling sixes 'DLF Maximums' makes me want to kill.

I think its now called Yes Bank Maximum.Remembers me of something I learned when young," Advertisements could be found in all spheres of life "

 

[PokerAce]

As for the IPL, I watched the first match in 2008 when McCullum whacked 150, but since then I haven't been able to stand watching it for more than 5 minutes. The whole thing is so grotesque. Calling sixes 'DLF Maximums' makes me want to kill.

Haha, yeah, IPL viewership is generally on the decline. However as long as the Richest keep getting involved in the IPL, the commercials will keep pumping in money. Take Roman Abrahamovich for instance, he got involved and suddenly Football became very expensive, and the finances for the top clubs and players shot through the roof. It also attracted more and more sponsors. In the IPL for instance the Ambanis have a team. Their net worth is $ 23.1B which is 2.5 times more than that of Roman Abrahamovich. You can only imagine what their involvement is doing to the money on offer. Its not just their team, but all around. If an owners are not rich enough by themselves, they have joined together to own a team, and together their combined worth yields the same clout as the Ambanis or close to it (RR being the exception). So as long as these big money giants are involved, the corporates and sponsors are going to keep pumping money in the leagues they are involved in. I remember reading somewhere, Yuvi earns more than Eden Hazard ! Who would have thought a day would come when cricketers would be earning more than some of the top footballers in EPL. Which corporate would not want a share in a league where the Ambanis of this world are involved. This creates a cycle, the Ambanis draw the sponsors, and this boosts the rewards for the teams which means the Ambanis get good returns. This means that IPL is here to stay, and we are doomed to listen to the sponsored commentary for ages and ages.

Also its starting to creep into Test cricket too. I remember Harsha Bhogle during the test series, number of times going lets look at the ________ (forget what the blasted sponsor's name was) Super Fours.

 

[Skater]

Thank god we don't have that here. It's bad enough that the tea interval in Test matches has been renamed the 'Yorkshire Tea Break'.

 

[SaiSrini]

The 'Captain' is a leader. He's meant to set an example, lead by example and try and be ahead of the game. He's not there to play for the others. Don't be stupid about it with the field placements and toss etc. etc. comment. Not once, did I defend Dhoni's tactics in these tests, but fans like you always need a reason to play the blame game and sway with the wind. By your logic, MSD should have been showered with garlands after the Lord's test because it was him who went with the idea of bowling short. TEAM sports don't work like that. You win and loose as a team. Of course there's a leader of the ship, but his role is often magnified more than it should be. MSD's wicket keeping has tapered off, very clearly, he's still safe but I don't think he's test level. Why? For god's sake show me one cricketer that has his kind of work load in a calendar year? It's not making excuses, it's stating facts. He was our best batsman on the tour as far as consistency went and though his tactics were shoddy, no captain in the world is going to win tests when his team is getting bundled out within 90 overs in 2 innings. It's nonsense on your part to expect the captain and coach to keep the 'ship afloat.' The captain leads, the others follow and the coach supports. India was simply spent after the first three tests to even compete further.

To me, the nonsense lies here - in your message. If Dhoni has too much workload, he has to draw a line somewhere and say "I can only take this much". He wants to have the pie, eat it and eat unlimited portions of it and then when he gets a stomach ache tomorrow, he cries saying "I can't be blamed for eating too much pie"?

I am not the guy who sways with the wind. I have been a big fan of Dhoni, the captain especially in his earlier days. I still believe he is the guy to lead India in the shorter formats. Its only PURELY test captaincy that I am arguing about. And I do believe that captain gets a good chunk of the blame because he leads the team on the field and makes important decisions that influence a game (e.g. field placings, batting order, toss, etc). Its rubbish if people say "the captain should never be blamed". If that's the case, get rid of the role of a "captain" from cricket. Why do we need it at all?

 

[Aalay]

This is the classic problem in India. The most typical excuse for an Indian fan. The moment the team begins to lose, the captain and most of all the coach is sleighed. I'm sorry, but the problems runs much deeper in regard to test cricket. I'll give you as honest an opinion as I can and as close to the truth as possible, without any bias.

First of all, India is a limited overs country. Our board's endless lust for money means that the national team is practically playing round the year and majority of it is limited overs cricket. If anyone on this board truly believes that India isn't the best limited overs team in any given conditions then they're lunatics. We've proven this around the globe and it's simply not appreciated enough. Look at England, they're almost always playing test cricket and they're still awful. How many majors have they won since the limited overs version began?

India did, will and will always struggle to win test series abroad. They're a talented enough bunch to have the odd sporadic sparkling performance, but if things are the way they are then they will always be behind the game. Why?

1) Look at the amount of cricket MS Dhoni plays compared to a Matt Prior, Brad Haddin or a Michael Clarke? The difference is chalk and cheese. The only guy that came close to his work load used to be AB de Villiers, but he also wasn't skipper and keeper across all formats. I think Dhoni's contribution is very very under rated and he's always in the eye of the storm thanks to some idiotic fans and journalists that lack vision. If India decide to sack him as limited overs captain, it will be the most stupid decision in the history of the BCCI. Also, I don't like his captaincy in tests and he might get the axe but who's going to replace him? I think he'll give up all captaincy himself post Australia and the WC, but India must stick with him for now. In his defence?

a) England have Anderson & Broad.
b) Australia have the best attack in the world. It makes Clarke look special, the same Clarke who was the 'cheap pretty boy' after his shocker in India. Test cricket is harsh. The captain is only as good as his attack. India's frankly is sh!t!
c) Pakistan have Ajmal and a fast developing Junaid.
d) SL have Herath.
e) SA have the best quicks group - a spinner.

Each serious test nation, has a world class bowler. I know Bhuvi was exceptional on the tour, but he's a work horse. He's not going to frighten even tail enders.

2) If India want to do well in tests, they need to start valuing their test bowlers. You've got a well rounded test attack that can really grow now in Aaron, Ishant and Bhuvi but if you're going to burn them out playing meaningless ODI's against SL on flat decks, then you're always going to get a tired fast bowler in the third test abroad. MANAGE fast bowlers. They're like gold dust in India anyway. Hell, forget Anderson and Broad, Australia even makes sure Michael Clarke isn't playing meaningless ODI's, let alone Ryan Harris or Mitchell Johnson.

3) STOP blaming the captain and the coach. They cannot bowl/bat for you. Yes, MSD got a few tactics really wrong but it's a complicated affair when your batsmen can't bat more than 90 overs for two straight tests, they can't catch in the slips and the bowling is good to begin with but tires fast. India didn't lose this series because of poor tactics. India lost this series because there was a longevity issue with their quality of cricket and because they simply don't play often enough in seeming conditions against fast bowlers of the quality of Anderson and Broad.

The moment the team begins to lose? It has been 3 years since we have won a series overseas, it has not been just a moment but 3 tweaking years. It's not like we are even drawing the series overseas, we are just losing all of them one by one. Both captain and coach had enough time to think over and make necessary changes that they wanted over past 3 years but the result is still the same and will continue in the similar manner if we are reluctant to change something that is clearly not working.

(1) Dhoni himself needs to manage his workload properly more than anyone else. The problem is he is captain in every single team he plays for. He needs to stop doing that and give up his captaincy in one of the formats. Test seems most likely because he has never enjoyed test captaincy especially outside the subcontinent. When he is in subcontinent, he will get favourable conditions and will fill up his side with spinners. That is his territory now and nobody will manage spinners better than him in the subcontinent. However, as soon as he goes outside the subcontinent and his spinners have less impact, his bowling changes looks absolutely clueless. When it comes to short format, he knows that opposition have to attack at some stage and even if he allows the game to drift away he will still have a chance to comeback because of opposition committing a mistake. In tests, there are less chances of that happening because the opposition won't have to attack you. They can grind it out and make your bowlers tired. So as soon as he adopts the strategy that has made him so successful in ODI's in tests, he starts failing. We saw in the Lord's test, how involved he was in the game with constant chat with his bowlers. I didn't see that in the next 3 matches. Nobody is calling him to quit the limited overs captaincy, he has to leave the test captaincy. Virat Kohli should captain the test team. Yes, he had a poor series in England but he will improve. He is way too talented to keep failing and I think he has been groomed very well under Dhoni past 3 years now. I also said this after our win in the 2nd test match that I think Dhoni will retire after the Australia series from tests because his keeping is becoming scratchy as well.

We have technically never had a world class fast bowler but we still managed to win test series before. The Kirsten era of 2008 to early 2011 which is one of our most successful test period in which we achieved number 1 test ranking, we only had Zaheer Khan as constant but there was no support for him from the other end. We still managed to win. Now that Zaheer is done, we have invested a lot in Ishant Sharma who has been a big disappointment so far but has recently found some form and has bowled well. We need to keep grooming him if we really do see him as the leaser of the bowling attack because he has played over 50 test matches and that guy is still 25.

(2) Managing fast bowlers have always been our weakness because we have never had so many talented fast bowlers coming in at once. Right now we have Shami, Aaron, Umesh Yadav who are all full of potential and can form a great attack if managed correctly. Shami was overworked and we saw the result in the England test series. He was bowling in early 80 MPH and absolutely wayward. He was supposed to be our best bowler but we had to drop him midway into the series because of his poor line and length.

(3) Who do you blame then? When does the result become more important than process? It has been quite a while since we have seen consistent performance from our test side overseas. Who's fault is it? We have a special coach for every department and we are still not improving in any of them. There is either something wrong with players or the coaching staff. I will go back to my original point again that if a combination hasn't worked for you, why not change it. It's not like we have not given them enough time to improve. Fletcher and Dhoni combination hasn't worked for us and our record in the past 3 years clearly shows it. The only positive that we have seen from this combo is that we have more younger players coming in the side which is always exciting to see but apart from that, nothing. Yes, we have a young team and it takes them some time to perform but they need to show some progress to make us believe in them. We of course see that when we play home series but we can't see it overseas.

 

[PokerAce]

The moment the team begins to lose? It has been 3 years since we have won a series overseas, it has not been just a moment but 3 tweaking years. It's not like we are even drawing the series overseas, we are just losing all of them one by one. Both captain and coach had enough time to think over and make necessary changes that they wanted over past 3 years but the result is still the same and will continue in the similar manner if we are reluctant to change something that is clearly not working.

Have you followed Ind cricket for long? When have Ind ever won Test series overseas with any great consistency. Its always been the one odd series every 4 or 5 years. Sure there was phase around 2007-2011 when things were different, but short of that, Ind have never been great travelers. Also why are u dumping the previous generations defeats on this lot. That 8-0 happened with a different team entirely.

This is a totally new side on its first tour to England. Apart from MSD and Ishant, its a first test tour to England,for everyone else. How fair is it to expect such an inexperienced side to win a series in England at the very start. MSD and Ishant (along with Bhuvi) are the only guys to do well, that shows how much experience counts. You cannot expect such inexperienced sides to win overseas series, and you have to give them time. India cannot win everything everywhere.

Similarly in Australia, where no one wins, this side will go with expectations to perform and win. That is ridiculous. When have Ind ever won in Aus? This same Eng side which won here had a torrid run in Aus. Yet the expectations will be for a win, and if that does't come ppl will ask for the captain's head. Australia are too good, you can't expect Ind to go and win there. Unreasonable expectations.