'A' Team Concept - Needs a look in !

Sans A Team, India Benched - Hindustan Times - 2nd April 2007

Once upon a time, when the world of Indian cricket was a happier place, India A tours were the way ahead. And once upon a time wasn't so long ago either. For instance, in the time that Sandeep Patil became a more or less regular India A coach, after leading Kenya to the 2003 World Cup semifinals, 17 players from A tours went on to play for India, others played for India again. And most (see the box for the roster) did well enough.

Suddenly, despite all the talk of "processes" and the "need to groom youngsters" that we have been hearing these past two years, India do not seem to have a proper, dependable bench strength. Why? For starters, the world’s richest Board doesn't seem to want to spend time and money on organising India A tours anymore.

Strangely, in the year that the BCCI reportedly broke the billion-rupee barrier in revenue, India had just one A tour, to Australia, in July 2006. So how are fringe players supposed to prepare for the Indian team, or be ready to step in at a moment's notice if they are not being given the experience?

"It is a serious problem," says a top BCCI official, who did not want to be named, as his views, if aired publicly, would not be appreciated within the BCCI. "There was an imbalance last year, when there were three under-19 tours (to England, Pakistan and New Zealand) and only A tour to Australia. This imbalance began when India won the u-19 World Cup in January 2000, but at 19, most boys are too raw and will suffer if thrown into international cricket."

So why didn't the Board do more? "The problem is that the Board depends on reciprocal arrangements, so a five-year plan for A tours is the need of the hour. Somehow, that hasn't happened." Well, the planning has to start somewhere, so why not at the BCCI meet over April 6 and 7?

"I think the BCCI has no choice but to organise as many A tours as possible if they want Indian cricket to succeed," said former India cap Ashok Malhotra, who has been both a National Selector and the India A coach."While three-four years in domestic cricket makes you street smart and gives you experience, you need to play outside India to be groomed for international games. So the real yardstick is India A tours. The likes of Gautam (Gambhir) and Aakash (Chopra), Irfan (Pathan) and others have come up through the ranks, that way. From u-19s to A tours to India."

The Board official agreed. "All our focus is the India team. The training methods and physio are focussed on those 15. The other players are not in that system, so they suffer when thrown into it. There is a feeling within the Board that we should have a larger pool of players who will travel as much as the seniors and gain experience.”

If it doesn't, then there's trouble ahead. "I'm really worried that Indian cricket will go the hockey way," said Malhotra. "We will stay obsessed with Pakistan and gradually be left behind by the others."

This was an article written by Hindustan Times Sports Editor, Kadambari Murali.

I had my own take on it. It was posted through an e-mail to the author.

Hi Kadambari,

I came across your article on the A Team concept today and would like to make my observations regarding the same.

The A team concept is undoubtedly critical for a team's future. But as we all know, this has just been shoved in India. My observations are regarding other teams who have approached this concept with a very open mind and are implementing the same to ensure that at any given point of time a pool of players are available to step up to the upper level i.e. international cricket. I am working on a book on Sri Lankan Cricket, and this concept has been exploited to the tee by that country. Having understood that their level of first-class cricket isn't the best in the world, Sri Lanka Cricket has been very active in the creation of A Teams and Developmental Squads. Whilst other teams were busy focussing on the World Cup, Sri Lanka A and Bangladesh A quietly played a series in Sri Lanka, whereby people who were omitted from the World Cup squad were handed an good run to impress the selectors all over again, if the situation of impending retirements has to arise. And the results of the successful A Team execution in Sri Lanka are there to see. Russell Arnold, who was missing from the scene for not less than 15 months, went through the grind of second team action to force his way back into the national scheme of things. Similarly, one of Sri Lanka's emerging one-day bats, Chamara Silva played his last game for Sri Lanka in 2002 in the Natwest Series before he came through the A Tours of New Zealand, India, West Indies and Bangladesh. The whole idea of an A team is perhaps based on the lines of a "Reserve XI" in football clubs, which is the way it should be. I suppose every team should have an A team which must play at least 75% cricket in every calender year, so that come the new season - the selectors are not faced with an eternal conundrum so as to make inflammatory statements like "We have no talent." Perhaps teams like Australia, New Zealand and South Africa do not need this sort of a back-up team as they churn out world-class talent year in and year out. But, to recount this, Hashim Amla made his way back to the SA team thanks to his dream run of centuries against a New Zealand A team. And perhaps, these teams send follow the Developmental Squad system - whereby they send 15 young players to countries where conditions are foreign to theirs, probably with one-eye on the future. And another way these teams do this is by sending them to participate in County cricket. Micheal Clarke played for Hampshire way back in 2004 and similarly Cameron White has been with Somerset for the past year. I reckon this could be the way forward for international teams to develop their talents. I also read an article yesterday suggesting that Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Bangladesh are participating in a triangular Developmental Squad limited-overs trophy in Bangladesh. Why isn't India playing that tournament ? Was the World Cup such a big shock for Indian cricket, that it cant move on ? Or do we not have simply any talent as Vengsarkar once famously said ? I really wish we had participated in that tournament, with Sharad Pawar's India Blue team, because not only does it give them a good know-how of the conditions before that BIG, I mean BIG tour of Bangladesh, but also throws some names in the selector's notepad ! Why are we not a proactive nation when it comes to developing talents ? Or do we depend upon our great National Cricket Academy in Bangalore to produce some really World Class talent ? Or do we have enough money, that talent matters no more. All of these are absolutely unanswered questions.

And guess what ? Sri Lanka Cricket has taken an absolutely progressive step by awarding CONTRACTS for their A Team players and have a coach on contract - Chandika Hathurusinghe. We do not need to look at Australia to learn our systemic improvements. Look down South, and you'll have all the solutions.

I really hope, someone of your calibre as a cricket writer can help me and the country find out about the overall failure of the Board in taking such futuristic initiatives, so as to benefit Indian cricket.

Regards,

Venkat Ananth

Looking back in Anger

Call it a disgrace, a disaster, a debacle or perhaps even the death knell, no word in the Oxford English dictionary can perhaps stand up to describe India’s performance in the World Cup 2007 in the Caribbean. It was certainly a rude shock to a nation that expected its cricketers to go past the first stage, at least. India’s exit from the World Cup has certainly raised several questions, which to the best of my knowledge will remain unanswered, as that’s the way our system works – specifically, the BCCI.

Yes, this is a game of cricket – aptly described by purists as one of “glorious uncertainties” and frankly speaking, India was at the receiving end of the adage. But what followed the exit is more interesting than the short stay in Trinidad itself. The public ire against the team the day after was well documented by the media, without realizing that it was they who ballooned expectations into dreams and when shattered, shirked responsibility for the same and turned into bashers. Some of the images that we saw was indeed natural, but could have been avoided considering the fact that it was just a game of cricket and not a war that we lost.

Greg Chappell attributed this loss to a “collective failure” and I somehow can’t stop myself from calling it a systemic failure. It is all well to sit and criticize the team for their shocking performances, but at the end of the day – the BCCI has not yet come forward and taken equal blame for their role in this debacle. People are still keen on completing their two-year terms, without realizing that the future of the game is in question. On expected lines, Sharad Pawar came out the next day and rubbished claims of his resignation by calling it “an utter nonsense”. And, as per my observations, the BCCI is looking for scapegoats, who they could deflect the blame on. First they took an aim at the senior players, followed by the media and realizing that both parties were not standing up for themselves, blamed it on the World Cup format. What Ricky Ponting stated the other day, might evoke some instant reactions from eternal patriots like Sunil Gavaskar, but by doing that, they are running away from the grim reality of Indian cricket. Has Dilip Vengsarkar come out and put his papers yet ? Why ? As a Sharad Pawar loyalist, he’s getting his due mileage.

Perhaps, in hindsight, the appointment of Dilip Vengsarkar as the Chairman of Selectors was a move directed at chopping the wings of Greg Chappell. The very objective with which Chappell was drafted in as the coach was defeated, when they realized that the “free hand policy” had to be chopped or may be to satisfy some of Pawar’s detractors. That is how the BCCI functions anyway. If we go back to Kiran More’s stint at the selectoral helm, Greg Chappell was given enough autonomy to choose the team he felt could win matches, rather than external compulsions. Reading between the lines, Ganguly’s return also smells of Pawar’s intentions to mute Chappell’s growing influence within the team. But to Saurav’s credit, the man redeemed himself. When the time was ripe to take some harsh decisions, the BCCI turned into lambs. This is where we lost the World Cup and not against Sri Lanka. Veteran cricket writer Rajan Bala equally vindicates this claim, as Greg was disappointed with the make up of the World Cup squad. For a man who used to regularly come out and frankly state “Ignore youth at its own peril”, he was given a squad of old men, who had no more bones left in them to match the standards set by other teams. I am not saying if Suresh Raina or Mohammad Kaif would have won India the World Cup, but if selected back then, they would’ve certainly given their 200% on the field, where India looked absolutely hapless. And the way the Indian selection system functions, even crystal ball gazing would not predict our future.

Culturally and in cricket, we still suffer from the colonial hangover. Foreigners are perhaps ridiculed for whatever they’ve done and we associate ourselves with everything Indian, without realizing that we lag by 10 years than where they are. Which is why it seems easier to blame a Greg Chappell or an Ian Frazer for the World Cup loss than one among our own? What can Greg Chappell do if he’s presented with a bunch of perennial chokers? What can he do if his words have no weight age among selectors? What could Greg Chappell have done if the system turns against him than stand by him? And it seems extremely convenient for the media to turn him into a villain when the team loses and fail to credit him during the more successful days. That’s the double standards that we Indians are known for. And now, there are talks of an Indian coach. And the possible candidates – Sandeep Patil and Mohinder Amarnath. An Indian coach has always been known to bring some regional bias into his operations and this time it would be any different. After all, an Indian coach would have understood the system by now, enough to exploit it skilfully. I have nothing against them, but from what the past says – we’d be changing them like underwears. If great sporting teams like Manchester United have the guts to stick with Sir Alex Ferguson even after a trophyless season, I am sure Greg Chappell can be treated similarly. Coaches do not come with magic wands, sigh.

The media is another active participant in this whole game. The news media have just succumbed to their own expectations and cricket journalism in this country has never hit such a low. The debates in the mainstream news channels and newspapers are quite primary and do not seek credible solutions from their experts. When some channels flashed news about Sachin Tendulkar’s possible captaincy move, all they did was display statistics of his previous captaincy record and not a single channel, I repeat, not a single channel questioned the credibility of these reports. Some of the panelists for their discussion shows reflect a lot of dumbing down. For example, having a Sharad Pawar loyalist on any show means the BCCI keeps mum about some issues and justification of their claims or lets say, some actors and actresses. All of these augur well for the TRP. The well-respected Indian cricket intelligentsia is almost kept in the dark. And where is the objectivity? Yes, India is out of the World Cup – so what? The show must go on. This is where the English channels are placed relatively better than their Hindi counterparts. People like Madan Lal and Yashpal Sharma do not really lose their sheen as World Cup winners, but their opinions cater to the most basic and primary instincts of the audience, more simplified than others. The Hindi dozen brings in former cricketers, presumably from Delhi to analyze the game and their analysis revolves around “Should Gambhir have gone instead of Uthappa?” C’mon guys, mature up!

The advertisers play their part in building this hysteric balloon that we all are so used to. Pepsi have come up with a jinxed campaign and ever since their ads were on air, Team India is seeing a Billion Blues than otherwise. Personally speaking, I am not against celebrity endorsements one bit, as they have the right to it, but only after they realize that cricket comes first. Every cricketer in every country does it. Be it Adam Gilchrist for Castrol, or Muttiah Muralitharan for Lanka TVS – but for them, cricket comes first. Barring a few good men here, it’s the other way. If I am not mistaken, Mahendra Singh Dhoni has close to 15 products in his pocket. Why can’t these guys come up with the same performances on the grounds? Reality is that, they somehow like living in their own myths!

Indian cricket somehow needs to stand up and stare reality in its face. That’s the only way we can move forward. Getting rid of the coach and the captain would be a knee-jerk reaction on the parts of the power men. Instead of these peripheral issues, address the more integral one. To conclude, I’d rather be a Manchester United by sticking to Sir Alex Ferguson than a Real Madrid who regularly change their nappies !