The race to sign Whatmore!

[Richard]

Seriously though, I am not sure such a hard nosed tough love sort of coach like Whatmore would be best for the premaddonas of India, unless it has the effect of whipping them into shape.

I thought that sort of perception was based on stereotypes in the Chappell case (and said so) and haven't yet changed my mind.

 

[Sanz]

Nope, they could have been coached by pretty well anyone decent in that period and it's very likely they'd have still gone well. Having an Australian as coach was not a crucial factor.

You know nothing about anything and your whole argument is based on silly asumptions could have would have should have etc. Anyone who tells me Aussies would have been same without Bobby Simpson as coach, then he has no clue.

Haven't a clue when the period in question was, I'm afraid.

If you dont have a clue about something then please dont make statments as If you had a PHD on the subject. Now please check India's record under Wadekar and you will know what I was talking about.

Err, no, because they are odd-ones-out. In case you didn't notice, 2 is a much smaller number than 8.

Did you pay attention when I was talking about Ajit Wadekar as India coach, that's 3 out of 8, and its not like England have won world Championship under Fletcher or SA won anything of any significance under Woolmer. Yes England won the Ashes, but they also got swept very next year.

 

[Manee]

I thought that sort of perception was based on stereotypes in the Chappell case (and said so) and haven't yet changed my mind.

Ganguly once made Flintoff carry his bags for him at Lancashire, is that not a bit premaddonaish?

 

[Richard]

Wikipedia October 1992 - March 1996.

Well this is how they went in Tests, and it's hard to compare, really, as there's a sum-total of one series outside the subcontinent there, and that was Wright's biggest achievement in his tenure.

 

[Richard]

You know nothing about anything and your whole argument is based on silly asumptions could have would have should have etc. Anyone who tells me Aussies would have been same without Bobby Simpson as coach, then he has no clue.

Err, of course they might not have been. But Marsh and Buchanan could have been any decent coach.

If you dont have a clue about something then please dont make statments as If you had a PHD on the subject. Now please check India's record under Wadekar and you will know what I was talking about.

I just did...

Did you pay attention when I was talking about Ajit Wadekar as India coach, that's 3 out of 8, and its not like England have won world Championship under Fletcher or SA won anything of any significance under Woolmer. Yes England won the Ashes, but they also got swept very next year.

Duncan Fletcher is by far and away the best coach England have ever had. They won many things under his tutelage, and likewise South Africa with Woolmer. I doubt you'd find a single SAfrican cricket fan who'd say they'd had a better coach than Bob Woolmer.

That, therefore, is 2 out of 10, which is not-many. John Wright's India IMO achieved more of note than Ajit Wadekar's India.

 

[Richard]

Ganguly once made Flintoff carry his bags for him at Lancashire, is that not a bit premaddonaish?

Thing is, people made it out to include Tendulkar and God-knows-how-many-other Indian players who were too primadonnaish to listen to the straight-talking Greg Chappell. And I don't like that perception, it seems to me to be based simply on stereotypes.

 

[Sanz]

Well this is how they went in Tests, and it's hard to compare, really, as there's a sum-total of one series outside the subcontinent there, and that was Wright's biggest achievement in his tenure.

Wadekar had a Win/Loss Ratio of 5, Wright had 1.2. Yeah Wadekar didn't coach whole lout outside India, so what, compare their records at home, Wadekar hands down better with much inferior players and a very poor captain. Wright had better more talented players with a much better captain.

 

[Manee]

Thing is, people made it out to include Tendulkar and God-knows-how-many-other Indian players who were too primadonnaish to listen to the straight-talking Greg Chappell. And I don't like that perception, it seems to me to be based simply on stereotypes.

It certainly is based on stereotypes. My comment maybe was a bit out of order saying pre madonnas but what I mean is that they would not be accustommed to being treated harshly. They are not bad people whatsoever, it is just the way they were brought up.

I hate it when people say (e.g.) that Tendulkar's innings being defensive (not even that defensive) meant he was selfish, didn't care about India and has lost all of his talent,

Bit of irony: Ganguly was the main person pushing for Chappell to be selected as India coach in the first place.

 

[Richard]

Wadekar had a Win/Loss Ratio of 5, Wright had 1.2. Yeah Wadekar didn't coach whole lout outside India, so what, compare their records at home, Wadekar hands down better with much inferior players and a very poor captain. Wright had better more talented players with a much better captain.

Yes, indeed, Kumble, Kapil Dev, Shastri, Sidhu, Tendulkar, Azharuddin, Mongia, Srinath... and Chauhan, Raju and Kambli too... such a terrible bunch.

 

[Richard]

It certainly is based on stereotypes. My comment maybe was a bit out of order saying pre madonnas but what I mean is that they would not be accustommed to being treated harshly. They are not bad people whatsoever, it is just the way they were brought up.

It's very interesting the way this has divided opinions amongst Indians - don't know if you read this part of this thread, but that demonstrated it very well.

 

[Manee]

It's very interesting the way this has divided opinions amongst Indians - don't know if you read this part of this thread, but that demonstrated it very well.

That blog is interesting. I think Chappell made some fatal errors as coach. Dropping Ganguly without a suitable batting replacement and telling Munaf Patel to bowl 'line and length' (in a country of those bowlers) and drop his pace are examples. I feel that with anyone, you can earn respect, and Chappell's decisions, although they tried, didn't do that.

I am also slightly confused how he could axe Ganguly if he was not part of the selection committee, but that is neither here nor there.

EDIT:

I still think Laxman should be playing but the team Dravid selected has done the job it was given.

Now I'm really confused about selection.

 

[Sanz]

Yes, indeed, Kumble, Kapil Dev, Shastri, Sidhu, Tendulkar, Azharuddin, Mongia, Srinath... and Chauhan, Raju and Kambli too... such a terrible bunch.

Not terrible but definately inferior Compared to Tendulkar, Dravid, Sehwag, Laxman, Ganguly, Srinath, Zaheer, Kumble, Harbhajan.

 

[silentstriker]

Wadekar had a Win/Loss Ratio of 5, Wright had 1.2. Yeah Wadekar didn't coach whole lout outside India, so what, compare their records at home, Wadekar hands down better with much inferior players and a very poor captain. Wright had better more talented players with a much better captain.

It is ludicrous to say 'so what' when talking about overseas records when it concerns India IMO.

Chappell: First win ever in SA, first series in WI in 35 years. That alone makes it a successful tenure.

 

[Sanz]

It is ludicrous to say 'so what' when talking about overseas records when it concerns India IMO.

And how else do you judge that when Wadekar had only one series away from subcontinent ? You clearly look at their home records and Wadekar's home record is better than Chappell/Wright, hence he is alot more successful than both.

Chappell: First win ever in SA, first series in WI in 35 years. That alone makes it a successful tenure.

No, it doesn't, atleast not IMO. We didn't win the series in SA, and winning a series in WI when they are close to Bangladesh doesn't mean much to me. W/L ratio of 1.75 (thanks to a series vs. zimbo high school boys) can never be better than a W/L ratio of 5.

It is laughable to suggest thta Chappel's tenure was a success from any angle. It was a disaster to say the least.

 

[Richard]

EDIT:

I still think Laxman should be playing but the team Dravid selected has done the job it was given.

Now I'm really confused about selection.

I think

Haha, oh dear.

is appropriate there.

 

[Richard]

It is ludicrous to say 'so what' when talking about overseas records when it concerns India IMO.

Chappell: First win ever in SA, first series in WI in 35 years. That alone makes it a successful tenure.

And drawing series in both England and Australia (unprecedented and only once before been done, respectively) makes Wright's probably even more so.

 

[Manee]

I think ['Oh dear'] is appropriate there.

I'm still confused who picks the team. I am a firm believer that the head coach should be on the Selection Comittee so they have their choice of players instead of neglecting someone who has been picked but the coach does not like.

 

[Richard]

Not terrible but definately inferior Compared to Tendulkar, Dravid, Sehwag, Laxman, Ganguly, Srinath, Zaheer, Kumble, Harbhajan.

I don't see so. The batting is probably a bit stronger, but only a bit, and the bowling's weaker. Zaheer Khan, for instance, was almost always very poor and does not deserve to be in a list with those others.

 

[Sanz]

I don't see so. The batting is probably a bit stronger, but only a bit, and the bowling's weaker. Zaheer Khan, for instance, was almost always very poor and does not deserve to be in a list with those others.

Batting only a bit stronger ?? Can you please check the batting performances of Sehwag, Sachin, Dravid, Laxman, Ganguly and compare that to the likes of Azhar, Sidhu, Shastri etc.

And yes Zaheer was poor, but was he really worse than Rajesh Chauhan or an aging KapilDev ?

 

[Sanz]

And drawing series in both England and Australia (unprecedented and only once before been done, respectively) makes Wright's probably even more so.

And then losing a series to Australia, failing to win a series against England at home negates that. Oh and we had won two series in England before - 1986 and 1971. I am not saying Wright was not successful, he was but not more than Wadekar esp when we look at the talent he had. In batting we were argubly the best side in the world.