The point regarding the performance of the senior players is well taken. It is a fact that the batsmen trio did not play enough. Although Ganguly did score some runs, it was merely a shadow of his past. The general attitude of the seniors in the team was score runs enough to secure the position in the team - and this was mainly because of the sense of insecurity brought in by Chappell. The role of the captain and the coach should be more on strategising and inspiring the team members to give in their best. In this role, both the captain and the coach failed miserably. It was clear from the body language of the team - it was like a radar-less ship drifting away. The half-baked concepts tried out by the coach was basically to make a team comprising of 11 sub-standard all-rounders wherein everyone could bat / bowl a bit. Too much focus was put on body fitness and other non-issues. Unfortunately, the desired core strenghts of a cricketer, ie., batting and bowling, was totally neglected. Greg Chappell was a man with a mission to put the team first before any player. This was taken to ridiculous extremes by him and if he states that there was a mafia of the senior players in the team, I would suggest that the real mafia was himself. He was at his abuse and threatening best throwing his venom and on the senior players. If perform or perish is the mantra for the players, so be it for the coach and the captain. It is an opt-repeated cliche that the coach or the captain is as good as how the team plays on a given day. By implying this are we undermining the role of a coach or a captain, or are we suggesting that the role of the captain is similar to that of a tennis team?
