Who Is The Second Greatest Batsman Ever?

[GotSpin]

Every single one of those 3 instances were responses to pretty stupid acts from his opposite numbers earlier and probably the reason no action was taken as it would action having to be taken on the stuff that started all this as well...


And as for the "numerous" people, I have not heard a single bad thing about him from folks like Murali, Lara or Sachin... They have all mentioned how genial and nice he is as a person and that he is well behaved unless he is ticked off by someone misbehaving with him.. If you think Andrew "binge" Flintoff is your be all and end all in deciding players' characteristics, then maybe you have a point...


And if you don't mind, plz do elaborate on the "numerous" and how great their own personal behaviour record was...

Your defense of Ganguly is like one of a childs "oh he did it first, he was mean". I would like you to clarify what 'stupid' acts were carried by Steve Waugh to justify Ganguly being purposely late to the toss, something that even you could understanding as being extremely rude.

As for guys like Murali, Lara and Sachin - It's not exactly common for those players to criticise others, despite what they may or may not be thinking. So this argument doesn't work either.

As to who criticises Ganguly I don't think their own personal behaviour record should be at stake here. We're arguing over the blatantly, well to me anyway, temperamental issues of Ganguly, not some other player.

As for specific examples of criticism towards Ganguly - I hate to do it but I can only quote from wikipedia at the moment because my internet is stuffed up and I can't trail through google articles right now.

Ganguly was condemned as a hot-tempered man who refused to listen to other's opinions and abided by his own rules and regulations.[116] Matthew Engel, ICC sport critic, noted that this "turning deaf" to other's opinions would one day harm Ganguly and that it was sheer luck that he existed on the sporting world.[117]

Engel commented that "He seems like aloof to the problems that his mal-decisions are creating. I don't particularly believe that Ganguly has an 'effing knowledge how to lead his team and tries to counter-pose it with instigating limiteless, confrontational behavious within the younger members of it. [One day] the time will come when such shock tactics will cease to work."[122] An article on Cricinfo Magazine pointed out his reckless behaviour. The reporter Rahul Bhattacharya said, "Generally Ganguly fostered angry or reckless young men. To him 'good behaviour', a broad term espoused by the present team management, belonged in school and probably not even there. He himself had been summoned to the match referee no less than 12 times in the last decade. His approach was bound to precipitate what could possibly be termed a cultural conflict in the world of modern sport. For Ganguly, like for Arjuna Ranatunga, competitiveness involved brinksmanship rather than training. As far as they were concerned Australia were not to be aspired to. They were simply to be toppled. England were not to be appeased. Victory lay precisely in their disapproval. In other words, Ganguly and Ranatunga wanted to do things their way."[123]

I do realise that wikipedia isn't always completely accurate but nevertheless it does give a general overview of Gangulys poor behaviour and temper issues.

 

[Zinzan]

Ganguly's famous for his volatility, can't see how it's even an argument tbh

 

[The Sean]

BUCKNOR vs INDIA

1992-93: India vs South Africa, Johannesburg
With South Africa reeling at 73-5, Indians appeal for Jhonty Rhodes’ run-out. Bucknor refuses to take Third Umpire’s help. Replays show Rhodes, who went on to play a match-saving innings, was clearly short of the crease.
Result: Match drawn

1998-99: India vs Pakistan, Kolkata
Shoaib Akhtar obstructs Sachin Tendulkar as he fails to make it to the crease. Bucknor turns a blind eye and refers the matter to the TV umpire. As the red light flashes and Tendulkar walks to the dressing room, Eden erupts.
Result: Pakistan won

So he's wrong when he doesn't refer, and wrong when he does?

 

[Cruxdude]

So he's wrong when he doesn't refer, and wrong when he does?

I wouldn't call him wrong on the second one. It was up to Pakistan if they wanted to withdraw the appeal as the contact wasn't deliberate but not referring a close decision is stupid.

 

[zaremba]

The important point about Steve Bucknor just wasn't very good, full stop, and the status he developed as some sort of umpiring great is just plain wrong. In matches that I watched him umpire he's made many, many appalling decisions. Most of these games incidentally did not involve India, and while I accept that India may have been on the receiving end of some bad decisions, they were by no means alone.

As for Ganguly, there's no doubting that he was/is not universally popular. He gained a very poor reputation indeed when he played for Lancashire as an overseas player. Of course that's not to write him off entirely as an individual and he undoubtedly has many fine characteristics. However it's futile to pretend that he's an all-round great guy because if he were he wouldn't have developed the reputation for surliness and arrogance which he undoubtedly has.

 

[The Sean]

The important point about Steve Bucknor just wasn't very good, full stop, and the status he developed as some sort of umpiring great is just plain wrong. In matches that I watched him umpire he's made many, many appalling decisions. Most of these games incidentally did not involve India, and while I accept that India may have been on the receiving end of some bad decisions, they were by no means alone.

As for Ganguly, there's no doubting that he was/is not universally popular. He gained a very poor reputation indeed when he played for Lancashire as an overseas player. Of course that's not to write him off entirely as an individual and he undoubtedly has many fine characteristics. However it's futile to pretend that he's an all-round great guy because if he were he wouldn't have developed the reputation for surliness and arrogance which he undoubtedly has.

Nail. Hit. Head.

 

[Himannv]

Ganguly may have had a bit of a temper, but I dont see what the issue is. Tons of people get worked up when situations arise. So many players do it, my boss does it, my mother does it. Whats the issue?

 

[bagapath]

The important point about Steve Bucknor just wasn't very good, full stop, and the status he developed as some sort of umpiring great is just plain wrong. In matches that I watched him umpire he's made many, many appalling decisions. Most of these games incidentally did not involve India, and while I accept that India may have been on the receiving end of some bad decisions, they were by no means alone.

As for Ganguly, there's no doubting that he was/is not universally popular. He gained a very poor reputation indeed when he played for Lancashire as an overseas player. Of course that's not to write him off entirely as an individual and he undoubtedly has many fine characteristics. However it's futile to pretend that he's an all-round great guy because if he were he wouldn't have developed the reputation for surliness and arrogance which he undoubtedly has.

why do you write so well zaremba?
case closed.

 

[Zinzan]

The important point about Steve Bucknor just wasn't very good, full stop, and the status he developed as some sort of umpiring great is just plain wrong. In matches that I watched him umpire he's made many, many appalling decisions. Most of these games incidentally did not involve India, and while I accept that India may have been on the receiving end of some bad decisions, they were by no means alone.

.

Yup, I'll take this over the supposed Bucknor/India conspiracy

 

[asty80]

Getting back to the original topic - I think a lot of older players are overrated for the same reason that a few current players are underrated.

Taking the example of my 2 fav players:

We can never know how Bradman would play if he were born in this era as an Indian with thousands cheering him on and the pressure of expectation with his wicket deciding the match and a cricket crazy public who can break your house windows/harm your family if you fail in an important match.

We can never know how Sachin would play in Bradman's place with uncovered pitches and languid strokeplay and no helmets.
Bradman was the greatest in his era and Sachin in his.
I dont think anyone else has come close to them consistently.

If you argue abour Richards, then it would be an injustice to leave out Sehwag who is doing the same these days. But to me, they dont come close to the former 2.

 

[GotSpin]

Getting back to the original topic - I think a lot of older players are overrated for the same reason that a few current players are underrated.

Taking the example of my 2 fav players:

We can never know how Bradman would play if he were born in this era as an Indian with thousands cheering him on and the pressure of expectation with his wicket deciding the match and a cricket crazy public who can break your house windows/harm your family if you fail in an important match.

We can never know how Sachin would play in Bradman's place with uncovered pitches and languid strokeplay and no helmets.
Bradman was the greatest in his era and Sachin in his.
I dont think anyone else has come close to them consistently.

Disagree. Bradman had a considerable amount of pressure on him. He carried the weight of expectation from an entire nation that was still suffering from the ill-effects of the Great Depression and the aftermath of WWII. It's been commented that while the economy slipped the importance of sporting achievements drastically increased. Bradman, arguably, lifted the spirits of Australia during a period of great turmoil.

 

[Burgey]

Not when you are around, burgey.. I mean, you can't be wrong or biased, can you?


And FWIW, yeah Bucknor was an angel in matches involving India...

Nah, he just wasn't that good an umpire, as Zaremba has said.

Of course I'm biased mate, and sadly very often wrong, I admit it. But I don't see conspiracy in every dodgy lbw or caught behind decision against my team (only some ).

Sometimes I perceive (as an outsider) that there's a massive victims complex in the culture of Indian cricket (not everyone obviously).

I may be completely wrong in that regard, and if I am so be it. But the level of conspiracy theory and stories of apparently being so hard done by and so often screwed over - very often reported as deliberate acts by either opponents or officials over so long, whenever there's been a defeat - staggers me.

Again, I may well be wrong in that perception, and if I am well I'm sorry. But as an outsider, there always seems an excuse, always a poor decision, always something nefarious by either opponent or umpire, when India has lost. Rarely that they were beaten fairly, and even more rarely an acknowledgement that the better team won. This was perhaps more so in the past than nowadays, and certainly India is not alone in that - heaven knows there are enough from my own country who think and sound the same. Of course that doesn't include 05, when we were robbed by Murray Mints!

But I'm finding the conspiracy theories and alleged anti-India bias is a bit like me really... beginning to get just a little old .

 

[GotSpin]

^ Racist ban

 

[vic_orthdox]

^ Racist ban

No need for that, thanks. Burgey's managing to turn the thread away from cheap sniping, we don't need you to return it to that.

 

[GotSpin]

No need for that, thanks. Burgey's managing to turn the thread away from cheap sniping, we don't need you to return it to that.

It was just a joke.

CC is getting so uptight these days. If you'd managed to bother reading more than one page you could see I have been contributing in a meaningful manner. One little joke shouldn't mean much.

 

[honestbharani]

Your defense of Ganguly is like one of a childs "oh he did it first, he was mean". I would like you to clarify what 'stupid' acts were carried by Steve Waugh to justify Ganguly being purposely late to the toss, something that even you could understanding as being extremely rude.

As for guys like Murali, Lara and Sachin - It's not exactly common for those players to criticise others, despite what they may or may not be thinking. So this argument doesn't work either.

As to who criticises Ganguly I don't think their own personal behaviour record should be at stake here. We're arguing over the blatantly, well to me anyway, temperamental issues of Ganguly, not some other player.

As for specific examples of criticism towards Ganguly - I hate to do it but I can only quote from wikipedia at the moment because my internet is stuffed up and I can't trail through google articles right now.






I do realise that wikipedia isn't always completely accurate but nevertheless it does give a general overview of Gangulys poor behaviour and temper issues.

Matthew Engel over Lara, Sachin and Murali? And I am the one who is being "childish"????


the kettle is black, right?

 

[honestbharani]

Ganguly's famous for his volatility, can't see how it's even an argument tbh

famous how, exactly? And why leave John Wright, who has made the same complaints? Or the facts still not allowed in the world where "Ganguly is always wrong"??????

 

[Jono]

I'm going to vote Sachin to annoy some people.

 

[BhupinderSingh]

Viv Richards.

 

[honestbharani]

The important point about Steve Bucknor just wasn't very good, full stop, and the status he developed as some sort of umpiring great is just plain wrong. In matches that I watched him umpire he's made many, many appalling decisions. Most of these games incidentally did not involve India, and while I accept that India may have been on the receiving end of some bad decisions, they were by no means alone.

As for Ganguly, there's no doubting that he was/is not universally popular. He gained a very poor reputation indeed when he played for Lancashire as an overseas player. Of course that's not to write him off entirely as an individual and he undoubtedly has many fine characteristics. However it's futile to pretend that he's an all-round great guy because if he were he wouldn't have developed the reputation for surliness and arrogance which he undoubtedly has.

See, Z, the point is... he is not the worst guy in the world and when he, being the captain of an international cricket team, actually accuses an umpire acting in a bad manner towards his team, it HAS to be at least considered before being dismissed.


But then again, if people want to believe that Bucknor never acted bad against India inspite of having NEVER watched him or the games in question, and just wanna have their cheap shots at Ganguly, who, at least, got a better testimonial from his own players than someone like Steve Waugh...