The Hindu : Sport : The Wright way of making errors

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Aug 01, 2006

Sport

Sport

The Wright way of making errors

Wright has used the passion for the game to fuel the sentiments of the people with whom he had worked, writes Makarand Waingankar

— File Photo: V.V. Krishnan

IT'S JUST NOT CRICKET! John Wright's revelations in his book, including his diffidence about Sunil Gavaskar's presence as a consultant, has led to many former cricketers expressing their displeasure.

Though John Wright did not spend enough years in India to study the passion the countrymen have for the game, he has perfectly used that very passion to fuel the sentiments of people with whom he had worked.

Ironically, those who have reacted to Wright's revelations about the selection meetings must be red-faced, because some of them were impressed with the assessment made by Wright about their commitment when he was the coach.

Barring Nari Contractor (who once exposed Wright's technical analysis in an interaction with the Talent Resource Development Officers) and Brijesh Patel (who was the Chairman of the National Selection Committee), the others connected with the selections either did not want to rub Sourav Ganguly the wrong way or felt Wright was not doing anything wrong.

The best thing about books like Wright's is that after spreading false information, the author can watch the fun while making money. The reactions of former Indian cricketers who were in the National Selection Committee range from incensed to furious and they are unanimous in condemning Wright's understanding of Indian selection policies.

`Indianness' being missed

The selection system in Indian cricket has always encouraged parochialism, but don't we see some degree of `Indianness' that was missing for decades? Compare selections of the past one decade with that of selections of the 60s and 70s and one observes a marked improvement. But unfortunately, Wright did not do any homework of the history of Indian cricket. There are umpteen instances, which Brijesh Patel has given while reacting to Wright's hand in selections. Wright will find it extremely difficult to deny them.

Leg-spinner Narendra Hirwani, who played against Wright in the 1988 series in India, was livid when he was not selected in the eleven for the first Test against Australia in the 2000-01 series after being told by Wright the previous evening that he was playing the next day. Hirwani was later dropped for the second Test. And if Wright did not approve of Sunil Gavaskar's presence in the dressing room as a batting consultant, why did he not record his dissent? Being a batsman himself and that too an opener, Wright ought to have asked the then president of the BCCI Jagmohan Dalmiya as to why Gavaskar was inducted in the team management without his consent.

There have been some wonderful revelations by Steve Waugh in his book, Out of my comfort zone and by Frank Tyson of his recollections of the 1954-55 Typhoon series of Australia in his book In the Eye of the Typhoon. These books relate to happenings on and off the field without accusing anyone.

Changing scenario

There have been books written by foreign cricketers on topics ranging from hotels to beggars in India, but the change in the Indian cricket economy has changed their opinion of the Indian scenario. John Wright cannot be an exception.

Analysing the various compositions of the teams during the tenure of Wright indicates that there were never wholesale changes as claimed by Wright, but then if the intent is to shake the system with outrageous revelations then Wright perhaps has succeeded.

For a person who gave the impression of being extremely concerned for the growth of Indian cricket, he — by revealing the discussions of national selection meetings — seems to have betrayed the trust of the very individuals who defended him against detractors.

Again, like Sanjay Manjrekar who questioned Tendulkar's approach, John Wright too may say that he has an opinion. But revealing secrets of the selection committee is not an opinion. Would he have done it had he been the coach of the New Zealand team? That is the question John Wright should answer.

There is a lesson for Indian cricket. Insert a clause in the contracts of the coach and the support staff that will prevent them, during and after their tenure, from making scandal-mongering attacks on the Indian cricket fraternity.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Sport