Monday 19 / May / 2025
The law of karma is one of the most complicated concepts put forward by ancient Indian texts. With multiple definitions and complex meanings, experts in the field find it hard to explain in a way that helps enthusiasts comprehend what it truly is, or what it is not. In the absence of a simple, straight-to-the-whole-point account coming from either Anil Kumble or Virat Kohli, we could either indulge in a bit of speculation and explore the spicy nuances about the captain-against-coach controversy or resign ourselves to the simple notion of karma playing out with incredible suddenness.
First, the speculations. There have been quite a few, ranging from Kumble’s ‘headmasterly’ style of functioning to the demand of pay rise that sought to seal not just a Rs 7.5 crore salary for the coach but a proportionate jump every time the skipper would be rewarded by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), which must have upset Kohli as well as the board.
Pretty little we got to hear, apart from the reported incident involving Kuldeep Yadav, about the difference of opinion between Kohli and Kumble. Reports suggest that Kumble wanted the spinner in the team for the crucial third Test against Australia when the scores were level at one-all, which didn’t happen, and that Kohli was more hurt by the way Yadav was pushed in for the fourth Test than by the fact that he had to drop out of the decider nursing an injured shoulder.
An inspiring element of twist unravelling right now in the West Indies leaves one confused, though. Looking at the way Kohli and Yadav celebrate their success in the West Indies, and on hearing what the skipper thinks about the spinner — “He’s quite amazing with what he does with the ball...writ spinner is always a bonus”— it’s hard to believe any vicious spin. It’s either that the Yadav selection row is a figment of media imagination or that Kohli is too quick, too smart to put his money on the winning horse.
Report suggest that seniors and juniors in the Indian team were not happy with the alpha male way Kumble went about the task.
What was objectionable to the seniors and the juniors? Few extra minutes in the nets? That’s unlikely, and we are not getting to hear the whole truth in this case. If there was something the seniors got upset about, it could have been the “injury protocol” brought in by Kumble that denied an automatic return to the team for anyone who sat out with an injury.
Ajinkya Rahane, Rohit Sharma, Shikhar Dhawan and Mohammed Shami had to go back to domestic cricket to prove their fitness and get back in. Some of the seniors might not have liked the new norm. MS Dhoni, when he was at the helm, used to speak about how difficult it was to get 150 per cent out of guys who were 80 percent fit, and the new regulation, if anything, should have put a smile on the face of Kohli, not grimace. If he chose to align with the disgruntled seniors, it was unfortunate.
Player revolts against a coach is nothing new to Indian cricket. There’s no foreign-desi reservations for such revolts. Two of the members of the present Cricket Advisory Committee, Sachin Tendulkar and Saurav Ganguly, were among those who revolted against Greg Chappell, and Madan Lal had spoken about players not being happy when he was coach. It’s not easy to resolve such differences with disciplinary measures, and what’s needed is a clearly defined job description for the coach.
The team selection committee picks a pool of players and it’s the responsibility of others, the skipper and the team management, to select the final eleven. Maybe, such aspects require a relook. The roles and responsibilities have to be defined clearly, and communicated in writing.
Ravi Shastri, the man backed by Kohli and persuaded to throw in his hat by the Cricket Advisory Committee, is almost certain to get the job again, unless there’s unexpected twists in the coach story. The former director is a familiar, popular figure among the boys and their leader, but leaving things to goodwill and camaraderie might lead to unwelcome setbacks in the future if there are no clearly defined boundaries.
The boys no longer need a former player to walk around with a stick to discipline them. If the skipper is the boss on the field, why not make him the boss off the field as well? Let the coach mind other things -- it’s up to the BCCI to come up with a list of the things he should mind and not mind.
Now, the karma part. In the 1990s, Kumble was reportedly among the players who backed the then captain Sachin Tendulkar in rows with coach Kapil Dev. History may have repeated itself and Kumble may have reaped the fruit of his karma.
*****
The writer is a freelance contributor based in India. All the views and opinions expressed in the article are solely those of the author and do not reflect those of Times of Oman
