‘John Wright had a unique philosophy in which he recognized every senior player as a leader in their own capacity. He cultivated an environment of respect and freedom for them, a stark contrast to the more rigid methodologies of his successors, Anil Kumble and Greg Chappell.’
IMAGE: John Wright with renowned cricketers Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid during a training session in Lahore on April 4, 2004. Photograph: Reuters
According to Sandeep Patil, a distinguished 1983 World Cup champion and former chairman of selectors, John Wright’s strategy of granting autonomy to players was pivotal in making his coaching tenure with the Indian cricket team so fruitful. Patil argues that this trust was something that both Greg Chappell and Anil Kumble lacked, thus affecting their coaching efficacy.
In his recently launched autobiography Beyond Boundaries, unveiled in Mumbai on Wednesday, Patil shares revealing observations that shed light on why Wright thrived as India‘s coach versus the challenges faced by Chappell and Kumble. This riveting book is a collaborative effort with eminent sports journalist Clayton Murzello.
During the tumultuous Chappell era, Patil gained insider insights as he participated in selection and board meetings in his capacity as the coach for India A.
“Since 2000, India has seen a variety of international coaches and support teams, and this influx has significantly bolstered India’s overseas performance. John Wright’s appointment as the first foreign coach was the pivotal starting point,” Patil mentioned.
“I firmly believe that John was perfectly suited for coaching India. He exhibited a soft-spoken demeanor, was polite and well-mannered, and remained content playing a supportive role to captain Sourav Ganguly rather than seeking the spotlight for himself,” Patil elaborated.
“He was adept at keeping a healthy distance from the media. This management was so masterful that his presence in the headlines was minimal—a stark contrast to the media frenzy surrounding the Greg Chappell years,” Patil noted in his illuminating book.
“In contrast, Chappell found himself in the limelight daily. It’s crucial for a coach to fully grasp the specific policies of the board, understand the perspectives of its members, and cultivate a strong rapport with the President, Secretary, captain, and players. John excelled in these areas,” he observed.
Patil emphasized that Wright viewed every player as equals, placing team unity above any notion of hierarchy.
“Under his guidance, there was none of the ‘seniors versus juniors’ mentality. It was fundamentally a single cohesive team. He granted respect and freedom to all seniors, a stark distinction from the approaches adopted by Anil Kumble and Greg Chappell,” he further remarked.
IMAGE: Greg Chappell with Sourav Ganguly during a training session in Bengaluru in 2008. Photograph: Punit Paranjpe/Reuters
Reflecting on Chappell’s coaching style, Patil believes that the aggressive methodology did not resonate well within the Indian dressing room’s dynamics.
“Greg possesses a very strong personality and is inherently aggressive. The moment Jagmohan Dalmiya granted him a ‘free hand’, he interpreted it as a mandate to transform everything overnight. In contrast, John took a more measured approach, absorbing the existing system first,” Patil elaborated.
“Chappell’s desire to overhaul the entire framework and selection process met resistance, particularly from seniors accustomed to a stable environment,” Patil commented.
“While he tried to implement changes, including moving players like Irfan Pathan up the batting order, the more experienced players, including icons like Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid, were resistant to shifting their batting positions.”
“Moreover, there was discontent among players regarding Ian Fraser’s role as Assistant Coach, which added to the turbulence,” Patil noted.
He insisted that Chappell rushed to infuse Australian principles into Indian cricket.
“Greg aspired to bring in the Australian cricket culture and approach, but his impatience hampered this goal. This impatience likely sowed the seeds of unrest among senior players who were unwilling to conform,” Patil pointed out.
“Understandably, Sourav wasn’t the type to jump into heavy physical training; he required a gradual approach. I believe Greg’s brusque style alienated several senior players, many of whom chose to remain silent about their grievances—even Kumble and Dravid. Ironically, while Ganguly facilitated Chappell’s entry, he played a key role in his exit,” he stated.
Patil ultimately posited that Gary Kirsten emerged as the most effective Indian coach largely due to his ability to connect with the players.
“Gary Kirsten’s tenure was exceptionally successful—arguably the most successful—after leading the team to triumph at the 2011 World Cup. His respectful and soft-spoken nature resonated well with the players. Having faced them on the field, he earned their respect, adding significant weight to his role,” he said.
“Kirsten’s prior experience playing in India granted him critical insights into expectations and pressures, further enhanced by his deliberate avoidance of media distractions, allowing him to focus entirely on the team throughout his coaching hours.”
**Interview with Sandeep Patil: Insights on John Wright’s Coaching Approach**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us, Sandeep. In your recent autobiography, “Beyond Boundaries,” you delve into the coaching philosophies of John Wright as opposed to Anil Kumble and Greg Chappell. Why do you believe John Wright was the ideal coach for the Indian cricket team?
**Sandeep Patil:** Thank you for having me. John Wright brought a unique approach to coaching that centered around respect and autonomy for senior players. He recognized each player as a leader in their own right, which fostered a positive environment where players felt empowered. This was markedly different from the more rigid methods employed by Kumble and Chappell.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned in your book that Wright managed to create a cohesive team dynamic. Can you elaborate on why that was significant?
**Sandeep Patil:** Absolutely. Under Wright, there was no division of ‘seniors versus juniors.’ Everyone was treated as equals, and this unity was critical in building a strong team spirit. The players felt they had a stake in the team’s success, which translated into better performances on the field.
**Interviewer:** In contrast, you noted that Chappell’s aggressive style didn’t resonate well. What do you think prompted that disconnect?
**Sandeep Patil:** Chappell had a strong personality and was keen on implementing changes immediately. However, this aggressive approach clashed with the existing team dynamics. The senior players, who were used to a stable environment under Wright, resisted this sudden transformation. In contrast, John took time to understand the team before making changes, which made his transition smoother.
**Interviewer:** From your experiences during Chappell’s tenure, how did his media presence affect his coaching?
**Sandeep Patil:** Chappell was often in the headlines, which created a lot of distractions. In contrast, John managed to stay away from the media frenzy, allowing the focus to remain on the players. This ability to maintain a low profile helped create a less pressurized environment for the team.
**Interviewer:** Lastly, what lesson do you think future coaches should take from John Wright’s philosophy?
**Sandeep Patil:** The key takeaway is the importance of trust and respect. As a coach, it’s crucial to cultivate an environment where players feel valued and have the freedom to express themselves. This approach not only enhances individual performances but also strengthens team cohesion, paving the way for success.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Sandeep, for sharing your insights on John Wright and the dynamics of coaching within the Indian cricket team.
**Sandeep Patil:** Thank you for having me; it was a pleasure to discuss this pivotal era in Indian cricket.
