I regard Tiger Pataudi as the best captain I played under because of the methodical way in which he handled his bowlers and the skillful field placements he employed. After all a captain can be judged only when his team is in the field. Pataudi had the advantage of playing against Karnataka, so he had a feel for the field which Chandra and myself had and used the knowledge to good effect in the Tests. He was a very good student of the game and a very confident person who also inspired confidence in his teammates.

Pataudi utilised his resources very well. When he captained the Indian team, he didn't have many pacemen around but he had three spinners to operate, who were all attacking bowlers, and whom he rotated with finesse. He was also very observant. I remember when we went to England in 1967, I was not getting my usual loop in the nets. Pataudi looked at me and knew I was a little concerned. He assured me it was only because I was bowling with 2 or 3 sweaters, so my arm was not coming round as it would do normally. He could also read what was going on in the bowler's mind, foresee his intentions and adjust the field before the bowler asked for a change. He had a lot of confidence in me because I could bowl according to his instructions. Chandra and Bedi were attacking bowlers, who were not able to contain the batsman easily when the situation required, but I could bowl tight when he wanted me to.

I played a lot of cricket under V Subramanyam who was my predecessor as state captain, and we often discussed between us how to handle the bowling resources of the side, so that helped me a lot when I took over. It also helped that I was confident of my own ability. I always believed that if Chandra had a bad day, I must do a little extra to take the wickets that should have accrued to him.

It's often said that batsmen make better captains than bowlers and I agree there is an element of truth in it. First of all cricket is a batsman's game and secondly once his role as a batsman is over, he is absolutely free to focus on his duties as a captain in the field. But a bowler's thought process is often distracted by his primary role of taking wickets because that is what he will finally be judged upon. There are times when a bowling captain may underbowl or overbowl himself or come into the attack when it is not really opportune, which could give rise to criticism. But a batsman does not have these constraints and can approach the job in a cool and collected manner.

I myself never felt disadvantaged because I knew my own capabilities well and I was also familiar with all the other bowlers I played with. I could assess whether it was Chandra's day or not and therefore set a field accordingly. I had many memorable moments as captain. We won the Ranji Trophy for the first time in 1973/74, and in the following year, Karnataka completed a double by beating Rest of India in the Irani Trophy. I also led the Rest of India successfully in the same competition besides winning another Ranji Trophy campaign in 1977/78. And while I didn't quite get to lead the country in my own right, I was once asked to captain the team in New Zealand when Bedi and Gavaskar couldn't take the field. During that short stopgap stint I think I did what was expected of me creditably.

Now Sourav Ganguly isn't having a great time with the bat but I feel his leadership skills are fairly well developed. Unfortunately Ganguly's batting woes have hogged all the attention but it's only a matter of time before he gets back into his stride. Being a part time bowler also helps him to understand a bowler's psychology better, especially the medium pacers. I think he's an attacking, imaginative captain but he does need a little more exposure specially with respect to attacking with the spinners. Perhaps a spot of interaction with some former captains like Pataudi or even Gavasker would help. If he can communicate his line of thinking to the bowlers more effectively so that they realise what the captain is expecting of them, he would emerge a better leader.

© CricInfo