Principles to Guide the Choice of Lanka’s Cricket Selectors

Michael Roberts

Rather exceptionally for a lad from the plantation Tamil peoples in the mid-20^th century Chandra Schaffter was educated at St. Thomas College, Mount Lavinia. He excelled at hockey and cricket in particular and went on to represent Ceylon in both sports in the 1950s.

He became one of the Cricket Selection Committee headed by DWL Lieversz and others in the 1960s. He went on to found the JANASHAKTHI insurance company in 1994 — an enterprise that has been so solid that it gave him time to serve as the Manager of Sri Lankan cricket teams in the decade 2000s.

Chandra also took the meaningful step of organising SS ‘Chandra’ Perera’s unique collection of cricketing memorabilia and cuttings in the Janashakthi Book of Cricket in the year 1999 … ……….. a godsend to historians of cricket as well as those involved in social history.

I was involved in writing articles on cricket in the 1990s and 2000s and happened to be in Taunton, UK when the SL touring team led by Mahela Jayawardene played a one-day match at that city on the 21^stJune 2002.** I had a long chat with Chandra at the team hotel on that occasion and our friendship matured subsequently when I visited him at the “Lighthouse Hotel” off Galle during some ODI matches circa 2003/04 (dates forgotten).

Set in this background, I can attest to the wisdom reposing within Chandra’s thinking and experience. What he has to say about the principles we should follow in choosing those who select the island’s cricket squads are worth their weight in gold …. and a form of insurance against gross idiocy.

Read ….. muse …. weigh ….

Jaffna youths mob Murali during Janashakthi’s ‘reconciliation match’ in 2002

 

 

 

ALSO NOTE

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandra_Schaffter
• https://thuppahis.com/2023/04/01/chandra-schaffter-at-hockey-for-school-university-ceylon/
• https://thuppahis.com/2023/04/05/chandra-schaffter-a-sturdy-sri-lankan-sportsman-and-administrator-for-all-seasons/

Chandra Schaffter on the PRINCIPLES to pursue in Selecting Lanak’s Cricket Selection Committtee

Dear Michael

They say great minds agree but I really think that great minds often disagree.  Anyway, let me reply your email entitled “Your thoughts and my thoughts”.

1)   I think exceptional cricketers are bad selectors and even worse as coaches. You need those who are good but not exceptional. Neither do you need the average ones.

2)   I think that recently retired players should have a break of about five years before they are considered to be selectors.

3)   The reason is that they carry with them some of the baggage of having been players and they may have had either good or bad relations with some of those still playing. They may try to help their friends or work it out on their enemies.  So, for this reason I think the recently retired player is not the best thing.

4)   I think that a 10-year gap would be reasonable.

5)   I totally agree that they should have a good cricketing brain and absolute integrity – not easy to find but can be found.

6)   I do not really agree that you need a batsman, a bowler, a wicket-keeper etc.; then you will also need a leg spin, off spin bowlers, etc. I think a good mature cricketer who has a fair knowledge of the game across the board can do a good job.

7)   Speaking for myself, with due modesty, I would say I am generally able to pick a promising cricketer within an over or two.  Do not need to watch him in an innings.

8)   I also feel that statistics are the worst indicator for selection.

9)   As I often tell my friends, 30–40 years ago, the English cricket averages were regularly published in the Observer, and you would find that not one of those among the top six made the English team.

10) When I was a selector, we had D.D. Jayasinghe who was an average batsman, K.M.T. Perera bowler, Bobby Schorman allrounder and myself perhaps a mediocre allrounder.

11)   I think the basic criteria for a selector  are integrity, experience not necessarily at the highest level of the game, but preferably so, but even a very good club cricketer can be a good selector.

Our problem of course is that the selectors are easily replaced.  If Sanath Jayasuriya says Upul Tharanga something, he has to do it or for that matter, any of the other selectors, but Sanath is not a selector but only a coach.  In terms of the rules, he does not have a say in the selections.  The more serious drawback in what is happening today is that no player is sure of his place as he knows he can be a victim of interference from the wrong quarters.  That is why our cricket is failing.  Cricketers are not confident of being selected even if they do well.

I am afraid my views are controversial, but I feel strongly about these matters and I cannot see a way out for Sri Lanka cricket until these are put right.  Selectors should be completely independent and the administrators should honour that requirement – not sully it.

Yours sincerely

Chandra Schaffter

P.S.

Two cricketers struck me in the just completed T20 and 50 Over matches:

1. a)   Wellalage, a shining example of how to keep your wicket and score when needed, and also how to tie the batsman down.
2. b)   Charith Asalanka, in manner, demeanour and relations with his team excellent. A simple man of sterling character.

*************************