court martial
Spread the wealth
MAKARAND WAINGANKAR

THE SELECTION politics springs up new twists and turns every week. In my last column I had mentioned about the muddled selection process in Indian cricket and the suggestion made by former national selector Kishen Rungta in 1997 to telecast live the proceedings of the selection committee. Dhoni has now backed the suggestion after the out of context leak from one of the selectors. Hopefully the BCCI president Shashank Manohar, known to be a straightforward official, will act on it. Most captains from Pataudi to Kumble insisted on a certain combination as they perceived to be effective and the selectors having played Tests were expected to be on their wavelength. At times a captain is likely to push for a player but at international level no captain would ever want to get an undeserved player in the side. Sometimes the coach-captain combination can be notoriously deadly in some of the state teams pushing their cronies despite their failure. This has happened in Australian cricket too but smart and experienced selectors handle such situations firmly. By and large, captains and coaches get away with what they want only when selectors haven’t done any homework. This is a sure indication of favouritism. Nepotism however still continues in most of the states and I received a lot of phone calls from Mumbai and other places after the last column complaining of blatant nepotism. However Ajay Shirke, president of the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA) mailed me objecting to my criticism of not including Yogesh Takawale who was good enough to be in the list of 40 in the Challenger Shield but not in the state side! The irony is that one of the national selectors, Surendra Bhave, represents Maharashtra and West Zone in the national selection committee but he is not in the state selection committee. If Bhave, a former Maharashtra captain picked Takawale to be in one of the teams in the Challenger Shield, logically the state selectors ought to have endorsed his view. How can the BCCI have two sets of selectors going in two different directions? Since the national selectors are not in their respective state and zonal selection committees, they have no control over the state and zonal selections and the selectors at state and zonal levels don’t know the vision and policies of the national selection committees. Perhaps that’s the reason why most of the non-zonal players played in the Challenger Shield. Hopefully this too will change. The best thing that has happened to Indian cricket recently is that now all the international stars would be available to play for their respective states. DRESSING ROOM LESSONS THIS ONE important aspect was sorely missing. Sharing a dressing room with Tendulkar or Dravid or sharing a partnership in the middle with them is a kind of cricketing education that is unparalleled. These men are institutions in themselves. Mumbai was known as the Mecca of batsmen. One third of India’s runs have been scored by Mumbai batsmen. There have been cases of youngsters learning from top batsmen, watching them play or playing with them. But because of the tight international calendar top players haven’t been able to play domestic matches. In ten years Dravid played 100 Tests but in the same period he played only 10 Ranji Trophy matches. Didn’t Vengsarkar batting with Gavaskar, Muzumdar with Tendulkar and Robin Uthappa with Rahul Dravid benefit ? Don’t be surprised if we watch Tendulkar donning the Mumbai cap in some of the matches this season, despite his busy schedule. Won’t that help Mumbai players? And when Mumbai struggled at Rajkot on the placid Rajkot track, the old timers were quick to raise a pertinent question as to what’s wrong with Mumbai cricket? Is it the effect of T20 or the players aren’t focussed enough? Do players take pride in wearing the Mumbai cap or are they content in being part of the champion team? Or was it the case of ego? The players from smaller states are pushing themselves hard against the top teams. Their commitment is reflected in their performances especially when they play for the country. Why is no cricketer from Mumbai able to cement his place in the Test side is the question decision makers of Mumbai cricket sitting in the Cricket Centre should worry about. It’s time we act and stop pointing fingers at others.

BRINGBACKTRDOS
MAKARAND WAINGANKAR The higher the stakes of a game, the worse is the selection politics. Lack of integrity and commitment, blatant nepotism and corruption are nothing new in Indian cricket’s selection process. When the selection discussions began to get published on the front pages, Kishen Rungta who was Chairman of the national selection committee in 90s advised the BCCI to have the proceedings of the committee telecast live. It was rejected. It’s time the BCCI thinks seriously about this proposition. The entire country is keen to know the details and reasoning behind the process. A live telecast will put an end to senseless speculation. Greg Chappell’s email regarding Ganguly created enough bad blood in the Indian team. Dhoni’s reported resignation must have caused some problems too. The only person we can believe is Dhoni and he has denied. Only once in the history of Indian cricket a captain— Polly Umrigar — relinquished the captaincy on the morning of the match when the then BCCI President Ratibhai Patel insisted on making offie Jasu Patel play in the Chennai Test against West Indies in 1958. The point is quite simple. When five selectors, captain, and the coach discuss the selection of players, obviously with the zonal pressure that the selectors face, they will push certain players. When they fail they become disgruntled and rush to the press. I have spent decades in the profession to know how the system works. In 70s the selectors would openly discuss selections with senior journalists. Selectors were open to suggestions. This was never misused. We were told that Ajit Wadekar was given the choice between Abbas Ali Baig and Dilip Sardesai for the West Indies tour of 1971. Wadekar opted for Sardesai who went on to score heavily in the series. What’s wrong if Dhoni had asked for RP Singh to be retained? COACH THE SELECTORS? THE FIRST time informal discussion with selectors was misused was when the day before the selection of the team for the India’s tour to Sri Lanka in 1997, a scribe handed over the team on a paper to Ramakant Desai who was the Chairman of the selection committee. Next day the same team was announced. Someone asked the other day why the NCA can’t have academy for the cricketers who are keen to be selectors. Not a bad idea. But how does one get rid of nepotism? Yogesh Takawale who plays for the India A team and Mumbai Indians and has been a prolific scorer, doesn’t find a place in the Maharashtra team. He is a typical victim of our system. It’s not the cricketing arguments of the selectors but the political thought process that is dangerous to the game. The best way to get rid of such illogical selections bordering on nepotism is to have a proper structure of parameters which will help selection process plug loopholes. Matches, averages, strike rate and other parameters should form the basis for selection like the way they have in the Australian junior cricket. Ranking system based on performances was launched by Cricket Australia recently. Talent becomes the additional attribute. When there was no system of having selection trial tournaments, Ravi Shastri was chucked out of the selection net trial of Mumbai Under-22 after batting one ball and bowling one ball. It was only after former Mumbai off-spinner Sharad Diwadkar told Sunil Gavaskar of 17-yearold Shatri’s talent, Gavaskar insisted on his inclusion in the pre-quarter Ranji Trophy match against Bihar at Jamshedpur in 1981. TIME FOR INTROSPECTION TILL THE time I presented the project of the Talent Resource Development Officers (TRDO) in 2002 to the BCCI, selections at all levels were on the basis of scores. In the 1974 Duleep Trophy match between West Zone and South Zone in Mumbai, both the India openers Sunil Gavaskar and Ashok Mankad were dropped and were replaced by names unheard of. Reason – the two openers – one from Maharashtra and other from Gujarat — had scored half centuries in the only Ranji Trophy round that was played before the selections. Selectors of Maharashtra, Gujarat and Saurashtra were in majority. 3-2. TRDO system produced Dhoni, Raina, Sreesanth, R P Singh, Irfan Pathan, Parthiv Patel Piyush Chawla and many others. It’s the system that produces the result. The existing selection system in India clearly indicates that the integrity of selectors is at a discount. And nepotism is at its worst. Sadly these are former cricketers who are playing with the careers of cricketers. It’s time for some serious introspection.

NEEDLE WORKS

NEEDLE WORKS - YUVRAJ SINGH - MUMBAI MIRROR COLUMN
MAKARAND WAINGANKAR

YUVRAJ Singh has some connection with Number 12. Sample this trivia; born on 12th December in room number 12 of the PGI Hospital, Chandigarh which is in Sector 12 at 12 pm, Yuvraj Singh was quite a heavy baby – more than four kg — when I took him in my arms on that day. As he grew, he worked hard on his strength and power hitting. He was convinced that only a fit body could make the talent produce performances. At Rajkot he exhibited what he was capable of — well timed powerful wristy shots. He gave England team the ‘Garfield Sobers dose’ that made them look pale. And on the slow and dusty Indore pitch with three down for 29, Yuvraj showed that he could also use the situation to his advantage in batting and bowling. The rise and fall of Yuvraj Singh is a story which gives enough fodder to all, to write and talk about his exploits. In a society that tends to lap up all the nonsensical off the field speculative stuff without realising the adverse effect it will have on a person, Yuvraj is reconciled to the fact that unless he silences the critics with some scintillating knocks and breathtaking fielding, he will always be known as the bad boy of Indian cricket. Once he was captaincy material. Now he isn’t even the vice-captain of the Indian team. When in mood, moody players destroy the opponents. When not in mood, they destroy themselves. This is an apt description of Yuvraj Singh. Such players are not slaves of technique. Their technique is a slave of their emotional state. To Yuvraj Singh, the point of impact while playing shot is what matters. Technical gyan doesn’t interest him. Such players are never consistent. His inconsistency may have prompted Kapil Dev and Dilip Vengsarkar to question his focus on the game but highly temperamental cricketers can’t be expected to stay focussed all the time. Temperamental cricketers expect others to understand them. They need to be handled. They have to be needled at the right time the way Kapil Dev and Vengsarkar did by saying that Yuvi needs to be focussed. This must have really angered him but hasn’t it worked? Chaavi(provocation) as we say in Mumbai cricket. CHAAVI MARO WASN’T IT before the India-Pakistan Test match at the Wankhede Stadium in 1979, that captain of the Indian team Gavaskar ridiculed Kapil Dev’s batsmanship in an article? Again the ‘chaavi’ and Kapil played a gem of a knock. These are the tricks Mumbaikars use of getting the best out of a player. Sandeep Patil never ever bothered about the views others have about his approach to the game but the media pressure was less compared to the scrutiny Yuvraj is undergoing. Like Yuvraj, Sandeep Patil was a match winner. The state of the pitch and form of a bowler didn’t matter when Patil was in full flow. At Indore, Yuvraj quickly sensed it was a different ball game. The greatness of a batsman is in reading the pitch and situations. He did it admirably. It could be an exaggeration to compare Yuvraj with Sobers but watch the innings of 254 of Sobers at Melbourne beating fielders on the point boundary against the fastest bowler Dennis Lillee in the 1972 series between the Rest Of The World and Australia and Yuvraj comes the closest to him in terms of power and elegance. Sobers hit six sixes off Malcolm Nash in a county game, Yuvraj did that to Stuart Broad in the T20 World Championship . LEAVE HIM ALONE TO BE fair to Yuvraj, he wasn’t handled properly. He was used as a spare-wheel in Test cricket. From opening the innings to number six, he was tried, tested and dumped. He wasn’t allowed to settle down. Yet at Bangalore he played a swashbuckling knock of 169 against Pakistan. The ball kept beating the field with a geometrical precision. That knock ought to have put an end to the debate as to who should be the successor of Sourav Ganguly. It didn’t. He was a victim of a subjective assessment. Don Bradman said he saw similarity between him and Tendulkar. Garfield Sobers surely would see glimpses of himself when he watches Yuvraj. Let’s leave Yuvraj alone for a few months and see how he shines with his batting in the next few years. A genius knows nothing till his art flows for the enjoyment of others. More than anyone, it’s the national selection committee that has to realise that such sheer genius is not born everyday in Indian cricket.

Yuvi and focus

Yuvi and focus? Utter bullshit. Yuvi is an enigma. A person who doesn't know what he will do next minute, how will his team mates or opposition know. Sign of a moody person. Another Salim Durani in the making.
I think he likes to be needled. Only yesterday Dilip Vengsarkar said that Yuvi has no focus and nobody knows Yuvi better as a cricketer than him. When Yuvi was 15, he was sent to Mumbai by his father Yograj Singh to practice at the Elf-Vengsarkar cricket academy.
What power was he generating. Hitting over the huge palm trees on the northern side of the Oval Maidaan the ball would land on the road , a good 100 yeard hit. Even big hitter Kambli couldn't hit the ball that high and long.
Everytime Yuvi fails either we talk about his technique or his off the field activities. And when he scores like he did at Rajkot, we compare him with Garry Sobers. Now did anyone bother to know that Sobers too enjoyed his off the field activities.
The similiarity between Sobers and Yuvi is that apart from being the left handers, their mood. When in mood Sobers loved tarnishing the reputation of the international bowlers. Yuvi loves to do that too. Let's allow him to do what he wants.

Anil Kumble Retires From International Cricket

So Anil Kumble said ta-ta to international cricket. Great cricketer. Period.

Only the other day every former cricketers were saying he has two year's cricket left in him and within two months, Kumble quit. Was it because of the media criticism ? no can't be. He has handled criticism from day one when all these chaps who are praising him now were questioning his ablity to bowl leg spin.

Kumble put them in place by getting wickets. I feel the reason for him quitting is that he was too preoccupied handling 10 other guys and young bowlers. Perfectionist that he is he was falling short of the standard he had set. Bowling ball after ball on the 22 yard for 18 years is no joke. He did that very well. What tremendous work ethic he had . Superb but he wasn't a captaincy material.

Had he not been made the captain, he would have bowled without a pressure. Now you know why bowlers can't be good captains.