DDCA needs fewer people, greater accountability

With the domestic cricket season due to begin in mid-September, the Delhi and District Cricket Association (DDCA) is yet to announce its selection panel. The window to pick teams and put preparations in place is already shrinking. In such circumstances, the last thing Delhi cricket needs is another unwieldy exercise involving a jumbo support staff.

The problem of having too many people attached to DDCA teams is hardly a secret. It is visible to anyone who follows Delhi cricket. What is difficult to understand is the logic behind appointing such large support groups in the first place. At times, it appears less about cricket and more about accommodating or pleasing people.

That is hardly a sound way to run a cricket system, particularly when public money is involved. As Congress MP and author Shashi Tharoor has rightly pointed out in a different context, public resources should not be spent merely to keep everyone happy. Cricket administration should be guided by merit, efficiency and results—not by the desire to accommodate as many people as possible.

If I am not wrong, DDCA may have borrowed this system of having a large number of coaches and different categories of support staff from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). But there is a basic difference that seems to have been overlooked.

At the BCCI level, the entire support structure is engaged for the whole year and its services are used extensively throughout the calendar. The national teams have a packed schedule, with players moving from one series to another and from one format to another. There is therefore a clear case for having specialists working with the teams throughout the year.

The situation at DDCA is very different. Delhi's domestic season runs for only a few months, after which most of these services are not utilised. Yet we end up paying for an entire entourage when their services may actually be required only for two or three months.

From a practical and financial point of view, this amounts to a clear wastage of resources. If people are being appointed and paid for the whole year but their expertise is being utilised for only a fraction of that period, the DDCA needs to seriously question whether such an arrangement makes sense.

Of course, there can be another way of looking at it. One could argue that continuity and access to specialists are important for player development and that a broader support structure can have benefits. That argument deserves consideration. But any such system must be justified by actual utilisation and measurable benefits.

For DDCA, the question should therefore be simple: are we getting sufficient value from maintaining such a large support staff throughout the year?

Delhi cricket also needs to confront a more fundamental reality: changing players alone will not change results.

The performances of Delhi teams across formats and age groups over the last two to three years have been disappointing. Whether it is the Ranji Trophy, Vijay Hazare Trophy, Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy, U-23 or U-19 cricket, Delhi has struggled to produce the consistency expected of one of India's traditional cricketing centres.

If the DDCA genuinely wants Delhi to return to winning ways, it must look beyond changing the personnel on the field. The coaching and support system needs a complete rethink.

Accountability must begin at the top. Before another season gets underway, the DDCA should identify who was responsible for the poor results of the past few years. Without accountability, every review becomes an exercise in passing the buck. And without consequences for failure, there is little incentive to improve.

The appointment of coaches and support staff must also be based on merit and proven record. Recommendations, personal connections and phone calls cannot be allowed to determine who gets a place in Delhi's cricket set-up. A successful cricket structure requires people with the expertise to develop players, prepare teams and handle pressure—not simply people who happen to have the right connections.

There is also a strong case for reducing the size of support staffs. A cricket team does not necessarily become better because more people surround it. In fact, an overcrowded dressing room can create confusion, dilute responsibility and increase pressure on players.

For most teams, a compact support structure comprising a head coach, manager, physiotherapist and trainer should be sufficient, with specialists brought in when genuinely required. The emphasis should be on quality rather than quantity.

Most importantly, players need a healthy and calm dressing room. Young cricketers, especially, should not have to navigate a maze of voices, instructions and competing interests. The dressing room should be a place where players can concentrate on improving their cricket, not worry about who is watching, judging or influencing them.

Finally, there must be a proper annual review of every coach and member of the support staff. Performance cannot be assessed only when a new season begins or when a selection controversy erupts. At the end of every season, the DDCA should evaluate what each member of the coaching and support system contributed—and whether that contribution justifies another appointment.

Delhi has no shortage of cricketing talent. What it needs is a system capable of nurturing that talent and converting it into sustained success.

The immediate priority, therefore, should not be to create another long list of appointments. It should be to create a leaner, merit-based and accountable system that also makes financial sense.

Delhi cricket does not need more people in the dressing room. It needs the right people—and it needs them to be held responsible for the results.

Tags : DDCA, Delhi, cricket, ranji trophy, Vijay Hazare Trophy, Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy, T20