hrgcricstats.com

N Srinivasan and Niranjan Shah will have to explain to the Supreme Court of India their roles in stalling the implementation of the Lodha Committee recommendations. The pair of former BCCI office bearers were singled out by the Committee of Administrators (CoA) in a scathing appraisal of the progress – or lack of – made by the BCCI in implementing the recommendations.

The court will hear the matter on July 24, two days before the next BCCI SGM to discuss the recommendations.

At Friday’s hearing, Justice Dipak Misra observed that “if a person is disqualified to be an office bearer, he cannot be nominated by office bearers”.

Misra’s statement is significant because Srinivasan and Shah, despite being disqualified as office bearers on grounds that they are over 70 years old and having exceeded the tenure cap, had attended BCCI meetings as representatives or nominees of their respective state associations – Tamil Nadu and Saurashtra. And according to the CoA’s latest status report, Srinivasan and Shah have prevented other BCCI members from reaching a consensus on implementing the Lodha Committee’s recommendations.

Anurag Thakur in the clear
Anurag Thakur, the former BCCI president, was cleared of perjury charges for a letter he had written to the ICC asking it to intervene, saying the Lodha Committee reforms amounted to government interference in the board. A day before Friday’s hearing he filed an affidavit, apologising unconditionally.

Over the last month, a special committee was formed by the BCCI to shortlist the most significant problems the board had with those recommendations in order to put them before the court for reconsideration.

However, according to amicus curiae Gopal Subramanium, when the wider BCCI body held special general meetings to discuss and ratify the shortlisted recommendations, the meetings were “hijacked” by Srinivasan and Shah.

“Till now, most recommendations were by and large accepted,” Subramanium said, but Srinivasan and Shah kept repeating “nothing can be implemented”.

Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of Srinivasan and other state associations, responded on behalf of his client, “I am a member of TNCA. Nobody can take my membership away.” The states have argued that the disqualified office bearers – such as Srinivasan and Shah – are not attending the meetings as office bearers but as representatives, and that the Lodha Committee’s eligibility criteria did not apply to representatives.

In the status report submitted to the court on July 12, the CoA said disqualified office bearers were “impediments” to the implementation of recommendations.

The BCCI secretary Amitabh Choudhary, in an affidavit filed in the court on Tuesday, said that five state associations – Tamil Nadu, Saurashtra, Karnataka, Kerala and Goa – had objected to the implementation of the recommendations at the SGM on June 26. Choudhary noted the efforts of the CoA, which had met the state associations twice and “stressed” that it could work with the BCCI in “canvassing the impracticality or difficulties that may arise in implementation of some clauses” of the recommendations.

Choudhary said that in addition to the three shortlisted recommendations, the special committee wanted restrictions waived for representatives of states attending board meetings, and members who sit on different committees. “The house also felt there should not be any disqualifications in terms of age, tenure or cooling off for representatives, nominees of the associations and the BCCI and the members of the BCCI committee.”

The court did not hear the other requests in the CoA’s status report, which will be heard on July 24. The court accepted the resignations of CoA members Vikram Limaye and Ramachandra Guha, and Subramanium submitted six names as possible replacements. Sibal argued that his clients should also be allowed to suggest names; the court granted him the request and decided to hear the matter on July 24.

The lawyer for Railways argued that they had been relegated to Associate status under the one-state-one-vote policy, and despite being regular contributors to Indian cricket, they were not invited to these meetings to decide their fate. They requested a “recall” of that specific part of the order. Subramanium argued this issue had been discussed at length previously, but the court agreed to hear the matter on September 5.

Sidharth Monga is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. Nagraj Gollapudi is a senior assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. Article courtesy – espncricinfo.com

The Committee of Administrators has turned up the heat on the BCCI’s old guard, asking the Supreme Court to take note of the “disruptive and subversive conduct” of disqualified office bearers who were preventing the board from implementing the Lodha Committee’s recommendations.

In its fourth status report which the court will consider on July 14, the COA, which was appointed by the Supreme Court to oversee the implementation of the Lodha Committee’s recommendations, named former BCCI office bearers N Srinivasan and Niranjan Shah as being particularly problematic to the process.

Srinivasan and Shah had become ineligible to continue in their roles as heads of the Tamil Nadu and Saurashtra Cricket Associations, and to attend BCCI meetings, after the court approved the Lodha report on July 18, 2016. They were disqualified because they were over the prescribed 70-year age cap and had exceeded the maximum tenure for office bearers.

Yet both Srinivasan and Shah have found ways to stay involved in administration and attend important BCCI meetings, including the most recent special general meetings (SGM) of the board on May 7 and June 26. Those two SGMs had been convened for the BCCI’s members – the state associations – to approve the new constitution, as per the Lodha Committee’s recommendations.

The CoA said the SGM on June 26 was “manifestly disruptive”. In its report, the CoA told the court that it had managed to convince the majority of the state associations to adopt the recommendations but the SGM was “hijacked” by the disqualified former office bearers.

“From an audio recording of the SGM, it appears that such disqualified persons were able to effectively hijack proceedings at the SGM by prevailing upon other attendees (who may have been otherwise willing to facilitate the reform process) to either support the cause of such disqualified person or remain silent,” the COA said.

Srinivasan and Shah, and other disqualified administrators, had attended the meetings as a representative or nominee of their state association. In their defence, the TNCA and SCA said the Lodha Committee’s eligibility norms were for office bearers and not representatives. The CoA countered in its report that the “true intention” of the court’s order had been violated on a technicality.

“In this manner, such disqualified persons are effectively able to do indirectly what they have been prohibited by this Hon’ble Court from doing directly,” the CoA said. “Such disqualified persons have a vested interest in stalling implementation of the Judgement because, if the Judgment is implemented, such disqualified person will have to relinquish control over their respective State/Member Associations.”

The COA also noted that though the three existing BCCI office bearers – CK Khanna (acting president), Amitabh Choudhary (secretary), and Anirudh Chaudhry (treasurer) – had given written consent to the Supreme Court, only Choudhary urged the members to take “concrete steps” to implement the reforms at the SGM on June 26. Chaudhry, the COA said, was a “mute spectator, lacking the courage and conviction” to support the implementation of the Lodha Committee’s recommendations.

The BCCI’s recent decision to form a special committee to shortlist “critical points” from the Lodha recommendations that it wanted the Supreme Court to reconsider, was also criticised by the CoA. Such a committee, the COA said in its report, was formed almost a year after the order was delivered last year, clearly indicative of the resistance to the reforms. The COA requested the court to “remove the impediments to implementation” of the Lodha Committee’s recommendations.

Nagraj Gollapudi is a senior assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo – Article courtesry – espncricinfo.com

The biggest names in Caribbean cricket could be about to return to the West Indies team after significant progress was made in negotiations between players and the board.

Not only has a resolution been agreed to the Darren Bravo impasse, but the likes of Kieron Pollard, Sunil Narine, Dwayne Bravo and Chris Gayle are also available for selection for the ODI side after an amnesty was proposed by WIPA, the players’ union.

Dave Cameron statement
“In early November 2016, I gave an interview to SportsMax TV during which I discussed player retainer contracts and the grades of contract that had been awarded to certain players. In the course of the interview I stated that Darren Bravo had previously been on an ‘A’ contract, which I have since been advised is not correct. I apologise for the misstatement, and wish to assure Mr. Bravo that there was no insult or offense intended towards him. Darren is a senior cricketer who has been a valuable part of the WINDIES set up for a long time, and I would hope to see his game continue to progress and mature, at both regional and international level.”

That means they could be available for the limited-overs section of the tour to England that starts in a few weeks.

Gayle, who marked his international return after 15 months during the one-off Twenty20 International against India in Kingston last week, said during an event in Bengaluru on Thursday that “things have been steadily improving” and playing the 2019 World Cup, for which West Indies may have to qualify, is still a burning desire.

“The fans were happy to see me back on the field representing West Indies. Hopefully, things can get better. Hopefully I can play a few more games. I definitely want to play the 2019 World Cup,” Gayle said. “Things are beginning to open up a little more now between players and the board. It’s looking good, and we’ve to try and build from this to get the best players out on the field.”

The key to the resolution has been Cricket West Indies abandoning its contentious policy regarding player availability for regional cricket. Whereas, in recent years, CWI policy dictated that players would only be eligible for West Indies selection if they had played in the corresponding format in regional cricket, the board is now in the process of softening that hardline stance.

It is anticipated it will be formally relaxed when the new round of central contracts are introduced in October, with a new range of white-ball contracts also adding to the players’ security and flexibility.

Both Jimmy Adams, Director Of Cricket, and Johnny Grave, CWI CEO, have previously intimated their desire to change the policy, with Adams labelling it “unsustainable”.

In the meantime, though, an amnesty has been proposed to those who have not been involved in regional cricket, giving them the chance to represent West Indies again. The likes of Marlon Samuels, Lendl Simmons, Darren Sammy and, once his WADA ban is served, Andre Russell could be other beneficiaries.

While the amnesty has yet to be ratified by the board of CWI, ESPNcricinfo understands a conference call will take place before the end of the week where it is hoped the proposal will be accepted.

Darren Bravo statement
“On 11 November 2016, after viewing statements made about me by Mr. Dave Cameron, president of Cricket West Indies, on a television sports programme, I tweeted a response which referred to the president which was, in retrospect, inappropriate. As I have always tried to uphold the best traditions of West Indies cricket and its players, I now therefore wish to withdraw the comment made on my Twitter account and apologise to the president of CWI and to all WINDIES fans.”

Darren Bravo, who has been suspended since November 2016 when he was sent home from the tour of Zimbabwe following his Twitter condemnation of board president, Dave Cameron, is also set to return.

Both parties have released statements of apology* and Bravo’s tweet will be deleted with no admission of liability and without prejudice to the pursuit of any claim for damages. That will not only allow Bravo to take a full part in the forthcoming CPL season but render him eligible for West Indies selection once more. Having not played much red ball cricket of late, he is not thought to be a realistic candidate for the Test tour of England. He could well feature in the ODI team, though.

That method of solution had been suggested as far back as February. But Bravo instead pursued legal action against the board, claiming lost earnings. It seems that action is on-going despite the apparent thawing in relations, though it is understood no damages have been paid to date.

A similar resolution is expected imminently in the case of Nicholas Pooran. The 21-year-old wicketkeeper batsman made his West Indies debut last September in the three-match T20 series against Pakistan in the UAE after excelling with Barbados Tridents in the 2016 Caribbean Premier League, but he has not appeared in domestic cricket since last year’s CPL. Pooran was drafted first overall by Leeward Islands in the 2016 Professional Cricket League draft, but had his Leewards contract canceled for both the four-day and 50-over squads when he took up an offer to play for Khulna Titans in the 2016 Bangladesh Premier League.

Pooran subsequently appeared for Islamabad United in the Pakistan Super League, City Kaitak in the Hong Kong T20 Blitz and was part of the Mumbai Indians squad at this year’s IPL. He played for a WICB President’s XI that took on Afghanistan in a T20 tour match on May 30 in St Kitts and also retained his place with Barbados Tridents in the 2017 CPL for $70,000, which places him in the top 10 highest paid West Indians in the tournament. However, Pooran’s exile from four-day and 50-over domestic competitions seemed set to continue when he went unclaimed in the 2017 PCL draft that took place on July 7 in Jamaica, which would have precluded him from eligibility for West Indies selection in ODIs and Tests under the hardline selection policy.

It all amounts to encouraging news for long-suffering West Indies supporters. With the side having slipped to 9th in the ODI rankings (they are 8th in the Test rankings and 5th in T20), it is almost impossible for them to qualify automatically for the 2019 World Cup ahead of the ODI rankings qualification cut-off date in September.

The availability of some familiar faces is a significant step in the right direction.

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo – Article courtesy – espncricinfo.com

 

Ravi Shastri is one of the front runners to take over as head coach of the Indian cricket team, after he threw in his hat for the role following the resignation of Anil Kumble

With Ravi Shastri throwing in the hat now for the job of India coach, one can’t help but question whether the brouhaha last year over his application and its subsequent rejection was really worth it.

The Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC), led by Sourav Ganguly, had taken exception to the fact that he had not appeared for the interview in person, holidaying as he was in Thailand, and appointed Anil Kumble to take his place.

There is little doubt that Shastri gelled better with skipper Virat Kohli than the more workmanlike Kumble.

Fielding coach R Sridhar, who has worked for three years and has been part of the team with both Shastri and Kumble, spells out the difference.

“Shastri was somebody who was character-based. He wanted characters in the team, so he worked on that kind of approach,” says Sridhar. “He wanted to take that approach to the field. Kumble was someone who wanted to achieve excellence in his own way.”

“They were two different people, they cannot be the same,” added Sridhar.

But what he hints at, even though careful in not saying it in as many words, was the fact that Kumble should have followed Kohli’s pack more than the other way around.

“What is important in today’s cricket as a leader is to follow the energies within the group. It is important to be receptive. You have to yield to the demands of the group and you have to make sure that each guy is in the best possible space,” says Sridhar.

That probably means a different, less fatherly approach — at best, an inspirational speech in the morning that Shastri can deliver quite effectively in his stentorian accent to charge up the boys. But nothing more, as captain Kohli needs to be the all-round boss.

Kohli and his boys fancy themselves having enough experience to take charge of everything and need a helping hand from the coach and plenty of trust, something Kumble failed to earn, it seems.

“The current Indian team has some great experience. So we should allow that experience to take over and be inclusive and take the best possible decisions for the team. What is important to be a good leader is to be a good follower,” says Sridhar.

The last line probably says it all. To lead Kohli, you have to let him do his own things. That is what probably makes Shastri the hottest contender.

The transition shouldn’t be that big an issue. Sridhar feels the team is well-equipped for that.

“Look, they are a professional outfit and they go about their business. Each guy is quite busy and taken up in his own preparations for each match. They know what to do and whom to speak to, and what to get out of the coaches. They are the best judges as how they need to prepare,” adds Sridhar.

Article and photo courtesy – The  Hindustan Times

Pakistan soundly beat India in the Champions Trophy final, and it has been interesting, to say the least, to witness the aftermath.

Firstly, the Indian coach, Anil Kumble, resigned. Then the Pakistan players – not surprisingly – were welcomed home as heroes. This was followed by an ICC announcement that Afghanistan and Ireland have been added to the list of Test-playing nations, increasing the number to 12.

Kumble’s resignation was no great surprise, as he’s a strong-minded individual and the deteriorating relationship between him and the captain, Virat Kohli, had reached the stage of being a distraction. Kumble’s character is relevant to any discussion about India’s future coaching appointments. The captain is the only person who can run an international cricket team properly, because so much of the job involves on-field decision making. Also, a good part of the leadership role – performed off the field – has to be handled by the captain, as it helps him earn the players’ respect, which is crucial to his success.

Consequently a captain has to be a strong-minded individual and decisive in his thought process. To put someone of a similar mindset in a position where he’s advising the captain is inviting confrontation.

The captain’s best advisors are his vice-captain, a clear-thinking wicketkeeper, and one or two senior players. They are out on the field and can best judge the mood of the game and what advice should be offered to the captain and when.

The best off-field assistance for a captain will come from a good managerial type. Someone who can attend to duties that are not necessarily related to winning or losing cricket matches, but done efficiently, can contribute to the success of the team.

The last thing a captain needs is to come off the field and have someone second-guess his decisions. He also doesn’t need a strong-minded individual (outside his advisory group) getting too involved in the pre-match tactical planning. Too often I see captaincy that appears to be the result of the previous evening’s planning, and despite ample evidence that it’s hindering the team’s chances of victory, it remains the plan throughout the day.

Too often I see captaincy that appears to be the result of the previous evening’s planning, and despite ample evidence that it’s hindering the team’s chances of victory, it remains the plan throughout the day

This is generally a sure sign that the captain is following someone else’s plan and that he, the captain, is the wrong man for the job.

India is fortunate to have two capable leaders in Kohli and the man who stood in for him during the Test series with Australia, Ajinkya Rahane.

It’s Kohli’s job as captain to concentrate on things that help win or lose cricket matches, and his off-field assistants’ task is to ensure he is not distracted in trying to achieve victory.

India’s opponents in the final, Pakistan, were unusually free of any controversies during the tournament. They were capably led by Sarfraz Ahmed, who appeared to become more and more his own man as the tournament progressed.

Watching Pakistan’s success unfold from Islamabad, it was obvious how much the team’s success meant to the fans. While the ICC deliberated on increasing the number of Test-playing nations, it’s good to see some consideration was given to Pakistan’s plight; they have not played matches at home for close to a decade now.

It was the right time for the ICC to implement a plan to resume matches in Pakistan and to commence with small steps. In light of the recent instability around the world, it was reasonable to ask: “Is Pakistan the only region that is unsafe for hosting cricket matches?” On the evidence I saw, and from what I was told by people in a position to know the situation, Pakistan’s security is much improved from the recent past.

Adding Afghanistan – incidentally, a more dangerous country than Pakistan – and Ireland to the roster does seem a little premature. The last thing thing Test cricket needs is more uncompetitive matches. Surely the priority is to ensure Pakistan and West Indies, two great contributors to the rich history of the game, are both playing Test cricket to their full potential before expanding the number of teams.

Former Australia captain Ian Chappell is a cricket commentator for Channel Nine, and a columnist – Article Courtesy – espncricinfo.com

The Cricket Committee’s proposals for rule changes include giving umpires the power to send off players for the most serious incidents of player misconduct, including violence. All members agreed to implement this in full. All other offences would continue to be dealt with under the ICC Code of Conduct.

From October 1, umpires will now be vested with the power to send players off the field for serious incidents of misconduct.

The International Cricket Council has decided that teams will no longer lose a review under the Decision Review System (DRS) if a leg before referral returns as ‘Umpires Call’, part of a slew of changes recommended by its Cricket Committee.

The ICC Chief Executives Committee approved the recommendations made by the panel headed by India’s Anil Kumble at its annual conference held in London this week.

The decisions include the use of DRS in all T20 Internationals. With the tweak in the DRS rule on umpires call, the current rule allowing the top-up of reviews after 80 overs in Tests has been removed.

The minimum standards for DRS use would include the mandatory use of accredited ball tracking and edge detection technology.

The Cricket Committee’s proposals for rule changes include giving umpires the power to send off players for the most serious incidents of player misconduct, including violence. All members agreed to implement this in full. All other offences would continue to be dealt with under the ICC Code of Conduct.

Other major changes to the laws are restriction on bat dimensions (thickness of edges and depth of bat), and that a batsman will have made his or her ground when a bat bounces after being grounded behind the crease by a running or diving batsman. Currently the batsman will be ruled out if the bat is not grounded when the stumps are disturbed.

The new playing conditions will come into effect from October 1.

Article Courtesy – The Hindustan Times

It has been learnt that there were disagreements between India captain Virat Kohli and the-then head coach Anil Kumble over the selections of Karun Nair and Kuldeep Yadav during the India-Australia Test series

The Indian team took the field in the first One-day International against West Indies here on Friday, for the first time without Anil Kumble in the coach’s seat. Skipper Virat Kohli oversaw everything in the lead-up to the match, including explaining the team sheet to the match official even as he directed one of the team members through some routine.

In modern day cricket, the captain’s job has been made a lot easier with a retinue of staff taking care of little, less important details.

It seems, however, that Kohli wants to lead the team from the front, in his own way, and doesn’t mind the stress that come along with taking on extra responsibility. Speaking to the media on Thursday, Kohli said he is ready for some grey hair while handling the Indian team’s responsibilities.

Selection, remuneration issues

On Thursday, the India captain had expressed his disappointment with the way Kumble had made the rift known through social media, catching the team unawares with his outburst even as it was gearing up for the tour of the Caribbean.

As per sources, there were a variety of factors that led to differences emerging between them. For long, the Indian captain says he had kept a lid on that.

However, it has now emerged there were a variety of issues, including differences over players’ selection and remuneration. In fact, it has been learnt that Kohli had been left unhappy over Kumble reportedly not keeping his word and backtracking over issues involving players.

Asking for too much

One of issues was that Kumble had been demanding as much money as a Grade A player’s total remuneration, which came to about Rs. 9.5 crore. Although there had been reports that the coach wanted Rs. 7.5 crore, a 1 crore increment over the Rs.6.5 crore he was already getting, it has been learnt that he had increased the demand and that didn’t go down well with Kohli.

That apart, there were issues over selection of players. Chinaman bowler Kuldeep Yadav, who made his Test debut in Dharamsala against Australia, was the bone of contention and it has been learnt that Kohli had been pushing for his name even as coach Kumble was objecting to his inclusion. Kumble, it is learnt, had been pushing for Karun Nair, who was struggling against Australia, and that reportedly didn’t go down well with the India captain.

Kuldeep’s inclusion at the expense of the experienced Ravindra Jadeja in Friday’s first ODI at the Queen’s Park Oval game lends credence to the theory that he had Kohli’s backing.

Kumble reportedly was one of the players who had forced the departure of Kapil Dev as team coach in the late 1990s.

Both Kumble and Kohli are or have been involved with player management companies leading to issues of conflict of interest.

Article courtesy – The Hindustan Times

 

Relaxing at their hotel’s waterfront foyer, India’s tour party to the West Indies is still coming to terms with the sudden resignation of their head coach Anil Kumble. It is learnt that the team, while leaving London on Tuesday morning, was unaware that Kumble wouldn’t be joining them in the Caribbean. It was only after they landed at St Lucia, their transit point en route to Trinidad, and switched on their phones that they got to know that Kumble had resigned.

“It came as a shock. The boys were dazed. There had been talk of him staying back in London to attend the ICC Cricket Committee meeting. We all thought he would join the team before the second ODI on June 25 at Port of Spain,” a source said.

It is also learnt that Kumble’s post-resignation Twitter statement — in which he said he was surprised to learn that captain Virat Kohli had reservations with his style — hasn’t gone down well with the team. “Virat had so many chances of talking about the dressing room rift during the Champions Trophy press conferences but he didn’t. He expected the same from Kumble. The team was disturbed to read those comments, that too on Twitter,” the source said.

He added, “What’s even more shocking was Kumble claiming that Tuesday was the first time he was informed about the problem. How can he claim to have been in the dark about this?” Breaking his silence for the first time since Kumble’s resignation, Kohli, speaking on the eve of India’s opening ODI match against West Indies, said, “Obviously, Anil bhai has expressed his views and he’s taken the decision to step out and we will respect that decision. We have created a culture over the last three-four years that whatever happens in the changing room, we’ve tried to maintain the sanctity of the changing room throughout.”

“What happens in the changing room is something that’s very sacred and private to all of us. And something that I would not express in detail in a public scenario,” Kohli added.

In a statement announcing his resignation, Kumble wrote: “I was informed for the first time yesterday by the BCCI that the Captain had reservations with my ‘style’ and about my continuing as the Head Coach. I was surprised since I had always respected the role boundaries between Captain and Coach. Though the BCCI attempted to resolve the misunderstandings between the Captain and me, it was apparent that the partnership was untenable, and I therefore believe it is best for me to move on.”

Interestingly, Kohli has deleted his year-old Twitter post, in which he had welcomed Kumble’s appointment as coach. The June 23, 2016 tweet — “Heartiest welcome to @anilkumble1074 Sir. Look forward to your tenure with us. Great things in store for Indian Cricket with you.” — is no longer on Kohli’s timeline. No member of the present Indian team has acknowledged Kumble’s resignation or commented on his tenure as coach on social media.

Even the hosts seemed a tad bemused by Kumble’s no-show, with a West Indies Cricket Board official insisting that they had been unaware till Wednesday whether they should retain the room booking for him or not.

“As far as we are concerned, Kumble was listed as India coach and we thought he would be showing up in Port of Spain at some point during this week,” the official said. Another official quipped how in the past, there were always fears of the BCCI sending second-string sides to face the West Indies and this time, they have sent a full-strength squad but one without a head coach.

Article Courtesy – The Indian Express

Sunil Gavaskar described the resignation of national cricket head coach Anil Kumble as a sad day for Indian cricket and patted him for doing a great job in his one-year stint.

“I have very little knowledge about the differences between Virat and Anil. But it is a really sad day for Indian cricket,” Gavaskar said. “India have won everything since the time Anil took over. I can’t see Anil doing much wrong in one year. Difference happen in any team but see at the results,” he said.

The legendary batsman also raised some pertinent questions regarding the future of coaches of the Indian cricket team.

“All that I am saying because of the next coach. So the next coach knows exactly where he stands. ‘If I do this, is this going to be overbearing. If I tell you to report to practice at 9.30, is it going to be overbearing. If I say to you that I want some extra nets from you, I want you to catch 50 more catches or if I want you to bowl 20 more deliveries in the nets, is it overbearing’. For the next coach’s sake it is important that these things are clarified,” said Gavaskar in an interview with NDTV.

Gavaskar also believes that Kohli should put forth his side of the story soon. “My advice to Virat would be to make a statement and make things clear. Kumble also needs to clarify who in the BCCI informed him about Virat’s unhappiness about him. A statement from Kohli will help clear the air, saying this is what I feel and my issue with Kumble.

“Let’s wait and see what exactly players found wrong in Anil Kumble. We need to also find out whether they found it overbearing and what exactly is overbearing. Let’s get a clarification also.”

Gavaskar also, in a rather sarcastic way, suggested the Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC) to not waste their time selecting a coach and leave that job for the players themselves. “It is because of the team and the captain not liking Anil Kumble’s methods we have come to this situation. Why not save all the trouble and ask them while they are in the West Indies, ‘Listen, you guys, who do want as coach. We have eight or ten applications or whatever applications… So who do you want as coach’ and that’s it. Simple.”

During his playing days, Kumble was known as a feisty fighter, even winning matches by bowling with a broken jaw, and Gavaskar wondered why he did not stand up this time. “Anil must have had his reasons (of resigning). I would have thought Anil would carry on. Once the CAC expressed their confidence in him, Anil should have stuck around. Hope he will take it on the chin and comes back stronger. But it is the first time a known fighter like Anil did not stand up,” said the former captain.

“I know that the CAC met Virat and had a very long session with him,” Gavaskar added. “Anil’s experience as a player and as an administrator needs to be utilised. CAC should be doing more for Indian cricket than just selecting the coach.”

He said India will have to appoint a coach before the team goes to Sri Lanka. “It is for the CAC to take a call on that.”

Article Courtesy – Daily News and Analysis

Dada plays with a straight bat.

Former India captain Sourav Ganguly on Friday said it was Anil Kumble’s personal decision to step down as head coach but refused to comment on the speculated rift with Virat Kohli.

“He has resigned at the last minute, it’s his personal decision. I don’t want to talk on this matter,” Ganguly, a member of the Cricket Advisory Committee (CAC) formed to recommend the coach, said at CAB on Friday. “I’m aware of everything that’s happening at the moment, I’ve even spoken with both Kohli and Kumble, but I believe things like these are confidential and shouldn’t be discussed in public.”

Kumble, in his parting statement, has said Kohli had reservations about his coaching ‘style’ and their partnership was untenable as he did not accompany the side in the ongoing tour to the West Indies.

Article Courtesy – Daily News and Analysis