Report or rip-off?

Faisal Shariff

Indian cricket -- an outside view is a detailed report by former Aussie opener and coach Geoffrey Marsh that was supposed to provide new insight into the problems facing Indian cricket. It surely did highlight problems, but about Indian cricket administrators and not Indian cricket.

Last year, erstwhile cricket administrator Raj Singh Dungarpur had pushed for Geoff Marsh's appointment, to revamp the domestic structure and point out the lacunae in the country's domestic circuit.

The Aussie submitted a 22-page document in August 2001, but, sadly, it is merely a rehash of what former cricketers and the media have been harping upon since eternity.

The main points of the report are:

1. India is a country of fast-scoring batsmen and hence the emphasis has always been on batting. Bowling has never been taken seriously in this country. Hence, the lack of depth in the department.

So how does one change this pattern has been very ambiguously suggested.

"We need to have good sporting wickets, like the tracks for the Australia-India series earlier this year for tournaments right down to the under-15 level," suggests Marsh.

2. The domestic structure needs to be changed and fewer teams should make it to the knockout zone, increasing the level of performance. National players should be asked to play if fit and available for their state teams to stiffen the competition. The top 55 cricketers of the nation need to play in the Duleep trophy from the five zones.

3. The cricket schedules should be planned out properly giving adequate rest to the players between series and enough time to play on the domestic circuit.

4. Umpires' reports should be a must in all domestic cricket including the under-17 and under-19 tournaments. It will set a precedent to improve the umpiring standards in the country.

Indeed, what Marsh recommends isn't wrong at all. But argues former Test batsman Dilip Vengsarkar, who was appointed chairman of the recently-formed Talent Resources Development Officers' Committee, "What does this report have that we haven't suggested before? I have been writing this since ten years but no one wanted to listen."

And what was the amount spent by the richest cricketing body in the world on this analytical report?

According to a BCCI official seven million rupees was paid to the former Aussie opener. It defies logic to believe that the Indian cricket administrators even bothered to spend such a vulgar amount on the report, which is mere hogwash. And this amount is much more than what India cricket coach John Wright has earned over a period of a year. In fact, what the Aussie has done is not even one-hundredth of the effort the Kiwi has put in since being appointed to coach the team.

In an attempt not to ruffle the feathers of the administrators, throughout the report, Marsh says nothing about the selection procedures, in effect giving it the clean chit.

A report of this nature should have been more incisive and more suggestive of immediate measures needed to revamp and recondition the cricket culture in the country.

Former BCCI president Dungarpur should stall his Ganguly-bashing for the meantime and explain to the cricketing fraternity of the country about this gross mishandling of the board's resources, as should Dr A C Muthiah, the board president at that time.

There's a funny part in the report where Marsh admits mid-way through that he hasn't seen the under-15 and other such tournaments in the country and is therefore not in a position to analyse that category.

Perhaps, a quarter of that vulgar amount could have been distributed to the under-15 cricketers to help buy equipment and pay for their other needs.

Also read:
'India is playing too much cricket; that is the problem' -- Dilip Vengsarkar interview
The gentlemen in question -- Prem Panicker

  Name:  

  Email:

  Your Views