Time to hang up the sunglasses

The appointment of Duncan Fletcher as India’s coach following Gary Kirsten’s decision to return to South Africa after the 2011 World Cup success seemed strange at the time. And now, eighteen months and nine Test defeats later, it appears even more misguided. With the team having got worse rather than better under his watch, it is surely time to hang up his sunglasses, or else they could soon descent into freefall.

Quite what attracted India to Fletcher is unclear. Yes, he did a good job with England, and led the team to some landmark successes. But however good his record with England was, he just seemed unsuited to the Indian job from the outset. Nasser Hussain has said that Fletcher’s greatest skills with England were ‘planning’ and ‘man-management’. Neither would seem to be key attributes for the role in India: planning is in the hands of N. Srinivasan and the BCCI whilst those, such as Greg Chappell, that have tried to man-manage India’s superstars have found that that it’s the wrong way to approach things. Fletcher was also well passed 60 when given the Indian job, and it can be argued that he belongs to an earlier school of world-class coaches than current masters like Kirsten and Andy Flower.

Whilst Kirsten and in particular Flower would appear to have a say in every significant decision that needs making, its also very difficult to tell quite what Fletcher’s done since taking charge. His press conferences with England were often caricatured as dour and uninteresting. But at least he gave them. Since taking the job he has hardly faced the Indian media; fielding coach Trevor Penney was left to take the questions after Day 2 in Kolkata. Whilst Penney’s answers might have been more interesting, Fletcher’s absence raises questions of whether he’s willing to hold himself accountable for the team’s failings. Even were he not actually to blame, a strong leader would take it upon himself to not only take his share of the responsibility, but also to ensure that changes are made to put things right.

And it’s a reticence to change things which is perhaps been Fletcher’s greatest weakness in his time at the helm. After seeing the team annihilated twice in quick succession away from home, something needed to be altered. Perhaps in personnel – it strikes me as ridiculous that Ajinkya Rahane, a 24 year-old with a first-class average of 64 is yet to make his debut. But more pertinently in attitude. A hallmark of the whitewash in England was that Indian heads dropped early, leading to some woeful fielding and village bowling. At the time they at least had an excuse for fielding, but with Dravid and Laxman gone the average age is now significantly lower, and the same problems persist. Whilst Cook and Trott were going about their business, the Indian bowlers rarely looked like breaking through – and when they did they dropped the catches. A properly motivated team keeps going hard through the tough patches. Fletcher must be held accountable for these failings in part.

Furthermore, mistakes Duncan made with England are being repeated. When England went to Australia in 2006/07, Andrew Flintoff (as captain), Ashley Giles and Geraint Jones were all picked for the 1^st Test despite having either hardly played, in the first two cases, or lost form completely in the third case. Fletcher’s India are doing the same thing. Given the depth of talent in the Indian domestic game, particularly in the batting department, it is near impossible to justify the selections for this series of Gautam Gambhir (who last reached three figures almost three whole years ago) and Yuvraj Singh (who was not first pick before his cancer battle, and had played two first-class matches since). That Gambhir has since found some form is neither here nor there – he shouldn’t have been in the team. Meanwhile, Harbhajan Singh had done nothing in the Ranji Trophy or his stint with Essex last summer to earn a recall. Rahane, Manoj Tiwary, Rohit Sharma and Ravindra Jadeja are just a few of those left on the sidelines while the pampered one-time, and often one-day, heroes add to their cap tally. It would be wrong to lay the blame for this entirely at Fletcher’s door. But a good coach should surely have enough influence to get the XI he wants from the selectors.

A tour of South Africa awaits next winter, and without change a full house of overseas whitewashes against Test cricket’s big three is on the cards. Relying on a strong home record, which is itself in the process of collapsing, is simply not good enough. What India need is a coach who can deal with the media, take the lead in team selection and strategy, and instil belief in a team in transition. With Flower committed to England, that man could be Tom Moody. Moody was a well-received coach of Sri Lanka, perhaps the next most difficult job in the world game after the Indian one. His work in the media means he’s be sure to appear at press conferences, and he understands the game better than most.

So, this writer thinks its time for Fletcher to go. He served England well on the whole, and will forever be associated with the introduction of central contracts, and a bigger coaching staff. He will also be remember as the Ashes winning coach of 2005. But his spell with India has been one long nightmare, which he desperately needs to wake up from.