Lawson laying into Pak senior players

Lawson about Pak team,

Pakistan cricket coach Geoff Lawson feels an artificially imposed system of hierarchy coupled with complacency among some senior players has been the major reason for the team’s inconsistent form.

Asked what he thought needed to be improved in the team at this point of time, Lawson quipped: “Oh well, there are a couple of senior players who, really are legends in their own country, who sometimes don’t train as hard as they should and sometimes, when the game gets in a pressure situation, they don’t actually perform.”

Lawson said he has been trying to get rid of the hierarchy system in the team.

“...The hierarchy they had was one, you know the junior players aren’t considered, selection is made on an ad hoc basis rather than having a process and a structure and as a foreigner you look at the team and you say, ‘well who is this guy playing this week? Never heard of him’.”

“Well I suppose anyone can break a contract. But that’s not my intention, — you know I’ve got definite aims about what the Pakistan cricket team need to do and how we’ll get there. So that, I mean, that really drives me at the moment.” he said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quite a serious charge I suppose. BTW who could be those 2 senior players?

1) Afridi and Yousuf?

2) Afridi and Younis?

3) Younis and Yousuf?

4) And what about Shoaib Malik?

As much as I think about it, IMO Afridi has to be one of those 2 seniors players.

Afridi and someone. Probably Younis, as Yousuf has been pretty decent under pressure of late.

Does Lawson remind you of another gentleman from Australia when he was making the same points about the Indian team a few years back?

As for Pakistan, why can't they forget that Afridi is a batsman too, and treat him as a genuine spinner and a very good fielder? That way they'll be able to think more positively. We had not only messed up our team composition but the bowler too when we counted Pathan in the genuine batsman's list.

Can't say much about Lawson but Chappell did his best to ruin Indian team while he was at the helm.

As for Afridi I wonder what has happened to his batting? Agreed he wasn't too hot as a batsman before as well but atleast he wasn't this bad as he is now. Incidentally his bowling is getting better and he is currently the highest ODI wicket taker this year.

SG wrote:As for Afridi I wonder what has happened to his batting? Agreed he wasn't too hot as a batsman before as well but atleast he wasn't this bad as he is now. Incidentally his bowling is getting better and he is currently the highest ODI wicket taker this year.

Exactly. So why can't they forget his batting? He can hit a six or a four lower down the order but just do not rely on him as they don't rely on Umar Gul. He is certainly not letting anyone down in other departments.

T20 has made Afridi think even more aggresively with the bat. Where as before he felt he had to hit a boundary every second ball, now he feels that he has to hit a boundary every ball. He's not giving himself a chance to get settled at the crease.

His bowling has been excellent in recent times, though.

Malik, Younis & Afridi.

Yusuf joins them as and when he can

John the bookie would be another 'senior player' that would encourage poor performances under pressure as well, no?

I'll get me coat....

afridi is probably the most famous cricketer in pakistan after imran, so its definitely him. dont know if younis can be considered a legend, so maybe yousuf. he does strike one as being a bit lazy as opposed to younis

So far Afridi is the unanimous choice for 1 of those 2 players.

SG wrote:Can't say much about Lawson but Chappell did his best to ruin Indian team while he was at the helm.

I'm sure it was quite unintentional though. I mean, come on, you can't really think he tried to screw us over?

Afridi never struck me as being a shirker.

afridi is probably the most famous cricketer in pakistan after imran

Huh? More famous than the likes of Javed, Wasim, Waqar, Qadir, the Mohammed's?..... Surely not.

sad, but true

More famous than MOHAMMAD SAMI? No way.........

I'm sure it was quite unintentional though

I never claimed it wasn't.

But whatever his intentions were he surely did more bad for Indian cricket than good. And there are some posters (apparently Indian) on PP who think that whatever little success India is reaping in cricket was due to Chappell's work with Indian team.

I mean how can anyone credit him for India's current successes is beyond me. None of architects of India's current successes are his finds. In fact if he had his way none of Tendulkar, Ganguly or Dravid would've played for India after the debacle of WC'07. And we all know how heavily these 3 have contributed to India's fortunes since WC'07, especially the first 2.

Shoaib?

JGK wrote:Shoaib?

When was the last time he played for Pak? May be some 6 months back?

SG wrote:

I'm sure it was quite unintentional though

I never claimed it wasn't.

But whatever his intentions were he surely did more bad for Indian cricket than good. And there are some posters (apparently Indian) on PP who think that whatever little success India is reaping in cricket was due to Chappell's work with Indian team.

I mean how can anyone credit him for India's current successes is beyond me. None of architects of India's current successes are his finds. In fact if he had his way none of Tendulkar, Ganguly or Dravid would've played for India after the debacle of WC'07. And we all know how heavily these 3 have contributed to India's fortunes since WC'07, especially the first 2.

Agreed. Except maybe in the form of Ganguly's magical rise from the ashes for which he can take partial/indirect credit.

But I actually thought (and still think) he did some good to the team (again, directly/indirectly/intentionally/unintentionally open to interpretation) because it showed in the results for a while. Then they lost focus, or, focussed too much on WC '07, England/Ashes style, and all the media hype was built around the World Cup. A couple of bad days in office during the tournament and everything he or the team had ever achieved was consigned to the pyre for the effigies. A bit harsh, no?

But I actually thought (and still think) he did some good to the team (again, directly/indirectly/intentionally/unintentionally open to interpretation) because it showed in the results for a while.

Thats why I mentioned he did more bad for Indian cricket than good.

SG wrote:

I'm sure it was quite unintentional though

I never claimed it wasn't.

But whatever his intentions were he surely did more bad for Indian cricket than good. And there are some posters (apparently Indian) on PP who think that whatever little success India is reaping in cricket was due to Chappell's work with Indian team.

I mean how can anyone credit him for India's current successes is beyond me. None of architects of India's current successes are his finds. In fact if he had his way none of Tendulkar, Ganguly or Dravid would've played for India after the debacle of WC'07. And we all know how heavily these 3 have contributed to India's fortunes since WC'07, especially the first 2.

India's youth policy is one gift of Chappell. Players like Raina, Chawla, RP Singh, Pathan, Sreesanth, Uthappa, Gambhir, Dhoni etc all either made their mark under Chappell or brought in when he and Dravid were in charge. Chappell had the right ideas [like giving non-performing seniors like Ganguly, Agarkar, Zaheer, Bhajji etc.] a bit of shake up, but faulty implementation. It certainly wasn't due to not trying though.

Certainly no one was complaining in his first year when Dravid and his young boys were winning and most one dayers left right and center [beating teams like Pak, England and Lanka 4-1, 4-1 and 6-1]. It is only when the team started losing all kinds of conspiracy theories started coming up. India also won their first overseas series [outside the subcontinent barring Zimboks] after 2 decades. The fact is that most seniors like Ganguly, Sachin etc didn't help by being very co-operative either. They didn't like stepping out of their comfort zones.

Most of what you are accusing some Pak seniors of right now also applied to our own seniors back then - seniors not trying hard, poor fitness, attitude, lack of commitment under pressure etc.

Easy to pillory Chappel in after thought after the water has been spilled. Fact is he did shake up the system and back then everyone [including your hypocritical self] agreed with his methods and accepted it was needed as long as the results backed it. Truth is a lot of the junior cricketers performing now are doing so as the Chappell era enabled them to have a lot of continous exposure which wouldn't have happened under any other coach. They got long enough ropes and real talent and players for future were found and given enough of a run to shape up today's winning team [at least where ODIs and T20s are concerned].

"Raina, Chawla, RP Singh, Pathan, Sreesanth, Uthappa, Gambhir, Dhoni etc all either made their mark under Chappell or brought in when he and Dravid were in charge"

could be said about any coach when the team is going through a transition. after chappell rohit, ishant, praveen kumar, etc were brought in

out of the players that came in under chappell only dhoni, sree and singh could be said to have done well. pathan, gambhir came earlier

chappell had some success with the odi team and most indians seem to remember that. no one remembers the absolute disaster of a stint he had with the test team

as for chappell's 'youth policy', india has always historically had one of the youngest squads in international cricket. its not a new policy