Sangakara, the newly appointed SL skipper has given thumbs up to John Buchanan’s flawed theory of 4 captains for KKR. Here is what he rants. My views are inline in red.
"If it's a way to go forward and it shows results, why not? Everyone is looking for the edge to win. If this is going to provide them that in the future, then it's well and good," said Sangakara, who will lead Sri Lanka for the first time in the Twenty20 World Cup in England this June.
"I believe that leadership is always situational. It's a very interesting concept, and I think it's all about using the best man for a specific situation," he told a website.
That’s ridiculous. Captain has got to be unique and the same man doing the job throughout the 40 overs or 100 overs or 450 overs of the 3 formats of the game. That doesn’t mean that say for an example captain in the crisis would be Sangakara and when the team would be good it would be Mahela or say when the things are out of the hands, the skipper would be Mendis. What do you term a situation? What do you make out of a good or bad situation?
"It will be tried and tested, and then you'll find that some people are better at ensuring that bowlers are changed correctly, and someone might be good for field settings,"
If that’s so, then whats your use man? Go blogging or writing when the team needs you to do the above changes. Why captain a game when there is going to be a set of captains ?
"Cricket is evolving. In American football, you have an offence and defense, a defensive coach and an offensive coach. And cricket, going forward, might have to look at itself differently. Things like fielding captains and bowling captains are experimental tactics where teams are trying to find the best way forward in Twenty20.
Ridiculous at its best.
"The traditional idea of one captain doing all the work is never really true.
It has always worked man. For 6 years of T20 cricket, 38 years of ODI cricket and 132 years of Test cricket. And it would always work in the future too. Crazy insane ideas die down soon as they evolve. Greg Chappell ‘s methods and boot camp of John Buchanan are prime example.
"In Sri Lankan cricket, at different times and difficult times, different people step up to lead the side. Also, we've always encouraged a team of leaders who are independent thinkers and who are not afraid to contribute ideas and information on and off the field.
But the blame or the credit has always gone to one single captain. Poor Hashan Tilakratne was kicked out when SL lost to Australia 0-3 in 2004. Arjuna Ranatunga remains the sole World Cup winning captain for Lanka. Mahela Blabberawardhene remains the finalist captain of 07 World Cup. And why is it that if SL had the team of leaders, the team finds itself in a mess in both forms of the game?
That feeding of information, as long as the captain has a clear idea of what to choose and what not to, has been the way we've been trying to nurture our cricketers. So the concept of having many leaders, many thinkers and so-called many captains has already been working in our side for a long time," he said.
We would have been happy to know who are the many captains in your side. May be Chuck as the bowling captain and the chucking captain who teaches spinners to bowl illegally, Vaas as the fast bowling captain, yourself as the keeper captain and Mahela as the blabberer captain J.
"If you have two or three captains operating at the same time on the field with the same players, you can have temperaments clashing, ideas clashing, and there could be an overload of information,"
You contradict yourself dude.
"The players themselves may not know who to turn to or listen to for guidance in the end. So you see a potential for confusion."
So how would you feel when Mendis would turn to Chuck for field change rather than you.
Views put forward by Buchanan are ridiculous and they are nonsense. He was hit by something when he said that utter rubbish quote. That was to undermine the authority of Saurav. No doubt that I am a big fan of Saurav and would always dislike the efforts to cut him down to size. It’s an Indian idea(IPL), an Indian owned side(KKR), you are just a coach and you come here and speak crap about the man(Ganguly) who has scored 19000 runs in international cricket, scored close to 40 centuries and has taken 150 wickets in international cricket. Has captained his side to glory against the side you coached, being the only captain who could challenge Aussies in their prime and beat them in their own game. Perhaps that’s what made you come up with this insane and revengeful idea. You have lost the plot sir. And then there are some loose talkers like Sangakara who is no different in loose talk than his predecessor.
Likes of Mallaya, SRK and the Deccan Chargers CEO who have no idea of international cricket or even the game or have never stepped into the middle for the game play, are now going to decide who is going to captain their side. Who has got the ability to match the achievements of the 3 beleaguered batsmen in iPL as leaders who form the trio of the Fab Four? Even if it’s a IPL, it doesn’t warrant for demeaning the skipper and the Indian icon players. I don’t say this on emotional grounds, but on the grounds of pure cricketing perspective. Board room is different, dressing room is different. The strategies drawn in both rooms have been different.
And it’s a pity that the skipper and ex-skipper of SL team who have been so called better batsmen in Tests, are going to play under Yuvraj Singh in the IPL. And they have been dying to play in IPL, so much so that they refused to represent their country in England tour to be hold during the same time. And trust me, we can never imagine that happening in India. We can’t imagine the likes of MS or the Fab Five (in the past) or even Yuvraj Singh to skip playing for their country for IPL.
Great stuff Sangakara and Mahela. You provide us perfect recipe for laughter.
