The race to sign Whatmore!

[Nishant]

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/****...ry/296265.html

Pakistan are interested in him as well.....and india are on the fence in terms of what they want to do

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/indi...ry/296291.html

[Richard]

Shame he wouldn't go to Lanka, TBH. Always thought he worked brilliantly there, and might do especially with the team dynamics at the current time.

[Sanz]

There were reports in Indian newspapers that Whatmore has already said that he is not interested in pakistan coaching job.
Also In India,Gavaskar and Kapil are against Whatmore's appointment as coach, whereas Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly, Kumble want to be coached by a foreigner.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/indi...ry/296291.html

[Richard]

I don't see how it makes any sense for India to be coached by an Indian or Pakistan by a Pakistani.

A foreigner would naturally find it easier to distance from the inevitable regional-politiking.

[Fusion]

Originally Posted by Richard

I don't see how it makes any sense for India to be coached by an Indian or Pakistan by a Pakistani.

A foreigner would naturally find it easier to distance from the inevitable regional-politiking.

I can't speak about India, but I would definitely agree with you in regards to Pakistan. I felt the biggest advantage Woolmer had (and in fact he also spoke off) is the fact that being a foreigner he didn't have the baggage a Pakistani coach would. No one could accuse him of favoring a certain region. He wasn't part of Pakistan cricket before so he had no allegiances and hence could not be lumped in with a clique. Simply put, a Pakistani coaching the National Team brings too much baggage with him.

[Sanz]

Originally Posted by Richard

I don't see how it makes any sense for India to be coached by an Indian or Pakistan by a Pakistani.

A foreigner would naturally find it easier to distance from the inevitable regional-politiking.

Not that I am against a foreign coach, but why should the nationality of a coach matter ?

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Sanz

Not that I am against a foreign coach, but why should the nationality of a coach matter ?

In an ideal world, it shouldn't. Practically, it does and for the same reasons Fusion mentioned above. If our coach was Indian, he would undoubtedly be accused of favoring a region (and it might even be true) or to gain favor with particular members of the board, etc.

A foreign coach brings an air of impartiality, which is not necessarily accurate, but is important for players, boards, and the fans. I don't think the team itself wants to be caught up in things like that, hence most of the senior players support a foreign coach.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Sanz

Not that I am against a foreign coach, but why should the nationality of a coach matter ?

Because in most places, it's easy to get caught-up either in regional-politiking or be accused of doing so. It's already happened with Moores and Prior, in his very first game - fortunately for Moores, to date Prior's performances have kept any accusations like that quiet. But can you imagine if he showed the faith in Prior that Duncan Fletcher did in Geraint Jones, with the player in question performing as poorly as Jones did? The accusations would be all over everywhere you look, even if they weren't true.

Basically, it's almost always best to have a foreigner as your national team coach. Everyone bar Australia (Simpson, Marsh, Buchanan) and Zimbabwe (Houghton) has done best that way...
Bangladesh - Whatmore (Australian)
England - Fletcher (Zimbabwean)
India - Wright (New Zealand)
Kenya - Patil (Indian)
New Zealand - Rixon (Australian)
Pakistan - Woolmer (English)
South Africa - same
Sri Lanka - Whatmore (Australian)
West Indies - no-one, really

EDIT: Manan's beaten me to some of what I just said.

[silentstriker]

Right, if an Indian coach showed the same faith in Raina that Chappell did, and he just happened to be from the same state as Raina....the **** would destroy the fan and it would divide everyone including the players, fans, the board, etc.

[Sanz]

Originally Posted by Fusion

I can't speak about India, but I would definitely agree with you in regards to Pakistan. I felt the biggest advantage Woolmer had (and in fact he also spoke off) is the fact that being a foreigner he didn't have the baggage a Pakistani coach would. No one could accuse him of favoring a certain region. He wasn't part of Pakistan cricket before so he had no allegiances and hence could not be lumped in with a clique. Simply put, a Pakistani coaching the National Team brings too much baggage with him.

Were Javed Miandad or Intikhab Alam) accused of regionalism ? I am sorry but if our boards/current players are going to continue to make this kind of assumption then they should have a look within themselves before applying such a criteria for selection of coach. Alsi it tells a lot about the their character rather than the coach's qualification and I would be very skepticle about such a team's attitude and performance.

What is a coach going to do if the selection panel (in India) is region based, where selectors are from picked from 5 different zones and are expected to push for players from their zone and not the best players from the country.

[Sanz]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

In an ideal world, it shouldn't. Practically, it does and for the same reasons Fusion mentioned above. If our coach was Indian, he would undoubtedly be accused of favoring a region (and it might even be true) or to gain favor with particular members of the board, etc.

A foreign coach brings an air of impartiality, which is not necessarily accurate, but is important for players, boards, and the fans. I don't think the team itself wants to be caught up in things like that, hence most of the senior players support a foreign coach.

Well in that case we should get a foreigner as captain as well.

[Sanz]

Originally Posted by Richard

Basically, it's almost always best to have a foreigner as your national team coach. Everyone bar Australia (Simpson, Marsh, Buchanan) and Zimbabwe (Houghton) has done best that way...

You contradict your own post..If it is best then how come Australia became the best team under Simpson/Marsh/Buchanan ? And wasn't Whatmore a SriLankan too ?

[Sanz]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

In an ideal world, it shouldn't. Practically, it does and for the same reasons Fusion mentioned above. If our coach was Indian, he would undoubtedly be accused of favoring a region (and it might even be true) or to gain favor with particular members of the board, etc.

A foreign coach brings an air of impartiality, which is not necessarily accurate, but is important for players, boards, and the fans. I don't think the team itself wants to be caught up in things like that, hence most of the senior players support a foreign coach.

I am going to repeat myself here, but this is a bit of hypocritical from Indian board/players and to some extent from fans. Because the board appoints a selection panel with five (?) from 5(?) zones whose job is to get the players from their zones into the team. The captains normally parade for their players (e.g. Azhar did for Noel David, Kapil did for Chetan Sharma and countless others, Tendulkar did for Dighe, Kanitkar etc, Dravid for Kumble in WC). Fans from jharkhand want Dhoni, fans from Orissa want Mohanty, the other day I was speaking to my friend from Karnataka and all he wanted to talk about was how great Uthapa is....I can go on and on..

And then we have the audacity to apply such criteria for coach selection when we dont even know him ? I watched Venkatesh Prasad and Robin Singh play for India and IMO these two were two of the most unselfish players to represent India in last 20 years. I dont think I can question their integrity and it would be highly unfair and (to some extent racist) if we were to deny them an opportunity to coach team India on such assumptions.

[Fusion]

Originally Posted by Sanz

Were Javed Miandad or Intikhab Alam) accused of regionalism ? I am sorry but if our boards/current players are going to continue to make this kind of assumption then they should have a look within themselves before applying such a criteria for selection of coach. Alsi it tells a lot about the their character rather than the coach's qualification and I would be very skepticle about such a team's attitude and performance.

What is a coach going to do if the selection panel (in India) is region based, where selectors are from picked from 5 different zones and are expected to push for players from their zone and not the best players from the country.

Being accused of regionalism is just one disadvantage. Miandad's history with the team made it impossible for him to be given a clean slate. There were always groups of players who supported him, and those that were vehemently against him. At one point or another, he had clashes with senior players like Wasim, Saeed Anwar, Waqar or chief selectors (Aamir Sohail). There is no point in analyzing whose fault it was. The fact is that a local coach would invariably have to deal with these aspects, whereas the foreign coach would not. I'm not saying this is right. You are absolutely correct that it says a lot about the characters of our cricketers and administrators that this happens regularly. But….it does. Hiring a (well qualified) foreign coach is a simple way to avoid this nonsense.

[Sanz]

Originally Posted by Fusion

Being accused of regionalism is just one disadvantage. Miandad's history with the team made it impossible for him to be given a clean slate. There were always groups of players who supported him, and those that were vehemently against him. At one point or another, he had clashes with senior players like Wasim, Saeed Anwar, Waqar or chief selectors (Aamir Sohail). There is no point in analyzing whose fault it was. The fact is that a local coach would invariably have to deal with these aspects, whereas the foreign coach would not. I'm not saying this is right. You are absolutely correct that it says a lot about the characters of our cricketers and administrators that this happens regularly. But….it does. Hiring a (well qualified) foreign coach is a simple way to avoid this nonsense.

I dont think Hiring a foriegn coach can solve this problem. John Wright/Chappell had similar problems in India. As far as I know Woolmer had the same issues with players (Akhtar), Richard Pybus had same/similar issues with the board and certain players.

IMO , it is the lack of descipline among players which has been seen a lot among pakistani cricketers and slowly crept up among Indian players as well.