It is amazing how nameless senior officials of the Board of Control for Cricket in India have come out of the woodwork to point out that India
captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni has crossed the line by saying that Duncan Fletcher would remain
coach of the Indian cricket team till the ICC
Cricket World Cup 2015.
In
BCCI's none-too-transparent and closed world, it is hard to figure out the tenure of the coach but reports in March this year ahead of the ICC World Twenty20 suggested that Fletcher had been reassured by the BCCI president in abeyance N Srinivasan that he would remain in charge till the ICC Cricket World Cup 2015 in Australia and New Zealand.
So what crime did
Dhoni commit by
stating what he perceives as fact? What line
did he cross? Is it not imperative that the board shows greater concern in the arresting the decline of India's Test fortunes overseas and addresses a number of issues that can help Indian cricket get back on the rails rather than spend time discussing Dhoni's alleged transgressions?
BCCI secretary Sanjay Patel has been quoted as saying that it seemed to him that
it was Dhoni's personal opinon. Surely, he was privy to the decision to extend Fletcher's contract till the World Cup. "There has been no discussion on his removal. We told him that we have a lot of faith in his coaching abilities and he should not be worried about," Patel had said in March.
It is another matter that some of recent actions around the Indian team have been contrary to Dhoni's assertions. For instance, his stout defence of
Rohit Sharma's stroke selection in the third Test against England Southampton was followed up by not playing him in either of the remaining Tests.
The captain's argument in favour of
Ravindra Jadeja - "The problem is who do you have to replace Jadeja?" he asked after the thrashing at Old Trafford - was followed up by axing the Saurashtra left-hander from the XI for the Oval Test match in favour of
Stuart Binny. Given Dhoni's recent track record, it makes us wonder if sands of time are running out on the coach.
Make no mistake, Dhoni's captaincy in Test matches has left a lot to be desired and India must quickly appoint a new leader so that a fresh thought-process can be infused. He must, however, remain captain of the limited-over side since he has few peers when it comes to leading the team in the shorter formats.
To revert to the nameless Board officials, they must be kidding themselves if they think all stakeholders of the game will believe that
Ravi Shastri will be in a position to give the mandarins in the Board feedback on Fletcher's inputs after watching him over a couple of weeks in which the team is slated to play five ODIs and Twenty20 game against England.
And, how would Shastri be in a position to offer a fair review of bowling coach Joe Dawes and fielding coach Trevor Penney's work? They are not even around since BCCI, in a knee-jerk reaction to the Test defeats, has given Fletcher a new set of assistant coaches for India's limited-over squad in England.
With Srinivasan having no direct say on the running of BCCI, it appears as if a new group - we must refrain from using the more political word 'coterie' - is straining its every sinew to become the new power centre within the board. The surfacing of a few nameless officials in the recent weeks is a reflection of the bloodless succession plan in the BCCI.
