India in Tests- Rapid decline after Kirsten left; gargantuan difference in win percentage

The difference with and without Kirsten in charge of India is stark, it's like after India won the World Cup and Gary left India fell of a cliff.
Yes, some of the Indian players were getting older and there was a generational change, but it's surprising how rapid India's decline had been.

Kirsten took over in 2008-when he left in 2011:
1-1 Series Draw vs South Africa at Home
1-2 Series Loss vs Sri Lanka Away (note Kirsten's mum was ill so he had to fly back for the deciding test match in this series)
2-0 Series Win vs Australia at Home
1-0 Series Win vs England at Home
1-0 Series Win vs New Zealand Away
2-0 Series Win vs Sri Lanka at Home
2-0 Series Win vs Bangladesh Away
1-1 Series Draw vs South Africa at Home
1-1 Series Draw vs Sri Lanka Away
2-0 Series Win vs Australia at Home
1-0 Series Win vs New Zealand at Home
1-1 Series Draw vs South Africa Away

So 7 Series Wins, 4 Series Draw, 1 Series Loss for Kirsten, and he wasn't around for the deciding match of the series he did lose.
Also I think India's most impressive display was the 1-1 draw vs South Africa in late 2010 early 2011, incredible quality from both teams and India held their own in hostile conditions.

After Kirsten Left and Fletcher took charge:
1-0 Series Win vs West Indies Away
0-4 Series Loss vs England Away
2-0 Series Win vs West Indies at Home
0-4 Series Loss vs Australia Away
2-0 Series Win vs New Zealand at Home
1-2 Series Loss vs England at Home (first home series loss since 2004-2005 vs Aus)
4-0 Series Win vs Australia at Home
2-0 Series Win vs West Indies at Home
0-1 Series Loss vs South Africa Away
0-1 Series Loss vs New Zealand Away
1-3 Series Loss vs England Away
0-2 Series Loss vs Australia Away (Still in play, 1 Test to go)

5 Series Wins, 7 Series Losses under Fletcher. Also loses home series to England, which was first time they had been beaten at home till 2004 vs Aus.


So what explains that ? Of course the team declined and the youngsters weren't good enough to replace the older players, but I think Fletcher has to take some responsibility. India's most impressive performance for me was the 1-1 draw vs South Africa in early 2011, and a bit more than half a year later they were totally hapless under Fletcher against England.
Still interesting under Kirsten India lose 1 in 12 tests, and under Fletcher India lose 7 in 12.


India have now slid from first in the Test Rankings, as they were when Fletcher took over, to 6th in the rankings and on the verge of dropping to seventh. Looking at India's team, with the ability they have they should not be battling for 6th and 7th place in the world rankings. Their team is better than that, but the mentality seems to be a lot behind.
I think Fletcher has to go, is Andy Flower available ? Lehman showed a great coach really can make a big difference.

It's not that simple, IMbL. For one, under Gary, the only big away tour they had was South Africa. West Indies, and 2010 New Zealand just weren't that good. By comparison, Fletcher's had
-Australia X2
- England X2
and a resurgent New Zealand. Not really an apples with apples comparison.

Of course it's not apples with apples; and you'll know from tennis discussions with me that I do recognise some series can be harder to win than others; but despite that India's performance has been really poor now.
Given how they played against South Africa, drawing 1-1, I think they'd have a good chance against either England or Aus away with Kirsten as coach. They were certainly showing that with their performances.
Now under Fletcher not only are they being steamrolled by England and Aus when away, they also lose to England at home and get beat by New Zealand.

There seems to be no mental strength and a tendency to randomly collapse.