Wright vs Chappell vs Kirsten vs Kumble: Which style of coaching suits India best?

“Taskmaster”, “mentor”, “my way or the high way” – unless you were living under a rock, the last few weeks haven’t lacked for providing a multitude of adjectives to describe coaching in modern-day cricket. The fallout between Virat Kohli and Anil Kumble has again opened the lid on an integral, but often less-understood aspect about the game nowadays: coaching styles.

It is clear now that Kohli and some players in the Indian team were not on the same page as Kumble regarding his style of management. The jury is still out on what these traits were exactly. In his parting letter, the former India skipper listed out a few, including professionalism, discipline, commitment and honesty.

All that the Indian captain said about Kumble’s decision to step down was that he respected it. What transpired and led to the implosion of fruitful partnership is still unanswered. The issue, though, has opened the debate whether old school coaching is relevant in today’s ever evolving cricketing landscape.

A generational shift

For one, as any other profession, coaching too has evolved. From the times of Bishen Singh Bedi and Ajit Wadekar in the early 1990’s to Gary Kirsten and Duncan Fletcher in more recent times, the role of a coach has only become more important as the team has become more professional. But how much of a change has there been?

“I feel there has been a generational shift when it comes to coaching styles,” former India coach Anshuman Gaekwad said.

“In my time, we used to believe in a very strong ethos of discipline, both on and off-the field. While, on-the-field, it’s still the same, that high regard for discipline off-the-field may have become a little relaxed now,” said Gaekwad, who was coach of the Indian team, when Kumble etched his name in the history books with 10 wickets in an innings against Pakistan in 1999.

“Then, there was a certain ethics and culture. You would never see a player go to a presentation ceremony in shorts or flippers and collect a memento. It would have been considered derogatory,” he added.

A coach as a friend?

With the advent of Twenty20 leagues, more and more players are being exposed to different styles of coaching. The arrival of New Zealand’s John Wright in 2000 introduced Indian cricket to a different style – coaches could actually be friendly rather than authoritarian, they were mentors rather than leaders.

“When John Wright was the coach of Mumbai Indians, I called him ‘Sir’ for the first time. He turned around and said, ‘I’m not Sir, call me John’. It was the same with Ricky Ponting,” remembered Aditya Tare, captain of Mumbai’s Ranji team.

“If there was a line set in the sand earlier, coaches are now friends,” Tare added.

But, just because a coach was a friend did not mean everything was a picnic. Wright was known for his measured approach but even he could blow his top and set a player straight. In 2002 during Wright’s tenure as Indian coach, Virender Sehwag was dismissed in an One-Day International at The Oval for a very low score. An enraged Wright grabbed Sehwag by the collar and demanded an explanation for his recklessness.

However, this incident despite creating a stir did not have a greater impact – Wright continued to share a good relationship with Team India’s players. Most modern cricketers are of the view that a coach should not pile on to the already present pressure in a match.

“Cricket is always a pressure game,” said Bengal Ranji player Sudip Chatterjee. “While at the senior levels of the game, it is important that a coach ensures that he is not adding on the pressure. A tense atmosphere affects your game. If the dressing room stays relaxed and enjoys the sport, it is good for the team.”

But, it is not as if there is a one-size-fits-all solution. As in life, so too in cricket, what may work for one player may not work for another. And it’s important that these distinctions are also considered in any discussion about coaching styles.

The old-school approach

One Indian figure who epitomises the old-school style is veteran coach and former cricketer Chandrakant Pandit. The 55-year-old coached Mumbai to a Ranji Trophy triumph in the 2015-’16 season and had a reputation for being strict if the situation demanded it. In 2007 during a training session for West Zone, Pandit did not allow off-spinner Ramesh Powar to train with the team as he was not wearing his whites. The veteran coach is renowned in the Mumbai cricket circuit for the steadfast emphasis he puts on discipline.

According to Pandit, players needed a coach to push them in the right directions.

“At the end of the season, the one person who is the first to be held accountable for a team’s poor show is invariably the coach. That’s how the Indian cricket set up operates,” Pandit said. “In such a scenario, to behave like friends with players only works if the team is delivering results.”

Tare mooted his former coach’s view stating that other than the coach, it is also the player’s responsibility to adapt to the coach’s way of thinking.

“Every coach’s style is different and it is also the responsibility of the players to adapt accordingly, work out how to improve to the best of their ability so that the team’s ultimate interest is maintained.”

In the past, not always have players seen eye to eye with their coaches. The most famous example being the standoff between Australian Greg Chappell and India’s star-studded line-up that rubbed players like Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and Rahul Dravid among others the wrong way and ultimately led to the Australian being sacked.

Kirsten’s approach

On the other end of the spectrum is the Gary Kirsten innings when Indian cricket saw some of its best performances. Kirsten and his team which also comprised mental conditioning coach Paddy Upton were renowned for their hands-off approach to the game and for treating players as adults. Kirsten gave a lot of importance on the idea of building relationships and players reciprocated his approach with MS Dhoni calling him “the best thing to happen to Indian cricket” in 2011.

Upton’s role in the team also came in for much praise. Virender Sehwag praised Upton for helping to strengthen his mental toughness and creating an atmosphere where any player could talk to him confidentially about whatever they wanted.

In a way, more than physical training, cricket at the top level always been about the mind. And, according to sports psychologist Mugdha Bavare a coach needs to always understand that and strike a balance. At a junior level, it is of even more paramount importance.

“Perhaps you need to be a taskmaster at a particular age-group. But when you deal with seniors, you need to be more of a mentor,” she said.

“Players depend a lot on their coach. A coach’s reaction to a player’s performance has a big impact, even more than that of their parents. A coach needs to be aware of the impact they have and react accordingly,” she added.

Changing game, changing times

The sport, though, has evolved. The changing formats, have brought in quite a few changes, that have begun on the field and traversed off it as well.

“Earlier, if a player got out trying to hit a lofted shot over the covers, he would be dropped for the next game. Now, if the player does not try that shot, how will the team score the quick runs?” Pandit chuckled.

“Through this freedom, players have become positive in their outlook and demand the same positivity from others. They don’t want to hear that they can’t do something,” he adds.

At the core though, the coach’s job is man-management. Understanding the requirements to improve the game of the ward is what the coach’s sole intention should be.

This is where the two schools of thought come into the picture.

According to Bharat Arun, former India bowling coach, the coach’s job is only to suggest.

“It is the player’s prerogative to take the advice or not,” Arun says. “Some coaches do not suggest and instead order. Which obviously does not always work. If a coach can answer all the doubts of a player, he will never have to shove down his ideas. How much a player is receptive depends entirely on how the coach puts his message across to the player,” he added.

Instilling fear

For Pandit, a Mumbai stalwart and a proponent of the 41-time Ranji champions’ famous khadoos attitude, instilling a bit of fear in the players never hurt anybody.

“A good coach understands the fabric of his team. He knows his players and treats them according to their individual merit. If he adopts a my-way-or-the-highway approach, it is for the betterment of that player and the team,” Pandit said.

“While encouragement does do the job for some, but if the coach feels that a good dressing down is needed to set the player straight, then it should not be looked down upon.”

There is probably no easy answer to the question of which coaching styles work. Just as every coach is different, so too is every player. What works for one player may not work as well for another player.

But the most important thing to remember is that both a coach and a player have the same goal: the team’s ultimate wellbeing. And once both the two parties buy into that philosophy and understand that the team’s requirements supersede everything else, that is the recipe for success. In that respect, it’s not a clash of two contrasting styles. It’s making use of the best of both worlds.