Do you support Ganguly, Dravid being dropped?

[Sanz]

I would have wanted Ganguly in the XI and in the squad in the place of Manoj Tiwari.

Forgot to say it yesterday, but Tiwary was not part of the original ODI squad, he was sent to Australia as Yuvraj's backup. He was the 17 member of the squad.

 

[Cevno]

If ganguly would have been sent as a "backup" for yuvraj then he probably would have declined it.
I said at that time also that for me it was between gambhir,sehwag and ganguly for two spots and for what i think were more off the field matters than on it sehwag and gambir were preffered.Sehwag very strangely.

 

[Sanz]

Agree.

Btw, sehwags or even sachins for that matter ego is not that big as ganguly's.
When sehwag misfielded dhoni was gesturing at him and making his displeasure known.That would not have been possible with ganguly as he would have entered a argument with dhoni if told to get his act right.
I Think that the main reason dhoni decided to drop ganguly besides his poor running,fielding is that he was being an obstruction to his authority and dhoni wanted to control the whole team as he wanted.

If you are going to post this kind of nonsense about Ganguly, Please do not quote my post. Please do not use my post as a supporting base to unload your crappy assumptions about Ganguly. This sort of post is clearly very disrespectful and demeaning to one of India's greatest cricketers and IMO our greatest captain.

 

[Cevno]

If you are going to post this kind of nonsense about Ganguly, Please do not quote my post. Please do not use my post as a supporting base to unload your crappy assumptions about Ganguly. This sort of post is clearly very disrespectful and demeaning to one of India's greatest cricketers and IMO our greatest captain.

I agree with that.
But i do not know how i am being demeaning and disrespecting about ganguly.
I am stating the facts.The guy has a big ego as has been proved in the past and he has been heavily involved in board politics unlike sachin and dravid or kumble.
Btw, i was saying if he was ready to play a team role and try his hardest under dhoni and even get benched without any hard feelings then he certainly should remain the team and play the kind of role sehwag played in this series.

 

[Sanz]

I agree with that.
But i do not know how i am being demeaning and disrespecting about ganguly.
I am stating the facts.The guy has a big ego as has been proved in the past and he has been heavily involved in board politics unlike sachin and dravid or kumble.

No Sir, what you are stating is NOT fact. Ganguly did play under Dhoni in two ODI series and he didn't have trouble taking instructions from him. He did play under Dravid, he did play under Kumble, two players he was supposedly fallen out with. Needless to say he gave his 100%. . Infact he also played under Greg Chappell after all that happened between them and once again he gave 100%.

Btw, i was saying if he was ready to play a team role and try his hardest under dhoni and even get benched without any hard feelings then he certainly should remain the team and play the kind of role sehwag played in this series.

You clearly didn't say this. Read your last post once again.

 

[Pratters]

Sehwag is not an ODI legend, Ganguly is. If Ganguly is selected in the squad and not picked to play in the final XI then what difference it makes ?

And How is him sitting in the dressing room (ala Tiwary ) going to strengthen Indian batting lineup ?

I think you are forgetting that Kumble's non-selection into the final XI didn't go too well with Kumble's fans and probably Kumble himself.

Also, I dont believe that Mumbai is the power center of Indian Cricket and that it has anything to do with this whole thing. Dont even understand why it was brought up in this discussion, especially when the ODI/T20 captain is from Eastern Zone. .

Lastly when I raised this point that "If Ganguly is part of squad, he has to be part of XI", I didn't have all this power struggle (Bengal Vs. Mumbai) in mind, I said it only because to me it didn't make any difference if Ganguly was going to warm the benches instead of Tiwary.

Forgot to say it yesterday, but Tiwary was not part of the original ODI squad, he was sent to Australia as Yuvraj's backup. He was the 17 member of the squad.

Kumble taking it sportingly or not is irrelevent as the point is whether x would be selected or not. So it doesn't come into play regardless of what one's view on it might be.

I mentioned Mumbai because of the reasons I pointed in the post and you are deluding yourself if you feel that Mumbai is not the power centre. It is not the main point though and as it is at a complete tangent to the discussion, debating on which the power centre is wouldn't serve much purpose to the main debate itself. The two key points are that Indian cricket is not the same as it was 10 years back, Dalmiya is not the power head and Ganguly doesn't have the power backing to ensure that he isn't outsed from the squad or the XI.

Tiwari, x, y, z. Who cares. I answered it because you asked me who I would have in the place instead. I could name some other player too like Sehwag or Uthappa. Point was that I was not comfortable with so many unproven/recently unproven players in the team.

You have replied to three posts of mine, one including the one on Sehwag which had already been explained by me. You ask stupid questions trying to look like a smart ass saying 'And How is him sitting in the dressing room (ala Tiwary ) going to strengthen Indian batting lineup ?' as if you don't know the impotance of strong bench strength, not that I would keep Ganguly in the reserve bench here to start off the tournament. Fear of keeping some one in the reserve bench is no reason to drop any one any way.

As I said earlier, I don't get why people start jumping up and down just because they do not share the same view on this. Heh. I thought that we have agreed to disagree like gentlement on this Sanz given how you saw my 'agree to disagree' post that day, didn't reply to it. However, just because I answer adharcric, you lose your cool and you start trying to be a smart ass (which is very stupid btw) replying to every post of mine and trying to create a debate out of nothing.

I was afraid this would lead to an endless debate as the other side refuses to accept that there is an alternate point of view which can exist on this. Any way, I have made whatever points I wanted to make on this topic in earlier posts and am over and out with this thread.

 

[Sanz]

As I said earlier, I don't get why people start jumping up and down just because they do not share the same view on this. Heh. I thought that we have agreed to disagree like gentlement on this Sanz given how you saw my 'agree to disagree' post that day, didn't reply to it. However, just because I answer adharcric, you lose your cool and you start trying to be a smart ass (which is very stupid btw) replying to every post of mine and trying to create a debate out of nothing.

First of all, You had agreed to 'disagree',not me. I didn't respond to your post same day because I wasn't online that day/evening much. I did see your post but by that time I did not have much time to respond. My response probably had nothing much to do with Adharcric's post.

Secondly take it easy and stop attacking me for no reason. This is a discussion board and I have right to debate on this forum as long as I dont resort to personal insults like you did. And even If I had agreed to disagree, I sill can come and make a post on the subject, quote you as long as I can remain civil, which I was. Besides, you may have agreed to disagree with me but you were still coming back to this thread and debating with other folks on the same topic so in a way you were not really done making your point in this thread.

Now coming back to your posts :-

Kumble taking it sportingly or not is irrelevent as the point is whether x would be selected or not. So it doesn't come into play regardless of what one's view on it might be.

It is a relevant point. If Ganguly is selected and not picked in final XI and his fans and CAB dont take it too well, then it does create an unnecessary pressure on a captain. What If Ganguly doesn't take it too well (not saying he will), it defintely is a very relevant point, IMO.

I mentioned Mumbai because of the reasons I pointed in the post and you are deluding yourself if you feel that Mumbai is not the power centre. It is not the main point though and as it is at a complete tangent to the discussion, debating on which the power centre is wouldn't serve much purpose to the main debate itself.

No I do not believe Mumbai is the power center, Sharad Pawar is. Sharad Pawar is not Mumbai and as much as I dislike Sharad Pawar's involvement in BCCI, I dont believe he influences the selection committee like Dalmiya did. In any case, as you said, it is completely irrelevant to the discussion here.

The two key points are that Indian cricket is not the same as it was 10 years back, Dalmiya is not the power head and Ganguly doesn't have the power backing to ensure that he isn't outsed from the squad or the XI.

Correct, As I said, Dalmiya influenced squad and team selection like no one and it was clearly not his job. I mean why would you want to pick a captain if you are not going to let him pick his final XI. No wonder India didn't have a half decent captain before Ganguly because the final XI would be dictated by their masters above them. Dravid's resignation had a lot to do with Sri Dilip Vengsarkar imposing his wish upon him for the final XI.

As for Ganguly, dont forget it was Pawar who braught Ganguly back into the mix of National team again after he was dropped by selectors.

Tiwari, x, y, z. Who cares. I answered it because you asked me who I would have in the place instead. I could name some other player too like Sehwag or Uthappa. Point was that I was not comfortable with so many unproven/recently unproven players in the team.

I care, because you didn't name Uthappa/Sehwag in answer to my question, you picked Tiwary and I pointed out that Tiwary wasn't even part of the 16 member squad and only there as a cover for Yuvraj.


Rest of your post is mere asusmptions, insults and attacks and isn't worth responding. I clearly have nothing against Ganguly, as can be seen from my posts in this forum, I am one of his biggest fans on this forum.

As I have said in the past, dont really have very strong opinion about Ganguly's selection/non-selection into the ODI team. I would have had no problem if he was selected into the team, nor do I have an issue with his non-selection. IMO, He is not a proven commodity anymore as an ODI batsman.

Besides Indian ODI team did well without him, captain is happy with the team he want, Team is performing, so I dont see an issue here at all.

 

[Sanz]

as if you don't know the impotance of strong bench strength, not that I would keep Ganguly in the reserve bench here to start off the tournament. Fear of keeping some one in the reserve bench is no reason to drop any one any way.
.

It is cricket not NBA. If you are not picked for the final XI, bench strength means nothing atleast as far as batting is concerned.

 

[jeevan]

Disclaimer: I was against dropping Ganguly from the ODI squad and even today think that it just happened to work out for this series (I'm happy for it) and the result was not due to any foresight.

That said, not playing Ganguly (on current form) would more or less be due to wanting a forward-looking team. That reason should not be evaluated on a match to match basis, or even a series to series basis. So picking him in the squad and not in the XI doesnt make sense to me - 'political' consequences notwithstanding.

He is sufficiently better right now than the alternatives (Sehwag, Uthappa at opening in ODIs for the need of the India team to have one end stable) to decide if he is part of the core (like Yuvraj) or not. If the alternatives deteriorate seriously (which I hope they dont, India will lose matches because of that), and if he's brought back in - it should be for an extended run of a few series.

 

[Richard]

I was against dropping Ganguly from the ODI squad and even today think that it just happened to work out for this series (I'm happy for it) and the result was not due to any foresight.

Absolutely 100% reflects my feelings on the matter.

 

[Jono]

We may copy India's youth approach: Ponting

Australia seemed to think it worked well.

 

[ret]

We may copy India's youth approach: Ponting

Australia seemed to think it worked well.

thats a nice read .... youth is the way to go .... gr8 decision by Ind to go with a young team. the think tank recognized the talent and gave it the opportunity

 

[jeevan]

We may copy India's youth approach: Ponting

Australia seemed to think it worked well.

With Hogg & Gilchrist retiring, the two oldest players (besides Ponting) are:
Hayden
Symonds





(actually Hayden Hussey then Symonds. But Hussey has serious catching up to do with the Don)

 

[Richard]

We may copy India's youth approach: Ponting

Australia seemed to think it worked well.

Praveen Kumar filled the breech

I thought The Age was supposed to be a high-quality publication.

Either way - saying "we'll pick youth" is all well and good - when it comes down to picking unproven players over proven ones, then we'll see.

I mean, are there even any particularly promising one-day seamers in the 23-24 agegroup going around in Australia at the moment? Only two I've seen - both First-Class impressive only - are Mark Cameron and Peter Siddle. Doesn't seem like much else currently, though there's of course Tait to come back, possibly soon.