.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Sight Screen

Wednesday, June 15, 2005

Kirmani on selection committees

On the South African website Independent Online, I spotted this story by Ananthanaryanan on, what else, Greg Chappell's appointment as India's national coach. The bit that made me sit up?
Chappell may also have to contend with the thorny issue of not being a selector, something which rankled his predecessor.
Borde and Kirmani defended India's five-man selection panel which only consults the coach and captain.
"The selection panel is supreme. If the coach and captain select the team why have a selection committee?," Kirmani said.

Nice bit of sophistry -- I mean, whoever said anything about the coach and captain selecting the national team? What they are seeking -- more accurately, what is being sought on their behalf -- is a voice.
By framing the argument as one of either-or choices, Kirmani neatly avoids a substantive answer to the central question: Since the responsibility of wins and loses rests with the captain and coach, why should they not have a seat, a voice, a vote in team selection?
To turn the argument on its head, if the selection committee picks the squad without reference to the captain and coach; if said committee even picks the playing XI (as has been done on some occasions) and occasionally even dictates where a particular batsman should bat (again, as was done during the turbulent years of Tendulkar's captaincy) then why have a coach and captain anyway?

8 Comments:

  • Why must you insist on asking the tough questions, Prem? Are you so masochistic? :-)

    By Anonymous Chirag, at 16:09  

  • Just one of the things that we all know but can do nothing about.

    Lets see what kind of luck Chappell has

    ~The Preceptor

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 16:18  

  • Well I guess Kirmani is right in saying that the selection panel is supreme. But I think the selection panel should take inputs from the coach and captain too.

    Selectors in an ideal situation has the following job:
    Since each selector represents a zone, he monitors cricketers playing for the zone he represents. He analyzes the preformances of all the players playing in his zone and hand picks the brightest of the lot who can represent India in the international team.

    The coach and captain ideally work with the team given to them. They try to make the most of players they have and keep improving. They should definately be part of selection process. But, they should not supersede the selectors. For eg.
    1. If the selector wants a certain player in national team to be dropped from the team then the coach and captain can ask the selector to give this player another chance as they feel he has the potential to deliver the goods if given another opportunity.

    2. If the selector wants to include a extra batsman in the side, the captain and coach can request an all-rounder instead because they have enough batting already and so on...

    Selectors and Coach+Captain should have a mutual understanding and respect.

    I also do feel that once the selectors have selcted the team then they should just let the captain and coach take the responsibility from then on. Selectors should have no business in selecting the starting XI or batting order and things of those sorts.

    By Blogger Rahul Kulkarni, at 16:43  

  • Greg Chappell gave an interview recently (see rtsp://media.abc.net.au/reallibrary/200505/r47877_125852.rm ) where he talked about why he didn't care about having a voice in the selection process. His reasoning? You don't want the players to hold things back from the coach because he might use that information to not select you.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 17:05  

  • The selectors are a well protected lot.
    They are wholly responsible (in that they are the ones voting) for selecting the squad, but they do not have to face the music; no, that is for the captain and coach.
    They do not (to my knowledge) submit any reasoning or validation for the players that they choose...the criteria by which they select the players is not known (apart from the zonal system).

    The captain and coach have every right to have a VOTE in the team selection. Their heads are on the block.
    As Prem has pointed out here, they would not be deciding the team by themselves, they would merely be having a say.

    By Blogger Dhruv Deepak, at 18:22  

  • On the issue of Selectors,I have this question on the selection of the Karnataka A team to tour Australia.One name that kind of hits u hard is that of Udit Patel.The entire season,he has done nothing noticeable. In fact, the first few matches,he bowled some 70 odd overs and went wicketless. And he has been selected bcos...he is Brijesh Patel's son.All cricketing fraternity in Karnataka and Bangalore know that Brijesh is pushing his son thru' only bcos of his clout and not on performance...
    Mr Brijesh Patel....If only you read this,please respond...We do not want other potentially good cricketers to lose out on opportunities. We have one Dharmichand case to prove that

    By Blogger Ravi, at 00:58  

  • On the issue of Selectors,I have this question on the selection of the Karnataka A team to tour Australia.One name that kind of hits u hard is that of Udit Patel.The entire season,he has done nothing noticeable. In fact, the first few matches,he bowled some 70 odd overs and went wicketless. And he has been selected bcos...he is Brijesh Patel's son.All cricketing fraternity in Karnataka and Bangalore know that Brijesh is pushing his son thru' only bcos of his clout and not on performance...
    Mr Brijesh Patel....If only you read this,please respond...We do not want other potentially good cricketers to lose out on opportunities. We have one Dharmichand case to prove that

    By Blogger Ravi, at 01:02  

  • I think when we talk abt selection as an issue i am very sure when John was saying abt having a greater say in selection,he was talking of a specific issue.Primarily i would like to bring in a question of Parthiv Patel.Parthiv was struggling for quite some time,before he was dropped.The question was why wasnt he dropped?Also in the case of Mr Yuvraj Singh ,who incidentally to me is one of the most undedicated cricketers india has ever produced.Such talent,and all wasted.When the coach feels that a player is not working hard enough he shld have the power to get him dropped.As far as selction is concerned i think that the selection panel shld have a specific period and they shld be ANSWERABLE to players.England does it regularly where Chris Read was informed personally why he was dropped from the oneday squad by Chairman of selectors.This would let them know their shortcomings and also what the team expects form them.What say PREM?How bat starting a discussion on this !!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 03:10  

Post a Comment

<< Home