Call it a disgrace, a disaster, a debacle or perhaps even the death knell, no word in the Oxford English dictionary can perhaps stand up to describe India’s performance in the World Cup 2007 in the Caribbean. It was certainly a rude shock to a nation that expected its cricketers to go past the first stage, at least. India’s exit from the World Cup has certainly raised several questions, which to the best of my knowledge will remain unanswered, as that’s the way our system works – specifically, the BCCI.

Yes, this is a game of cricket – aptly described by purists as one of “glorious uncertainties” and frankly speaking, India was at the receiving end of the adage. But what followed the exit is more interesting than the short stay in Trinidad itself. The public ire against the team the day after was well documented by the media, without realizing that it was they who ballooned expectations into dreams and when shattered, shirked responsibility for the same and turned into bashers. Some of the images that we saw was indeed natural, but could have been avoided considering the fact that it was just a game of cricket and not a war that we lost.

Greg Chappell attributed this loss to a “collective failure” and I somehow can’t stop myself from calling it a systemic failure. It is all well to sit and criticize the team for their shocking performances, but at the end of the day – the BCCI has not yet come forward and taken equal blame for their role in this debacle. People are still keen on completing their two-year terms, without realizing that the future of the game is in question. On expected lines, Sharad Pawar came out the next day and rubbished claims of his resignation by calling it “an utter nonsense”. And, as per my observations, the BCCI is looking for scapegoats, who they could deflect the blame on. First they took an aim at the senior players, followed by the media and realizing that both parties were not standing up for themselves, blamed it on the World Cup format. What Ricky Ponting stated the other day, might evoke some instant reactions from eternal patriots like Sunil Gavaskar, but by doing that, they are running away from the grim reality of Indian cricket. Has Dilip Vengsarkar come out and put his papers yet ? Why ? As a Sharad Pawar loyalist, he’s getting his due mileage.

Perhaps, in hindsight, the appointment of Dilip Vengsarkar as the Chairman of Selectors was a move directed at chopping the wings of Greg Chappell. The very objective with which Chappell was drafted in as the coach was defeated, when they realized that the “free hand policy” had to be chopped or may be to satisfy some of Pawar’s detractors. That is how the BCCI functions anyway. If we go back to Kiran More’s stint at the selectoral helm, Greg Chappell was given enough autonomy to choose the team he felt could win matches, rather than external compulsions. Reading between the lines, Ganguly’s return also smells of Pawar’s intentions to mute Chappell’s growing influence within the team. But to Saurav’s credit, the man redeemed himself. When the time was ripe to take some harsh decisions, the BCCI turned into lambs. This is where we lost the World Cup and not against Sri Lanka. Veteran cricket writer Rajan Bala equally vindicates this claim, as Greg was disappointed with the make up of the World Cup squad. For a man who used to regularly come out and frankly state “Ignore youth at its own peril”, he was given a squad of old men, who had no more bones left in them to match the standards set by other teams. I am not saying if Suresh Raina or Mohammad Kaif would have won India the World Cup, but if selected back then, they would’ve certainly given their 200% on the field, where India looked absolutely hapless. And the way the Indian selection system functions, even crystal ball gazing would not predict our future.

Culturally and in cricket, we still suffer from the colonial hangover. Foreigners are perhaps ridiculed for whatever they’ve done and we associate ourselves with everything Indian, without realizing that we lag by 10 years than where they are. Which is why it seems easier to blame a Greg Chappell or an Ian Frazer for the World Cup loss than one among our own? What can Greg Chappell do if he’s presented with a bunch of perennial chokers? What can he do if his words have no weight age among selectors? What could Greg Chappell have done if the system turns against him than stand by him? And it seems extremely convenient for the media to turn him into a villain when the team loses and fail to credit him during the more successful days. That’s the double standards that we Indians are known for. And now, there are talks of an Indian coach. And the possible candidates – Sandeep Patil and Mohinder Amarnath. An Indian coach has always been known to bring some regional bias into his operations and this time it would be any different. After all, an Indian coach would have understood the system by now, enough to exploit it skilfully. I have nothing against them, but from what the past says – we’d be changing them like underwears. If great sporting teams like Manchester United have the guts to stick with Sir Alex Ferguson even after a trophyless season, I am sure Greg Chappell can be treated similarly. Coaches do not come with magic wands, sigh.

The media is another active participant in this whole game. The news media have just succumbed to their own expectations and cricket journalism in this country has never hit such a low. The debates in the mainstream news channels and newspapers are quite primary and do not seek credible solutions from their experts. When some channels flashed news about Sachin Tendulkar’s possible captaincy move, all they did was display statistics of his previous captaincy record and not a single channel, I repeat, not a single channel questioned the credibility of these reports. Some of the panelists for their discussion shows reflect a lot of dumbing down. For example, having a Sharad Pawar loyalist on any show means the BCCI keeps mum about some issues and justification of their claims or lets say, some actors and actresses. All of these augur well for the TRP. The well-respected Indian cricket intelligentsia is almost kept in the dark. And where is the objectivity? Yes, India is out of the World Cup – so what? The show must go on. This is where the English channels are placed relatively better than their Hindi counterparts. People like Madan Lal and Yashpal Sharma do not really lose their sheen as World Cup winners, but their opinions cater to the most basic and primary instincts of the audience, more simplified than others. The Hindi dozen brings in former cricketers, presumably from Delhi to analyze the game and their analysis revolves around “Should Gambhir have gone instead of Uthappa?” C’mon guys, mature up!

Indian cricket somehow needs to stand up and stare reality in its face. That’s the only way we can move forward. Getting rid of the coach and the captain would be a knee-jerk reaction on the parts of the power men. Instead of these peripheral issues, address the more integral one. To conclude, I’d rather be a Manchester United by sticking to Sir Alex Ferguson than a Real Madrid who regularly change their nappies !