Technical point, but Gillespie was dropped by the selectors, of which Ponting is not one. The way Australian selection works is that they take a couple of their selectors with the touring team who (with the coach? I'm not sure) pick the team. This would contrast, for example, with England where the selectors pick the touring team (or squad for home games) but all decisions after that are taken by the captain and coach (I don't know what happens if they disagree, i don't think it's as formal an arrangement as the Aussie one).Sanz said:
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Ganguly: once a hero, now an embarrassment ...
- Thread starter adharcric
- Start date
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
It is important to understand the context of whatever Chappell said to Saurav and the background. Yuvraj's form and place in the team was the starting point of the controversy. Chappell had not been happy with the way Yuvraj was batting in Sri Lanka and said so in the presence of the then captain Dravid. According to Chappell with this kind of batting Yuvraj would not command a place in the side or words to that effect. It seems Yuvraj blew his top and then when he got his hundred in the triseries he gesticulated to wards the dressing room(coach) and openly mouthed unspeakable Punjabi obscenities. This was noticed by everyone and Chappell was very unhappy about this open defiance and indescipline by a young player. It is important to note that Yuvraj was always considered Ganguly's boy and had complete support of Saurav.
Then as Ganguly came back to the team it was a bit tricky since Dravid and Chappell were beginning to gel together well on a personal level and had mutual respect fopr each other as well as similar ideas about what needed to be done. Chappell being the outspoken person he is made his preference for Dravid clear at this stage before the captain for the Zimbabwe tour was announced.
The Dalmia controlled establishment then decided not to invite Chappell to the selection meeting since Dalmiya wanted Ganguly back and they did not want any arguements on this from the coach. The seeds of a rift were being watered.
Then came the performances of Yuvraj and Kaif in the tri series. Kaif doing well against the stronger sides but Yuvraj scoring runs too though against the weaker attacks.
Ganguly wanted to include Yuvraj in the first test (though it has been suggested that he wanted Kaif but pressure was brought in from calls from India) but he knew that dropping Kaif would be inviting controversy and so he tried to involve Chappell in the decision making. Ganguly knew that the Yuvraj's indiscipline towards the coach had been already noticed and that Chappell would not like to make it sound as if he was carrying on that issue by speaking against Yuvraj's inclusion. So he asked Chappell who he thought should be included between Kaif and Yuvraj.
Chappell stumped Ganguly with his response that in his view both of them should be in the team. Ganguly was shocked and asked whether he was suggesting that Laxman be dropped and Chappell said no he fely Dravid, Laxman, Kaif and Yuvraj were at present the best and in form middle order batsmen.
Ganguly asked him if he was suggesting that he should be dropped himself. Chappell replied that he was asked for his honest opinion and he had given it.
I am not sure Chappell is at fault for his response to the query on which of Yuvraj and kaif should be played.
Ganguly was trying to be smart by going to the coach and asking him to choose between the two. It would have been different if he was sitting with the coach and Dravid(maube Kumbe too) and discussing the total composition of the team) then lots of permutations and combinations would be discussed and debated , which surely was done and Laxman's reference to 'bad vibes' in the team probably refers to some team members(maybe just one or two which are easy to guess) suggesting both Yuvraj and kaif should play and Laxman be dropped. similarly the rumour on the night of the match that Gambhir may be dropped to accomodate Yuvraj in the opening and kaif in the middle order.
But having exhausted (maybe turned down by whosoever) Ganguly feeling cornered between the pressure in Zimbabwe to include Kaif and from back home (and his own) to include Yuvraj, tried to see if he could try another trick and it boomeranged into the biggest shock of his life.
Having recieved this shock, Ganguly, if he had a wise head on his shoulders, should have gone ahead with the team he wanted to play and closed the mater at least for the time being. He could have taken up the matter when back home in whatever manner he thought fit. But so incenced was he that he called up his favourite reporter in Calcutta and told him that Chappell had suggested to him to step down.
This gentleman, instead of shutting up, or advising Ganguly, who he counts as a friend, to cool down, went on air and talked openly about what Ganguly talked to him on a cricket programme that night on Sahara TV.
We can all form our own opinions as to who is the culprit. But the fact is that as long as outsiders, be thay administrators (present or past) sponsors and future candidates for the BCCI' presidents post keep interfering in selection we will have either a totally subservient coach(or even captain) OR , in case the coach is not willing to take this kind of interference we are always going to have a mess.
PS Mr Dalmia's group wants to corner the BCCI presidents post again. THere are those who were working to get Mr Sharad Pawar who almost defeated him last time(his gropup) but for unethical triplicate voting by Mr Dalmia. Now with the courts having ruled and that jugglery not being available to Mr Dalmia, an effort is being made to bring round the main opponent of Dalmia in BCCI, the former president Bindra, also president of Yuvraj and Harbhajan's home state body. Bindra it seems is willing not to back Mr Sharad Pawar but if he wants his pound of flesh then Indian cricket will have pay.
Then as Ganguly came back to the team it was a bit tricky since Dravid and Chappell were beginning to gel together well on a personal level and had mutual respect fopr each other as well as similar ideas about what needed to be done. Chappell being the outspoken person he is made his preference for Dravid clear at this stage before the captain for the Zimbabwe tour was announced.
The Dalmia controlled establishment then decided not to invite Chappell to the selection meeting since Dalmiya wanted Ganguly back and they did not want any arguements on this from the coach. The seeds of a rift were being watered.
Then came the performances of Yuvraj and Kaif in the tri series. Kaif doing well against the stronger sides but Yuvraj scoring runs too though against the weaker attacks.
Ganguly wanted to include Yuvraj in the first test (though it has been suggested that he wanted Kaif but pressure was brought in from calls from India) but he knew that dropping Kaif would be inviting controversy and so he tried to involve Chappell in the decision making. Ganguly knew that the Yuvraj's indiscipline towards the coach had been already noticed and that Chappell would not like to make it sound as if he was carrying on that issue by speaking against Yuvraj's inclusion. So he asked Chappell who he thought should be included between Kaif and Yuvraj.
Chappell stumped Ganguly with his response that in his view both of them should be in the team. Ganguly was shocked and asked whether he was suggesting that Laxman be dropped and Chappell said no he fely Dravid, Laxman, Kaif and Yuvraj were at present the best and in form middle order batsmen.
Ganguly asked him if he was suggesting that he should be dropped himself. Chappell replied that he was asked for his honest opinion and he had given it.
I am not sure Chappell is at fault for his response to the query on which of Yuvraj and kaif should be played.
Ganguly was trying to be smart by going to the coach and asking him to choose between the two. It would have been different if he was sitting with the coach and Dravid(maube Kumbe too) and discussing the total composition of the team) then lots of permutations and combinations would be discussed and debated , which surely was done and Laxman's reference to 'bad vibes' in the team probably refers to some team members(maybe just one or two which are easy to guess) suggesting both Yuvraj and kaif should play and Laxman be dropped. similarly the rumour on the night of the match that Gambhir may be dropped to accomodate Yuvraj in the opening and kaif in the middle order.
But having exhausted (maybe turned down by whosoever) Ganguly feeling cornered between the pressure in Zimbabwe to include Kaif and from back home (and his own) to include Yuvraj, tried to see if he could try another trick and it boomeranged into the biggest shock of his life.
Having recieved this shock, Ganguly, if he had a wise head on his shoulders, should have gone ahead with the team he wanted to play and closed the mater at least for the time being. He could have taken up the matter when back home in whatever manner he thought fit. But so incenced was he that he called up his favourite reporter in Calcutta and told him that Chappell had suggested to him to step down.
This gentleman, instead of shutting up, or advising Ganguly, who he counts as a friend, to cool down, went on air and talked openly about what Ganguly talked to him on a cricket programme that night on Sahara TV.
We can all form our own opinions as to who is the culprit. But the fact is that as long as outsiders, be thay administrators (present or past) sponsors and future candidates for the BCCI' presidents post keep interfering in selection we will have either a totally subservient coach(or even captain) OR , in case the coach is not willing to take this kind of interference we are always going to have a mess.
PS Mr Dalmia's group wants to corner the BCCI presidents post again. THere are those who were working to get Mr Sharad Pawar who almost defeated him last time(his gropup) but for unethical triplicate voting by Mr Dalmia. Now with the courts having ruled and that jugglery not being available to Mr Dalmia, an effort is being made to bring round the main opponent of Dalmia in BCCI, the former president Bindra, also president of Yuvraj and Harbhajan's home state body. Bindra it seems is willing not to back Mr Sharad Pawar but if he wants his pound of flesh then Indian cricket will have pay.
Deja moo
International Captain
Your lack of comprehension defies belief.Sanz said:
You once again convert an entire discussion into a one-liner to sensationalise it. Gillespie could have thrown a tantrum like Ganguly did , " You dont want me in the team. I'm packing my bags and leaving for home ! ". See how silly that is ?
So what you're suggesting is that Chappell make 5 telephone calls to 5 different selectors back home in India and then wait while they teleconference with each other before calling them up again for their verdict ? Practicality is obviously not a consideration in your rants. Once again, I repeat, the coach has every right to suggest a captain drop himself. He wasnt involved in the selection of the 15 , but he certainly is involved in the selection of the final eleven, which is what he did.
No, he is well within his rights to make suggestions to any player in the squad, including the captain. Hes the captain, not a king. Get rid of this feudal mindset you carry around.
Quote the part where I said Murali is involved in Match-fixing. Quote the parts where I said that India fixed matches in Zim. Could you do that ?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.
Deja moo
International Captain
Because LIVE TELEVISION is tabloid stuff too ? Or do you think Sahara somehow managed to teleport the Kolkata reporter back in time to the day before the test after the third day ?Sanz said:There comes the biggest tabloid contribution on Cricketweb. That was the gist of all the tabloid stories appearing in India. Deja Moo..are you reading ?
Deja moo
International Captain
Gangulys sulkathon continues - a never ending tantrum.
As if his past mistakes werent enough, Ganguly has gone ahead and compounded his guilt.
Coach Chappell read out a statement on Monday seeking to clear the air. The proud Aussie kept his emotions under check as he read out a signed statement, but couldn't stop his eyes popping out when he discovered that Ganguly had flummoxed him yet again. When asked to give his views on the team composition for tuesdays test, he said ," We shall decide about it later in the evening."
When told that the captain had already gone ahead and declared that the same eleven that had done duty in the first test in Bulawayo would play at Harare too, he could only gape in astonishment. However, quickly collecting himself, he said, "Well, it was more or less certain that the same team would play."
So now His Royal Sulkiness cannot bring himself to discuss the team composition with anyone else.
As if his past mistakes werent enough, Ganguly has gone ahead and compounded his guilt.
Coach Chappell read out a statement on Monday seeking to clear the air. The proud Aussie kept his emotions under check as he read out a signed statement, but couldn't stop his eyes popping out when he discovered that Ganguly had flummoxed him yet again. When asked to give his views on the team composition for tuesdays test, he said ," We shall decide about it later in the evening."
When told that the captain had already gone ahead and declared that the same eleven that had done duty in the first test in Bulawayo would play at Harare too, he could only gape in astonishment. However, quickly collecting himself, he said, "Well, it was more or less certain that the same team would play."
So now His Royal Sulkiness cannot bring himself to discuss the team composition with anyone else.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Are you saying that the reporter said all those things on Sahara Television ..such was ganguyl getting calls from India, ganguly acting smart and all that stuff.Deja moo said:
I am sure everything mentioned in that garbage post was uttered by LP Sahi (the reporter in question) on Sahara TV.
fine...so how does that change my statement? cricket is a team game and all contributions have their own significance but how does it compare with the people i mentioned...? shounak was suggesting that it was gang's captaincy that won the series for us....and the answer to that is an emphatic no...!honestbharani said:
i remember azhar winning a whole lot of one day tournaments and home test series when he was captain, towards the end of his career, he was contributing less and less as a batsman(he was never a good captain) and was a benefactor of several heroic performances from dev(i think?), tendulkar, kumble etc, i and my friends used to discuss this and say that he was in the team just to collect trophies and pose with them that was won off his team mates' toil....i am not comparing the cheat that was azhar to ganguly, the point is that you have to look at his contributions from a captaincy and a batting standpoint(not just that his team won something when he was captain) and while he makes a lot of noise and shows a lot of overt aggression on the field and off it, i don't think his captaincy has been anything to write home about...
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
No, its you who is comparing apples with Oranges. Gillespie wasn't asked to drop himself, he was dropped by the team management. I am not saying that Ganguly was very mature in his approach, I am ready to accept that but you somehow are adamant on your stand that Greg was right in his timing, which he wasn't.Deja moo said:
There is a Chairman of Selectors which can be reached before the match, no need to contact each one of the selectors.
Anyways, It's ironic that you give example of Jason Gillespie, do you even know how he was dropped ? Let me flash this newspiece to the ignorant you :- " A late-night phone call between Australia's chairman of selectors Trevor Hohns and the coach John Buchanan was followed by a tap on the shoulder yesterday morning and the words which a cricketer fears above all others. By being dropped from this practice match, leaving a shoot-out between Mike Kasprowicz and Shaun Tait, Gillespie has been ruled out of the fourth Test barring injuries to the other two, and probably forever"
You see the right way there, Gillespie was first left out of the tour game and then from the test match. Not to forget that Gillespie was just a player, here you are talking about dropping your captain itself and Chappell didn't feel it necessary to speak to the selectors about it.
So much for your rant, now I expect you to come up with another excuse or justification of Greg's call. Really so much of sucking up .
No he is not, his job is to coach the team, not to drop/pick captains..and no I dont have a feudal mindset.
"Oh, and it has been confirmed that it was indeed Muralitharan who was a regular at the dance bar of the bar girl who regularly spent her money betting on matches, including the recent Ashes.
"It must be really unfortunate that he picked the one girl who happened to be part of a betting ring...."
"According to todays TOI, two ICC officials were recently in mumbai to investigate four top bookies as well as a "swashbuckling batsman" and two pace bowlers ( all from India)."
Not to forget , you ran away and never posted in that thread after I posted the details of the issue.
Last edited:
Sanz said:
That kind of assumes the Indian selection works the same way as the Austalian one does.
Compare for example with how Chris Read was dropped for the Antigua test match - the selectors had no say in the decision whatsoever (not that they were totally happy about the situation because of the effect - Fletcher and Vaughan had basically used their power to select teams on tour in order to prejudge selection for future series)
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Well I dont know how Indian selection works, I am not sure if anyone knows. My response was to DejaMoo's persistent comparison with Gillespie's exclusion and his statement :- "...So what you're suggesting is that Chappell make 5 telephone calls to 5 different selectors back home in India and then wait while they teleconference with each other before calling them up again for their verdict.. "greg said:
If he is going to compare this with Gillespie's situation then it is only fair that he should be told how Gillespie was dropped.
Well Chris Read was just a member of the side, not the captain. If coach Fletcher is going to ask Vaughan/Hussain (basically the captain) to drop himself, then I would assume he would talk to the selectors before taking such a drastic measure.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
No, I agree with you that Sourav is not contributing now, but it is just sad that a pretty good knock of his is being forgotten by almost everyone.Anil said:
Deja moo
International Captain
No the timing was spot on. You select the playing eleven ( not playing ten, FYI) on the eve of a match, not a month or so in advance. You select the eleven best possible players, and thats what he suggested Ganguly do.Sanz said:
And you're displaying total ignorance regarding how the selection of the playing eleven on tours works as far as Indian cricket is concerned. The selectors have absolutely NO say in playing eleven selections on tours. It is just the captain, coach and some senior players who are involved. The only instance when the selectors are involved is when a player gets injured and a replacement has to be called for.
Once again, you select a playing eleven, not a playing ten . The captain is a player too, and subject to the same pressures for keeping his spot as any other player. Besides, Ganguly was given a chance to prove himself in the tour game, something which is commendable, not otherwise.
Because he didnt need to. India doesnt follow the Australian system.
Calling out to Biased Indian, do you mind transferring your username to sanz ?
Funny then why the coach is allowed to have a say in selecting the playing eleven then, huh ? Which means coaching isnt his only job.
Regarding the 3 Indian players, those were words from the Police Commissioners mouth. So if you're questioning that, I suggest you make up your mind as far as your policy on the ineptness/corruptibility of the Indian police goes.
And regarding Murali, I see you've failed to mention my last post in he thread :
http://forum.cricketweb.net/showpost.php?p=591361&postcount=27
, which shows that I did admit that it might not necessarily be match fixing that had made it big news. But mentioning that concession I made would make your current allegations weak, wouldnt it ?
I cant help it if your cheap mindset allows you to entertain that thought. As mentioned, I had already tempered my stand and accepted that the news might have been sensationalised.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
You can keep defending the call, after all you have so much sucking up to do to Chappell. But IMO you dont ask/suggest your captain to drop himself on the eve of the match. It is the first and only instance. And as for playing 10 players, who ended up scoring a century in that matchDeja moo said:
I never claimed to have known the Indian selection process, But You are the one who kept comparing Gillespie with Ganguly and now you have taken a complete U Turn and didn't mentioned the word 'Gillespie' once.
. Since you are saying Gillespie with Ganguly situation it is only fair that you were educated by the 'Process' followed by Ricky, Coach and selectors. Ganguly is the captain selected by the selection Committee for Entire TOUR and if someone asks/suggests him to step down in the middle of a tour, he must speak to the selectors before doing so. Dont tell me that the coach didn't know about Ganguly's form before the test match.That's why you ask him to drop himself before the test, right ?? As for Playing 10, ever heard the name 'Mike Brearly' (not that Gangs is so good as captain). Beside Yuvraj cant be part of best XI for TESTs, I will pick Ganguly over him any day.
so were Yuvraj & Kaif, Gangs scored more than their combined score.
Then stop comparing Gillespie with Ganguly. Although you have still not figured out the difference that one is a captain and player both and the other is just a player. And What is the Indian system btw, enlighten us please ?
And I am suggesting you change your icon to this ->
Of Course coaching isn't his only job, His main job is asking his captain to drop himself, give false interviews to the media, take a complete U turn and say that he wasn't really suggesting Ganguly to drop, but just trying to motivate. Coaching is his last priority actually. Needless to say, With this approach and attitude he wont come anywhere close to Wright.
Actually you quoted a tabloid - "According to todays TOI, two ICC officials were recently in mumbai to investigate four top bookies as well as a "swashbuckling batsman" and two pace bowlers ( all from India)." is what you posted. Let me tell you that a Police Commissioner will never use the word 'swashbuckling batsman'. Anyone who reads Indian media regularly would be able to tell you that such adjectives are created by reporters..and even if it came from a police commissioner there is no way for me to know it. So stop accusing me of what you suggested (highleighted part). I have lived in almost every part of the country and know how ept/inept, honest/corrupt they are.
no you didn't admit anything, if at all you you still defended the way media handled the story when you said "... thats why its being made such a big deal of."And regarding Murali, I see you've failed to mention my last post in he thread :
http://forum.cricketweb.net/showpost.php?p=591361&postcount=27
, which shows that I did admit that it might not necessarily be match fixing that had made it big news. But mentioning that concession I made would make your current allegations weak, wouldnt it ?
You worry about your mindest and the ways you can suck up to Coach. Those who matter to me are happy with my mindset and the way I think and that's enough for me. You didn't tmpered your stand at all and as I said never seen in that thread again after I posted post # 29, 30 and 32.
You accuse a player of Murali's caliber of match fixing and consider him guilty just on the basis of a tabloid report and then come up with sarcastics posts in support of your claims and what not and run away when shown the fact and you accuse others of sensationalization and guess what is the word in the dictionary for that ? It starts with 'H'
Deja moo
International Captain
Hurrah for ganguly. McGrath and co must be shaking in their boots in anticipation of things to come.
And please remove your lips from the Maharajas posterior. Your muffled sounds make no sense.
Gillespie. There. I've mentioned it. Happy ? So while we're at it, lets discuss how one senior member throws a tantrum at the mere suggestion of being dropped, and the other ( you know, Gillespie) doesnt. Damn, I've mentioned the word twice now ! And why do I not need to mention his name anyway ? Because I have already explained to you the parallels, or lack of in their cases:
Now dont spout out that same nonsense about things being different because Gillespie isnt captain. Its a question of two very senior and well-entrenched players, one of whom accepted himself being dropped, and the other who threw a tantrum on his batting credentials being questioned. Its a question of two egos, and how they've handled theirs very differently.Deja moo said:
And since you seem to be fond of accusing me of "running away", lets see just one of the many points you have shied away from facing upto, the crux of the matter really:
Deja Moo said:
Too bad you're not the coach then, eh ? Or is it a good thing ?Sanz said:
Besides its rich to see you make an attempt at condescension by throwing out Brearleys name, a far better tactician than Ganguly. May I ask why you couldnt answer the more relevent point I had put forth earlier in post#78, regarding establishment of a precedence? :Deja moo said:
You have either ignored it conveniently, or need further spoon-feeding. Heres one more clue : Mike Denness, Ashes 1974-75.
And Kumble scored more than Ganguly. Hence the relevance? Besides, Ganguly simply walked off the crease once the second new ball was taken compaining of elbow pain, only to resume against the old ballSanz said:
. Now that cant be good news for a batsman, could it ?A captain is a player as well. You havent gotten this into your head, and I'm not going to dwell further on this point since you refuse even make an effort to comprehend it. Once again, Mike Denness.
meh, you're so wrapped in your own world that you dont even bother to read others posts completely ? Read the post you just quoted, oh wanderer in need of enlightenment.You mean like Gangulys main job is attending his wifes birthday party when he should have been on the flight to Zimbabwe, throwing a tantrum at a mere suggestion by the coach, threatening to pack his bags and leave, creating fissures within the team by going to the media for an issue that never was supposed to leave the dressing room, sulking and avoiding contact with a fellow player for two whole days, refusing to issue a statement to clarify the situation, declaring the playing eleven for the second test without consulting his coach ?
Thats true. Wright simply gave up and settled into a routine knowing that he wasnt going to be allowed to make a difference. Thankfully Chappell is made of sterner stuff and hopefully wont be as tolerant of bullshyte from his players.
Those words were from the police Commisioner, reported by a reporter. I assure you no newspaper worth its salt can afford to misquote a commissioner, and that reporters do use adjectives here and there.
No, your lack of comprehension shows up again. It means I suggest that the very act of a subcontinental cricketer celebrity visiting a bar could be the reason it was made a big deal of by the media. I cant make it simpler than that.
Good for you. Stick to them. If your internet persona is any true indication of your real life persona, those might be the only people you'll ever have to make do with.
I cant help it if you have problems in understanding a persons posts. I had closed the matter with that post, which is why you didnt "see me there".
Once again, I cant help it if you misinterpret my posts ( as I have proven again). You keep accuse me of running away. I dont. I either stick to the end when I'm in the right, or admit my mistakes as I have done in the past on more than the one occaision. The only time when I leave a thread is when
(a) I've made my stand clear,
or (b) see no point in continuing, because of someone involved in obfuscation of facts in an attempt to save face, as you are doing in both this as well as the other related thread. You have consistently avoided facing upto many facts in both threads, keep spouting the same ill-formed, pre-conceived and biased opinions, and for having the nerve to accuse someone else of that, truly deserve that big H.
See you. Thats it for me in this thread (and if you need a reason why, see points (a) and (b) just above
).
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Whethere Mcgrath is shaking or not isn't the point. Yuvraj's highest score is 20 something, Ganguly's 101 and the coach thought he is better than him. I can see in which direction your head is headed now.Deja moo said:
No you have not explained parellels, If Ricky as captain can be a parallel case, Gillespie's isn't. So how was Gillespie dropped ?
Here is another logic, even if I consider Ganguly and Gillespie as only players, Gillespie was given 3 tests to perform, How many tests did Greg give Gangulyto perform ? Ganguly's reaction was immature and all I have already said that. So dont try to be scoring points there.
Yes You ran away, after I posted the facts.
Dont behave as if you are coach of the team. And sorry I missed the part about Dennes dropping himself or something, well That decision has to be taken by Ganguly. May be he isn't that strong individual and that's why he needs to be dropped. But Chappell suggesting him that he drop himself is something very stupid and hardly the way to go.
As I told, it's possible that Ganguly isn't strong enough or is too insecure to act the way Dennes did. Once again the coach didn't ask Denness to drop himself. Denness dropped himself. I dont understand how that means that the coach is right here. And as per the coach Ganguly is such a great leader, anyone would think he automatically warrants a place there.
Relevance is in the tour game everyone was given a chance and Ganguly scored more, even in the subsequent test he scored more than Yuvraj. You can continue your rant about Tabloid reports..etc I am least bothered.And Kumble scored more than Ganguly. Hence the relevance? Besides, Ganguly simply walked off the crease once the second new ball was taken compaining of elbow pain, only to resume against the old ball
In one post mentioned it 3 times..make it sound as if you have mentioned it in 3 different posts and i have been avoidign it. anyways already addressed it couple of times.
Read your post(in response to my post about why he didn't say when the squad was picked on) you said he wasn't even invited. He was infact invited for the squad selection, why didn't he say there that he wanted a non-playing captain.
Keep reading the tabloid, here is more if you would like - Ganguly and Agarkar were dating Nagma and Jyotika and that is why AA always makes a come back, Ganguly and Nagma used to meet in a temple where Nagma would do a snake dance for him and he would play the pipe
Yeah that's why Wright was so successfull and Chappell's team is struggling to cross 400 marks against Zimbabwe's massivly superior attack.
No commissioner uses the word 'Swashbuckling Indian batsman', Tabloid of India reporters do, do a search for that word and see how many times in the past reporters have used this word.
I know what you suggested and were never found in that thread again after I posted the facts.
My personal life is none of your effing business. Enjoy your real life casanova personality.
Btw were you involved in this ?
Last edited:
Deja moo
International Captain
yeh Sanz, in your world, everybody is as good as their last score. Then I guess Bradman must be a pretty crap batsman IYO.Sanz said:
No you have not explained parellels, If Ricky as captain can be a parallel case, Gillespie's isn't. So how was Gillespie dropped ?
If its the dyslexia preventing you from understanding the parallel, I sympathize. Both were senior players, captains can, and have dropped themselves before, and not everyone throws a tantrum at the suggestionGanguly has played a lot of cricket before the tests TYVM. He had a complete tri series and a tour game.
Keep ranting. Misunderstanding others posts and having an inflated opinion of yourself is not a new occurance with you.
Its not stupid, and would be considered so only by the most egoistic and insecure. You keep twisting facts to project an image of Chappell ordering Ganguly to step down, when in fact it was a suggestion Ganguly could just have turned down. But no, thats not his style.
In case Ganguly wasnt aware that captains could drop themselves for the betterment of the team, Greg certainly has made him aware now
. The captain deserves every input in how to go about things.And Kumble scored more than a Ganguly who left the crease as soon as the second new ball was taken. So I guess going by your trend of judging players by just the scorebook, Kumble is a great batsman.
You certainly have been running away from it until now
A couple of times ? Ha! you realise it only in this last post, and that too after I had to emphasise it so much that you just couldnt avoid it.
Ha! You questioned why he didnt mention anything when the CAPTAIN was being picked, I said he wasnt invited, and your response was to try and "prove" that he was indeed present when the CAPTAIN was picked. That has been proven utterly false, and you're once again involved in obfuscation to try and save face, which no longer surprises me TBH.
Because he gave Ganguly plenty of opportunities to prove his worth, which he couldnt achieve to an adequate degree. Keep digging.
Funny then how you're bringing up these reports, and I'm not. So guess who pays more attention to the trashy coloumns ?
yeah, Chappells team is losing the series, while Wrights team swept the Zimmies. Oh wait a minute ! Its the other way round !
No commissioner uses the word 'Swashbuckling Indian batsman', Tabloid of India reporters do, do a search for that word and see how many times in the past reporters have used this word.
So you still cant understand things. I said the reporters do use adjectives, did I say the commissioner uses those adjectives ?whatever rocks your boat Sanz. If your insecurity leads you to believe that, believe so
. And by the way, dont forget to accuse me and some others to of lying every now and then. You're the one who brought your effing personal life into the topic, and when pointed out the bitter truth, get all touchy and sensitive ? hahahaha...
And as a parting gift, since you dont know when to stop and save yourself the embarrasment, I present to you, for your digging enjoyment, :
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Article by Andrew Miller UK editor of Cricinfo.com
Excerpts
Now, contrast Hussain's actions with those of the captain who refuses to go quietly. There are many similarities between Hussain and Sourav Ganguly (another man who has been in impressively candid form this week), ones that go far beyond their Indian heritage. They are both proud men with a backbone infused with arrogance, who built impressive Test careers in spite of some glaring technical shortcomings, and who defended their young players with the wrath of a cornered vixen as they hoisted their teams towards the top of the Test tree.
There, however, the similarities end. Hussain felt the fire in his belly flicker during the second of his unexpungeable Ashes drubbings, and had it unequivocally doused during the Zimbabwe debacle of the 2003 World Cup.
Within months he had vacated his post, before his apathy could affect the men he had led so well. Ganguly, by contrast, clings on without purpose as his team falters with him. The memories of his seismic series win over the Australians are now four years distant - the same amount of time that his opposite number in that series, Steve Waugh, said was the right tenure for a captain, given the demands of modern international cricket.
For the past week, Cricinfo's servers been log-jammed, quite literally, with the most apoplectic feedback I've ever witnessed. Reams upon reams upon reams of irate Ganguly fans, complaining in the bitterest terms imaginable about a perceived South Indian bias that has captured the tongues of our commentators and forced them to spew venom on a leader they once adored.
Not that I'd dare comment on the minutiae of such an accusation but, as an independent commentator who has witnessed the rise, plateauing and gradual descent of a side that only two years ago seemed set to take on Australia's mantle as the best team in the world, there seems only one man who can possibly carry the can. As Ganguly's young bucks might one day testify, from a bookshop near you, great things can be achieved when youth and vigour are permitted full freedom of expression.
Excerpts
Now, contrast Hussain's actions with those of the captain who refuses to go quietly. There are many similarities between Hussain and Sourav Ganguly (another man who has been in impressively candid form this week), ones that go far beyond their Indian heritage. They are both proud men with a backbone infused with arrogance, who built impressive Test careers in spite of some glaring technical shortcomings, and who defended their young players with the wrath of a cornered vixen as they hoisted their teams towards the top of the Test tree.
There, however, the similarities end. Hussain felt the fire in his belly flicker during the second of his unexpungeable Ashes drubbings, and had it unequivocally doused during the Zimbabwe debacle of the 2003 World Cup.
Within months he had vacated his post, before his apathy could affect the men he had led so well. Ganguly, by contrast, clings on without purpose as his team falters with him. The memories of his seismic series win over the Australians are now four years distant - the same amount of time that his opposite number in that series, Steve Waugh, said was the right tenure for a captain, given the demands of modern international cricket.
For the past week, Cricinfo's servers been log-jammed, quite literally, with the most apoplectic feedback I've ever witnessed. Reams upon reams upon reams of irate Ganguly fans, complaining in the bitterest terms imaginable about a perceived South Indian bias that has captured the tongues of our commentators and forced them to spew venom on a leader they once adored.
Not that I'd dare comment on the minutiae of such an accusation but, as an independent commentator who has witnessed the rise, plateauing and gradual descent of a side that only two years ago seemed set to take on Australia's mantle as the best team in the world, there seems only one man who can possibly carry the can. As Ganguly's young bucks might one day testify, from a bookshop near you, great things can be achieved when youth and vigour are permitted full freedom of expression.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Moo - There goes your entire credibility. Read this post :-Deja moo said:
http://forum.cricketweb.net/showpost.php?p=598799&postcount=38
I said - "Why not say so in the camp or when the selectors were selecting the team ?"
You responded - "Why didnt he say so when the selectors were selecting the squad ? Just the simple reason that THEY DIDNT INVITE HIM !!! gee, talk about drawing conclusions with incomplete information.
Now I see you running away again after shown the truth. Wait a minute that must have been someone else impersonating Moo. Moo never talked about SQUAD selection, he was talking about CAPTAIN.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Whichever way you compare - Ganguly is/was/will be a better test player thanYuvraj.Deja moo said:
And captains have played despite poor forms..and accodring to Coach Ganguly has been doing a great job
. Ganguly throwing a tantrum was certianly immature and I have mentioned it many times in this thread.Since when ODIs have become a criteria for selecting a test team, In the tour game he performed better than both the players the coach thought better than him and in the following test he performed better than Yuvraj sort of proving his stance right.
Ganguly may be egoistic and insecure but that doesn't make Chappell's action right. I have never twisted the facts, it is you who has been quoting tabloids and have not provided any source of your twisted imaginations and wicked assumptions.
Not about dropping himself though.
Once again your wild imaginations have gotten better of you. Ganguly can never be as good as Ganguly as batsman yeah and that's from the scorebooks of cricinfo.
How many tests did Ganguly play under Greg ?
They are just the tabloid stuff which you seem to trust so much. I was feeding you some more. Ironically it was said by one of the most reknown cricket journo in India (on his Blog)
Wow, Chappell just won an away series since 1986, he desrves the Paramveer Chakra for his job. What a great opposition it has been.
If Greg can take this team to WC Finals, ICC trophy finals 2/3 times in a row,draw a series in ENG, AUS, win a series in Pak etc etc then he can be talked with Wright in the same breadth. (I am willing to put 1000 bucks against it though ). Wright did everything while Sourav was in the team. His man management skills were great. So dont even go there comparing Wright with Greg.In that thread, I posted what Comissioner said. Obviously you were not seen anywhere near thread to know what he actually said. It's a pity that you still believe that those words posted by the Reporter in the tabloid was actually said by the Police Commissioner.
As I said I dont need a certificate from you on my personality. And I have already shown how lied (you kow Greg not invited for squad etc etc)
I didn't bring my personal life, neither do I feel touchy. It's just none of your business. You can continue to talk about it (that's what I expect from tabloid reading people), and feel good about it. Although I have a feeling that you are feeling terrible after yourself. Did my posts make you angry Moo ?
I thought you had already parted when you said you wont be replying to me again, so I dont know if I should trust you this time. But I guess this time you will stay away as I have shown you your post which just touched your raw nerve there.