Is Ganguly good enough to play test cricket ?

[deeps]

dravid averages 15 as captain........if captaincy didn't affect his batting so much, ganguly wld be gone by now...the reason he's still there as captain is that there is no real alternative

 

[chekmeout]

dravid averages 15 as captain........if captaincy didn't affect his batting so much, ganguly wld be gone by now...the reason he's still there as captain is that there is no real alternative

How about Sehwag .. Sehwag has captained India in an ODI and he doesn't look like the kind of player to let captaincy affect him

 

[chekmeout]

Good enough to play isnt necessarily good enough period, for IF you play or not is totally subject to whether you are amongst the top 11 choices from the available talent-pool.
If your talent pool is zimbabwe, a player like Bashar would be under no pressure...
If your talent pool is like the WI of the 70s/80s or or OZ of now, players like Gillespie or Jayawardene would struggle to get a look.

However,simply good enough to play test cricket, irrelevant to who's path he is blocking, then hell yes!

Overall in test cricket, Ganguly is a better batsman than MANY who are playing/have played recently- Mark Butcher, Nasser Hussain, Neil McKenzie,Stephen Fleming,Craig McMillan, Younis Khan, etc etc.

Good point mate... but when you check the recent first class records of Yuvraj & Kaif, I don't know why Ganguly is still in the team..

 

[Arjun]

How about Sehwag .. Sehwag has captained India in an ODI and he doesn't look like the kind of player to let captaincy affect him

Sehwag is LAZY. He will place himself in a safe position in the field and contribute nothing- he's bone idle on the field, as Ted Corbett once said. Worse, he won't even bring himself on to bowl. In the Challenger Trophy matches against stronger teams than Bangladesh (2003), he made a mess of his own bowling attack, the way he handled them, and even got the batting order wrong. He needs to be more active as a bowler and fieldsman if he should be a captaincy contender.

 

[chekmeout]

Hmm... I don't know I didn't watch the Challenger Trophy, but he seemed pretty OK in the Bangladesh ODI.. maybe he needs to be a bit more proactive and aggressive.....

 

[marc71178]

Worse, he won't even bring himself on to bowl.

Because his International record really means he should be bowling (!)

3 @ 116 (eco 3.72) in Tests and 51 @ 40.92 (eco 5.26) in ODIs)

 

[dudeurfriend]

Well Ganguly has hit a bad patch and he has not converted good starts into big innings...
He is still pretty much a capable batsman and i guess he should come down the order that is at no6..He also thinks more about the team rather than his own batting...Leading an indian team is not easy, that to with a paramount amount of success... Just look at Dravid's and Sachin's record as captain. Ganguly's record is far better... He is a great leader... Just he has to convert those starts into big tons...

 

[honestbharani]

SJS's second post says it all. It is a little too early to be drawing the knives and the guy has been a good player/captain for India and deserves a longer rope. If he fails over a period of time, then yes, he can be dropped, as the guys waiting to replace him are pretty good themselves.

 

[Jono]

BTW, from what Ive seen, Dravid is a poor captain and Tendulkar is the only one with a cricket brain.

I wouldn't say Dravid is poor, but I wholeheartedly concur with your analysis of Tendulkar. He has one of the best cricket brains I've seen, he's always thinking. The reason he wasn't an excellent captain was the pressure of 'being captain' was too much, and came to not only effect his batting (though he did score whilst captain) and his enjoyment of the game. Facing questions and press conferences, being held responsible for every decision made etc. gets to some players more than others.

I still think Kaif is a future Indian captain, well should be anyway. At the current moment Ganguly isn't performing, but I wouldn't axe him as captain simply because he is captain at the moment. But boy I'd love to see Kaif in our test battine line-up.

 

[tooextracool]

3 letters......... FTB
just to prove things further.
ganguly vs australia - 25(not counting the series with bracken, williams etc)
ganguly vs SA - 27
ganguly vs pak - 32
clearly there lies a deficiency against pace bowling. the person who thinks that ganguly is a better player than hussain and butcher needs to get his head examined

 

[tooextracool]

Do you think his captaincy alone warrants his retention?

I haven't been able to see the current series over here, but the reports suggest he's made some questionable decisions.

I've no real axe to grind either way, just curious.

most people already knew that ganguly wasnt exactly a smart captain. the only reason hes india's captain is because he has good enough leadership qualities and theres no one else better in the side.

 

[Sanz]

3 letters......... FTB
just to prove things further.
ganguly vs australia - 25(not counting the series with bracken, williams etc)
ganguly vs SA - 27
ganguly vs pak - 32
clearly there lies a deficiency against pace bowling. the person who thinks that ganguly is a better player than hussain and butcher needs to get his head examined

So Nasser was so good that couldn't score against Zimbabwe,SL, WI & Pakistan. How many centuries did Nasser score in Australia ?? What is His average in England compared to Ganguly's?

Mark Butcher, he struggled to get into double digitst against the mighty attack of BD.

 

[tooextracool]

So Nasser was so good that couldn't score against Zimbabwe,SL, WI & Pakistan. How many centuries did Nasser score in Australia ?? What is His average in England compared to Ganguly's?

Mark Butcher, he struggled to get into double digitst against the mighty attack of BD.

because scoring against b'desh is what counts isnt it? i mean england really needed runs from butcher against them.
and just to let you know, ganguly has never score a century against a first string australian bowling attack anywhere in the world. nor has he ever scored a century against pakistan or SA. but then again all that matters to you is how much he scores against b'desh.
personally id take butches record since 01:
filtered 44 80 6 3035 173* 137 124 41.01 6 19 5

v Australia 10 20 1 774 173* 124 83 40.73 2 2 1
v Bangladesh 2 4 0 56 42 8 6 14.00 0 0 1
v India 7 12 1 427 92 54 53 38.81 0 4 0
v New Zealand 6 12 1 281 60 59 47 25.54 0 2 2
v South Africa 7 13 1 503 106 79 77 41.91 1 4 1
v Sri Lanka 6 10 0 514 123 105 94 51.40 2 3 0
v West Indies 4 7 2 296 61 61 58 59.20 0 4 0
v Zimbabwe 2 2 0 184 137 47 - 92.00 1 0 0

over any of the rubbish that ganguly has ever played.

and yes hussain couldnt play against zim - wow i mean england would have been really disappointed with that and WI- especially considering that his 3 50s in the last series pretty much carried them to victory against them.

 

[tooextracool]

and with regard to hussain in australia, he averages 41.5 in australia, which is pretty impressive whether hes scored a 100 or not.

 

[C_C]

Ganguly has a weakness against pace...nasser has a weakness against spin....so wtf is the problem...

And taking records from a certain time frame is irrelevant and erroneous...OVERALL, Ganguly is a BETTER test player than Hussain. I am sure if you took 86-onwards statistic, you could prove that Viv was an inferior player to Ritchie Richardson.....similarly the 01-current stat of Butcher and Gangs......01-now butcher has risen but ganguly has fallen...whereas before that ganguly was at his peak and butcher was pathetic.

 

[Sanz]

because scoring against b'desh is what counts isnt it? i mean england really needed runs from butcher against them.
and just to let you know, ganguly has never score a century against a first string australian bowling attack anywhere in the world. nor has he ever scored a century against pakistan or SA. but then again all that matters to you is how much he scores against b'desh.
personally id take butches record since 01:
filtered 44 80 6 3035 173* 137 124 41.01 6 19 5

v Australia 10 20 1 774 173* 124 83 40.73 2 2 1
v Bangladesh 2 4 0 56 42 8 6 14.00 0 0 1
v India 7 12 1 427 92 54 53 38.81 0 4 0
v New Zealand 6 12 1 281 60 59 47 25.54 0 2 2
v South Africa 7 13 1 503 106 79 77 41.91 1 4 1
v Sri Lanka 6 10 0 514 123 105 94 51.40 2 3 0
v West Indies 4 7 2 296 61 61 58 59.20 0 4 0
v Zimbabwe 2 2 0 184 137 47 - 92.00 1 0 0

over any of the rubbish that ganguly has ever played.

and yes hussain couldnt play against zim - wow i mean england would have been really disappointed with that and WI- especially considering that his 3 50s in the last series pretty much carried them to victory against them.

Are you saying that Nasser and Butcher deliberately throw their wicket against lesser oppositions.

anyways I see your fascination with selective statistics . I guess It seems that, trust me those stats of Mark Butcher make him look like Bradman(esp the one against Zim)

 

[tooextracool]

Ganguly has a weakness against pace...nasser has a weakness against spin....so wtf is the problem...

nasser hussain has a problem against spin? thats the first ive heard off.

And taking records from a certain time frame is irrelevant and erroneous...OVERALL, Ganguly is a BETTER test player than Hussain. I am sure if you took 86-onwards statistic, you could prove that Viv was an inferior player to Ritchie Richardson.....similarly the 01-current stat of Butcher and Gangs......01-now butcher has risen but ganguly has fallen...whereas before that ganguly was at his peak and butcher was pathetic.

except that ganguly's best lasted for about a year, as opposed to richard;s whos prime lasted for nearly a decade. ganguly was worked out after his first year, it was so clearly obvious when SA figured him out both home and away back then. to say that ganguly is a better player than hussain when he has disgracefull averages against all the quality bowling attacks is an insult to hussain.
if ganguly ever plays an innings like this :
http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard.asp?MatchCode=1611
or this :
http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard.asp?MatchCode=1431
or anything remotely close to this:
http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Matches/MatchScorecard.asp?MatchCode=1572
id be extremely surprised

 

[tooextracool]

Are you saying that Nasser and Butcher deliberately throw their wicket against lesser oppositions.

err no im saying that they raise their game in more difficult conditions and against better bowling attacks, largely because they realise that their team needs them in these situations.

anyways I see your fascination with selective statistics . I guess It seems that, trust me those stats of Mark Butcher make him look like Bradman(esp the one against Zim)

err these are butchers stats since his return in 2001, and anyone whos watched him since then would know that hes been a completely different player since then, even his record shows that so clearly.

 

[chaminda_00]

IMO opinion Ganguly is good enough to play test cricket, but Yuraj and Kaif are better batsmen ATM then Ganguly and he should make way for him, Dravid is also a better captain. But outside the Australian, Indian and maybe england he would make any other side easierly.

 

[C_C]

nasser hussain has a problem against spin? thats the first ive heard off.

ever seen Hussain play spin ?
He stuck out his pads and hoped for the best....through the 90s, Hick and Thorpe apart, there wernt many in the ENG team who could play spin.

except that ganguly's best lasted for about a year, as opposed to richard;s whos prime lasted for nearly a decade. ganguly was worked out after his first year, it was so clearly obvious when SA figured him out both home and away back then. to say that ganguly is a better player than hussain when he has disgracefull averages against all the quality bowling attacks is an insult to hussain.
if ganguly ever plays an innings like this :

utterly irrelevant. I am not comparing Ganguly to Richards...that is ridiculous.
I merely pointed out that taking selective periods of one's career instead of the whole distorts the image-just like how Richards would come second best to Richardson if 86-onwards or so stats are taken into accordance.

As per his best lasting only a year- again that is false. Till 2000, he had only 1 bad year since his debut in 1996.
He was averaging 50 or close to 50 till 2000....Hussain on the other hand...heh nevermind.

Hussain has had a consistent career - he has never been superb but he has never been shyte...Ganguly the first half was superb...for the past few years he's been shyte.
however, overall, Ganguly is superior to Hussain in my view....

As per playnig lone hands- IND batting order is a lot stronger than ENG's....has been for a long time....therefore you will see lot less collapses from IND than ENG...(both were pretty collapso before Dravid-Gangs stood up in the late 90s)
As per those hussain-innings, check Ganguly's debut innings....He and Dravid propped up IND...
Also check his 144 in OZ...

Besides, a half dozen superb innings outta 150-200 odd doesnt make one better than another....its the overall what matters...and overall, Ganguly is a better batsman unquestionably than Butcher and handsomely than Hussain.