Dec 15, 2005

Differing strokes

11 comments:

Manish said...

I guess Kapil Dev is one of the examples being "eased" out. Ganguly should have been offered the same with a shorter time frame.

It is not always important to "pack' some one out. If that hasn't been done in past, that also does not means it should not be done so in future.

Why just creat an unwanted confusion and treat a senior player with utter disregard?

Why was he taken for this tour at all?

I think this could have been better handled by everyone of them. Tommorrow, if Sachin is meted such treatment, we can't say it's ok just because it has been happening before.

There are always better method around.

daemon said...

So far, Dravid has proved to be a good captaining purely based on on field performance. Off field, difficult to know. Though, some might argue that off field shows on field. My point is that Ganguly should have been given a longer run. Perhaps a series more. And then it was fair to drop him if he doesn't perform. That would have been professionalism. Rest is just personal taste.

Harish Kumar said...

A 'dignifed exit' will always be at the cost of the team.We have no idea of the tensions and confusion all this selection dramas lead to - read Out of My Comfort Zone for a frank account of the same.We also come to know of the 'professionalism' of the ACB.All this drama over his sacking is uncalled for.He was clearly in good form in Delhi. But he was dropped.It was based on some thinking/logic/politics by the selectors.At this stage,there is no other option but to go along with this .There have been such political decisions in the past and some of them have been very successful - remember the 1996 tour to England??
And Multan was 194*.

Harish Kumar said...

Another thing - There has been lot of criticism over politicians and parliament getting involved in this debate. If you consider that they haven't been doing much lately, it is not such a good idea but the importance that cricket has in the lives of Indians,I don't think it is 'wrong' on the part of the leaders to get into this 'left',right and centre.
Also - people have been questioning the cricketing merit of Sharad Pawar.The BCCI president doesn't need to be a Bradman - he needs to be an administrator of Saheb's class,efficiency and stature.The Selection committee is the one which should be loaded with cricketing statistics - and a keeper is always the one who has the best view of the game.Considering our structure, the selection committee has always done a fair job.Every selector in this world is criticised.It is a thankless job.More so in India.

Samk said...

Here is what I think

http://e-kid.blogspot.com/2005/12/gangulys-exclusion-from-3rd-test.html

Gaurav said...

Sorry, was busy the last few days so noticed this post only today.

It is not my point that Ganguly deserves to be in the team. I find it bizarre that they took him for the first two tests and then dropped him. Dalmiya had already lost.....what was the point in picking him at all?

Once they picked him up, they should have let him stay for the whole series unless he batted really badly.

You misunderstand my Brutus-ing of Dravid. I am not questioning his motives or calling him petty. I genuinely admire Dravid. And I don't think Brutus was an evil man either. But the fact remains that though so many men stabbed Caesar, the world remembers Brutus as having killed him. So it was bad politics, bad strategy on his part.

A few years later folks won't remember More or Pawar. They will say Dravid dropped Ganguly. Remember, even now, Gavaskar gets blamed for Kapil missing that test. No one remembers who the selectors were.

I just think Dravid should have been more assertive, either in the beginning and not let Ganguly be picked......or now and dropped him after the series, or a failure.

Plus the fact remains, if the dude is making runs and seems in decent form, why drop him?

People keep talking about Healy, Waugh, etc. I think I have made this point before. The dropping of those guys, or even Martyn, Clarke etc was truly professional, because there were Hodges and Husseys making bucketfuls of runs in domestic cricket and whenever they were given the chance. I don't see any such rightful contender now.

Yuvraj, if anything, is a lesser batsman at least on Indian tracks facing the Lankans.

Gaurav said...

Lest my above comment seem contradictory when i say "i dont say he deserves to be in the team" and "why drop him", I mean that i think Ganguly should now be judged on form rather than class. Drop him when he hits a rough patch. But dropping him at such a time? Bad cricket AND bad politics.

Doctor Bruno said...

Let's cast our mind back to that famous declaration at 196* (at Multan, was it?). Dravid has shown this ruthless streak before .............. ruthless selfishness.......

GK said...

i fail to see how people can honestly believe that dravid declared on 194 in multan with the sole intention of hurting sachin

Sridhar Raman said...

I have to laugh at Bruno's comment. Nobody remembers the fact that Sachin was dragging things along, and doing nothing to up the rate. "Team above self" is Dravid's mantra. And if that is "selfishness", then hyper-selfish is what he is. :)

Peeyush Gupta said...

It really does not make sense to Drop Ganguly after the second test , when both his innings in the test came at a crucial stage. He should have never been picked if he was to be treated this way.
And for me it is over to Ganguly. He cannot get back in the same dressing room with these players.
What is Dravid is too early to decide. The chips have not been down for India yet. They have been playing at home. Let them play in Eng , Aus , Pak , SL and lets see what the new captain has in store.