Constant challenge will lead to constant attitude

From time to time, situations develop that cause average teams to improve, say to number 3. It can happen. Electrons jump to another energy level, political warlords feel the need to be honest! However, since this higher level is not a comfortable, or a practical, state to be in, it is unstable. As the scientists would say, it is not in steady state and so forces appear that nudge a team back to the preferred, or comfortable, equilibrium.

Players get complacent, they start enjoying the perks of success and, in doing so, sometimes lose sight of what made them successful in the first place, the media tells them that they are far better than they actually are. Attitude suffers and the team begins its descent. Inevitably the downward momentum takes it beyond the state of equilibrium and down to, say, number 7.

Now, new forces get triggered. Criticism hurts, finances take a hit, the same media mocks at the team, pride bursts through those layers of complacence and the players acquire a mission. That is why, I suspect, India are at their best when down and at their poorest when, relatively, on top. The difference between teams that yo-yo and those that exhibit steady performance is attitude. It is the answer to all of Indian cricket’s worries; on the field and in the boardroom.

It is also, like the fountain of youth and the perfect portfolio, a little difficult to find.

So how does one guarantee constant attitude? I believe constant challenge is the answer. With great players and teams, the challenge comes from within. From a desire to be better. That is why a Borg won and a Federer does, Woods and Jordan did, and this Australian team does. For the more ordinary, for the lesser inclined, it must be enforced. And the only way to do that is to ensure that the periphery is stocked with enough hungry cricketers.

The problem though is that players on the periphery are swimming in the same pool; in the same easy, unchallenging waters. So how do we make the waters deeper, how do we let a couple of sharks in? The answer is staring at us. Sometimes we search too hard and believe that the most obvious has to be a mirage, a decoy. So we look for people who have the keys to the kingdom of knowledge, we search high and low, near and afar. Or maybe we see the obvious and it is unpalatable. The search is unnecessary but convenient.

We have at least 300 players in first class cricket. We need to knock off 170. Ah, the administration says, we are denying them opportunity. It is one of the great fallacies of democracy. The only opportunity to offer is the opportunity to play for India and if players are not good enough to make it to the top 130, they are unlikely to be good enough to make it to the top 20. So we must be kind to these players and let them go; to pursue another career, to have a life beyond 35, maybe a more fulfilling life than that of a failed first class cricketer. By weeding them out early, we will do them a favour.

Merge Kerala with Tamil Nadu, Goa with Karnataka, Hyderabad with Andhra Pradesh, Baroda with Gujarat and Saurashtra, Punjab with Haryana. Or maybe find another route. As Gandhiji said: have purpose, the means will follow. Competition does lovely things to minds we have assumed are unwilling or incapable. Young men and women in the knowledge industry are taking on the world, slickly made Indian cinema has begun making inroads. So, why not Indian cricket?

We need to move that state of equilibrium from number 5 to number 3. And the longer we dilly-dally on domestic cricket, the longer we will take to make that move. If we don’t reform cricket now, today, it means we are happy with where we are.