Ganguly: once a hero, now an embarrassment ...

[Dasa]

Of course it is time (it has been for a while) for him to go and the sooner he realizes it the better it is for him. I dont think anyone is arguing that.



Actually Dravid is as attacking as they come and we will see that very soon.

Yeah he's attacking, but he's not "aggressive" in the same way as Ganguly...which is a good thing IMO.

 

[tooextracool]

err If you look at the ODIs, there isn't really much difference..And despite having players like KP, Flintoff, Collinwood England are in the bottom half of the ICC table along with India.

because collingwood is such a great ODI player isnt he? his bowling and batting averages are nothing special and they only get worse when you take out his record against minnows.
and KP has played 2 series its not like 2 series is going to raise england too far up from the bottom half of the table.

 

[Sanz]

because collingwood is such a great ODI player isnt he? his bowling and batting averages are nothing special and they only get worse when you take out his record against minnows.
and KP has played 2 series its not like 2 series is going to raise england too far up from the bottom half of the table.

Dude Collingwood was just an example. The point was that Vaughan has been pretty pathetic in ODIS. There are many people who think that he shouldn't even be there in the ODI team. But imagine the situation if Duncan fletcher came and said the same thing what Greg Chappell said to Ganguly.

 

[honestbharani]

ganguly taking on waugh's mental disintegration manfully was really admirable....but are you honestly suggesting that that's what won the series for india? are you seriously suggesting that laxman, dravid, tendulkar, harb had a huge series because of ganguly's in-your-face attitude? ganguly failed miserably as a batsman throughout that series and because a number of his mates performed extremely well, india came back from being completely outplayed for a test and a half and won the series, that too very narrowly...and it was not any kind of tactical brilliance either...gangs has never been tactically good....as a strategist, he has always been pretty average....

Actually, he played a rather vital, often under rated and almost forgotten knock in the second innings at Kolkata. HIs 48 was a very important knock under the circumstances.

 

[honestbharani]

I think both people are to be blamed here,but quite honestly, I think having a pretty aggressive difference of opinion with the captain over his personal form is not as bad as mentioning it in public. Sanz, I know that Laxman, in a way,started all this, but I expect a captain with Sourav's experience to be more strong to the media. There was certainly no reason to let the world know that there were differences in the side. After all, John Wright only mentioned about the time he pulled Sehwag by his collar ONLY AFTER he retired.

 

[Deja moo]

And then why was Indian team not doing better before Ganguly became captain with almost same team (albeit with a better tam under Azhar and Sachin) ?

Er, some comprehension please. Ganguly did well because he had players in good form. Sachin, Dravid, himself, Harbhajan were in excellent form. Now Sachin is out and other than Dravid, none of the others are in touch. And he himself hasnt shown any signs of being able to stem the rot.

Yeah may be Ganguly was wrong by spitting it out in Public(IMO he wasn't but for many he was), but this whole thing was started by VVS Laxman the previous day (which you seem to have conveniently forgotten).

Nope, I havent forgotten. You seem to believe this makes the case against Gangs weaker. It doesnt. It simply means there are two, rather than one player who have no sense of propriety. Atleast Laxman can defend himself in that he didnt take names. But Ganguly did. And wonder of wonders, guess who has the decency to come out with an official statement to clarify the situation ? Thats right. Chappell. And was the maharaj out there with him ? Of course not. Sulk mode was still on.

Yeah dude, I am such a psycophant of Gangs that at least 3-4 times in last week I have said that Ganguly doesn't deserve to be in the team that he has lost it, immidiately after watching him in Bangladesh series I said it then that he has lost the art, that Ganguly should be dropped. Now go and see how many times you have questioned Greg's statement and after that try to figure out who is sucking up to whom. Now go and worship the rising sun of Indian cricket aka Greg Chappel.[/QUOTE}

Odd then that you suggest that Chappells decision wasnt on the spot then, eh? Oh wait, you'd have to remove your lips from Gangulys posterior to answer that.

Uhh this is what we call ignorance. Ganguly didn't go to media on his own, on the 3rd day when he scored the century, Harsha was interviewing him at the end of the day. Harsha asked him about the 'nagative vibes' in the team and then asked him a couple of times about the problems in the team and that's when Gangs said that 'He was asked to quit'.

Er, do you even know what happened? Its always Gautam Bhimani who interviews the players at the end of each day. The very fact that Bhogle walked out to do the job that day means that the crew had prior knowledge of Ganguly wanting to spill his guts out, which is why they sent out their more experienced commentator. Half baked understanding of the situation does you no good.

 

[Deja moo]

Moo, Yeah Let's start bashing Ganguly, that would make you happy and make a great debate.

The fact is that I am not the only one who thinks that Greg has been wrong in his timing and his approach. If at all Gangs did anything wrong was that he went to press, but I am glad he did. Otherwise we could never know Greg's man management skills.

But why am I telling you this, you have already made up your mind about Ganguly.

Ohh I better run and call ganguly that what a great job I have been doing as part of his coterie.

Its your coterie. Do as you wish.

And lets start bashing Chappell, that would make you happy and make a great debate.

And lets see, Greg wants the weakest link in the side out. What would that result in ? Hmm..strengthening of the side. And lets see, Gangs doesnt want out. What would that result in ? Oh yes, preservetion of his ego and a weakening of the side. Doesnt take an Einstein to make a choice.

 

[Sanz]

Er, some comprehension please. Ganguly did well because he had players in good form. Sachin, Dravid, himself, Harbhajan were in excellent form. Now Sachin is out and other than Dravid, none of the others are in touch. And he himself hasnt shown any signs of being able to stem the rot.

Oh..so when India wins it was because the players were in form, but when India loses It was because Ganguly couldn't lead. Really a fair assessment, isn;t it ? . A captain is as good as his team. If you are going to credit him for loses, then give him credit for wins also, that is the fair thing to do. He took the Indian team from the clouds of match fixing and nearly made them world champs (but for one ODI match), took them to many ODI finals. If that is nothing then I dont know what is.

Nope, I havent forgotten. You seem to believe this makes the case against Gangs weaker. It doesnt. It simply means there are two, rather than one player who have no sense of propriety. Atleast Laxman can defend himself in that he didnt take names. But Ganguly did.

And ganguly took the name, didn't he ?? He must have said it you personally because I haven't heard Gangs taking any names yet. Not to forget that you have not said a word about Lax yet.

And wonder of wonders, guess who has the decency to come out with an official statement to clarify the situation ? Thats right. Chappell. And was the maharaj out there with him ? Of course not. Sulk mode was still on.

So ?? Give him the Bharat Ratna for doing so. Chappell started this so he is the one who has to end it. I dont care what mode Gangs is in, He didn't start it.

Odd then that you suggest that Chappells decision wasnt on the spot then, eh? Oh wait, you'd have to remove your lips from Gangulys posterior to answer that.

No Chappell's suggestion isn't on the spot. He should make this suggestion to the selction Committee not to the captain, if at all he wanted to make this suggestion, he should have waited for the series to get over or at least the test to get over and certainly not when yer captain is getting ready for the toss.

Oh, That reminds me that you still have not said a word about Chappell's timing, No marks for guessing in whose hole your head is right now. Once you bring yer head out, read what I have said all along on this.

Er, do you even know what happened? Its always Gautam Bhimani who interviews the players at the end of each day. The very fact that Bhogle walked out to do the job that day means that the crew had prior knowledge of Ganguly wanting to spill his guts out, which is why they sent out their more experienced commentator. Half baked understanding of the situation does you no good.

..and you assumed that it was Ganguly who leaked this to Bhogle or Media before the interview itself. Now do you know who leaked that news to the media ? I read somewhere that a 'Senior Indian spinner'. Now your guess is as good as mine as who that 'Senior Spinner' can be.

Not to forget the role of Bhogle, who knowing very well what happened in the dressing room came out and kept prodding Ganguly until he blurted out. If Ganguly is guilty of spewing this in media, then so is VVS, so is the 'Senior Spinner' , so is Bhogle, so is Chappel for making that kind of suggestion in the first place.

But I dont blame you for such unidirectional thinking, since your head is still inside Gregs' posterior.

 

[Sanz]

And lets see, Greg wants the weakest link in the side out. What would that result in ? Hmm..strengthening of the side. And lets see, Gangs doesnt want out. What would that result in ? Oh yes, preservetion of his ego and a weakening of the side. Doesnt take an Einstein to make a choice.

I also want Gangs out, Almost everyone I know wants Gangs out. But that doesn't mean I would want him to be insulted in the middle of an away tour.

If Greg wants the weakest link out, then let it be known to the selection Committee. If he has the guts then tell the selection committee it is either him or Gangs. what he did in Zimbabwe is hardly the best way to go about it and that is my point all along. if you think that as Greg-bashing or I am being pro-Ganguly then be it.

 

[Deja moo]

Oh..so when India wins it was because the players were in form, but when India loses It was because Ganguly couldn't lead. Really a fair assessment, isn;t it ? . A captain is as good as his team. If you are going to credit him for loses, then give him credit for wins also, that is the fair thing to do. He took the Indian team from the clouds of match fixing and nearly made them world champs (but for one ODI match), took them to many ODI finals. If that is nothing then I dont know what is.

Conversely, if you're giving him credit for wins, give him the 'credit' for losses too. Simple as that. He has done nothing of note, either as player or as captain for quite a while now.

And ganguly took the name, didn't he ?? He must have said it you personally because I haven't heard Gangs taking any names yet. Not to forget that you have not said a word about Lax yet.

Listen. Lets take a look at your incursions into OT. You keep mentioning a 'coterie'. The fact that you do not actually name their names does not mean you havent explicitely implied who you're referring to. Its similar here. His language was expressive enough to point a blame without actually naming Chappell.

As for Laxman, I dont get why you're clutching at straws here. Have I ever claimed that hes a paragon of virtue ? Havent I said that hes to blame too ?

So ?? Give him the Bharat Ratna for doing so. Chappell started this so he is the one who has to end it. I dont care what mode Gangs is in, He didn't start it.

No, he didnt. It was a straightforward discussion on the composition of the team, where Chappell said that he wanted both Yuvraj and Kaif in the team and suggested Ganguly drop himself ( unlike the false sensationalised versions of the convo you're procuring from god-knows-where). A coach has absolutely every right to be involved in team selections, and make the best possible suggestions. Which he did. Now if an insecure Ganguly starts sulking and creating fissures in the team, he has no one to blame but himself.

No Chappell's suggestion isn't on the spot. He should make this suggestion to the selction Committee not to the captain, if at all he wanted to make this suggestion, he should have waited for the series to get over or at least the test to get over and certainly not when yer captain is getting ready for the toss.

You mean the same selection committee which is a puppet in the hands of the board administration? In case you arent aware of the normal selection procedures, here it is:

(a) Selection committee selects a squad and sends them on a tour. Thats where their role ends.
(b) The think-tank of the team, ie. the captain, coach, and a tight group of senior players do the selecting for all the games on the tour. No, contrary to what you might believe, they are not required to consult the selection committee.

Which means that Chappell was completely in the right as far as providing his input was concerned. And it certainly wasnt presented in a blunt manner as you falsely report here.

Oh, That reminds me that you still have not said a word about Chappell's timing

The night before the match isnt right for you ? Or would you rather that the playing eleven for the first test be selected before the final of the One day series ? laughable !

No marks for guessing in whose hole your head is right now. Once you bring yer head out, read what I have said all along on this.

How does he do it ? How does he talk without peeling his lips of the captains posterior ?

 

[Deja moo]

..and you assumed that it was Ganguly who leaked this to Bhogle or Media before the interview itself. Now do you know who leaked that news to the media ? I read somewhere that a 'Senior Indian spinner'. Now your guess is as good as mine as who that 'Senior Spinner' can be.

Not to forget the role of Bhogle, who knowing very well what happened in the dressing room came out and kept prodding Ganguly until he blurted out. If Ganguly is guilty of spewing this in media, then so is VVS, so is the 'Senior Spinner' , so is Bhogle, so is Chappel for making that kind of suggestion in the first place.

But I dont blame you for such unidirectional thinking, since your head is still inside Gregs' posterior.

Lay off the dope for a while, and clear your mind. A question asked twice isnt prodding. Get that straight.

 

[Sanz]

Conversely, if you're giving him credit for wins, give him the 'credit' for losses too. Simple as that. He has done nothing of note, either as player or as captain for quite a while now.

I always have. You need to learn to read properly. I have not defended Ganguly's batting/Captaincy in last couple of years. Infact the more I watch him, the strongly I feel that It is time for him to go. So dont accuse me of something I have not done.

It's funny that you keep popping that Q up when I am not even arguing this or infact agree with you on this. From the very first post I have maintained that Greg's suggestion came at a wrong time, wrong place.

 

[Deja moo]

I always have. You need to learn to read properly. I have not defended Ganguly's batting/Captaincy in last couple of years. Infact the more I watch him, the strongly I feel that It is time for him to go. So dont accuse me of something I have not done.

It's funny that you keep popping that Q up when I am not even arguing this or infact agree with you on this. From the very first post I have maintained that Greg's suggestion came at a wrong time, wrong place.

The motive was correct, he meant to field the best possible eleven.
The time and place was right too, you choose the playing eleven either the night before or on the morn, not a month before.
The only thing wrong about the entire situation was the sulking and the publicising.

 

[Deja moo]

I wonder why Gillespie didnt make a big fuss about his omission in the Ashes tests. After all, you would have us believe that the correct moment to tell him that he wouldnt be playing in the latter part of the test series would have been somewhere before the twenty20 game. Could it be just that Gillespie had more sense and dignity and a smaller ego?

 

[Sanz]

Listen. Lets take a look at your incursions into OT. You keep mentioning a 'coterie'. The fact that you do not actually name their names does not mean you havent explicitely implied who you're referring to. Its similar here. His language was expressive enough to point a blame without actually naming Chappell.

As for Laxman, I dont get why you're clutching at straws here. Have I ever claimed that hes a paragon of virtue ? Havent I said that hes to blame too ?

But you said that at least Laxman didn't name the person, and Ganguly Did. The fact is that Ganguly didn't. Neither have I in the OT.

No, he didnt. It was a straightforward discussion on the composition of the team, where Chappell said that he wanted both Yuvraj and Kaif in the team and suggested Ganguly drop himself

I find it hypocritical that you keep mentioning it as a 'straightforward' discussion. How can it be a straightforward discussion when the captain goes to discuss the team with the coach and the coach suggests him to drop himself. It's Davis cup we are talking about, its TEST CRICKET.

( unlike the false sensationalised versions of the convo you're procuring from god-knows-where).

Can you for an example show me one post of false sensationlised version I have posted here ?

A coach has absolutely every right to be involved in team selections, and make the best possible suggestions. Which he did.

No, he didn't discuss the team selection, instead He suggested that the captain drop himself to make room for Yuvraj & Kaif. And no, Coach doesn't have the right to ask the captain to drop himself. Coach has to discuss the tam with the captain, not without the captain.

Now if an insecure Ganguly starts sulking and creating fissures in the team, he has no one to blame but himself.

And you accuse me of sensationalizing the issue.

You mean the same selection committee which is a puppet in the hands of the board administration?

Yeah the Greg should go to the Board Admin and display his guts there and not to his captain in the middle of a tour.

In case you arent aware of the normal selection procedures, here it is:

(a) Selection committee selects a squad and sends them on a tour. Thats where their role ends.
(b) The think-tank of the team, ie. the captain, coach, and a tight group of senior players do the selecting for all the games on the tour. No, contrary to what you might believe, they are not required to consult the selection committee.

But the coach decided that he doesn't want his captain in his team, so who does he discuss the team with ? What if he doesn't want the Vice-captain either ? Now what ? Oh let me guess the coach with some senior player decides to do a 'Coup' against the captain and that is perfectly justified, isn't it ?

Which means that Chappell was completely in the right as far as providing his input was concerned. And it certainly wasnt presented in a blunt manner as you falsely report here.

It is widely reported by very pro-chappel Cricinfo reporters and other Pro-Chappel media, so dont accuse me of this BS that I am falsely reporting here.

The night before the match isnt right for you ? Or would you rather that the playing eleven for the first test be selected before the final of the One day series ?

Oh so it is perfectly okay for your team to know that on the next morning when they wake up that Gangs isn't their captain anymore as their coach has finally decided that he isn't good enough. I haven't heard that one. Wow how exciting that would have been for the team.

 

[Sanz]

I wonder why Gillespie didnt make a big fuss about his omission in the Ashes tests. After all, you would have us believe that the correct moment to tell him that he wouldnt be playing in the latter part of the test series would have been somewhere before the twenty20 game. Could it be just that Gillespie had more sense and dignity and a smaller ego?

Was Gillespie the captain of the aussie team ? I didn't see John Buchanan or any aussie asking Ricky Ponting to quit in the middle of the ashes. Besides Gillespie was dropped by his captain, not by the coach. His coach didn't come to him and say 'Hey Jason, since Ricky isn't going to drop you, why dont you do us a favor and drop yourself in favor of the most talented Tait' .


The very fact that you have brought up Gillespie's example proves that you haven't figured out what I am trying to convey here.

 

[Sanz]

The motive was correct, he meant to field the best possible eleven.
The time and place was right too, you choose the playing eleven either the night before or on the morn, not a month before.
The only thing wrong about the entire situation was the sulking and the publicising.

And as you know we are playing Cricket, not DAVIS CUP. And no matter how many times you say, the timing was not right. You dont ask your captain to drop himself on the eve of the test match.

As for the motive - well, read cricinfo, now the coach says that whatever he said was to 'motivate' the captain. If it was indeed that, then I guess it was a poor one.

 

[Deja moo]

But you said that at least Laxman didn't name the person, and Ganguly Did. The fact is that Ganguly didn't. Neither have I in the OT.

You tell me a secret. My friend walks in and wants to know what it is. I dont tell him, but give him enough hints so that he gets it. I havent blurted it out, but have given it out nevertheless. Now make the co-relation. Its something every kid knows about. Explicit and direct verbal expression is not the only avenue of communicating .

I find it hypocritical that you keep mentioning it as a 'straightforward' discussion. How can it be a straightforward discussion when the captain goes to discuss the team with the coach and the coach suggests him to drop himself. It's Davis cup we are talking about, its TEST CRICKET.

And the principle in test cricket, as in Davis cup is the same. You field your best possible players. Its simple. And you mean to say that you're not aware of a single instance of a captain dropping himself, and that too mid-series ???

Can you for an example show me one post of false sensationlised version I have posted here ?

Yes. The part where you make it seem smart alecky on the part of Chappell with his supposed answer.

No, he didn't discuss the team selection, instead He suggested that the captain drop himself to make room for Yuvraj & Kaif. And no, Coach doesn't have the right to ask the captain to drop himself. Coach has to discuss the tam with the captain, not without the captain.

The coach has every right to suggest that Ganguly step down for the sake of the team. Whether the captain agrees or not is an altogether different matter. If Ganguly agrees and steps down, the deputy becomes captain, and team tactics get discussed with him. Its not the end of the world. Rare, but not unthinkable.

And you accuse me of sensationalizing the issue.

Ganguly refused to interact with the coach for almost a week after the discusson = fact.
That Ganguly didnt have a single word of consolation/discussion with Kaif for 2 whole days after dropping him = fact.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but that fits the definiton of sulking to a tee.

Yeah the Greg should go to the Board Admin and display his guts there and not to his captain in the middle of a tour.

Despite the fact that the playing eleven is selected on the eve of the test and not after or a mont before? Impossible to implement that procedure you suggest.

But the coach decided that he doesn't want his captain in his team, so who does he discuss the team with ? What if he doesn't want the Vice-captain either ? Now what ? Oh let me guess the coach with some senior player decides to do a 'Coup' against the captain and that is perfectly justified, isn't it ?

So now you wish to paint the coach as some sort of dictator. You will please note that the coach has the right to discuss selection issues, but not the right to impose them. Chappell made his suggestions, Ganguly would have none of it. End of story. Then came the uncalled for sulking and tattle tales.

It is widely reported by very pro-chappel Cricinfo reporters and other Pro-Chappel media, so dont accuse me of this BS that I am falsely reporting here.

Pro Chappell or pro-Ganguly, doesnt alter the fact that the media laps up controversy, and where there is none, embellish incidents to provide the illusion fo one. Nothing sells copy more than a nice little spat.

Oh so it is perfectly okay for your team to know that on the next morning when they wake up that Gangs isn't their captain anymore as their coach has finally decided that he isn't good enough. I haven't heard that one. Wow how exciting that would have been for the team.

The discussion took place on the night before the game. It was widely reported in the papers on the first day of the test that Chappell had to spend some time consoling a disconsolate Kaif during the team dinner the night before. Now they dont have dinner in the morning, do they ?

 

[Deja moo]

Was Gillespie the captain of the aussie team ? I didn't see John Buchanan or any aussie asking Ricky Ponting to quit in the middle of the ashes. Besides Gillespie was dropped by his captain, not by the coach. His coach didn't come to him and say 'Hey Jason, since Ricky isn't going to drop you, why dont you do us a favor and drop yourself in favor of the most talented Tait' .


The very fact that you have brought up Gillespie's example proves that you haven't figured out what I am trying to convey here.

Oh so now the very knowledgable Sanz knows for a fact that it was Ponting who dropped Gillespie. So you dont think Buchannan had any input in the decision ? And you've failed to grasp two points here. One, a captain has the absolute right to drop a player. The coach has the right to make suggestions as to team composition. Similarly ( and I'm getting tired of repeating myself here. If you still cannot grasp this elementary concept, I'm calling it a night), Chappell has every right to suggest that Ganguly drop himself. He cannot order him to, but he certainly can make the suggestion. No matter if its the captains spot in question, because the captain is a player too. And secondly, even though Gillespie was a senior player, he didnt start avoiding contact with his team mates or make a big show of being hurt. Cricket is a demanding game, and you dont just start sulking once your credentials are questioned.

 

[Sanz]

Oh so now the very knowledgable Sanz knows for a fact that it was Ponting who dropped Gillespie. So you dont think Buchannan had any input in the decision ?

Clutching Straws ?? The Coach must have given his inputs to Ricky Ponting about Gillespie (If there was anything left to say about his performance). But I doubt that the Coach went to Gillespie and said 'Hey Mate, Ricky isn't going to drop you, so for sake of your legacy and your career, why dont you drop yourself and do us/yourself a favor'.

Anyways you dont even understand this basic difference.

And you've failed to grasp two points here. One, a captain has the absolute right to drop a player. The coach has the right to make suggestions as to team composition.

Wrong on all count. The coach doesn't have the right to suggest the Captain drop himself. He should make that suggestion to the board, not to captain himself. Neither does the captain have the right to ask the coach/Vice-captain to drop themselves. Captain has the right to pick the Final XI, but he doesn't have the right to pick/drop final 15 for the tour.It is for Selection committee or Board to decide that Gang is the right man to lead, Greg is the right man to coach, and Dravid is the right man if Gang is unavailable. These three can not suggest one another to drop just because they think one of them is not performing.

Similarly ( and I'm getting tired of repeating myself here. If you still cannot grasp this elementary concept, I'm calling it a night), Chappell has every right to suggest that Ganguly drop himself. He cannot order him to, but he certainly can make the suggestion. No matter if its the captains spot in question, because the captain is a player too.

No, Coach cant' make that suggestion to captain himself, he should make that suggestion to the board.

And secondly, even though Gillespie was a senior player, he didnt start avoiding contact with his team mates or make a big show of being hurt. Cricket is a demanding game, and you dont just start sulking once your credentials are questioned.

Coming from someone who accused me of posting unfounded report....but no I am not surprised, after all you were the one who believed that Murali was involved in match fixing and that the finals India played in Zim was fixed and all that..so tell us more about the tabloid stuff you have been reading.