NEWS
GROUNDS
COLUMNS
MATCH REPORTS
INTERVIEWS
ENEMY CAMP
GALLERY
SCHEDULE
FORUM

Analyse this

Captaincy anyone? Presenting point of view number one million on the second most favourite topic in India. (The first being, will India lose in Australia. And everyone knows the answer to that one. Right, Mr. Lele?) Why yet another point of view? Why not? Everyone and his wife has a point of view on it. So why not me? Ok, let's try that again. Why yet another point of view?

Well, because cricket is no longer just a game. Because cricket is our chai, breakfast, lunch, tiffin and dinner. Because when a team wears the India colours, they also happen to be wearing a zillion expectations. And since the captain of India is virtually answerable to every one of these zillion expectant supporters, he has to be an extraordinary man. With extraordinary skills. Skills that will help him mould a bunch of very talented and very mentally impoverished sportsmen. Sportsmen who keep forgetting how important the 'India cap' is. Who don't seem to realise how tough the game at the top has become. Who don't seem to have the hunger to play the game with the continuously high intensity levels that this hunger demands. And who, preposterously enough, seem only mildly disappointed at being consistent under-achievers!

We've seen how helpful conditions, natural ability and home-cooked food make this team nearly invincible. But put this same 'seemingly invincible' team in tough conditions. Ask them to fight their way out of trouble. Use their heads to will out the opposition. Grind the enemy to the ground. Win a war. Play like their life depended on it. They won't. They can. But they won't. And why should they. Cricket can't be that important. It would be unreal, unreasonable and abnormal. Especially for us academically oriented Indians. But…it is that important. And it's the captain's job to make the rest of the team realise it. It's his job to drum it into their heads everyday, five times a day. Maybe more. Or else, we'll always be what we are today: easy meat, breakfast, lunch, dinner and desert for the ugly Australians and the rest of the world.

And since we're on Australia, let's just dwell for a minute or two, on the mental make-up of a typical Australian cricketer. For the Australian, the opposition team is the enemy. An enemy they attack from multiple fronts. They mess with the batsmen's minds. Target the captain. Terrorise the new ball batters. Make the warm up games just that bit inconvenient. (By scheduling them on dead Hobart pitches when the Test match to follow is on a pitch that's anything but slow. Some warm-up game!) The Australians have a unique kind of hunger to crush the opposition. It comes naturally to them. It's in their blood. They know what they want. They know how to get it. And it's got a lot to do with 'convicts' written in their genes. (And I promise you I don't mean to be offensive in any way whatsoever. It's a fact of nature that has no judgmental value attached.)

We, on the other hand, are a peaceful people. We believe in live and let live. Aggression is not in our blood. Take, for instance, Srinath. He is from Dravidian stock - it is pertinent to note here that history will tell you that we Indians have been more 'the oppressed' than 'the oppressors'. A race, that's more passive than active. There is a tendency among us Indians to let things happen to us. Rather than make things happen…anyway, back to Srinath. As I was saying, Srinath is from Dravidian stock. He is predominantly a vegetarian. And he is polite and soft-spoken on the field! (His latest interview is proof of his attitude towards his cricket.) An attitude very, very different from say, Glenn McGrath. Not surprisingly McGrath performs just that bit better. Especially, when the occasion calls for it. For example, McGrath would never have let his form dip during something as important as the World Cup. (Remember that crucial match against India? Also, remember how Srinath and Agarkar floundered in the crucial opener against the South Africans? Despite having 250 odd to bowl at.)

It's all in the mind. And it's something we Indians don't seem to be naturally endowed with. Confrontation is not our middle name. The gene that we come from doesn't have aggression written on it in ALL CAPS. Genetically, the more docile part of us tends to dominate most of the time. Naturally, we don't aim to destroy. We forget to get angry when the India blue gets beaten black and blue. We forget that it is our 'merawalablue!' Not surprisingly, we almost always lose the big ones. The ones that demand that we fall back on intangibles like grit, gumption, resilience, anger….nope. That's not us. No gumption please! We're Indians.

Enter the captain. He has to make the mental makeover happen. Make the team slip into a different garb on the field. (Something a lot less cushy and comfortable than what the last decade has seen our teams sink into.) Make them think more about what they are doing. Get inside the heads of the opposition. And analyse their way out of tight situations. For which, the captain needs to be a little less intensely focussed. He needs to have more that incredible individual ability. And he need not be the best player in the side. The fact of the matter is that the best batsman in the side isn't necessarily the best man for the job of captain.

A captain must, in my view, quite overtly relish the role of captain. Sure, he doesn't have to be animated to look in charge. (Far from it.) But he must look relaxed. Even a little happy. (Maybe in a controlled sort of way!) He must love the extra pressure. He must convey a brand of dignified intimidation on the field. It also helps if his style is infectious. 'It' should talk to his team-mates. Make them want to make things happen. Make them restless when things start to drift. Make them not feel queasy about being aggressive. Also, his team-mates must not be in awe of him. A team in awe of its captain will find it hard to accept advice dished out by him. More likely, they might consider his expectations a bit impossible to achieve. (Probably even silently mutter to themselves, "man his standards are a bit unrealistic. Let's be a little more conservative in our minds.")

So, in the light of all that I have said, is Sachin the 'rightest' man for the job? Does his unquestionable genius make him unsuitable in some way? Why has he been just that bit disappointing as captain? Are we expecting too much from the man? Are we compromising an incredibly great batting career and settling for a great batting career plus a moderate captain? I know, we really want Sachin to succeed but you've got to admit, his handling of the job has been…well, a touch uninspiring. Which is why I think we need to look a bit closer at Sachin the captain and batsman. And Sachin the master batsman. Very, very objectively.

Admittedly, his batting record as captain does not compare that badly with his record as just batsman. What's significant though, is the way he has made his runs as captain. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out how much pressure Sachin is under. It's evident to everyone that the man-boy from Bombay has too much to deal with. And the horror of it all is that the crease lines are showing in his mental approach towards his batting. His knocks as captain haven't been as authoritative as his knocks otherwise. (Understatement of the millennium!) That vital element of aggression seems to have given way to caution. Which then becomes self-imposed pressure. (The worst kind.) Which gets transmitted to the rest of the team. Which wonders to itself - "hey, if Sachin's under so much pressure and is having such a hard time…well !"

We need a Sachin at his best. A Sachin in full flow, gees up the rest of the team. (Remember Sharjah, vs the Aussies). The batsmen feel better. The strokes flow. (Both, from Sachin's blade and the rest of the batsmen's.) The bowlers have more to bowl at. They bowl more aggressively. They get more wickets. The fielders start enjoying things just that bit extra. The team's confidence comes back. Things begin to happen. India wins more often. The captain looks good. And a zillion and 16 (or is it 17?) people are happy. It's the good old multiplier effect. We need Sachin. Not as a captain-cum-batsman-under-intense-pressure, but as the batsman in full flow, out to destroy. (Something that's not happening often enough as captain.)

The problem with Sachin is that he gets ultra-intense as captain. He puts too much pressure on himself.

And it's got everything to do with the kind of person Sachin is. He wants to succeed in everything. And he wants it very badly. So badly, that the additional burden of captaincy is adversely affecting the way he's thinking about his batting. (He's thinking too much. And all it seems to be resulting in is more pressure.) It's something the team can ill afford. It's bad enough that Sachin's got a bad back. The last thing we need, is him dying of intensity. Ok, bad joke. But sad and bad jokes apart, Sachin doesn't look like he's enjoying the part. And my take on the captaincy has a lot to do with enjoyment.

The man at the top must look the job. He must look like he can't get enough of it. He must look hungry for the job. More often than not, Tendulkar looks like he's had enough of it. (We know he uses a heavy bat but one look at his batting as captain, and you begin to wonder how much heavier that bat has become?) Give him a break guys. It's bad enough having to walk out and be expected to perform like Tendulkar all the time. Let him do it without the burden of captaincy. He's a natural patriot. And that, combined with him batting at his best, will win many, many matches for India. (Many, many more than him as captain.) Give the captaincy to someone who loves leading. Somebody who has seen the worst of times. Somebody who knows the meaning of being written off. Somebody who knows what it is to have to fight one's way back. Against all odds. And no, his name doesn't start with 'A'. (Mr. A can't get a place on the Test side. Not Azhar! Ajay Jadeja. Only the 'mostest' of optimists will give Azhar a place in the 16, err…17, er…18. Let alone another shot at the captaincy.) Give it to the prince of Calcutta, the maharajha, dada, the Bengal tiger, the man who was so pathetic the first time he played for India (1991). The man who struggled for four very long years before shutting people up with a grand century on debut. (The second time he made it to the Indian team 1995). Give it to Ganguly. (Stay with me and I'll tell you why.)

We all know why not Jadeja. So I won't get into it. Suffice to say, a captain can't be captain if he can't find a place in the side. And Jadeja's Test match technique makes him a sure non-starter. Anyway, why settle for a Jadeja when you have a man who enjoys the job just as much. A man who's tactically just as sound. And a man who's pretty much streets ahead of Jadeja when it comes to ability in both forms of the game. End of the Jadeja story.

In that case, why not Dravid or Kumble? Because Kumble lacks the edge. He may be aggressive, committed and a great bowler. But there's one weakness in Kumble few notice. He doesn't possess the ability to consistently turn it on when the pressure is on. (Which it is almost every time we tour.) Which is why he is what he is: a class act. And Warne is what Warne is: a class act and a gem of a 'big match' player. End of Kumble.

Dravid on the other hand, is very similar to Tendulkar. Intense, intensely focussed, loves batting, always looking to improve, thinks very deeply about his game and gets into a batting rut when under pressure. Admittedly, his abilities as a batsman and thinker would seem to make him the ideal candidate for the job. But there's every likelihood of him becoming a captain very similar to Tendulkar. One who hates criticism, is a little more defensive than attacking and a little too intense for his own good. (And for the team.) Most of all, thanks to the enormous pressures that come with the job, his batting as captain, is sure to become more defensive. (Not a sight cricket fans around the world want to see.)

Ok, now that I've told you why some of the front-runners for the job are not front-runners for the job, let me tell you why Ganguly is. For one, he seems to really love the job. He performs better when he's captain. He has as good a cricketing brain as any. He has seen some very tough times. (Which have made him very hungry for success.) He has shown that he has the ability to build in new things into his game. (For example, his second coming and his improved leg-side play.) He has also shown that he possesses the mind to come up with innovative tactics. Significantly, his confidence levels as a player, and as an individual, seem to soar when he's leading the side. In short, he looks the part. And it is my gut feel that he will be one of the few captains whose performance will not suffer once he takes over the job. I'm also pretty convinced that Ganguly as captain will do both, Sachin and Ganguly, a world of good. (Put simply, it's the trials and tribulations during his early days, the snide remarks directed at him by all and sundry and the related pressures Ganguly must have had to deal with that convince me he's the man for the job.)

Not for a minute am I suggesting that Sachin is not tough enough for the job. He's tougher than anything India has seen. But me thinks his failure as captain and relative failure as captain-batsman has a lot to do with him rarely having tasted failure. There's just that something about that highly expressive face that says "I'm not enjoying this. I just want to do what I'm best at: batting." And it's this something that makes Sachin a wee bit diffident in his approach as captain. A little wary of losing. A touch incapable of making things happen for the team. And it is this inability to achieve the high standards he must most certainly be setting for himself and the team that is damaging Sachin the batsman. And unfortunately, his amazing talents as a cricketer are what make most people forget that Sachin is not doing a very good job as captain.

Sure, you can say the team is not rallying around him. We saw it happening during his first stint as captain. When we had some of our worst scores. (66 in SA, 80 odd in WI, the second innings collapse against the rookie Klusener in Calcutta and now a 38-over collapse in Australia.) His stint as captain has also seen his team being unable to go in for the kill. (WI in WI., SA in SA.) What's worse is that he's beginning to explain away defeats in pretty much the same manner Azhar used to. Without realising that a captain who let's the same mistakes be repeated is not doing justice to the job and the 'merawalablue'.

The best captains get their teams to analyse the reasons for a loss very closely. They have to ensure that people don't commit the same mistakes again. That the basics are not thrown out of the window every time the team is having a bad day. They have to get the team to perform when the chips are down. That's the captain's job. For too long have our overseas tours been 'learning exercises for the youngsters in the team'. Close to 15 years without an overseas series win obviously means nobody is learning anything. This cannot go on. And the captain must take responsibility.

In many ways, Sachin is like Viv Richards: a great batsman, a great cricketer, a proven match-winner but not a great captain. But fortunately for Viv, his team had at least three other proven match-winners. (Let me put it this way, Richards's team was almost unbeatable even on a bad day!) As a result, Richards's limitations as a leader of men rarely stood exposed. But Sachin and India don't have the fearsome bowlers to scare the opposition out. Nor a Greenidge and a Haynes to deal with the McGraths of the world. Which is why it becomes doubly important for the team to have a man at the helm who can consistently bring out the best from every team member.

Historically, India has never really had a great captain. And it has everything to do with the way we choose them. The way our selectors see the function of captaincy. For some strange reason, our selectors still think the best player in the side is the best candidate for the captaincy. (Little do they realise how much the game has changed) Someone should tell them that cricket today is played as much in the mind as on the playing field. And just because somebody is the master on the playing field doesn't mean he'll be just as good a leader of men. And yet, they consistently choose the biggest star in the side to be captain. Irrespective of whether he possesses the aptitude or not for the job. No wonder, we keep calling for the captain's head. We anyway don't seem to place much of a premium on what's inside it. Of course, it's only instinct that tells me Ganguly will be more successful than Sachin. But then, instinct and captaincy do go hand in hand. Is somebody in the BCCI listening? My instinct says no.

The views expressed here are by a cricket fan who has captained Indian teams since the seventies. (Just the way all young Indian cricket fans have dreamt of being Gavaskar, Tendulkar and Kapil Dev.)

Guest Columns