#dnaEdit: Choosing Kumble

The coach for the Indian cricket team never attracted much attention in the ancient past. It was only with the choice of Greg Chappell in 2005, and that too at the suggestion of then Indian captain, Sourav Ganguly, that it became nasty and controversial. Chappell’s predecessor, John Wright, stayed in the background, and he seemed to have done what he could quietly. Chappell pushed himself forward and redefined the role of the cricket coach in terms of the manager of a football team, out there in the front, making changes, prodding, cheering and admonishing the players in the middle. Chappell’s tactics proved disastrous for the Indian team in 2007 Cricket World Cup in the West Indies. The players were dispirited and de-motivated and the team just crashed out of the tournament in the first round.  Sourav has obviously not forgotten the bitter lessons from the Chappell episode. He seems to have made amends by choosing his former team-mate and legendary spin bowler, Anil Kumble.

There are two interesting things about choosing Kumble. Sourav alone could not have chosen Kumble however much he might have wanted to compensate for his ‘folly’ of dropping the bowler in the 2003 World Cup final against Australia in South Africa. There are others, including Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Lakshman, who are on cricket advisory board, along with BCCI secretary Ajay Shirke and president Anurag Thakur. There were many contenders, 57 to be exact, including Ravi Shastri. The choice of Kumble can be termed as passing on the baton to the next generation. There is the sense of the cosy old boys’ club sort of thing. Perhaps it cannot be helped.  

But questions remain. The obvious one of whether it should be a foreign or an Indian coach reflects the politics of the game — which is different from the power politics of the BCCI — and the argument offered was that the players would fall in line with a foreign coach rather than an Indian one. It is a sad reflection of Indian attitudes if it is indeed the case. A coach is a coach is a coach. It should not really matter whether he is Indian or a foreigner.

The other question is about the role of a coach in a cricket team. Is he an unofficial non-playing captain, planning the strategy for each game, a trend set by South African coach, Bob Woolmer, who is supposed to have micromanaged the tactics in each game during the 1999 World Cup in England. Whether the Woolmer coaching model is the right one is to be questioned but the compulsion for scoring a victory has become so compelling that it is often forgotten that a game should remain a game, and that it should be played well, and the team that plays better should win. 

Kumble’s initial press statement about the coach remaining in the background, and that it is the players who should be the focus, shows that he wants to send the coach back to the dressing room and the pavilion, and not one remote controlling the game on the field.

The coach could be helping out the players in their game, both at the psychological and technical levels. And perhaps Kumble, an exemplary player in many ways, fits the job well. He should also be able to make the games less stressful, where the team should enjoy playing in order to win. The cricket team is not a platoon on a battlefield. Kumble should be able to instil the spirit of the game to the players.