silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
haroon510 said:
Hah! All their matches, huh?
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Greg Chappell– your opinion?
- Thread starter Arjun
- Start date
Hah! All their matches, huh?
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
I think Chappell has done pretty well. He has not been as big a success as some of the media portrays but he hasn't really failed as badly as some other part of the media portrays. I think he has done okay so far. INdia's test team has been on a bit of a slide recently anyway and I think the emphasis on ODIs with the WC a year away has meant that India have slumped even more in tests. No reason why things shouldn't turn around soon though.
Matt79
Global Moderator
From my outsider's perspective, I think he's made a good start, but that the kind of program he's installing will take a couple of years to bear its fruit. The turnaround in ODIs will obviously be quicker because frankly success in ODIs is dependent less on ability alone and more on a combination of talent and intent. Test cricket really requires the ability to produce prolonged good cricket.
As the coach, Chappell can't pull up the Indian team's socks when they don't have any. He can only work with what he has - which at the moment, with Tendulkar injured/out of form is a batting line up overdependent on Dravid, with many naturally talented players like Sehwag and Dhoni that are either out-of-form, suffering attitude problems, or simply too inexperienced to be consistent match winners in test cricket. Many of these problems might be turned around, or alternatively, long term options for replacements identified and groomed, but it will take time.
My opinion of Ganguly, and its only my opinion, was that he appeared to be an unhelpful influence on the team when it needed to be reexamining themselves and rebuilding it. Its a tough call to make, but if you aren't going to help, and your form isn't great, for the long term future you need to go, even if its painful in the short term - no individual can be bigger than the good of the team, be it a Tendulkar, a Lara, let alone a down-on-form Ganguly. I think Chappell's willingness to come in and make those very tough calls, and wear the subsequent slings and arrows, will probably be his greatest legacy to the team, along with expanding the aides and techniques the team uses. I think a biomechanist will be seen to be a great addition if it improves the fitness and availability of the team.
If the ingredients that made India one of the best two teams in the world a few years ago are no longer working, it helps noone to try and continue living in the past - best to identify what changes need to happen to make India successful again, and successful for a long time.
He's probably still adjusting himself to the different cultural nuances of the job. In Australia, coaches, particularly football coaches being combative and sometimes rude with media can be par for the course. In a situation where he's not sure the best way to act, he's probably just trying to be himself - if he's there long term he'll learn to handle things in a smoother manner, or else he'll decide its too alien to his personality and pack up and leave.
As the coach, Chappell can't pull up the Indian team's socks when they don't have any. He can only work with what he has - which at the moment, with Tendulkar injured/out of form is a batting line up overdependent on Dravid, with many naturally talented players like Sehwag and Dhoni that are either out-of-form, suffering attitude problems, or simply too inexperienced to be consistent match winners in test cricket. Many of these problems might be turned around, or alternatively, long term options for replacements identified and groomed, but it will take time.
My opinion of Ganguly, and its only my opinion, was that he appeared to be an unhelpful influence on the team when it needed to be reexamining themselves and rebuilding it. Its a tough call to make, but if you aren't going to help, and your form isn't great, for the long term future you need to go, even if its painful in the short term - no individual can be bigger than the good of the team, be it a Tendulkar, a Lara, let alone a down-on-form Ganguly. I think Chappell's willingness to come in and make those very tough calls, and wear the subsequent slings and arrows, will probably be his greatest legacy to the team, along with expanding the aides and techniques the team uses. I think a biomechanist will be seen to be a great addition if it improves the fitness and availability of the team.
If the ingredients that made India one of the best two teams in the world a few years ago are no longer working, it helps noone to try and continue living in the past - best to identify what changes need to happen to make India successful again, and successful for a long time.
He's probably still adjusting himself to the different cultural nuances of the job. In Australia, coaches, particularly football coaches being combative and sometimes rude with media can be par for the course. In a situation where he's not sure the best way to act, he's probably just trying to be himself - if he's there long term he'll learn to handle things in a smoother manner, or else he'll decide its too alien to his personality and pack up and leave.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
nice analysis man. 
adharcric
International Coach
Good stuff there. I'm grateful that we had a man at the helm who could stand up to someone like Ganguly and look after the welfare of the team.
Ganguly's treatment was unfair and unfortunate, but there was much more to it than Chappell's actions: the media, the selectors, the BCCI and Ganguly himself.
The emphasis on fitness, flexible thinking and discipline that Chappell and his crew have introduced should have a long-term impact on Indian Cricket.
Ganguly's treatment was unfair and unfortunate, but there was much more to it than Chappell's actions: the media, the selectors, the BCCI and Ganguly himself.
The emphasis on fitness, flexible thinking and discipline that Chappell and his crew have introduced should have a long-term impact on Indian Cricket.
Last edited:
adharcric
International Coach
Yeah the way guys like Sreesanth, Raina and Rao have been persisted with really augurs well for the development of our young talent at the international level. (not suggesting that Rao compares with the first two as an ODI player)
On another note, I'll always remain confused about why Rao struggles to score quickly in ODIs. He made two well-crafted centuries at a good rate in the Challenger Series last year, but he's never looked like doing anything of the sort since then.
On another note, I'll always remain confused about why Rao struggles to score quickly in ODIs. He made two well-crafted centuries at a good rate in the Challenger Series last year, but he's never looked like doing anything of the sort since then.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
adharcric
International Coach
I actually like the idea of sending Pathan at #3 because he's a good batsman who can usually score at a brisk rate and set things up for the real middle-order. The problem is that he's sent in at #3 so regularly now that the original reason - flexibility - is less relevant. Pathan, Yuvraj, Kaif, Dhoni and Raina can all be sent in at #3.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
While I see your point...honestbharani said:
...it does seem as though you've jumped on Chappell's back a bit here because it didn't work, which is a bit facetious considering how it has worked for India in recent times. Just because Pathan at 3 didn't work once, it doesn't make it the wrong move.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
I'd pretty much always send Pathan at 3 if India are chasing a huge score and the powerplays are still on (and if Sehwag has gotten out first, which is generally the case) however I'd probably back Yuvraj or Kaif at 3 (or Dravid if Tendulkar is opening) when 4-4.5 an over is needed.
Not really bothered with Pathan failing at 3 though on Saturday.
Not really bothered with Pathan failing at 3 though on Saturday.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
If Sehwag keeps getting out like this, I would drop him and bring Uthapa in his place. Sehwag doesn't own this position. Also Pathan should not be used as a regular no. 3. He doesn't have the technique to be a regular no. 3, he is much more useful @ no. 7-8.
Just incase if anyone has any doubt - While Chasing a target Irfan averages 22 in 6 games @ No. 3 whereas he averages 42@no. 8 in 6 matches. Whatever success he has got @ no. 3 position is mainly when India has been batting first and not when we are chasing a target. Irfan cant be a replacement for 3. We are basically throwing a wicket every time , he may click once in 10-15 games but he will still be a failure.
Just incase if anyone has any doubt - While Chasing a target Irfan averages 22 in 6 games @ No. 3 whereas he averages 42@no. 8 in 6 matches. Whatever success he has got @ no. 3 position is mainly when India has been batting first and not when we are chasing a target. Irfan cant be a replacement for 3. We are basically throwing a wicket every time , he may click once in 10-15 games but he will still be a failure.
adharcric
International Coach
You guys are right, Sehwag doesn't own this spot. In fact, he's the most inconsistent member of the current Indian side; yes, he even outdoes Agarkar. The problem is that he has some sort of backing from Dravid, Chappell and just about everyone else that matters ... he's the damn vice captain, so it's tough to drop him. They can keep letting Sehwag make a big score and then fail several times, get rested for a few games for a youngster to shine and then come back and continue his pattern, but that won't cut it. We need stability at the top, whether it comes from Sehwag, Dravid, Uthappa or Dhawan.
adharcric
International Coach
I won't go by those stats. For me, if we're chasing a huge target we need to take the gamble and send Pathan (or Dhoni) early. Also, if we're batting first and the openers get off to a flying start and we need to maintain a RR of 5 or 6, we can consider that.Sanz said:
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Honestly, it is something that I have never talked about because I have limited time on the net these days. If you notice, I don't do detailed posts on matches at all these days, except in the weekends. But this is something that I have been mentioning a few times recently in most circles where I talk cricket.vic_orthdox said:
The logic of Chappell is obvious. If SEhwag gets out, he wants a more aggressive batsman out there. If Dravid gets out, you will see either Kaif or Yuvi walking out. But why does it have to be Pathan everytime? And why is Pathan trying to bat too properly if he is sent in to take advantage of the field restrictions?
I agree that I may have over reacted there, but it really was a daft move to send him in when you are chasing just 198 and you have Yuvi in the form of his life and Kaif just getting back to good form.