Skip to main content

The professionalism gap

The gulf between this Indian side and their hosts over the last seven weeks or so has been quite significant (on average) from a cricketing perspective but two events from this past week highlight how big the gap is even off the field.

First, Dhoni's suspension for one game (for slow over-rates). Its hard to imagine the Australian team management (coach, selectors etc) allowing their captain to get suspended for the second time on a single tour. I'm a big fan of Dhoni's (despite all the flak he's copped this tour) but even an immensely capable man like him occasionally needs some guidance and support. And here, Fletcher hasn't had a single thing to say about it (more or less like his silence on the rest of the tour). Its surely not a coincidence that both the transgressions have come when India have chosen to play four seamers, so its not as though the solution is hard to find (even setting aside the tactical questionability of that team composition). Hopefully, someone (ideally Fletcher) is having a word with Dhoni behind the scenes.

Behind the scenes intrigue is something that needs to be avoided when it comes to the issue of the retirement of senior pros clearly past their best. Its refreshing to see the openness that John Inverarity has when it comes to explaining decisions and the agreement that he and Ponting had is how mature adult professionals should operate. The contrast with the Indian selectors is glaring whereby Kris Srikkanth has never bothered to indicate where Tendulkar, Dravid, and Laxman stand in the selectors thinking. Again (as in the case above with Dhoni), hopefully there's more going on privately than has been revealed to the masses. Judging by how Dravid had to force the issue when it came to his ODI career, its unlikely that there's any real plan that Srikkanth and co have.

Cricketing gaps can be made up to some extent with hard work on and off the field. How do you cope with attitude gaps though?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Et tu?

As a single sport website, I think Cricinfo has brought about a revolution and the fact that they were bought by ESPN is testament to how highly valued they've become. Their editing and approach to articles/opinion has been refreshing to say the least and even though they seem to have had a lot of editorial staff movement they've usually maintained very high standards. Off late though, both in their headline styles as well as in actual content, there seems to be an occasional slippage of standards and an inching towards the modern media sensationalism which is a bit of a pity. This piece  by Siddharth Monga is a classic example. Granted that the last two press conferences by Dhoni and Sehwag  indicated clearly that the captain and his deputy did not agree on this aspect of selection but "discord", "dissent", "public sniping" feels rather presumptuous and heavy handed. Yes, it is a team sport but there is no reason why everyone on the team needs ...

First thoughts on the Ashes

The only minor surprise for me in the 2013 Australian Ashes squad announced last week was the selection of James Faulkner ahead of Moises Henriques as the second all-rounder. Minor because given  the Shane Watson shenanigans of recent times, I would have thought that Inverarity and co would have opted for a second batting all-rounder (which is what Henriques clearly is). Instead they've gone with a bowling all-rounder in Faulkner and it'll be interesting to see what happens if Watson's batting woes in Test match cricket continue in the first two Tests. As for the rest of the squad, given the way the inexperienced batting performed in India, Rogers and Haddin were always going to make it in to the team and the choice of Khawaja over Smith appears sound too given that the latter's strength is in playing spin bowling. The batting still looks as unsettled and shaky as the Indian fast bowling line-up and its here that the series will be won or lost for the Aussies. The retu...

Quick singles: Why the double standards?

I'm no fan of David Warner's but for once, I'm firmly and squarely on his side . Sportspersons are probably treated the most unfairly by public opinion (and often the media) whenever they are involved in pay disputes. "Oh, look these millionaires are complaining about not getting paid enough" seems to be the gist of the general reactions. I find this attitude inexplicable at best and grossly hypocritical if I'm feeling less charitable. Like the rest of us, all athletes have the right to fight for what they think they should be paid. That is the fundamental part. In addition (and unlike many of the rest of us), most sportspersons operate in the knowledge that they only have a short period available as a performer, and therefore only a short period to maximise earnings. Most people that I know would behave exactly the same as Warner and his colleagues are doing. So why all the hue and cry?