Do you support Ganguly, Dravid being dropped?

[Pratters]

But Pratyush, India had fielded proven players in the World Cup and we were miserable. We fielded Proven players in the past Tri-Series in the Australia and never succeeded. So IMO it was only fair that the selectors gave chance to youth and it did pay off despite our first string bowling attack not available.

Failing in the world cup of senior players is irrelevent as we remained with them post world cup. It makes no sense to persist with a Ganguly and then drop him when you fancy it. That is no way to treat a player.

If we leave out Ganguly's past record and only consider his current performance and form and compare it to Gambhir's, I dont feel he(Ganguly) adds more value to the team. Gambhir is not unproven, he has played good amount of international cricket and I think it was a great move by Dhoni and selectors to give him the responsibility and what a way to deliver. It may come out as an opinion on hindsight but when I saw Gambhir's name in the team I had expected him to get more responsibility. Rohit Sharma is a young talent and from what I had seen of him, I definately would have wanted him in the ODI side at any cost. Someone like Sehwag who has so much international experience couldn't make it to the final XI. Dravid's case is different, IMO his non-selection has more to do with non-cricketing reasons.

Who are the youngsters that you wouldn't have wanted in the present team ? Uthappa ? I dont see anyone else who didn't deserve his place in the XI

Gambhir wasn't proven before this series in ODIs. Neither was Rohit Sharma for that matter, though he has a lot of talent. I would have wanted Ganguly in the XI and in the squad in the place of Manoj Tiwari. In the XI, I would have liked 2 of Gambhir, Uthappa and Sharma to get the chance in the XI.

 

[Sanz]

Failing in the world cup of senior players is irrelevent as we remained with them post world cup. It makes no sense to persist with a Ganguly and then drop him when you fancy it. That is no way to treat a player.

But why do consider dropping a player as some sort of poor treatment. It happens all over the world, Ganguly didn't do too well in last two ODI series he played and I do think that a case could have been made for his non-selection.

Gambhir wasn't proven before this series in ODIs. Neither was Rohit Sharma for that matter, though he has a lot of talent. I would have wanted Ganguly in the XI and in the squad in the place of Manoj Tiwari. In the XI, I would have liked 2 of Gambhir, Uthappa and Sharma to get the chance in the XI.

Well you can afford to not pick Tiwary, Uthappa etc in the final XI, but If you pick Ganguly in the squad, he has to make it to the final XI and I dont think Ganguly's batting commanded that position.

As for Sharma, from what one has seen of him, it will be a travesty to pick Ganguly ahead of him, IMO ofcourse. Gambhir may not be proven but IMO he brings as much to the table as a batsman as Ganguly does at this stage and he is a better fielder.

 

[ret]

Not that I prefer one way or another, but that's really a very stupid way of looking at stats. Why would anyone want to take the best inning out ? Yeah take out Gambhir's centuries and let me know what he averages in the series. Take out tendulkar's scores in the finals and tell me what he averages. Take out the best performances of every player in the series and then check their averages out.

well, stats look stupid if you don't know what they mean and how they r suppose to be taken

i m showing that he hasn't performed that well against the major sides, which you can see from the avg, which is already low, and when you take that HS out, his scores become even more pathetic

it also shows that against major sides, he has just 1 50 from 12 games

and why not just make your point instead of saying that it looks stupid, blah, blah .... i don't hv to look at stats like you do and if you hv any doubts, you can always ask

 

[Pratters]

But why do consider dropping a player as some sort of poor treatment. It happens all over the world, Ganguly didn't do too well in last two ODI series he played and I do think that a case could have been made for his non-selection.

I don't consider dropping a poor treatment. Dropping without it being justified definitely is. We disagree on whether it was justified here.

Well you can afford to not pick Tiwary, Uthappa etc in the final XI, but If you pick Ganguly in the squad, he has to make it to the final XI and I dont think Ganguly's batting commanded that position.

Disagreed that you have to pick x in the XI if you pick x in the squad. When Ganguly was captain, he didn't select Kumble in the first XI for instance and Kumble has been as big a legend in tests as Ganguly has been in ODIs, if not more.

As for Sharma, from what one has seen of him, it will be a travesty to pick Ganguly ahead of him, IMO ofcourse. Gambhir may not be proven but IMO he brings as much to the table as a batsman as Ganguly does at this stage and he is a better fielder.

That is unrelated to my point where I mention Gambhir. I wouldn't have tried so many unproven players together.

 

[Sanz]

That is unrelated to my point where I mention Gambhir. I wouldn't have tried so many unproven players together.

The point I was trying to make is at this stage of his career, Ganguly does not bring the advantages of a proven player.

 

[Pratters]

The point I was trying to make is at this stage of his career, Ganguly does not bring the advantages of a proven player.

He does.

Ganguly in his last 3 ODI series:

NatWest Series [India in England], 2007
7 7 0 249 72 35.57 339 73.45 0 3 0 32 5 21 Aug 2007 England view innings
Australia in India ODI Series, 2007/08
5 4 0 127 86 31.75 181 70.16 0 1 2 13 2 29 Sep 2007 Australia view innings
Pakistan in India ODI Series, 2007/08
4 4 0 89 39 22.25 109 81.65 0 0 0 12 2 5 Nov 2007 India view innings

In seven matches in England, 3 50s and an average of 35.57.

Versus Australia, he averages 31.75 in the series which doesn't look flash on paper but he played a crucial role in 2 of the 4 matches of the series in which he batted. 41 in the second ODI and 86 in Nagpur. Those two innings also meant opening partnerships of 91 and 140 respectively with Tendulkar. It isn't a surprise that India won the first ODI which I mention and fell short by just 17 runs in the second. The value of solid opening partnerships.

He averaged 44 in 2007 and I would say that he was very much a proven player.

 

[Sanz]

He averaged 44 in 2007 and I would say that he was very much a proven player.

Well based on pure stats yes, it does look like he had a very good year, but as always Stats never tell you the complete story.

 

[Pratters]

Well based on pure stats yes, it does look like he had a very good year, but as always Stats never tell you the complete story.

Which is why I didn't just post stats in my post. We will have to agree to disagree here I guess as he was very much proven according to me.

 

[honestbharani]

Look it may not be a great move to have taken out both Rahul and Sourav at the same time. As Pratyush said, we could have phased them out better but the point is, we had to go beyond these guys sometime in the near future. Neither of them add anything in the field and they are not getting any younger either. And neither are as fit as Sachin... So the selectors and Dhoni juz bitten the bullet gone for the youngsters at one stretch. It was a gamble, but given the situation they could afford the gamble, I feel..

 

[biased indian]

it was bold and It all ended very well...

but i would still like to see Ganguly in the XI team instead of Uthappa

 

[adharcric]

Disagreed that you have to pick x in the XI if you pick x in the squad. When Ganguly was captain, he didn't select Kumble in the first XI for instance and Kumble has been as big a legend in tests as Ganguly has been in ODIs, if not more.

That's rather idealistic. I won't elaborate but I definitely agree with Sanz - if Ganguly was picked in the squad, Dhoni would have to play him in the XI.

 

[Pratters]

That's rather idealistic. I won't elaborate but I definitely agree with Sanz - if Ganguly was picked in the squad, Dhoni would have to play him in the XI.

Nah. Every one was saying the same thing when Sehwag was picked in the test squad in Australia. Didn't happen in the earlier tests. Disagreed that x HAS to be selected just because x is in the squad, whoever he is.

 

[adharcric]

Nah. Every one was saying the same thing when Sehwag was picked in the test squad in Australia. Didn't happen in the earlier tests. Disagreed that x HAS to be selected just because x is in the squad, whoever he is.

Huge difference between Sehwag and Ganguly. Besides, I'm not talking about whether x SHOULD be selected just because x is in the squad, I'm saying that x WILL be selected because of who x is. It's Indian cricket, things aren't that simple.

 

[Pratters]

Huge difference between Sehwag and Ganguly. Besides, I'm not talking about whether x SHOULD be selected just because x is in the squad, I'm saying that x WILL be selected because of who x is. It's Indian cricket, things aren't that simple.

I mentioned not just Sehwag as I named Kumble too earlier. I know what you mean but I don't agree with it. Maybe 10 years ago Indian cricket cared that much about reputations of players, not any more. Dhoni is a powerful and strong minded captain (which is a good thing). If he didn't want to select Ganguly in the XI, he would go that way. You talk about the way things work in Indian cricket.. fact is that Mumbai is the power centre of Indian cricket again and it isn't Bengal any more. So you don't have to select Ganguly in the first XI out of compulsion, or for that matter in the squad if you don't want to as the captain or team management or selectors.

 

[sirdj]

Is this discussion still going on??

I guess Dravid and Ganguly have the IPL series to prove whether they can perform at the same levels as the youngsters.

 

[Richard]

The finisher job? It was a makeshift arrangement when first tried out, but his match winning knock at the Oval was so good, that he has played 10 or so matches since, and has had 2 or 3 more very good knocks (two resulted in losses any way, but he made it close from a hopeless situation).

So 3 or 4 solid knocks out of ~ 10 tries (40+) in ODIs at #7 is good. Also now that Dhoni at #5 or 6, tends to have to put down anchor - his strike rate tends to be very valuable.

Hmm, interesting - I actually somehow or other hadn't noticed that he'd played the odd other 30-40. He's now had 12 innings since then. I still don't think he's done a particularly good job, but he's done better than I'd thought.

Still, though, think he's far better at the top of the order, and if your only alternative is Sehwag, most definitively so.

 

[Richard]

Ganguly > Gambhir? Of course, but I'm not sure Ganguly would have done what Gambhir did this series. Ganguly's been subpar against Australia for a while and Gambhir this series batted with maturity that we've rarely ever seen from him before. Your argument to suggest that Ganguly > Gambhir so Ganguly would've scored 450 runs this series is well, just stupid. Gambhir was the top run-scorer in a series that featured pretty strong bowling attacks, that means a lot. He's obviously not a great batsman after just one great series, but he's certainly promising now. Yes, he's a good fielder as well.

There's so much more to say about how Dravid's and Ganguly's exclusion may have helped Dhoni's captaincy but I'll stay away from that for now. Looking back, I'd still take Ganguly over Sehwag (of course, Dhoni being uncomfortable with having folks like Ganguly and Dravid around in the field probably played a large part in that move too) but now that it's been done, it's time to move on. Hope these two retire from ODI cricket rather than trying to force a fruitless comeback campaign and focus on test cricket, where they are really needed.

Of course it's time to move on now, and I think the best thing those two could do is retire from ODIs now, I've already said that. The issue at stake here is whether to exclude Ganguly and Dravid was the right decision. If a captain cannot strike-up a rapport because Player X is in the team, for mine it doesn't say much for his captaincy. Neither Ganguly nor Dravid would ever deliberately disrupt team morale, and indeed might well do the opposite, the latter especially. So I don't really buy that line.

And as I've said, I think it's fanciful to suggest that if Gambhir could do this, Ganguly couldn't. Nothing will ever change my mind on that. I do not believe Gambhir deserved selection. Well done to him for making the most of his undeserved selection, and if he can go from strength to strength from now, I'll reassess him. But I still think he's more likely to go back to failure.

 

[Sanz]

Nah. Every one was saying the same thing when Sehwag was picked in the test squad in Australia. Didn't happen in the earlier tests. Disagreed that x HAS to be selected just because x is in the squad, whoever he is.

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 ?

 

[Cevno]

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 ?

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.

 

[Sanz]

I mentioned not just Sehwag as I named Kumble too earlier. I know what you mean but I don't agree with it. Maybe 10 years ago Indian cricket cared that much about reputations of players, not any more. Dhoni is a powerful and strong minded captain (which is a good thing). If he didn't want to select Ganguly in the XI, he would go that way. You talk about the way things work in Indian cricket.. fact is that Mumbai is the power centre of Indian cricket again and it isn't Bengal any more. So you don't have to select Ganguly in the first XI out of compulsion, or for that matter in the squad if you don't want to as the captain or team management or selectors.

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.