We personalise everything. Nothing is ever looked at from an intellectual and critical point of view, dispassionately. If so, then we could say that under the captaincy, we have had 56 different players on the Test team. We have had 3 wicketkeepers, etc, etc. We have not had a fast bowling partnership deveop (since Curtley and Cuddy). Our opening partnerships have lasted all of 3 Tests without change. If you want to look at one simple reason - that, to me a major one. We have not had a team to work with. The core has been Lara, Chanderpaul, Sarwan, now Gayle and Hinds. How can one work with a team when you consistently have to change to adapt to new payers - as you are starting to get into their mind, to get them as a part of the team, they are dropped and you have to start all over again with a new person - getting going with them - the fist one comes back, and so on. Ever see that with a winning team? And is that the captains fault in Windies cricket? Not when the Capt has little choice in picking the team, when the manager and coach are overruled by the selectors and the Board.
Lara has had the misfortune to be Windies at the most disorganised and confused time of their history, and this at a time when the rest of the world was getting their act together! So of course we will lose. Even if we had a team of Tendulkars, turbinators and the whole Aussie fast bowling posse, we can't win if the basis of team building is being undermined by the Board and its poor management.
Thursday, June 09, 2005
I am all for a multistakeholder approach with regard to Internet Governance, as I think it is vital for the way forward. We are getting to the stage of cross-national constituencies, such as gender, indigenous peoples, etc. Internet users' interests cross national borders, so the old model of Governments alone cannot be maintained, as even the democratic governments cannot justify that they are elected and have the mandate from the people.