Former India captain Sourav Ganguly, who believed to have played the most significant role in appointing Anil Kumble as the head coach of the Indian cricket team, reacted to Ravi Shastri’s recent claim with a diplomatic approach. Yesterday Shastri claimed that when he was being interviewed by the BCCI-nominated four-member panel, Ganguly was not there. The CAB president ducked the bouncer from former Team India director with a perfect reply saying the interview (process) was a “confidential” matter.
“Well, actually he wasn’t there,” Shastri told on Friday as he was asked: ‘You mention Sachin, Laxman, and Sanjay Jagdale. No questions from Ganguly’?
Reacting to this question on Saturday, Ganguly told: “The (coach selection) interview is absolutely confidential. I don’t want to talk about Shastri’s comment. You should also ask the other members of the (cricket) advisory committee.”
Shastri also cannot hide his disappointment being snubbed. “I was very disappointed. Disappointment because the hard work entire unit had put in in the last 18 months. To see where they were when the support staff and I took over and to where they reached in 18 months makes me feel proud. They got up, threw punches and ended up where they were. No 1 in Test cricket, No 1 in T20, No 2 in ODI. You can’t ask for more.”
Ganguly, the CAB president, revealed Shastri’s interview was conducted between 5 and 6pm (IST) at Taj Bengal on Tuesday, when Ganguly had to go to Eden to attend the CAB working committee meeting. He then rejoined the process around 6.30 in the evening.
Meanwhile, the former India team director didn’t appear in person, rather he joined from Bangkok via video linkup. He was considered to be a strong favourite until Anil Kumble entered the ring.
The latter ultimately bagged the job despite not making the 21-member BCCI shortlist as the chart had been prepared from the list of 57 probables.
Now as the interview drama is over, there are some bigger issues need to be looked at. Many believe the scrutiny process was to some extent a bit faulty. Some applicants made presentations and were interviewed in person, some by Skype. From the advisory committee, Tendulkar was on holiday and did his interviews through video conferencing while Sourav Ganguly wasn’t even present when Shastri made his case via skype from Thailand!
The entire process looks loose and makeshift rather than a robust one. For such a vital position, definitely, there would have been a way the entire advisory committee could meet all candidates in person.
Also, the biggest miff is Kumble’s appointment is for just one year. This clearly reflects division in the BCCI over the selection procedure and points out a lack of faith in the appointee. BCCI should have backed the coach fully, with at least a three-year term before the 2019 World Cup. That would have given Kumble more time, rather than work under the pressure of producing ‘instant magic’.