The Performance Test

Who would argue with the sentiment expressed so poignantly by the BCCI chiefthat "the coach and the captain will have to work out mutually theirprofessional working relationship which has to be maintained and for thispurpose performance will have to be the criteria"?

And perhaps the reference to the gag-order was only to be expected:"Any player going to the media will face disciplinary action. All thesedecisions have been taken by the committee keeping in mind the interest ofIndian cricket."

Perhaps it is only of secondary interest that the samegentlemen -- Ranbir Singh Mahendra, S.K. Nair,Jagmohan Dalmiya, Sunil Gavaskar, Ravi Shastri and S. Venkataraghavan.-- had also, ironically, chosen Greg Chappell as the Indian cricketcoach. But then that was before the contentious elections to the BCCI and thestakes of award of TV rights and other such assumed such topical importance. Thefirst two are the president and secretary of the BCCI, though only till the endof this month, and we don't know who their successors would be because the BCCI,which is supposed to control cricket has no control over its Annual GeneralMeeting. And the influence of number three over these two does not merit anyelaboration.

While the remaining three have impressive credentials, itis only the last named who could be expected to take a relatively more unbiasedand objective look at the current controversy, given the publicly stated viewsof the other two (Gavaskar has never shirked from stating his preference for anIndian coach and Shastri has been advocating for quite some time now thatGanguly's sell-by-date as a captain is long gone).

Nor is it exactly a state-secret that the Chappell e-mailwas leaked to the press on the day of the contentious, much court-ordered AGM ofthe BCCI, and that it did succeed in taking the spotlight away from thebyzantine goings-on in the BCCI. So to expect a committee heavily loaded infavour of those who had much to gain could hardly be expected to say anythingbeyond what they did about who leaked the Chappell e-mail: "it will beinvestigated".

But surely even Mr Mahendra must have realised that -- apartfrom the platitudes about having the good of the Indian cricket at heart and how happy the coach andthe captain are by the new arrangement -- bycalling the coach's charges against the captain a result of"miscommunication" and "far from truth", he was actuallyquestioning the competence of the coach, if not quite calling him a liar in somany words. Surely if this were the case, it is reason enough to firethe coach? And it remains to be seen, despite the gag-fatwa, how Greg Chappellresponds to this.

Was it just a gratuitous faux pas or was it actually considered wisdom of thesix wise men? If the BCCI president could hold forth with so muchconviction on the captain's fitness regime, surely some more plainspeaking couldhave been indulged in, when it came to the other points raised by Chappell inhis email, which, incidentally, from all available evidence, was not leaked from his end? It ishigh time that S.Venkataraghavan, Sunil Gavaskar and Ravi Shastri spoke out andlet us know where they stand on this, and other issues raised recently.

The politics of the BCCI and the vituperations of the various contestantsaside, perhaps it is important to come back to the issue at hand: therelationship between the coach and the captain.Chappell's previous recordas a coach with South Australia, or the discontent against his -- dictatorial or de Bono -- ways, among some inthe team, while important, is not really the issue here. If he is guilty of levelling false charges against Ganguly, he needs to go. But the current controversybegan with the public outburst by the captain and the whole farce since thenseems to have been stage-managed by the powers-that-be. The incumbent BCCIpresident, till the end of this month, of course, is merely being tautologicalwhen he says: "At present Ganguly is the captain, and unless and until anew captain is appointed, he is the captain".

And here lies the rub. Ganguly was named captain only for the Zimbabwe touras the selection committee had argued then that since its term was ending inSeptember, it would only be fair for the newly selected committee to choose thecaptain for the future. (By that reckoning, of course, there is no way that anyselection committee can now select a team or its captain now for the 2007 WorldCup). But because the next selection committee can be formed only after the BCCIelections -- which, as we know, after the last AGM was adjourned sine die,are not expected in a hurry, not till November-end in all probability, variouspetitions to various courts notwithstanding -- it would, by its own standards,be even more unfair that it would end up selecting the captain.

In the meanwhile, of course, are the twelve ODIs against Sri Lanka and SouthAfrica, before the Test series against Sri Lanka in December. Granted that therewould be pressure on Ganguly, but now that he would have nothing to lose, whatif he were to score heavily in these 12 matches? Would that"performance" then justify that he be retained as India captain tillthe 2007 World Cup? And what if the BCCI elections in between, by some miracle,throw up a different result? It is nobody's case that Ganguly's publicposturings against the coach leave much to be desired, but what if there isactually a genuine problem between the coach and most of the players?

One could go on, and the idea here is not to deny the stellar role played byGanguly and his aggressive captaincy or to undermine his enviable record, butonly to point out how the real issue seems to be getting sidetracked once again.Do we wish to play series by series in the uncertainty and hope of the guy beinguncharitably dismissed as a dodo to reinvent himself once again as a dude - and justify hisselection in both the Test and the ODI side? Or do we actually wish to work witha plan for the 2007 World Cup, Chappell or no Chappell? Or are we only waiting, as the BJP did withAdvani, for him to resign/retire "gracefully" on his own terms(whatever that might mean)?

Chappell might have the public opinion on his side right now, but he shouldknow that he ain't seen nothing yet. If he sticks around for so long, that is. And if the various charges levelled by him against Ganguly are manifestly false, then there is no reason to persist with him. Ganguly and Chappell definitely have a problem, and it seems unlikely that any of the forced handshakes would work. The question that needs to be asked is: can we do without both? Or only one? Which one? One of them at least has to go, if not both.

Meanwhile, it would be nice to apply the "performance test" enunciatedby the BCCI today on that very august body itself. Getting real would be astart.