Going forward, former India captain Anil Kumble reckons that countries may have a separate Twenty20 International side that is different from Tests and ODI teams.
The touring South Africans have three captains for the three different formats. They're comfortable with it as all the three skippers – Faf du Plessis (T20), AB de Villiers (ODI) and Hashim Amla (Test) play in all the three formats.
Going forward, former India captain Anil Kumble reckons that countries may have a separate Twenty20 International side that is different from Tests and ODI teams.
Delivering the seventh Dilip Sardesai Memorial Lecture at the CCI here on Saturday, the 44-year-old Kumble said he had no problems with India's two-captain theory – MS Dhoni in limited-overs and Virat Kohli in Tests. But this isn't new to Indian cricket. Kumble had, during his last years in international cricket, led India in the longer format while Dhoni captained the ODI side before taking over all the three formats after the legendary leg-spinner retired in 2008.
"I don't think there is any problem with the two-captain theory," Kumble said at the lecture while articulately speaking on 'Captaining India'. "If a captain is good enough to lead in all three formats and is not stressed by it, then that is the way to go. Till recently, Dhoni was comfortable leading in all the formats. Now India have two captains, and that is logical too.
"It is not difficult to adjust to two captains as you should have played some matches before becoming captain. You adjust to their ways of thinking. Perhaps, three captains for three formats, like the South Africans have, is the way things may happen," he added.
With aggressive cricket being the mantra of the current Indian team under team director Ravi Shastri, Kumble, who himself played and led aggressively, said "aggression is a misplaced word".
"The bottom line is you need to be attacking and the intent is to win. The game is about maximising resources aimed at one goal – winning. Some captains tend to go into the first Test of a series, especially away from home, playing for a draw. The captain must lead with only one idea in mind – to win the game. The draw mentality is partly because captains lack confidence and partly because they want to protect their record. I have always felt it is better to lose in pursuit of victory than to kill a game with defensive tactics. If you don't think winning is the point of the game, there is little point in even entering the field."
Kumble said great players need not necessarily make great captains, and mentioned the likes of England's Ian Botham and West Indies' Gary Sobers as examples.
"One possible explanation is that such players are so outrageously gifted that they cannot understand the lesser players, and therefore cannot lead a team. Perhaps, they tend to get impatient with teammates who cannot perform up to their own high standards, which is unfair because nobody else could."
Sachin Tendulkar, too, fell into this category. Kumble said Tendulkar led against sides that were at their peak at the time – West Indies, South Africa and Australia – and hence did not get the desired results.
There is an oft-repeated cliché, 'the captain is only as good as his team'. Kumble, however, deemed the reverse was true.
"The team is only as good as its captain. Very good teams have been undone by mediocre captaincy while perceived average teams have played above themselves and surprised everybody," he said.
He gave New Zealand under Brendon McCullum as an example.
"They (New Zealand) play a brand of attacking, positive cricket that has brought back the sheer joy of the game even in these pragmatic, winning-is-everything times. In some ways, McCullum is an exception. He is the best batsman in the side, and the easy choice to lead, although the best players do not always make the best captains."
Kumble was at the helm during the monkey-gate scandal in Sydney on India's tour of Australia in 2007-08. He said it was the job of the captain to protect his players. "Whatever said was said on the field but what was important was how we started moving ahead as a team. The general perception was that we come back (to India). Questions were asked, 'Do you think you will compete?'. My answer was that we went there to win the series and believed we could win. The only way to achieve that was by playing. It was important to convince the team and especially Bhajji, who was deeply affected by it, to carry on with the tour. I had Rahul (Dravid), Sachin (Tendulkar), VVS (Laxman), Viru (Sehwag) and all these players being there helped me take the right decision. You go by what the players say and as a duty, it was my responsibility and duty to protect my players."
(For full text of Dilip Sardesai Memorial Lecture by Anil Kumble, visit http://dnai.in/cVAe)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Kumble")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}