Graham Ford named India's new coach

[Romeo]

Hope he has his armour ready.

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/current/story/297443.html

 

[Romeo]

Well Roebuck certainly doesn't seem to think he's the man for the job.

INDIA CRISIS •Sat, 9 Jun 2007

​

The candidates for the India job inspire little confidence, writes PETER ROEBUCK​

NONE of the candidates mentioned as contenders for the Indian coaching position has much appeal. Arjuna Ranatunga, Graeme Ford and John Emburey have been mentioned in dispatches. None of them has shown the strength to last this particular course. India had their chance last time and picked the wrong man, preferring playing reputation to a track record as a coach. Presumably those responsible for this blunder have been called to account. At least India now are casting their net wide and not relying on the pages of Wisden as their sole source of information.

A glorious batsman and a ceaseless, questing thinker about the game, Greg Chappell lacked the patience and judgment needed for the job. Among his earliest observations were that Virender Sehwag might emerge as a captain and Ajit Agarkar might mature into a lively allrounder. As Oscar Wilde said of second marriages, these remarks required a “triumph of hope over experience”. Not unreasonably, Chappell also wanted to reform the game across the country. No coach has the power or time needed to effect such widespread change. Moreover, reformers make more enemies than friends.

Not that Chappell was entirely to blame for the deterioration. Indeed he became a convenient target. Whenever the team lost, his name was splashed all over the papers. Confident of his ability to reverse the slow decline of a side reliant upon famous but fading performers, he courted the headlines. It was a mistake. India’s fate became his own. Chappell wanted everything and so ended with nothing. Not that a long occupation was ever likely. He was temperamentally better suited to a consultancy role.

Now the search resumes for a coach with the abundant qualities needed to inspire a revival in the national team. So far three possibilities have emerged, none of them compelling.

Ranatunga’s candidacy is a flight of fancy. He has many qualities, none of them relevant to his calibre as a coach. His inclusion in the list owes more to his anti-colonial posturing than his achievements as a coach. India as a country has its ranters and ravers. Some agitators living in countries independent for 50 years have made their names blaming outsiders whenever anything goes awry. Wily, lazy, ambitious and unproven, Ranatunga does not have the credentials for this posting. In any case it’s hard to imagine him accepting. As other retired champions could confirm, life as an observer is more enriching.

Nor is Ford quite the right man. Although he has impressed as a coach with South Africa, KwaZulu-Natal and Kent, and is widely respected, he lacks the warmth and wisdom needed in this position. His ideas are sound, but his blood runs a little cold, a trait that might not work in an emotional country. He understands technique and tactics but is inclined towards stubbornness. Appointing him would be like putting a square peg in a round hole.

Although likeable, John Emburey has stumbled as a coach. Acumen is missing from his repertoire and shrewdness is a poor substitute. Blessed with a tolerant disposition, he is better placed to serve as a second in command.

Players like him but after a few months start to ponder upon the precise nature of his contribution. Hitherto his county team have trod water and before long he has been obliged to seek another ship.

In short, a satisfactory answer has not yet been found to a difficult question. If more convincing contenders cannot be found, then India must examine their own backyard.

 

[notting18]

A non-Australian international cricket coach appointed?!

 

[Freo Big Fella]

What a hilariously poor list of candidates. Embruey probably had the most merit (he's done pretty well with Middlesex), Ford is a no-name and the fact that Fat Arjuna was even considered is ridiculous.

 

[usalion]

BBC reporting Ford is staying with Kent.

 

[Cooldude]

Apparently he's turned down the India job

Kudos to him, and haha to India

 

[Ice goddess]

A non-Australian international cricket coach appointed?!

Yeah they are pretty much all Aussies aren't they except from memory Roger Harper and a South African bloke coaches Ireland.

 

[Philhawk]

Lol, Indian Cricket is such a farce.

Don't know why I bother still being interested.

The complete cycle of failure/mediocrity will turn once more when once Emburey is appointed coach.

 

[Dipper]

It's funny isn't it that such a pernicious, talentless little c*** like Roebuck can without any hint of the irony, pass judgement in a not particularly pleasant manner on these people.


I don't profess to know much about Ford but isn't his record as coach of SA rather good?

 

[Grimwood]

Bugger.

I was hoping Kent might start playing more young English players with him gone.

 

[Romeo]

It's funny isn't it that such a pernicious, talentless little c*** like Roebuck can without any hint of the irony, pass judgement in a not particularly pleasant manner on these people.


I don't profess to know much about Ford but isn't his record as coach of SA rather good?

They won 9 out of 11 series with him at the helm.

 

[Romeo]

Emburey has apparently turned down the job as well. And apparently with Ford the Indians created a mix-up by announcing it in their papers that he was the new coach when he was only considering their offer to coach. I guess they think their position is so presitigious that nobody would refuse it.

 

[Cleavy]

Better start crawling back to Dav Whatmore.

 

[Ice goddess]

Better start crawling back to Dav Whatmore.

Why did they reject Dav?

 

[Vedder]

Oh he turned down the job?...smart fella

If he had taken the job tho i would of thought a more appropiate heading would of been 'Graham Ford named as India's new scapegoat"

 

[magoo]

Oh he turned down the job?...smart fella

If he had taken the job tho i would of thought a more appropiate heading would of been 'Graham Ford named as India's new scapegoat"

Surely you would have to recognise that wright did a good job as coach of india. he worked well with a difficult captain and seemed to get better performances out of most of his charges. over the period of ganguly and wright at the helm, india played some of its best cricket in perhaps two decades and this is with the least amount of internal politics as seems to be so prevalent in indian teams. the same simply can not be said of chappell. he got blaimed, as most coaches of professional teams do, because the team plays significantly below expectations. chapell did not get the team to perfom anywhere near capabilities and had lost his players. he had to go.

 

[Dipper]

Why did they reject Dav?

I read that senoir players including Dravid didn't want him.

Dunno why, maybe some previous.

Maybe he'd force them to get their snouts out of the trough.

 

[Romeo]

I read that senoir players including Dravid didn't want him.

Dunno why, maybe some previous.

Maybe he'd force them to get their snouts out of the trough.

That's probably right because it was Dravid who recommended Ford. The players seem to have an undue influence in terms of sacking and appointing coaches.

 

[magoo]

The players seem to have an undue influence in terms of sacking and appointing coaches.

John Wright was the Indian coach for 5 years. he left at the end of his contract. Did the players have a role in his sacking of appointing? Is there anything wrong in Dravid suggesting Ford as coach when he would have been coached by him when he was playing for Kent? why should that be construed as undue influence.

BTW. Dav whatmore was also mentioned as a possible coach for India at the time that Chappel got the job. he wasn't considered for the post then, so why should that change now?

 

[Romeo]

John Wright was the Indian coach for 5 years. he left at the end of his contract. Did the players have a role in his sacking of appointing? Is there anything wrong in Dravid suggesting Ford as coach when he would have been coached by him when he was playing for Kent? why should that be construed as undue influence.

BTW. Dav whatmore was also mentioned as a possible coach for India at the time that Chappel got the job. he wasn't considered for the post then, so why should that change now?

Because he seems if Dravid doesn't like someone he can veto him. The board may have liked Whatmore but Dravid recommends Ford so he's interviewed. Obviously he has influence. I rate Dravid but the tail shouldn't wag he dog.

 

[magoo]

Because he seems if Dravid doesn't like someone he can veto him. The board may have liked Whatmore but Dravid recommends Ford so he's interviewed. Obviously he has influence. I rate Dravid but the tail shouldn't wag he dog.

Whatmore was not considered as a suitable candidate before Greg Chappell was appointed (even before Dravid was captain). Why do you now suggest that it was Dravid who didn't want him for the current appointment? Why is it wrong for the team captain to suggest a coach he had worked under (Ford)? do you have any evidence that dravid is unduly influencing the new coach's selection or are you just guessing?

 

[Dipper]

Whatmore was not considered as a suitable candidate before Greg Chappell was appointed (even before Dravid was captain). Why do you now suggest that it was Dravid who didn't want him for the current appointment? Why is it wrong for the team captain to suggest a coach he had worked under (Ford)? do you have any evidence that dravid is unduly influencing the new coach's selection or are you just guessing?

Well I think he went on from my post.


I read in the Times over here, which is a fairly serious/reliable paper where cricket is concerned, that senior Indian players didn't want Whatmore & that Dravid 'insisted' that they interview Ford.

Now whether that is just because Dravid has a high opinion of Ford or whether he has an issue with Whatmore I don't know.

But from my point of view a captain shouldn't necessarily have a say in the appointment of a new coach.It's important that the coach can stand up to the captain & isn't just a lapdog as Bob Woolmer was.

 

[Romeo]

Well I think he went on from my post.


I read in the Times over here, which is a fairly serious/reliable paper where cricket is concerned, that senior Indian players didn't want Whatmore & that Dravid 'insisted' that they interview Ford.

Now whether that is just because Dravid has a high opinion of Ford or whether he has an issue with Whatmore I don't know.

But from my point of view a captain shouldn't necessarily have a say in the appointment of a new coach.It's important that the coach can stand up to the captain & isn't just a lapdog as Bob Woolmer was.

Yes I took my cue from your post and also read that Dravid pushed for Ford. The latter suggests considerable influence in the coaching process.

 

[Romeo]

Not everyone is champing at the bit to coach India. Officials you've received a reality check.

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/current/story/297946.html