Questions for Roger Harper...

As he prepares to hand over the reins of the West Indies team to a new coach, Roger Harper has a lot on his mind.

Having already railed against the monster of insularity in the Caribbean, the 39-year-old Guyanese -- who took over as West Indies coach in March 2000, sat down with Nigel McKenzie for a Q&A session dealing with his tenure, the recent World Cup campaign and the present state of West Indies cricket...

Nigel McKenzie: Why do you think it has been so difficult for the region's best players to focus when required, and apply themselves to a job for which the remuneration (in Caribbean terms) is comfortably above average?

Roger Harper: Undoubtedly, this has been one the main problems we've had -- the inability of our players to focus and concentrate for long periods under pressure. We speak of the region's best, but when you compare our players to other internationals from the top sides, you'll see there's a big gap. Their Test batsmen average around fifty in first class cricket, and if you peruse the stats of their bowlers; you'll understand what I'm saying.

By no means am I suggesting that we don't have the talent, we certainly do, but we have to ensure that our players are properly prepared in every sense. Not just physically, but mentally and tactically ready to compete at the highest level. What we should be cognizant of, is the fact that when a bunch of young players get together at international level, and are required to find their way, so to speak, as most of the West Indies players were a couple of years ago, it's difficult for such a composition to compete consistently with the best in the world.

As these players mature and gain experience, their competitiveness and consistency are expected to come to the fore, and this certainly has begun to happen in some measure. However, complacency is one of the things we always have to guard against, and I think that sometimes when we begin to achieve success, we tend to expect it to happen for us, and not understand that it's a continuous process. It's not going to happen for you, you've got to make it happen! That was one of our problems in this World Cup. Having beaten South Africa, we expected things to fall into place, and really did not follow the planned process as we should have.

Would a system of performance-related incentives and penalties make a difference?

As far as performance-related incentives and penalties go, it's hard to say. Whether it would bring that much sharper focus, I'm not sure. Maybe it's something that could be tried, and then we could see where you go from there.

One of the things we implemented in the team at one stage, was fines for dropping catches. That wasn't done just for the sake of fining players, but to try to encourage them to practice harder, and take their catching practice more seriously, with a view to better match performances. However, while guys were relatively efficient, and put in the all the hard work at practice sessions, at times we ended up dropping more catches in matches. It's difficult to tell how well something like that works. But, having said that, implementing it in a general sense may produce different results.

Do you sense that some of our players see themselves as fixtures, and are inclined to exist on that premise?

Again, because of complacency, and having achieved some degree of success; players sometimes tend to think that they can divorce themselves from the process that brought them that success in the first place. It just doesn't happen that way.

When you took the job, What were your expectations as West Indies coach? In your opinion, have you met those expectations?

When I took over the job as West Indies coach, we were going through a low period. We had a lot of changes in personnel -- as in players I mean, and it was a case of trying to set a foundation and build from there. Some development has taken place, especially among the younger players. The foundation has been laid, and there is potential for this team to blossom into a tremendous force. Having played consistently well in India, where we won that one-day series in impressive fashion, I expected us to be able to build on that performance in the World Cup. There's still some work to be done, but I'm satisfied that we're on good footing.

How difficult is it not to be a part of the team's next stage in their development?

It's a bit difficult, and that's natural I suppose. It's been a challenging period, but also an honour to serve the West Indies in that capacity. I was grateful to be able to play a part in the team's development and West Indies cricket as a whole. Though I will obviously be missing as an integral part of the equation, I am of the sincere belief, that whoever takes up the baton, has a team that they can move forward with.

Considering our tremendous successes without a coach in the past, and using the recent World Cup fixture against New Zealand as a prime example of how extremely difficult it can be, even after three years, to exorcise ingrained bad habits from independent minds, what compelling argument would you put forward for the continued need for a coach?

When you look at the sort of team we have, and the players, it's obvious that there's an even greater need for a coach than there was in the olden days - when players had a better foundation, and greater professional experience. A coach is required to bring that sort of discipline on the field, and I talk about discipline in terms of the way we play; execution of plans, player preparedness, keeping the team focused as well as strategizing for the various opponents they're going to meet. It's something I think that the players might find a little more difficult to do by themselves. The coach can help to bring that focus and direction that is needed and necessary, iron out some of the technical flaws, as well as assist with their mental approach to playing the game and handling different situations.

Were you totally satisfied with the scope you were given?

I'll say that the coach needs to have a bit more autonomy. If you're going to have as great an impact as you'd like to, or is expected of you; you'll need to be given the necessary autonomy.

With respect to autonomy, chairman of selectors Sir Vivian Richards has been travelling with the squad. Given his imposing status, would you say that his presence tended to blur the line of command?

Not at all. Sir Vivian Richards was there in his capacity as the chairman of selectors. One of the things that he was concerned about, and was trying to determine, was the reason(s) for the great difference in the team's performances at home and abroad. He chaired the selection meetings, and discussed strategy with the captain and myself, as coach, but never, did he interfere with the day to day running of the team. His presence, if anything, should have helped the players to focus a bit more.

What in your opinion, are the major challenges facing your successor?

Well of course, that could depend a lot on where he's from. Generally, there will be a number of different challenges -- but I believe getting to know, and understanding the players will be the main ones. The new coach, whether or not he's not from these parts, will become fully aware of the fact that West Indians, even though we play under one banner, are from different territories, and have different ways of approaching issues. That is something he will have to be prepared to deal with. I'm sure he'll get the gist of things quickly enough.

Our exit from the World Cup must have been devastating for you. The encounter with Super Six qualifiers, Kenya, was as close to surreal as cricket could get. What were your feelings at the end of that game?

No unusual feeling after that particular match. There was of course, the realization that we were leaving the World Cup. I will say, however, that it was at the end of the Sri Lanka game, that I, as well as the rest of the guys suffered utter and intense disappointment.

Defeat in that game meant that our chances of progressing to the Super Sixes were very, very slim, if not non-existent. What was so disappointing, was the fact that even though we were unfortunate against Bangladesh, when rain affected our game and we missed out on two vital points, we still had the opportunity in our own hands to progress by beating Sri Lanka. We had set the game up pretty well, having restricted them to 228 and we let it slip through. That was the crucial game. At the end of it, there was bitter disappointment, and a real sense of hurt.

You made mention of it already, but could you expand on what effect the hype and excitement generated by the victory over South Africa, had on the remainder of the campaign?

I think from the time it was announced that West Indies would be playing South Africa in that opening match, our build-up was sort of geared not only to the World Cup, but especially to that encounter, because we saw South Africa as one of the top teams in the tournament, and beating them should have really set us up well to progress to the Super Six stage.

In a lot of cases - the players especially - that focus was firmly on that first game. The way that game unfolded was fantastic. South Africa started very well - in the first twenty overs, we lost two early wickets and they kept us down to forty-nine runs, yet we recovered beautifully to score 278 for the loss of just three more wickets, and we won. Spirits were understandably high in the camp, and an extremely favourable tone had been seemingly set for the challenges to come. However, even though we discussed, studied and talked at length about applying the positive aspects of that (South Africa) game in our upcoming fixtures, we failed to do so.

Is it possible that our team's preparation was inadequate?

I certainly don't think that we can blame team preparation at all. If we were able to beat South Africa in the opening game, in their own backyard, and I stress, under intense pressure, I'm inclined to suggest that we were ready for the tournament from a preparation standpoint.

Jermaine Lawson was not picked until the merely academic contest against Kenya. Why was our fastest bowler not given an opportunity before then, to 'show his wares' on the receptive surfaces in South Africa?

In selecting teams, we discuss and consider all the options, and pick what we think - taking the balance into consideration - would be our best eleven for a particular encounter. Certainly, if you look at the stats, you will see that Dillon, Drakes and Collins have been our best one-day bowlers. But basically, it's a decision that we took as a selection committee on tour, and we felt that we had selected at all times, the eleven that would best get the job done.

After eight hostile and menacing overs, Lawson left the field in apparent discomfort. Did he sustain an injury while bowling in that game? And would you say that our team's general level of fitness was acceptable?

Yes, Lawson came off the field suffering from a strain to his upper leg. I don't think we can really blame a lack of fitness on some of the injuries that are sustained. Over the last two to three years we've worked quite hard in that respect, and achieved quite a lot. Admittedly there's more work to be done, and improvements could be made, but there has been progress. In my opinion, it's just a case of some of the players not being initially as strong as they needed to be, prior to getting to this level, and they're suffering overuse injuries, which can be expected, given the demanding international cricket schedule.

There was a published report describing an incident during a net session in South Africa between Brian Lara and yourself, which caused a hue and cry here in the Caribbean. Could you shed some light on this rather sensitive issue?

Lara did storm out of the net in Benoni. He was batting, and had two practice bowlers - the number of which he was unhappy with. He expressed that opinion, and when he was told that there weren't any more bowlers available, basically, he stormed out of the net. He grumbled aloud for a while, but at no point did he direct any abuse towards me.

Superstars the world over,usually have to endure their fair share of the negative. With respect to Brian Lara, there's been the line of thinking that his presence somehow hurt the team's ability to function. How could such a disturbing notion persist in the minds of so many, for so long?

I can't see the logic in such reasoning. It's no secret that Lara is a unique and exceptional talent, but the team has won with him -- and without him. If you recall the last series against India at home, the Test series that is, where we came from behind to win 2-1; Chanderpaul and Hooper scored the bulk of the runs. They both amassed in excess of 500, and we won that series. Lara was in that team.

The team then went to India, and won the One-Day series without him, the young players produced the goods, and we played consistently competitive cricket. I just think that the other players have to focus on doing their job, and executing their roles, regardless of whether he is there or not. If such focus and commitment is brought to the table in every situation, then I don't think comments like that would arise.

Insularity seems to be rearing its ugly head once more in our cricket, in recent times. There's every likelihood, that the various territories may not be reading from the same page at present. What do you say to those whose thought processes are deeply entrenched in this regard?

Around the region, people have to start thinking of what's best for West Indies cricket, and not just of their respective territories or players. In a lot of cases, people only tend to think of the advancement of their own territorial players, often disregarding the bigger picture. Everything done must be for the betterment of West Indies cricket, and our quest to return to the pinnacle.

We need to be honest with our players, telling them exactly when they're wrong and when they're right; and not just support them regardless of what they do and how they do it - because they're from a particular territory. We have to be 'brutally honest' with them at times. The bottomline, is that associations, administrators and supporters alike, need to be fully conscious of how their roles and actions affect, or impact upon West Indies cricket.

What were the moments that you will cherish from your coaching experiences overall?

The win against India in the One-Day series there was special, because having lost the first two matches in the Test series, most people expected the team to fold and crumble, but we came back to draw that last Test match, and then win the One-Day series, which I think in India is a remarkable achievement. The come-from-behind victory against India in the home series and winning the triangular series in Zimbabwe also stand out as highpoints.

From what you've observed in South Africa, what will be the most challenging aspect for the hosting the 2007 tournament in the Caribbean?

One of the biggest challenges we face is getting the facilities in order. Looking at how immaculate the stadiums were in South Africa, I can say that we have quite a lot of work to do, in order make the grade, and time is running out.

The Australians come here next month, what areas do you see as critical in our quest to be highly competitive, if not win the two series?

Mental toughness is going to be key. It's simply a case of us being able to withstand the pressure they exert on us, and for us to be able to sustain pressure on them for long periods. Mental preparation will be crucial, and we're going have to will, and ready ourselves to fight every inch of the way.

Now that you'll be spending more time in Guyana, is there the possibility that if requested to, you'll play an integral part in the development of its cricket?

Certainly. Like I said, I still expect to play a part in the development of West Indies cricket, in some shape or fashion. In the region as a whole, there's a lot of work to be done, and if the opportunity arises, most definitely.

If you had the chance to start all over in the WI coaching ranks, is there anything that you would do differently?

From the experience garnered during my tenure, I might make subtle adjustments in some areas.

* Nigel McKenzie is a cricket columnist for Guyana's Kaieteur News daily newspaper.