A change at the top can make a difference

There is little doubt that for a change, Sachin Tendulkar is not the man of the moment as far as Indian cricket is concerned. That signal honour right now belongs to Sourav Ganguly. The new Indian captain has been featured on magazine covers and there are lengthy features on him by experts in newspapers. And there he is, on BBC World's `Face to Face' talking with Karan Thapar. Even the TV and newspaper ads which feature him are becoming more frequent. The 27-year-old Bengali has been unfazed by all this sudden attention. For one thing, as one of the leading players in the side, Ganguly has been used to the spotlight ever since he made his dream debut at Lord's in 1996. And secondly, Ganguly by nature has always remained level headed and phlegmatic. Where Tendulkar, anxious to please, worked himself to a frenzy and put pressure on himself, Ganguly, more relaxed, takes things as they come.

Ganguly's one big advantage was that he took charge when the Indian team was virtually a wreck. There was really no pressure on him. He was in a win-win situation. If things did not improve under his leadership, the analysts would say `well, things were not any better under Tendulkar.' If on the other hand Indian cricket's fortunes were on the upswing with him in charge, it was inevitable that he would get more than his share of the credit. Simply put, the expectations were more with Tendulkar as captain rather than Ganguly.

Free of much pressure, Ganguly's captaincy has been refreshingly different - and successful. For one thing, thus far at least, captaincy has not affected his batting. Indeed, like Ray Illingworth thirty years ago, his batting seems to have improved since he has taken over. So leading from the front - an important must for any captain - has come naturally to him. Secondly, there is no doubt he is a thinking captain and not an intuitive one. He has made a close study of the batsman's strength and weaknesses, makes the bowling and fielding changes accordingly and hustles them into errors. Third, he is among the most democratic of captains willing to consult his teammates - the bowlers as well as senior players.

All the same, Ganguly has made it clear who the boss is. Interviewed by Ravi Shastri at the presentation ceremony after the victory at Baroda, he made his displeasure clear at the manner in which the team made a mess of things towards the end and almost blew away what should have been a comfortable victory. He is one who clearly follows the adage of Theodore Roosevelt - `Speak softly and carry a big stick.'

Certainly at the moment Ganguly can do little wrong. But perhaps praise for him should be tempered with a bit of caution. Sure, he has pulled off a well merited victory over a strong South African side and it must not be forgotten that the visitors are ranked among the two top sides in one day cricket. What's more, their morale must have been high after their clean sweep in the Test series. But the fact remains that it has been achieved at home. Ganguly's real test will be at Sharjah where the Indians cross swords with South Africa and Pakistan.

But given his refreshingly different approach, there is no reason why Ganguly should not follow the victory over South Africa with a triumph in Sharjah. He is not one to be overawed by the reputation of the opposition. Nor was he in awe of a South African total of 301 at Kochi. As he advised his team at the break, ``don't think of it as a target of 300. Think of it as six runs an over.'' Besides being an able captain, Ganguly it seems, is a qualified psychologist too. That advice was nothing but ingenious psychology.

Sometimes a change at the top can make a difference. The most famous instance of this in Indian cricket is when Ajit Wadekar took over in 1971 from MAK Pataudi, who had led India for almost a decade. Pataudi alone wasn't to blame for the successive defeats sustained under his captaincy. But Vijay Merchant, whose casting vote as chairman of the selection committee saw Wadekar get the top job, said he had approached the question of captaincy as a director of a company would, who when faced with the problem of a decline in production might ponder over replacing the production manager. As he added, one could not be sure the new man would succeed but some change was desirable.

Similarly Tendulkar alone can't be faulted for all the setbacks India has suffered lately but some change was deemed necessary. Wadekar was responsible for Indian cricket's golden period between 1971 and 1973. Who knows? Maybe the Ganguly era will herald another golden period for Indian cricket.