There are no two views that relations between coaches and captains, especially in cricket, are wrought with anxiety and tension. For a great synergistic relationship, a lot depends on how much each party trusts the other. In any sporting team around the globe, there have been more prominent spats than complementary roles with excellent understanding. In India, we have had the much-mentioned Greg Chappell and Sourav Ganguly episodes. Even Sachin Tendulkar had comments about Kapil Dev in his book Playing It My Way during his second stint as captain in November 1999. Women’s cricket has had its share too with Tushar Arothe and Ramesh Powar not finding the going good as coaches.
All the names mentioned above are legends in their own right but could not be comfortable together in the team dugout. Since history tends to repeat itself, how can it not be for spats between coaches and players during the watch of the CoA? We had our own share of trials and tribulations with coaches in the men’s and women’s side of the game. Let’s look at the men’s team first.
We were in Hyderabad on 5 April 2017 for a scheduled CoA meeting. That was the day on which, after overcoming many obstacles, the IPL was finally taking off as per schedule and the inaugural match was to be played. The office-bearers also attended a part of the meeting. During the course of the meeting, the CEO informed us that the head coach of the Indian team, Anil Kumble, only had a one-year contract and it was due to expire on 22 June 2017. This information hit us like a ton of bricks as we had no inkling of it.
The timing was exceedingly inconvenient since the Indian team had to participate in the Champions Trophy in the UK from 1 June, and from there, proceed for a tour of the West Indies set to begin on 23 June 2017. Considering the limitations of time and the need to provide some stability to the team, we looked at the terms of the contract and found that while his predecessor, Ravi Shastri, had been given a two-year term as team director, for some inexplicable reason, Kumble’s tenure had been restricted to a year.
Also read: When Rahul Dravid told Ram Guha to ‘shut up’ about cricket strategy, write history books
The CoA was informed that the BCCI GB had constituted a CAC for selecting the head coach. The three-member CAC comprised former distinguished cricketers: Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and V.V.S Laxman. It was learnt that the BCCI had followed a very elaborate and transparent process in 2016, post the expiry of Ravi Shastri’s two-year tenure. It had released an advertisement for a new coach in the first week of June and received 57 applications, including Kumble’s. However, it was reported that Kumble’s name had not been included in the 21 names shortlisted by the office of the then BCCI secretary, Ajay Shirke.
The CAC, however, asked for Kumble’s name to be included. The committee had interviewed Kumble among other candidates and recommended his name for appointment. Following the recommendation, the then secretary and president took the decision to appoint Kumble for a one-year period so that he could acquaint himself with the job and permit the BCCI to assess his performance as he had never taken on a coaching role before.
Under the circumstances, without the contract having an extension clause, if the CoA had decided to grant him an automatic extension, there would be a cacophony of contrarian utterances commenting on the decision-making process being followed by the CoA. As a consequence, we were left with no option but to follow stated procedures.
In another CoA meeting held on 21 May 2017, in Hyderabad, in which the office-bearers were also present (with the IPL final going on), Kumble made a presentation on the issues facing the players and proposed certain structural changes, including restructuring of payments and facilities at the NCA. It transpired that the players’ compensation package had not been revised after 2011 though, of course, the CoA had effected an enhancement of the packages in March 2017 itself. He made some very good suggestions regarding upgradation of the players’ compensation packages. During the course of the presentation and based on a query by him regarding his contract, the CoA and the officebearers explained to him the non-existence of an automatic extension clause in his contract.
Following this issue becoming public knowledge, a barrage of opinions appeared in the media. Some called his one-year contract a ‘silly little contract’, which can be ignored by the CoA. There was also a cacophony of voices indicating that the players were unhappy with the coach’s overbearing attitude—that he behaved like a headmaster, and it was also rumoured that the captain and coach were not on talking terms. Stories of dissonance in the dressing room aside, the issue was clear: for BCCI to continue to utilize his services, we would have to follow a process. I cross-checked this decision taken by the CoA with a couple of persons who had been associated with the BCCI, as also legal experts, who felt that if we permitted a unilateral extension, it could lead to complications later.
Also read:
CAC: The third umpire
Having taken the decision to advertise for the post of head coach, the attempt was to avoid a switch while the Champions Trophy was underway. We felt that while the team was preparing for the Champions Trophy 2017, an ongoing process would undermine the position of the coach and divert the team’s focus towards speculations in the media. It would have created further acrimony. So we decided to announce the new appointment in the fortnight’s gap between the tournament getting over and the team leaving for West Indies. The call for applications’ timeline was decided accordingly.
In my conversations with the captain and team management, it was conveyed that Kumble was too much of a disciplinarian and hence the team members were not too happy with him. I had spoken to Virat Kohli on the issue and he did mention that the younger members of the team felt intimidated by the way he worked with them.
Newspaper articles and viewpoints in the media kept appearing to the effect that Indian cricket has become captive to ‘superstar’ culture or that now players (read captain) will be deciding who the coach should be. It is not the first time that teams around the world perceived dissonance in the dressing room. Dav Whatmore, the Sri Lankan team coach when it won the 1996 World Cup, and who has handled other international teams, such as Pakistan, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in a two-decade coaching career (he was also the coach of the India U-19 team led by Kohli which won the U-19 World Cup in 2008), says:
A successful coach is a good man-manager. You need to develop a healthy environment in the dressing room. You should give them good space and the players should have the freedom to express themselves. Of course, you have to have the tactical acumen and technical know-how to point out their shortcomings and address them in a diligent manner.
He further added:
Captains are powerful in every country and it is not just India. In India, you have to understand that these cricketers are superstars and they are treated that way… So the man willing to take up the responsibility of Indian coach has to understand the system and manage it.
All in all, I am also of the opinion that a coach can only be a friend, philosopher and tactical guide. It is ultimately the team and the captain who have to play the game, and it is on their performance that the team’s fortune rests. After all, how many of us remember the team coach from when ‘Kapil’s Devils’ won the World Cup in 1983?
The comforting factor for the CoA was that coach selection had been done in 2016 by the CAC, which comprised luminaries like Tendulkar, Ganguly and Laxman. They were towering personalities and were best suited to speak to the captain, players and the coach on how to go about the process in the future. In fact, when I met Tendulkar in Birmingham during the first match between India and Pakistan on 4 June 2017, I discussed with him in detail the awkward predicament in which we all had been placed. Apprising him of my conversation with the captain, I impressed upon him the fact that legends like him and other members of the CAC could bring about a rapprochement between the captain and the coach, and that maybe if it came from stalwarts like them, it could have the desired effect.
Tendulkar had seen the media reports and was conscious of the disquiet that was bothering everyone. He mentioned that the CAC would speak to Kumble and Kohli and ascertain the nature of the dissonance, if any, and factor it into the decision it would take in choosing the new coach.
This excerpt from ‘Not Just a Nightwatchman-My Innings in the BCCI’ by Vinod Rai has been published with permission from Rupa Publications.