LOL at that skunt Ian Chappell

[AFRO]

Has anyone seen this mess he's just wrote about that Indian u19 spinner?

HARMEET SINGH AND UNMUKT CHAND READY FOR INTERNATIONALS


by Ian Chappell

August 26, 2012

India may have found their next Bishan Bedi in Harmeet Singh but will they handle him right?

The first thing that strikes you about the ICC Under-19 World Cup is that the young fast bowlers are well ahead of the batsmen in their development. But there's one striking exception: the tantalising talents of Indian left-arm orthodox spinner Harmeet Singh. He bowls like Bishen Bedi, with that same natural flight and guile that would right now place him as the best spin bowler in any Test side bar England. Harmeet has the skills to be a successful spinner, and only needs to develop the necessary temperament to handle the tough environment of international cricket and have a sympathetic captain.

That leads to the question: is the U-19 competition the right career path to the top level? It is, for the bulk of the players, a few of whom will make it to international cricket, while the majority will fade away to life as an obscure Trivial Pursuit question. However, it's not the right thoroughfare for exceptional talents like Harmeet and one or two other players on show in Townsville.

The very best players need to be constantly challenged from a young age, and that means regularly being upgraded when they have success at a lower level. I recall an exasperated Rod Marsh, when he was head coach at the Australian Academy, blurting out: "Thank heavens for Tasmania." When I asked why, he replied: "They pick young players on ability, not age." Tasmania's selectorial wisdom resulted in the fast-tracking of David Boon and Ricky Ponting.

That's why the big money needs to be spent on finding the right selectors rather than being lavished on a small-town population of coaches who often make decisions to justify their existence rather than in the best interests of the players.

A cricketer like Harmeet will stagnate if he's left for too long at a lower level, because that leads to sloppy habits. Harmeet is ready to be considered for national selection.

The other U-19 player in that category is the India captain Unmukt Chand. He's a very talented batsman and should also be consistently plying his trade at a higher level. Both Harmeet and Chand have played first-class cricket but it isn't doing their games any good to participate in an U-19 World Cup even if it does help India win the trophy. There's always a temptation to win another trophy but it mustn't be done at the cost of a young player's development. Rodney was right. Players must be chosen for their skill level, not their age.

India are the envy of the other major nations. Their best young batsmen - in Townsville and at home - are technically better than most of their counterparts from the other Test-playing nations. All that Indian players need is regular exposure to bouncy surfaces against strong opposition and the national team's recent travails in England and Australia will soon be a thing of the past.

Australia, on the other hand, seem to be going through a period of producing solid but unspectacular batsmanship. It's unclear at the top level where the next Ponting or Michael Clarke will come from, and that picture becomes no clearer after watching their U-19s play.

Cricket needs artistic and dominant batsmen of varying styles but the future in that regard is not looking so rosy. Are the right methods being used to develop young batsmen?

I'd like to see an alternative option provided where young batsmen get the opportunity to develop along the lines of Sachin Tendulkar and other successful international batsmen. That way they play a lot of pick-up matches, either on a maidan, in a backyard or on a street, and develop naturally so they don't look like they have dropped off the end of a coaching conveyor belt.

Young batsmen who have to face the likes of Harmeet Singh are going to need sharp footwork and agile brains. I don't see the current method where a young player has to endure hours of structured net sessions and endless deliveries from a bowling machine producing batsmen with those capabilities.

LINK

is this man fecking nuts? how the hell he can judge how a player would perform at TEST level just by watching them play YOUTH CRICKET is beyond me, i mean of course sometimes you can see a talent and think "wow he looks special", but to imply that "he's better than all the test spinners right now apart from Swann" just beggers belief, for a start this kid only took SIX WICKETS in this world cup, our Akeal Hosain who is also a left-arm spinner took five, also Swann is finished as a top spinner and he's obviously too fecking ignorant to have watched the likes of Narine and Ajmal work their magic!! ,

The yute will be 20 in a matter of weeks and he still hasn't even played an A-game for India yet, plus from what i saw of him he has balance issues, falls away when he's delivering the ball but according to Chappell he's "the next murali" or something!!..it's pathetic man!! , same thing with Chand, he delivered in the final today but apart from that he was sub par, he could take our pacers at all so could you imagine if he had to face Steyn, Roach, Anderson etc now? he'd get murdered out there.

India done well to win the trophy in the end, and i always said they would be a danger, but the bottom line is when our yutes played them there was a big difference in class, thats why we won the game with general ease, so it will be interesting to see how many players from each side reach the top level in the end.

[BallOil]

maybe Chappel see something special in these guys, no?

[Arnik]

When I saw Harmeet bowl the first thought that came to mind was Bedi. Time will tell whether Harmeet becomes as good as Bedi.

I'd like to see an alternative option provided where young batsmen get the opportunity to develop along the lines of Sachin Tendulkar and other successful international batsmen. That way they play a lot of pick-up matches, either on a maidan, in a backyard or on a street, and develop naturally so they don't look like they have dropped off the end of a coaching conveyor belt.

Chappell may have a point. I recently heard one of our commentators say that Hooper was saying something similar about the batters coming out of the HPC. They were all looking the same!!

[mapoui]

Chappell may have a point. I recently heard one of our commentators say that Hooper was saying something similar about the batters coming out of the HPC. They were all looking the same!!

har har!
har har har!

har har har harrrrr!

wat..a teensy tiny lil recog dat coaching is not all its strapped up to be?



bring on the coaches man..hire plenty..mek dem all head coaches! and who deh doh bull and sex deh will deh will drive crazy, and kick dem off the team sayin deh fat!

den to justifiy de'ar huge wasteful, useless, pointles salaries, make everybody look the same and say coaching essential fuh dat reason. if de coaches doh homogenise all the players like milk, deh cyant play as a unit. deh mus' all be the same to get dat unit effect on the field.

ent alluh like and want coach....den coach in allyuh wiyah, comin' outtah allyuh nose everywhere

[mapoui]

coaches mus' be part of a process of development...not the locus and driver of that development.

the job of coaching is a paid one, from money earned by players who attract crowds. a coach does not prodcue any wealth. no admin does. everythng flwos from the team.

so once you put peole in charge who must be paid their first consdieratin is the security of that job ...how to make it last or permanent. and when yu give them all the power what does one expect but for them to turn the game in ways hat justify their salaries.

look at the people in the wicb who has a permanent hold on the power up in there, who organises unopposed leadership continuity so that no chairman comes in that would oppose them?

di'ze how I know thngs go in life. and all those who have power that way tries to increase such concentration of power in all thnsg to continue to justify their own. there is safety in expansion of the same thing one does to make a living. the more there is of that the safer one feels

so the parasitic civil service expands continually and taxes the crap out of the people no matter how poor they are to pay for that xpansion. if it does not expand it will collapse on itself and they would be all out of work. better the por rass and dem pay through the nose than we out of work

thats why this wicb will never go well..because it is corrupt at the heart of it. for that administrationthe pint is not the development of or the best for westindies cricket but how for them to continue geting paid

and to that effect they keep hiring all like themselves up in there. there is not one progresive westindian in the wicb mix. it is bunch of rightwing, parasitic lackeys up in there..to a man..collectively soem of the worst peoel in the westindies.

they all banded together for eg., to prevent Lloyd from becoming wicb chair. they will never allow Lloyd in there if they can help it. it will be more of people like skunt hunter until the cricket dies... or some real social change takes place in the westindies
once they got in they carried out a coup and established their permanent control

[mapoui]

COACHES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SUPPORT STAFF, DOING AS DIRECTED BY THE ADMINISTRATORS OF OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS.

thats all.

once you put all the power in their hands these low level fellas an' dem become gods all of sudden, with the final say, the power of life and death over the careers of players.

imagine skunt that eh!..jackass dat! a job description that is supposed to be support is now in total charge?

well with that kind of power these skunt coaches become gods, ful of themselves, TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL.

they feel so powerfull and above even the law, their individual lives now finds expression in their work. deh start to phuck everyone..boys, girls..anyone who passes-by and tarries too long.

and any one who speaks up in opposition are finished.

so power corrupts..and total power corrupts totally.

THAT IS WHAT WE NOW HAVE IN COACHING THE WORLD OVER..IN ALL SPORTS!

the rise of the coach was a bad idea. it is time to correct it ..first by putting the coach back in his/her place..then workng out ways of contro and oversight that maxes of all-round input..especially into selection that eliminates the coaches' role in that critical activity.

prior to the advent of the head coach there were selection committes that did decent jobs in dcricket..hapned by greater powers on the outside that forced individual selections....

that hppens to an even greater extent now with hed coaches

the idea is to retain and expand selection committees and eliminate all outside power interference in selection by having a transparent selection process

[mapoui]

and of course Chappell was a head coach himslef. one of the worst though I had expected him to be one of the best.

he as head coach was a perfect example of what I mean by the nature of head-coachng and why the position must be eliminated in cricket.

instead of allowing headcoaching to homogenise the game drop them back to their support position where their coahcing can be made to follow directives not impose their will on players.

we can tell them what to do..and crucially WHAT NOT DO DO! so that we save our players from assembly line coachng crap

all yuh don know how pissed I ma when a jackass like Otis Gibson could come in and domiate westindies cricket, impose his skunt will on the team and make a pigs breakfast of our team while erning a huge salary.

the mediocre skunt could not get a look-see at the westindies team during his playing days.

now during his senile dotage, armed with a coaching certificate, some english experience, and supported by a wicb that likes his kind of incompetence and loves backward and reactionary outlook, he gets into tear things apart, screw the process.

the fat dotish skunt shud be shipped back to england immediately..along with his Radford Panza

and no more head-coaches for the westindies. put the money inot developing players and infrastructure. and relaget the coahes to do what you are told to do and nutten more or less at a salary comensurate to such a level of importance in the game. hardly a crucial need

[Arnik]

coaches mus' be part of a process of development...not the locus and driver of that development.

You see Andy Flower being the focus and driver of any development - stewps.

[mikesiva]

is this man fecking nuts? how the hell he can judge how a player would perform at TEST level just by watching them play YOUTH CRICKET is beyond me, i mean of course sometimes you can see a talent and think "wow he looks special", but to imply that "he's better than all the test spinners right now apart from Swann" just beggers belief, for a start this kid only took SIX WICKETS in this world cup, our Akeal Hosain who is also a left-arm spinner took five, also Swann is finished as a top spinner and he's obviously too fecking ignorant to have watched the likes of Narine and Ajmal work their magic!! ,

The directors of the COTR would do well to remember this line....

[mapoui]

coaches mus' be part of a process of development...not the locus and driver of that development.

You see Andy Flower being the focus and driver of any development - stewps.

what the hell are you talking about?
do yu understand whats going orn?

the english apparently had adjusted after Duncan Fletehcer r and the bruhaha with Pietersen and Moores.

Flower is working fine getting along by not imposing himself as Fletcher did and Moores started doing which pissed off Pietersen.

now I dont know who did that adjusting..if it came as directive form english authority or it just flows from flowers attitude and smarts.

but the power relation is still there..the concentration of power in the hands of the coach. and as lon as its there so is the corruption or the potential for.

but the flower phenomena is one in a sea of crap with head coaching. and flower will no be there forever.

the key in the equation is whether the relation gets the best out of the sitation for the nation, for the cricket development?

the key is coachng itself its function and benefit..how best shud coaching be used in the edevelopment of cricketers.

back in the day few of our players great players were selected and coached from day one, they learned their cricket however, were naturals who often rubbed shoulders with our greats who were always around.

the company they kept helped immensly. by the time of Kanhai and Butcher Walcott was a coach but it is how Walcott coached is the key. Walcott appeared hardly ever to be telling players what to do. he let them flow and intervened only when he felt he had to..if ever.

being there as coach was indentifying talent and helping it to come forward by opportuity, encouragement but hardly ever interference with styles.

coaching can ruin players with talent if cochng des not know how to deal wth the development of players. he has to incoprate their private lives and how it shapes them into his coaching..not by talking with them about that part of their lives with the youth..that is not eh coaches business in that way.

but knowing that such is the nexus of personailtiy, that youth is still forming, developing their nature and that hei not to interefere bys strick coherene to manuals etc but to let the kids flow, not to be another source of stricture in their lives but to let them play.

a coch might ask a player why he played across and got bowled or caught?

if the player does not know the coach might say look here are the mechanics..playing across can mean this and is not advisable. but if yu like to play across it can be very profitable becase he opistion does not expect you to do that and so set fields in expectation that you will play straight. so hers how you can do it with max chances of getting runs

so yu tell him and leave him alone..or practice him in the net to hit across..play straight etc. but yu have to be careful to allow freedom for the development of the full style and nature of the player.

that what I mean by coaching must be part of the overall development plan for the game in the jurisdiction..or nation. and thats all coaching/coaches must be. coaching as head and all powerful is a conflict. and such a conflict has resulted in real loss and scandal for al sports.

so it does not come down to one successful coach... flower in england. we are talking about a relation that is unnecessary and corrupt from the start that must be eliminated..while coaches/coachng must be structured as it should ..as discussed above.

I have no idea wats wrong you this mawning armick. eat your porridge before you post or something