Why having Sourav Ganguly as India's head coach would be a bad idea

Sourav Ganguly as coach? I have a confession to make: I’m a huge fan of Sourav Ganguly. Possibly no cricketer in the history of the game has given me more happiness than Ganguly. Not Sachin Tendulkar or MS Dhoni or, even, AB de Villiers. That said, I’m convinced Ganguly the coach of the Indian cricket team is a bad idea. Some decisions should not be driven by emotions. The push to make Ganguly the coach is one such move. [caption id=“attachment_2290532” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Sourav Ganguly. AFP[/caption] I don’t know Ganguly personally, but, as one of his biggest fans in the world, I have observed and listened to him very closely in his roles as player, captain, commentator, and spokesperson. Based upon which, I have arrived at some carefully considered conclusions about Ganguly’s suitability as coach of the Indian cricket team. There are many things one can say about him. ‘Disciplined’ is not one of them. He wasn’t even disciplined enough to work on his fitness; he wasn’t disciplined enough to improve his fielding; he wasn’t disciplined enough to become a better runner between the wickets. In short, Ganguly was never disciplined enough to set a great example that others could follow. ‘Tactical genius’ is not one of them either. Gangly was an aggressive captain, but far from thoughtful. His way was autocratic, not inclusive. He was instinctive, but not innovative. Put simply, Ganguly was not analytical and sensitive enough to make a good and compassionate guide. Sourav Ganguly was also not unselfish enough to step back and let others take the credit. He was never brave enough to consistently put himself in the line of fire when the chips were really down. He was never large-hearted enough to forget about himself and play for the team when it was no longer ‘his’ team. In other words, Ganguly was a dictator, which is required under certain conditions, but those conditions only. There are many things one can say are needed in a great coach, but undisciplined, autocratic, and overly emotional are not among them. A coach needs to be thoughtful, unselfish, self-effacing, sensitive, inclusive, and visionary more than many other things. A coach who loves the limelight will not make a good coach. A coach who isn’t open-minded will not make a good coach. A coach who believes in ‘his way or the highway’ will not make a good coach. A coach who is provincial will not make a good coach. Sure, Ganguly is aggressive. And, yes, many Indians could do with more of this quality. But Ganguly was (and perhaps still is) also a pampered, petty, and petulant brat. These are some of the qualities Indians need to do away with if they want to be the best in the world at many things, including cricket. I have no doubt the Indian cricket team with Ganguly as coach will do well when the conditions suit them. This is nothing new. This is nothing extraordinary. This is nothing special. But Ganguly rarely excelled outside his comfort zone and what India needs is to be pushed beyond their comfort zone. Now you might say Ganguly is that rare captain who led India to Test wins outside the Indian subcontinent, well outside their comfort zone. You might say this particular outstanding record makes him the right man to coach a team that has forgotten how to win Tests outside the Indian subcontinent. I would urge you not to succumb to the temptation to do so. Captaining a team is very different from coaching one. I fear Ganguly will try to captain the Indian team if he is given the job to coach it. And that is a recipe for disaster. Remember what happened with Greg Chappell?