Chappell Wants Ganguly Out - Emails BCCI.

[Pratters]

Also Sambit Bal earlier and Sidhu today (On NDTV Programme Cricket Controversies) remarked on how the BCCI is more responsible than any one and has their own vested interests for leaking the matter (The Dalmiya faction).

I am not an expert into the founding principles of the BCCI but I feel now there should be a serious enquiry into its structure and the current structure should be dissolved - with Indian cricket starting anew.

 

[shoot_me]

Bhajji's such an a-hole. Should get smacked for talking crap at a time like this. It's obvious he wants Daddy Gangs to stay so he can keep screwing up without a care in the world and he's scared of Chappell because this is a coach who's tough and direct.

This proves how pampered and spoiled some of our little superstars are-- it's not just a theory anymore. For the first time, they're being challenged by authority and some of them can't handle it.

 

[TendulkarFan]

I don't know if either Chappell, Ganguly or anyone else wished this whole dirty laundry to go public but I am extremely glad that it has. Like the article posted by Sanz says, a stop-gap solution will not work here.

Either Ganguly or Chappell has to go; and which way the Board goes will tell us, the fans, what they want for Indian cricket.

Kudos to Chappell for standing up to the petty politics within the Indian team and demanding accountability; I'm hoping this is the rock bottom that the team needed to hit and it's nowhere but up from here.

Let's see what happens on Tuesday.

 

[shoot_me]

I don't know if either Chappell, Ganguly or anyone else wished this whole dirty laundry to go public but I am extremely glad that it has. Like the article posted by Sanz says, a stop-gap solution will not work here.

Either Ganguly or Chappell has to go; and which way the Board goes will tell us, the fans, what they want for Indian cricket.

Kudos to Chappell for standing up to the petty politics within the Indian team and demanding accountability; I'm hoping this is the rock bottom that the team needed to hit and it's nowhere but up from here.

Let's see what happens on Tuesday.

I agree. Are Ravi Shastri and Gavaskar going to be at the meeting? I hope so because former players like them are reliable and have Indian cricket's future in mind, unlike the scheming politicians.

 

[honestbharani]

"Whenever any controversy surrounds the team, the performance of team is adversely affected,....It will be good for the team if the controversy is immediately resolved so that every player can concentrate on his game instead of getting mental tension.....it may be the coach's [Chappell's] own observation but, as far as I am concerned, Ganguly has been proved as an excellent captain, which is evident from his match winning record....I have played for almost five years under the captaincy of Ganguly and never felt like that....In fact, he takes personal interest to boost each and every player during practice as well as during a match.Ganguly has rebuilt this team and whatever the team has achieved so far, credit goes to the captain." ." Harbhajan source cricinfo.

Also, I dont understand why do people ask that Harbhajan should have kept his mouth shut. I think everyone should come out and say it in the open instead of someone quoting them as 'Sources'.

Not now, Sanz. That is the problem. This is an issue between Sourav and Greg Chappell and the other players should have stayed out, no matter how much they were mobbed by the media. See, Greg Chappell never made any comment on anyone in public. It is not his fault that the email was leaked by some BCCI official, possibly someone higher up. But both Sourav and Bhajji are wrong for airing these stuff in the media.

 

[honestbharani]

One more balanced article from Business Standard (India) -


Run out at both ends

Business Standard / New Delhi September 26, 2005

Only the most naively optimistic fan of Indian cricket can believe that a little manoeuvring will solve the current crisis. Some hard decisions are needed, especially if the Board wishes for more than a stop-gap solution.

The first of these is to start afresh by removing both the coach and the captain; the second is to build a team that stands a fighting chance at the next World Cup, due to be played in 2007 in the West Indies.

It should be clear to those with some understanding of the way the game works that neither Saurav Ganguly nor Greg Chappell can any longer maintain an effective working environment.

To deal with Mr Chappell first, he has over-stepped some lines. Once the selectors had chosen Mr Ganguly as captain, it was not the coach�s call to ask him to step down before a ball has been bowled in the Test series.

Nor does a diatribe over the e-mail mid-way through a two-Test series suggest restraint and measured speech. The subsequent patch-up was clearly a fraudulent exercise if the e-mails leaked contents were seriously meant as they seem to have been.

Mr Chappell clearly brings with him a typically Australian rough-talking, no-nonsense approach which lies contrary to the Board�s and Indian cricket�s preferred way of doing things�suggestion, compromise, accompanied by a whole lot of politics.

Mr Chappell will now find it difficult to strike the right balance with a new captain, who will be from the existing team and who will find it difficult to exercise independent judgement if the Board backs Mr Chappell in this row. And no one wants the shadow of this dispute to linger over a new coach-captain duo.

However, the coach�s arguments against Mr Ganguly�s inclusion in the team are valid. The immediate question is the captaincy, and the larger one the nature of India�s 2007 World Cup team.

There comes a point when, no matter how successful a captain you are, if you cannot keep your place in the side for what you were originally selected, you become a liability to the team. Even Sachin Tendulkar found it difficult to balance the two and opted to simply bat.

Mr Ganguly�s decision is, however, not easy. Were he to renounce the captaincy, there�s no guarantee that he will hold his place in the side as a batsman, especially because of the quality of those he keeps out of the side.

In other words, if Mr Ganguly isn�t captain, he is not in the team. But that is precisely why he should not be captain, and indeed why he should not have replaced Rahul Dravid after the Sri Lankan tour.

The tough decisions, therefore, lie with the Board. This is about the time that teams begin planning for the next World Cup and India should be no different. As things stand, at least half the present Indian side�s key players will find themselves too old by 2007.

This translates into not just a liability in the field but also, critically, slower reflexes on the unpredictable West Indian wickets. The Board, therefore, needs to take the bit between its teeth, Australian-style.

For this, first, it must not be seen to be taking sides in the current dispute and sack coach and captain both so that it can start again. Secondly, it must ensure that new players are given more chances to prove themselves in future team selections.

http://www.business-standard.com/co...leftindx=5&lselect=1&chklogin=N&autono=201177

But you honestly think any professional coach worth his salt will want to come to India after such episodes?

 

[SJS]

But you honestly think any professional coach worth his salt will want to come to India after such episodes?

NO. I am sure they dont.

But guess what. This is EXACTLY what some of the former players, some very big names included who are speaking against Ganguly and thus sound as if they are (by inference in favour of Chappell), actually want. The position of the coach, if you are one willing to use it to your own advantage rather than that of the team, is one of the three most powerful (read potentially lucrative) one in Indian cricket.

 

[Shounak]

Coaching the Indian cricket team sounds like driving in India..

 

[SJS]

Coaching the Indian cricket team sounds like driving in India..

If you agree to join the other two most pwerful guys, the coach and the big daddy - no not the President of BCCI_ but the big Daddy who pulls his strings, then its like driving a car on the Saharan desert after it has been completely metalised and has no red lights and no rules except the ones the big daddy makes and you follow.

See how easy driving in India is for the Indian selectors. And they almost nameless as well. Most Indian fans cant name all five of them and these five guys decide who the lucky 16 are going to be. But no we can name Dalmiya, Mahindra-the-puppett and of course the 16 * 1 billion(approx) as members of the team

 

[Sanz]

But you honestly think any professional coach worth his salt will want to come to India after such episodes?

Why not ? that is one of the challenges of coaching in India. Every Coach(indian or foreigner) goes/has gone through that. Hey big bucks dont come for free. If you think you are worth the astronomical amout you have demanded then show us your man-management skills, show your coaching skills.

John Wright did that successfully, didn't he ?

 

[howardj]

My take on things, is that you never should **** (metaphorically speaking) with a Chappell. They are hard to get the better of.

 

[Sanz]

Not now, Sanz. That is the problem. This is an issue between Sourav and Greg Chappell and the other players should have stayed out, no matter how much they were mobbed by the media. See, Greg Chappell never made any comment on anyone in public. It is not his fault that the email was leaked by some BCCI official, possibly someone higher up. But both Sourav and Bhajji are wrong for airing these stuff in the media.

Well, I am not suggesting that whatever Harbhajan says is truth. IMO It is certain that there are some players in the team who have a problem with Chappell's work ethic, chappell's way of coaching and If I am a cricket fan, I would like to know the name of all those who have a problem with that. (Harbhajan by speaking out has indicated that he does have a problem with it, IMO his outburst has more to do with the strict work ethic Chappell wants and less to do with actually supporting Ganguly )

I want the Board to clearly tell all such players NOW that either you follow the rules set by the Coach or you are OUT. Trust me I dont want coach to go, but If he is going to stay then he better have the players who are willing to be coached by him. I dont want another player coming up in the media starting up the same issue all over again.

 

[SJS]

My take on things, is that you never should **** (metaphorically speaking) with a Chappell. They are hard to get the better of.

In India they say the same about a Dalmiya so we need to find out if it is between Chappell and Ganguly or is it going to be turned into Jaggu dada's personal battle

 

[Sanz]

i don't think it will be such a bad thing if gangs and his coterie are all booted out, ...

I couldn't agree more. If you want to keep Chappell, then give him players who are willing to adapt/follow his ways. We still have enough time to rebuild a young team for 2007 world cup under Rahul Dravid. Although I dont see that happening.

 

[Sanz]

My take on things, is that you never should **** (metaphorically speaking) with a Chappell. They are hard to get the better of.

That's true, If anyone thinks that Chappell isn't playing politics in all this, then he has got to be kidding. Chappell knows that (most) fans are with him, media is with him and BCCI cant remove him and keep Ganguly, it is either both of them go (highly unlikely), both of them stay (highly unlikely) or Gang goes, he stays. He has already started praising Sehwag in the media as he is one of the important members of this team and supposedly supporting Ganguly in this mess.

 

[Sanz]

A marriage gone sour too soon

September 26, 2005 (Rahul Bhattacharya)


Greg Chappell's methods don't seem to have hit home with a significant section of the Indian team © Getty Images

Look where we're stuck now. Sourav Ganguly, cornered, fighting, armed with supporting evidence and affidavits, will respond point by point to the contents of the most read email in the history of cricket. The review committee which meets tomorrow (why must Jagmohan Dalmiya be on it?) will have before it sets of claims and counter claims to negotiate, and no power save that of an advisory body. It will emerge that both parties have told some truths or what they believe to be the truth and both parties will have told some half-lies. Inevitably the issue will be politicised.

Eventually one man must have to make way. That man ought to be Ganguly; yet the irony is that, thanks to a calculated leak by the board, in being accused he now has his greatest chance of redemption.

A few points. It needs mentioning here that Greg Chappell, acknowledged thinker though he may be, has little to show for as coach. He took over South Australia in 1998-99, much like he did India, a messiah, in charge of a team that had tailed off after a high. The expectation in the state then was that he would do a Malcolm Blight, the Aussie Rules Hall of Famer who had just coached a mediocre Adelaide Crows outfit to a pair of premierships in his first two years. Quite to the contrary, Chappell's five years saw SA finishing fourth (out of six), fourth, last, fourth and fourth.

One SA journalist says that Chappell `helped develop several poor performers into handy ones but found it difficult to communicate well with the lesser players. His major battles came with the state's administrators and the conservative culture of SA. The relationship ended with both parties thinking they could have got more out of each other.' Another SA observer thought Chappell overly theoretical, unable perhaps to connect with the team, and half-jokingly described his tenure as `reign of terror'. Whatever, that South Australia won a championship under Chappell, as was mentioned in a few news reports in India either shows the sheer sloppiness of journalists or else indicates how enamoured they were of him.

And the press Chappell got in India was so fabulous that it immediately made one wary. Chappell does like the press, and he does talk a good game. He sought out the Indian media and wooed them with a presentation of his vision for Indian cricket on the last tour to Australia; barely a day has gone by in his tenure so far that an exclusive interview is not granted. Far more worrying is the number of journalists who routinely receive detail and opinion, plenty of it in writing, that really ought to remain inside, unless the idea in the first place is to spread the word.

Is it unreasonable to harbour mild scepticism of Chappell? Leave aside Ganguly, the noises emerging from a significant section of the team indicate that he has not been able to hit home with them. By introducing the coloured hats of Mr de Bono he can come across to players as much a ******** artist as enlightened guru; by expressing displeasure over players whistling or singing, as some have claimed, he risks being seen as an unbearable bore rather than a hard taskmaster. There is no telling yet if the Chappell way will work simply because there is no evidence of it.

Chappell's first objective of making India look beyond Ganguly is not just fair but necessary; yet reading his own account of trying to destabilise the captain before the Test match makes you wonder. He saw a moment which he tried to exploit, to finish off Ganguly. But what were the percentages here? What odds that Ganguly would indeed stand down on the eve of a Test match against Zimbabwe when he's trying to save his career?

Has Chappell been able to foster an atmosphere of positivity? Looking back at his early days, when he was presented with an England team that had scraped bottom, Duncan Fletcher said, "The first thing I say is that you win as many games in the changing room as you do out in the field." It is worth analysing - and it is the more profitable area for the review committee to concentrate on for it is the younger members and not Ganguly who are important now to India - how much of this has been the wailing of slackers and how much of it is down simply to ineffective coaching. If the dissidents, and several of them have been pulled up for attitude before, are using this standoff as an opportunity to pave an easy path then they are not worth a moment of indulgence.

The big worry for Indian cricket has become that a player rebellion against Chappell will take its final form in the reappointment of Ganguly. That Ganguly must be replaced as captain ought to be non-negotiable, email or no email. It is a decision that would have ideally been taken four months ago. The details remain open to dispute, but not much in Chappell's email has surprised the majority of journalists.

And there is a point in that. Much of the Chappell `vision' is something any half-astute observer could tell you. Chappell's job is that of execution. Has he the ability to? Crucially, is the system prepared to allow him to? These are questions which will only be answered over time but they must be raised.

Despite the scepticism offered here, my personal opinion is that Chappell must be given the latitude and the duration to work things his way, to toughen up the side as is his brief. Ganguly, due respect and all, has nothing really to offer the future of Indian cricket. With Chappell we will not know unless we let him have his shot. Unpleasant as it may be, Indian cricket must brace itself and make the leap. We could come to owe him. It may help if Chappell, committed to holding up an unforgiving mirror to the team, can also hold it up to himself and consider his management of men. Perhaps he could start by dropping the MBE.

 

[Sanz]

Can the Board keep anything secret, now the questionaire they are going to ask Gangs/Chappell has been leaked to the media as well. Needless to say that the questions to Sourav look damn easy (seem like just a formality) :-

http://web.mid-day.com/sports/national/2005/september/119582.htm

Questions for Sourav

• Did you tip off the press that it was Greg Chappell who had asked you to step down as captain?

• Who should have the final say in the playing 11: captain or coach?

• What do you think of Greg Chappell as a coach?

• What prompted both of you to create a wall between each other?

Questions for Greg

• Why did you send the email to three people — board president Ranbir Singh Mahendra, secretary SK Nair and joint secretary Gautam Dasgupta? (The purpose of this question is to find out who leaked the email.)

• Why did you send the email in the middle of the tour, when you knew the review committee would be meeting in Mumbai on September 27?

• How did you conclude that Ganguly was physically and mentally unfit in such a short time?

• How did the media find out that you had asked Ganguly to step down before the first Test in Harare?

• You called for a truce with Sourav Ganguly and even posed for pictures with him on September 18. On the same day you emailed the three board officials, criticising the captain.

What prompted you to do this?

 

[howardj]

Can the Board keep anything secret, now the questionaire they are going to ask Gangs/Chappell has been leaked to the media as well. Needless to say that the questions to Sourav look damn easy (seem like just a formality) :-

http://web.mid-day.com/sports/national/2005/september/119582.htm

Questions for Sourav

• Did you tip off the press that it was Greg Chappell who had asked you to step down as captain?

• Who should have the final say in the playing 11: captain or coach?

• What do you think of Greg Chappell as a coach?

• What prompted both of you to create a wall between each other?

Questions for Greg

• Why did you send the email to three people — board president Ranbir Singh Mahendra, secretary SK Nair and joint secretary Gautam Dasgupta? (The purpose of this question is to find out who leaked the email.)

• Why did you send the email in the middle of the tour, when you knew the review committee would be meeting in Mumbai on September 27?

• How did you conclude that Ganguly was physically and mentally unfit in such a short time?

• How did the media find out that you had asked Ganguly to step down before the first Test in Harare?

• You called for a truce with Sourav Ganguly and even posed for pictures with him on September 18. On the same day you emailed the three board officials, criticising the captain.

What prompted you to do this?

Yeah, I think they are all relevant, considered questions. However, I think the Board should just be focussed on one question - has Ganguly taken Indian cricket as far as he is going to take it? I think the answer to that is a resounding 'Yes'. India, under Ganguly, peaked in 2003/2004. He has never been a top batsman, but now - sadly for him - he can't even use the teams results as a crutch to prop up his ailing, poisonous reign.

 

[Anil]

I agree. Are Ravi Shastri and Gavaskar going to be at the meeting? I hope so because former players like them are reliable and have Indian cricket's future in mind, unlike the scheming politicians.

i am not too sure about gavaskar...he was not above ruining a couple of promising careers, pulling a few favourites into the team, had frequent ego-clashes with the other superstar in the team, kapil....he might actually empathise with ganguly's situation...(please don't for a moment think that i am comparing them as players!)

 

[greg]

I haven't read the whole thread, but has anyone picked up on a nice touch in the Chappell e-mail?

I can assure you of my very best intentions.

Yours sincerely,

Greg Chappell MBE