Greg Chappell, in an interview with Wisden Asia Cricket,talks about how a side like India could conceivably replicate Australia’s success
Wisden Asia Cricket interview by Anand Vasu24-Nov-2003
Greg Chappell – ‘India need a different attitude’
© Getty Images
You’ve said before that Australia’s dominance is not good for the game.
The gap between Australia and the rest is bad for the game. Having said that, it’s not Australia’s fault – you can’t blame them for the domination. It’s not a criticism of Australia; it’s a comment about world cricket. The success of Australian teams in recent times really started with decisions that were taken 20 years ago – to set up identification processes, elite programs and proper structured programs to develop players. They changed methods, did some research, improved systems, got sports psychologists involved, all for developing cricketers.Other countries need to do the same thing as soon as possible. It is critical for the long-term future of the game that other countries close the gap from they are now to where Australia is, because Australia are going to keep doing the things that work for them and value-adding. The systems may not always produce the talent that there is at the moment; there will always be fluctuations. But the decisions that were taken 20 years ago were to control the major fluctuations and try to even out the results.The fact that England have been weak for such a long time, and West Indies and South Africa are struggling with their own internal problems is not good for cricket. It’s not healthy for one team to be dominant for too long, with all other teams just waiting. All teams should be trying to move forward and narrow the gap.The rise of Australia has run parallel to the fall of many other sides. Surely, this isn’t a coincidence?
I don’t think it is a coincidence. A lot of people are hoping it is a coincidence. Especially in England, people talk about cycles and say this is just one of those cycles. They’ve been down for 20 years. That’s one hell of a cycle! You can’t afford to have those kinds of cycles if you want to be one of the top sides. These cycles occurred at a time when everybody was just relying on natural talent to come to the surface. Now, with more science and technology involved in the game, we’re seeing a variation in the way young people are being developed. Thinking about it a bit more, I don’t think it’s a coincidence at all. Australia has planned and looked to develop. They’ve got a business plan and a developmental plan and that’s worked. In some ways it’s understandable – a lot of the cricket-playing countries are third world countries and don’t have the resources that Australia has. That is a problem, and one the Australians have recognised. We’re exporting a lot of expertise and personnel. Some of the scientific knowledge is being shared with the cricket world.The ICC should be aware of this, and I’m sure they are, because it’s going to affect the business of cricket. Some years ago, Australia, and other teams that were on top of their game, looked to keep secrets and their successful methods to themselves. We now know that spreading the knowledge is a good thing. After all, even if another team have the knowledge and information, it’s still up to them to implement it.You’ve been part of successful teams yourself. The resources and the coaching methods at the time could not have been what they are today. What else is it that sets these teams apart?
The greatest strength of Australian cricket is our bank of natural resources. By and large we have good climate, good outdoor facilities for youngsters to play sport – whatever the sport is. From a cricket point of view, we have the best domestic competition in the world. That really is the basis of our structure. The competitive nature of our domestic cricket is a key.The game has changed a lot in the last 25 years. International cricket has pulled away from first-class cricket, which in turn has pulled away from our club structure. That has created some stress on our infrastructure which needs addressing. We didn’t have the science and the technology that is being used now, but in some ways the methods that we had were better. Not all of the innovations that have come into player development in the last 20 years are necessarily advancements in preparation techniques. A lot of things that were done in the first 100-odd years of Australian cricket – the natural techniques – worked very well and are lost now. We need to be aware of this and re-introduce some of the natural techniques.Would you say champion teams are as much about determination and the will to succeed as about skill and technique?
Again I think an advantage Australia have over most teams is that we build very good spirit and very good unity in the team. It’s a comment about our culture and our society. We’re a very egalitarian society. Our history suggests that we build very good spirit under adversity. This brings out the best in our nature. A lot of other cultures don’t develop that unity, and there’s a lot more individualism in those teams. A good unit will always beat a team of good individuals. That’s been evident throughout the history of Australian cricket. It’s particularly noticeable now, the camaraderie and the unity in this Australian team.You look at a Matthew Hayden or a Justin Langer … you wouldn’t say they’re wildly talented; yet they’re putting runs on the board with regularity.
I think there’s more method and work done in Australia towards understanding the process of success – what it really takes to be successful. Like anything else, in sport, there are basic things that need to be put in place. The foundations of success, in any walk of life, are built on a series of disciplines. Hayden, Langer, and all of the Australian players do that sort of thing very well. A lot of time is spent on inculcating that sort of understanding in Australian cricket. It’s not just about natural talent – it’s about perseverance, about putting building blocks in place, about focusing on the processes not the results.Turning that around a bit, would you say that someone like Javagal Srinath would have been more successful if he was part of an Australian team?
It’s hard to say. Obviously, every individual is different. Having said that, I have no doubt any player will develop better in a successful team than in a team that is under pressure all the time. The support that comes from playing in a successful team is very important in nurturing a person. Sharing the good times and the bad times, particularly the good, is very important.That’s where the team selection process becomes crucial. Bringing in young players, changing the personnel … in the last 10 years or so the Australian selectors have tapped Allan Border on the shoulder, and Ian Healy and David Boon, letting them know it’s time to move on. More than anything, this is because the time and environment were right at a certain stage to bring in a young player. Adam Gilchrist was demanding to play Test cricket, and the only way to get him in was for Healy to move on. Healy felt he could have played for a few more years, and he probably could have. But it would not necessarily have been in the best interests of Australian cricket. Breeding success certainly is contagious.Turning what you said around on its head, I’m sure there are Australians in this team who would not have been successful if they had played for other teams, because without the support and the success going around them, things would have been very different.What would it take to topple Australia?
It would obviously take a team with considerable talent. There are a few teams that have the talent, but it will take the same commitment to excellence that Australian cricket has had though its history, and particularly the last 10-20 years.If you look at our history, we’ve had a very strong team every 15 years or so and had a very successful period. That was occurring naturally, but we’ve now begun to understand that there is a process that allows for this to happen. If other teams put the process in place, the gap between Australia and them will narrow. Australia will have a down period. There’s no doubt that we will see Australia come off the peak in the next few years. This is when other teams must be strong and push hard to topple Australia. That is a cycle. But because of the processes in place, the cycle will be shortened. Instead of being a trough, it will just be a dip in the curve.Which do you think is the team most likely to challenge Australia?
India have the best chance of anyone. India have got a better-balanced side than anyone apart from Australia at the moment. They have good young fast bowlers, quality spinners that we all know about, a strong batting line-up, and the fielding is improving all the time. It should be the mission of Indian cricket to be the next team that dominates world cricket in the next 25 years. I’m sure the team and board are already thinking along those lines. They have the resources, the raw material to start with, and the funds to put a system in place that can cause Australia a lot of problems. Whether the Indians can replicate the spirit and the unity of the Australians, only time will tell; but they certainly have what it takes. In that sense, India has the best chance to topple Australia and become the team that sets the benchmarks in international cricket.But specifically, what does India need to do to be successful in Australia?
If they’re going to beat Australia they have got to go there with a different attitude. They normally go there expecting to be beaten up and they play accordingly. They expect aggressive behaviour and fast bowling and a lot of short balls, and they go into their shell before they reach Australia. They have to go there with an attitude that they’re going to play positive cricket. If they can do that they have as good a chance as anyone. I don’t know that they can beat Australia at home, but if anyone can, India can. They have to go there with a positive attitude and a belief in themselves that they can win. It’s no good going there and hoping to get away without losing a Test match or without getting beaten in the series. That is just not going to work.People talk of an Australian tour in very general terms. But isn’t it true that the challenges for touring teams differ from venue to venue in Australia?
Oh, absolutely. Brisbane will have more bounce and pace than anything they are used to. Adelaide is a good chance for them. There are a lot of wickets in India that are very much like Adelaide. Sydney will seam a little bit but will also turn. It’s getting back to being what it was – a good cricket wicket – and will give everyone a chance. Melbourne is hard to predict because it’s a drop-in wicket. It depends on how long the pitch has been there and how many games have been played on it. It always takes time to settle but has a bit of bounce in it. Sydney and Adelaide are distinct possibilities for India to win. Even Brisbane and Melbourne … if [Ashish] Nehra is fit and [Zaheer] Khan bowls well with the new ball, there’s no reason why they can’t get early wickets.But it’s also not just about wickets and conditions. The Australian media can be hostile, the lifestyle very different. It’s easy to get into a siege mentality. Is that a big factor?
It is a factor but the bigger factor is that teams go there expecting it and go into a defensive mode. They go into a siege mentality even before they get there. As I said before, that will never work. The teams that have had success in Australia are the ones that have believed in themselves, and backed themselves to play positive cricket. If you are going to bat, it is one thing to occupy the crease. But the bottomline is that you have got to score runs. If you’re not actively looking to score runs then things become hard. If Australia bowl a wide half-volley or a wide short ball you have to punish them. Standing there and letting things go by, just relieved that you have survived is just playing into their hands. The art of batting is about scoring runs. Survival is one part of it. There will be times when the opposition bowls well and you go for long periods without scoring runs, but you still need to be looking for runs. You have to score as many runs as you can under the circumstances, whatever they are.And the opposition captain – they save the best for him don’t they?
That’s been going on since forever. Key players and captains have always been targeted on the basis that if you get them out of the way the pressure is increased on the others. [Sourav] Ganguly is going to have his work cut out for him. Then again, he shouldn’t go to Australia thinking that he is going to survive a barrage of short-pitched balls. If he does that he won’t make runs. He has to back himself and go out there looking to handle whatever they bowl. When Ganguly came to Australia and met me we spoke about these sorts of things.You say Ganguly should go to Australia with a positive mindset, but does he have the basic technique and ability to do well there?
Ganguly has the ability to make runs in Australia, no doubt about that. Batting is as much about your attitude and your mental state as it is about your ability to play shots. If you’re in the wrong frame of mind you won’t move properly and you won’t use your physical ability. If you start trying to build a technique to field a particularly delivery, what that does is not necessarily bring you success against such deliveries. But it does reduce your options when you get other sorts of deliveries. When you start thinking you’re going to get a lot of short balls and tell yourself to play back all the time, then the wide half-volley will get you out. Batting is about having a technique that is capable of dealing with whatever the bowler bowls. The good players have all done that. India have three or four players with that capability.We see very few draws these days. The Australians have changed the pace of the game. Should teams try to beat them at their own game? Or can they be frustrated into losing?
You’ve got to beat them at their own game. You have to be positive, have gameplans that will work and stick to them. Only then can you put the pressure back on Australia. Part of the tactics of the game is that you need to assert your dominance from as early as possible. In that sense, cricket is just like a game of chess: it’s about moving your men into a position of strength and being able to dominate the opposition and dictate the moves that they’re able to make. That’s what Australia does well. They go out there with the intent of dominating the opposition. If you play the counter role, that’s not necessarily going to work. Against this Australian side, you become a bit like the duck in the shooting gallery – it’s only a matter of time before you get picked off. You really need to come hard at Australia and fight fire with fire.Some people would suggest that this Australian team is weaker than the one India played against when they toured there in 1999-2000.
It depends on who is fit and playing. And fit enough to perform at their best. If [Glenn] McGrath and [Jason] Gillespie and [Stuart] MacGill are fit and bowling well, it’s still a formidable side. Having said that, Australia are probably a more vulnerable side than they have been in a while.Is there one glaring weakness in this Australian team that India must look to exploit?
I don’t think there are any glaring weaknesses. If you break it down to the various disciplines, they have good fast bowling, good spinners, good batsmen, and they all field very well. And most of all they have a great belief in themselves. Any team that thinks they can beat Australia will have to match them in all those departments..