RE:wow
by C Kishen on Apr 18, 2008 09:56 AM Permalink
Sachin Tendulkar is not an idiot to listen to Greg's nonsense. If you read Greg's book making of champions - Tendulkar is shown as an example. So please pick up a cricket bat and you will know how great Tendulkar is. GC was a good player but he is not a good coach and frazer is just a marketer. The RCA is full of gimmickry and the results will not change. The better players will come through anyway. These two guys are just making money by running a circus.
I read this piece with a great deal of interest and got the impression that Greg Chappell clearly knows what he is talking about. Then I read something that I happen to know something about-- about how the brain recognizes patterns. I don't know Charles Krebbs but would like to query Chappell's view that he is one of the few people in the world who knows about this. There is an enormous literature in cognitive psychology about this exact subject and I am not sure that cognitive scientists will name Krebbs as one person who has special knowledge here. I then move on to his discussion of Gladwell's tipping point. Again, I was struck by the superficiality of Chappell's understanding here. Given that Chappell is clearly out of depth talking about the only two things I know in his extensive conversation here, I have to doubt his expertise on other topics he brings up in his conversation. I think we need to recognize that being articulate is not a good indicator of expertise.
RE:RE:Greg Chappell
by on Nov 15, 2007 11:27 AM Permalink
Regarding the comment "ne of the few people in the world who knows about this" about the brain pattern - there is something specific that Chappell is mentioning, which is about the work that Krebbs is doing as I read and re-read this ...
The comment reads "one of the few in the world in his line. " Why do you have to reword it to "one of the few people in the world who knows about this."
I think it'd been really mean if Chappell would have actually said that and I hope you - Madan - made it all by yourself and that would be equally mean as well.
Also regarding the "Tipping Point" remark - it's Ian who made that comment. I have read the book as well when it came out and I can make perfect sense in the context of the "tipping point" concept used and expounded by Gladwell in his book.
I'd like to know what is superficial about it?
Reading your comment, Madan, I think you are sounding superficial because you did not read it carefully and trying to beat it up for the heck of it...
RE:Greg Chappell
by C Kishen on Apr 18, 2008 10:13 AM Permalink
Charles Krebs is about pseudo science. Madan is intelligent enough to know that G C and Frazer are superficial con artistes. They are not qualified coaches or sports scientists. Excellent points Madan. I know what happens at the RCA so can confirm what you say is true. Its humbug. They are here for the money.
RE:Greg Chappell
by ashok kumar on Nov 21, 2007 12:31 PM Permalink
Thank you sir, hit the nail on the head with the articulation vs expertise summation. I see a mass hypnosis at work.
Charles Krebs was a kinesiologist and during his brief stints with the Indian team it is alleged he gave transparent pills with no branding etc, to Indian players, in plastic bags with the words R&D trials written on them and told them they were aminos or something of the sort. Distinctly dodgy.
RE:Greg Chappell
by on Dec 03, 2007 12:38 PM Permalink
The impression I got is that he is more of an old fashioned coach in the way he thinks, that the more modern scientific reductionist approach takes focus away from the big picture. This is evident from the fact that he rates the more intuitive and experiential coaching style of indian coaches in the other disciplines he encountererd ...not cricket, above the more scientific australian method. This is probably why aussies don't want to touch him even with a barge pole and the reason why he came back to India despite the horror he and his wife went through.
