Dasa said:
I agree with all of that, but I think it's time to go for Ganguly. He has done a LOT of good in the past, but he should realise that his time is up (or should be up at any rate) and go with dignity. Otherwise he'll just be remembered for being axed while whinging, instead of as one of the best things to happen to Indian cricket.
On the subject of captaincy, I'm not a fan of "aggressive" captains - unless they have something to back it up...I'd prefer someone with tactical nous and good instincts..like a Fleming or even Vaughan. Dravid IMO should take over now.
See, on its own I do think that Ganguly is pretty much done and dusted. He may produce a few good knocks, but I it'll be like morse code. Dot Dot Dot Dot Dot Dot Dash.. So I understand all that..
Fleming and Vaughan are two examples of fairly laid back captain who are excellent at what they do. I would rate Fleming higher then Vaughan but thats OT.
I don't think Dravid could handle captaining India. A few matches, of course he could but not for good. I think Dravid could get away with captaining a team like Australia but not India.
Hypothetically, if Dravid did captain India in 2001, he would have done nothing against SR Waugh and I'd imagine that Australia would have prevailed. I just can't picture Dravid taking on the opposition, like is necesary for an Indian captain.
I just think that India need a strong back bone in the team to support them. Australia don't need it as much, because they not only are a team of champions, but aggressive ones who always hold their ground. Even a player like Michael Clarke. Got into bit of a bout with Flintoff, hardly an event though.
I seriously can't see any other alternatives. That's why I'd prefer keeping Ganguly as a specialist captain.