Pointing fingers and calling names is never the best approach in attempting to solve problems.
It becomes worse when internal affairs are put into the public domain.
Hence, I didn’t think that coach Otis Gibson’s public dressing down of senior players after the West Indies exit from the World Cup solved anything.
If anything it merely served to suggest that there are problems in the West Indies dressing room and if this is so, they should be addressed there and hopefully solved beyond the eyes and ears of the public.
Gibson singled out Chris Gayle, Ramnaresh Sarwan and Shivnarine Chanderpaul after the team was eliminated in the quarter-finals.
He expected more from them and in his own estimation didn’t get it.
The statistical evidence may, in fact, support his stance as it relates to the returns of the individuals he earmarked for criticism but he could have discussed his concerns directly with the players or in his mandatory tour report.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not against those in authority reading the riot act in situations where it is merited but how and where are important. The coach’s public assessment of the three players may only have served to set the rumour mill running but in principle would have done little to put wrong things right in West Indies cricket.
At best there isn’t any immediate solution to the problems facing West indies cricket so all stakeholders must thread cautiously lest we destroy the already fragile bridge that is holding it up.
Yes, I will give a 100 props to policymakers who want to encourage frank discussion on the issues that have caused the stagnation of our game but washing dirty linen in public is not going to get us moving again.
Every action brings a reaction and as expected someone as outspoken as former captain Gayle was bound to respond to Gibson’s comments.
In his response the former captain seemed to be suggesting that the coach shouldn’t be looking for scapegoats because the lack of performance by the seniors wasn’t the only reason for the team’s World Cup failure.
Truth be told, Gayle is right because the way we were beaten by the established teams resembled what has happened consistently for more than a decade, long before Gibson became coach.
It’s a simple matter that nothing has changed since Gibson took over and he would have to be a miracle worker to turn things around in such a short space of time, particularly when the majority of players under his charge have been part of the peaks and valleys for a very long time.
In going forward, can Gibson influence hisco-selectors to bite the bullet and cut loose the stalwarts from the team and replace them with some of the promising young lions
Does he see the need to be given a core of players he can bend while the trees are young instead of having to deal on a regular basis with those who are no longer hungry and are stuck in their ways?
This question can also be directed to captain Darren Sammy who may find it difficult to gain the respect of the senior players when it is perceived that he is not capable of keeping his place in the team based on merit as an all-rounder.
In essence, there is no easy way out of the clutches of the cricket depression we have found ourselves in. There is more depreciation than appreciation at the moment because we are not fortunate to have a surplus of outstanding players in any department.
Subsequently, Gibson can expect to be burdened by the process of recycling players for some time yet. He has very little to work with and he has to accept this.
Therefore, doing or saying things publicly to alienate any faction – senior or junior – will be counter-productive in trying to regain our status among the elite.
Coach Gibson may be on the right path in playing his role in the transition but he might be going about it in the wrong way.
Andi Thornhill is sports editor at the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation.