Ganguly = Legend.. Dont u reckon

[Sanz]

what youngsters? as far as im concerned he shattered chopras confidence by dropping him, then made yuvraj open for no apparent reason and shattered his confidence too. hes then continued to show faith in bowlers like nehra who really shouldnt be coming anywhere close to the side.

Well, That is the only mistake he has made so far, which IMO is unpardonable.

As for giving chances to Nehra, I dont think he can be blamed for giving enough chances to Nehra or Zaheer. Look at the alternatives he has in Agarkar, Salvi etc. Whenever Zaheer was fully fit and Srinath was there, Nehra hardly got any chance to play. Infact when Pathan and Blaji came, Nehra and Zaheer both had to sit down. If he picks up Agarkar and he is tonked around, People question his move and ask why Nehra was ignored. When he selects Nehra instead of Agarkar and Nehra sprays all over, same question again.

 

[Sanz]

based on what, 1 bad series?

Two bad series, In pakistan he didn't play great either (except for his 270, where no decent bowler was there).

How many test matches did India win in NZ ??

 

[tooextracool]

Dravid deserves the credit so does Bangar

yes and did i say that bangar didnt? dravid and bangar both batted out the only difficult period in the match.

and Tendulkar whom you called a FTB (Flat Track Bully) who just took advantage of Dravid's innings. Dravid Scored only 148, SRT scored 190+.

yes and did sachin bat when there was some amount of seam movement? no he didnt. dravid did. we all know that tendulkar can score when the pitch is flat, so what his 190 proves is absolutely nothing.

Yeah right, When Dravid was batting, Pitch had seam movment, but there was no movement for others, and when England batted it was simple poor batting.

did you seriously watch the match at all? if you find it so far fetched that wickets offer seam movement on the opening few sessions then you are obviously out of your mind.i mean youd think that the recent series in pakistan would have emphasised that.
and i notice how you conveniently ignore the fact that the pitch started to turn as the game wore on too....well done with that.

As for Dravid's innings at Oval, i have said all I had to. It was a dead test. England took two days to make 500 runs, India took another 2 days make another 500 runs and that's it. Whether Dravid made 200 or 500 alone, doesn't really matter. It's like Tendulkar's innings in Sydeny, he made 250 something which was painfully slow and I have no respect for such a useless knock.

and what part of ' if it wasnt for dravid it would not have been a dead test' do you not understand?
and tendulkars innings in sydney wasnt similar by any means, india werent even bowled out, laxman scored 178, and several other players got 50s. in dravids case there was no one who got another big score, and if he hadnt scored those runs and more importantly batted for that period of time, india would have been following on and struggled to save the match.

 

[tooextracool]

Two bad series, In pakistan he didn't play great either (except for his 270, where no decent bowler was there).

err akthar?
dravid had 4 innings, one of which he was run out in, so that doesnt count. in the other 2 he scored 33 and 6. so id say he failed once, was decent in one and was brilliant in another. and all this credit you heap on ganguly for succeeding in pakistan, you might wanna consider that if it werent for dravids 270 you might not have won that illustrious series?

How many test matches did India win in NZ ??

and thats dravids fault too? by averaging over 30 on those wickets i think he did his job pretty well. perhaps you might wanna blame that series loss on players like ganguly who managed to average an oh so brilliant 7.25.....

 

[Neil Pickup]

SJS, Let me tell you this (at the risk of sounding Politically incorrect), Had Nasser been an all English Boy born and raised in England, He would have gotten much more respect and would definately have gotten much more respect and IMO he does deserve more respect.

I very, very strongly disagree with that. Ethnicity and birthplace of a player does not come into how I form my opinions of them. When I think of Hussain, I don't think Indian-born, Madras-born, I think of his qualities, in the same way that Devon Malcom creates images of that burst of 9-57 against SA ten years ago, and when I think of Usman Afzaal, Mark Ramprakash, Graeme Hick and Aftab Habib, I break into a cold sweat at the merest suggestion they get anywhere near the England XI.

Just because some people are racist doesn't mean everyone is and the allegation you make doesn't impress. Nass stands with Atherton in the history of English Test cricket. Not legends, but the step below

 

[Jono]

Sanz I actually agree with you, that Ganguly is the best man for the job of captain in Indian cricket, and by a fair way as well.

That being said, its laughable that you think he's a better batsman than Dravid (right now) and its also crazy that you think he deserves ALL the credit for the successful away wins, when Tendulkar, Laxman and Dravid have done more with the bat than he has. This is coming from a big Ganguly fan as well, but to say that Dravid has no heart is crazy.

 

[honestbharani]

I think Sourav is a legendary leader of men. As a captain, he has his flaws when it comes to tactical planning and that kind of stuff, but as a leader of men, he is legendary, IMHO.

 

[Sanz]

err akthar?
dravid had 4 innings, one of which he was run out in, so that doesnt count. in the other 2 he scored 33 and 6. so id say he failed once, was decent in one and was brilliant in another. and all this credit you heap on ganguly for succeeding in pakistan, you might wanna consider that if it werent for dravids 270 you might not have won that illustrious series?

So now you consider Akhtar as a god bowlers ?? Until yesterday he was Rubbish and far too blody inconsistent.Anyways, Akhtar got injured and didn't return to bowl on the 3rd day. Take a look at the bowlers in that match.

As for his 270, Look at the scores Pakistan made, 224 & 245, Are you telling me that Indian batsman minus dravid (and his 270) wouldn't have been able to make 150 runs in the 4th innings with Akhtar not fully fit. That match was won by our bowlers.

 

[Sanz]

yes and did i say that bangar didnt? dravid and bangar both batted out the only difficult period in the match.

If Bangar could bat on that pitch, means anyone could, Let alone Sachin.

yes and did sachin bat when there was some amount of seam movement? no he didnt. dravid did. we all know that tendulkar can score when the pitch is flat, so what his 190 proves is absolutely nothing.

Yes it is Sachin't fault that Bangar and Dravid played 500 balls and scored 150 runs. As for Sachin being a FTB, I sure do not need an approval from a jealous person on his batting qualities. His 190 along with Sourav's 120+ made the match interesting otherwise it would have ended up in another boring draw.

As for Oval test draw and your analogy that India would have followed on. Common the wicket was so easy, even If India followed on our FTB aka Sachin Tendulkar would have batted to save the match.

 

[tooextracool]

So now you consider Akhtar as a god bowlers ?? Until yesterday he was Rubbish and far too blody inconsistent.

read up wise guy, ive never called akhtar rubbish. ive said hes too inconsistent to be called world class.

Anyways, Akhtar got injured and didn't return to bowl on the 3rd day. Take a look at the bowlers in that match. .

he bowled 21.2 overs in that match, and i would assume dravid was at the crease for 21.1 one of those overs,certainly more than enough to test someone. and akhtar did in fact bowl better in that match than he did at any other point of that series.

As for his 270, Look at the scores Pakistan made, 224 & 245, Are you telling me that Indian batsman minus dravid (and his 270) wouldn't have been able to make 150 runs in the 4th innings with Akhtar not fully fit. That match was won by our bowlers.

funnier things have happened, if it werent for dravid i would say that india would have been at least 300-350 runs short(take into account the runs in the partnerships that would not have happened without dravid).

 

[biased indian]

in a recent intreview i remember sachin saying that the leeds pitch on the second day was also very difficult to bat

 

[tooextracool]

If Bangar could bat on that pitch, means anyone could, Let alone Sachin.

we all know that thats all rubbish, time and time again we've seen lessser players produce good innings. i recommend you watch the 1st day of that match, it was an excellent grafting effort, in conditions that should have helped the bowlers.
and if you apply that concept to the lords game where agarkar scored a century, one would assume that players like tendulkar should be able to do the same?

Yes it is Sachin't fault that Bangar and Dravid played 500 balls and scored 150 runs. As for Sachin being a FTB, I sure do not need an approval from a jealous person on his batting qualities. His 190 along with Sourav's 120+ made the match interesting otherwise it would have ended up in another boring draw.

these are kinda stupid comments really, i certainly am not jealous of tendulkar, if i was to be jealous of someone, i would at least be jealous of a legend.
and as far as the comments on boring is concerned, if you believe that test cricket is all about hitting 6s and 4s and smashing the bowlers out of the park, then you certainly shouldnt be watching test cricket at all. you will probably never realise that if it wasnt for bangar and dravid those innings from tendulkar and sourav would probably never have happened.

As for Oval test draw and your analogy that India would have followed on. Common the wicket was so easy, even If India followed on our FTB aka Sachin Tendulkar would have batted to save the match.

how do you know this? its quite possible that he would have failed too or scored another 50 odd like he did in the first innnings. you cant assume that india would have saved the game, if they had played in the same manner that they did in the first innings(bar dravid) they would quite likely have lost. what we can assume though is that dravid played a large part in making sure that that didnt happen.

 

[Hit4Six]

these are kinda stupid comments really, i certainly am not jealous of tendulkar, if i was to be jealous of someone, i would at least be jealous of a legend. QUOTE]

whys tendulkar not a legend?!

 

[tooextracool]

these are kinda stupid comments really, i certainly am not jealous of tendulkar, if i was to be jealous of someone, i would at least be jealous of a legend. QUOTE]

whys tendulkar not a legend?!

lets not get into that again, search for some of those is tendulkar a choker threads and you'll see the results of those.

 

[Sudeep]

these are kinda stupid comments really, i certainly am not jealous of tendulkar, if i was to be jealous of someone, i would at least be jealous of a legend. QUOTE]

whys tendulkar not a legend?!

I believe he opines that Tendulkar's a legend in ODIs, but not Tests, basically because he hasn't won much for India in that form of the game. Something that I don't agree with...

 

[Sudeep]

lets not get into that again, search for some of those is tendulkar a choker threads and you'll see the results of those.

I agree. Let's not get into that.

 

[Hit4Six]

I believe he opines that Tendulkar's a legend in ODIs, but not Tests, basically because he hasn't won much for India in that form of the game. Something that I don't agree with...

he's a terrific test batsman, as worthy as Lara or Waugh in terms of 'legend' in both tests and ODI, he hasn't won much for india - how many of those losses were a direct result of tendulkar losing/not winning them the match?

EDIT: for the sake of preventing tendulkar is a choker threads lets ignore what i just typed

 

[marc71178]

in a recent intreview i remember sachin saying that the leeds pitch on the second day was also very difficult to bat

Link?

 

[Sanz]

read up wise guy, ive never called akhtar rubbish. ive said hes too inconsistent to be called world class.

Yeah Right, I guess I said the following :-

shoaib akhtars performances should be analyzed in spells, generally hes rubbish for 5 out of 6 spells in a match.

I look forward to give new spin to the above.

he bowled 21.2 overs in that match, and i would assume dravid was at the crease for 21.1 one of those overs,certainly more than enough to test someone. and akhtar did in fact bowl better in that match than he did at any other point of that series.

Yeah 10-11 overs by a rubbish bowler in an entire innings really too much to test dravid.

funnier things have happened, if it werent for dravid i would say that india would have been at least 300-350 runs short(take into account the runs in the partnerships that would not have happened without dravid).

Yeah you just said the funnier thing. Pakistan made 469 in both innings combined and without Dravid's innings you are telling me that Indian would have been all out for 119-169 and would have needed 300-350 in the second innings. Yeah, If you say so. And even without Akhtar now bowling in the second inning, it would have been really lot of trouble for India to score remaining runs.

 

[tooextracool]

Yeah Right, I guess I said the following :-
I look forward to give new spin to the above.

read carefully, ive said hes generally been rubbish for 5 spell, not the entire match. hes been absolutely brilliant in the 6th spell, which is why hes got such a good average.it evens out. if akhtar could bowl as well as he does when he is in rhythm consistently, he would be by far the best bowler in the world and one of the best fast bowlers ever.

Yeah 10-11 overs by a rubbish bowler in an entire innings really too much to test dravid.

are you out of your mind? you certainly dont need 20 overs to test a batsman, if you cant get a batsman out in 10 overs, then clearly the batsman has played you well enough.

Yeah you just said the funnier thing. Pakistan made 469 in both innings combined and without Dravid's innings you are telling me that Indian would have been all out for 119-169 and would have needed 300-350 in the second innings. Yeah, If you say so. And even without Akhtar now bowling in the second inning, it would have been really lot of trouble for India to score remaining runs.

i didnt say that they would have needed 300-350 in the 4th innings, i said that without dravid india would have scored at least 300-350 runs less in their first innings.
certainly would have been game on if india were chasing 200-250 odd in the final innings.