-
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.
Isn't Saurav Ganguly such a lovable character ?
- Thread starter DaBombayDuck
- Start date
jlo33692
U19 Debutant
???
Huh,i think we are getting off the subject,it is obviosly a very emotional issue.
My only comment on the chappell issue is ,i am pretty certain he would not be acting alone and i think he will get his way and the board will back the appointment they made till he has completed what it is they required him to do. IMO,sad though to see Indian cricket in such termoil ,I dont think anyone is the winner in this sorry debate,but i know who the loser is,INDIA,comeon sort it out and get the team back as a team.
Huh,i think we are getting off the subject,it is obviosly a very emotional issue.
My only comment on the chappell issue is ,i am pretty certain he would not be acting alone and i think he will get his way and the board will back the appointment they made till he has completed what it is they required him to do. IMO,sad though to see Indian cricket in such termoil ,I dont think anyone is the winner in this sorry debate,but i know who the loser is,INDIA,comeon sort it out and get the team back as a team.
Last edited:
jlo33692
U19 Debutant
Here is a pro Gangully article for those who feel he is hard done by.
Ganguly refuses to fade away
-----------------------------------------
Rahul Bhattacharya at Rajkot
October 21, 2005
Sourav Ganguly: dividing opinions and stoking the argument © Getty Images
The most fascinating Indian cricketer of his generation made an innings today that must count among the more poignant in recent times at any level of cricket. It could mean nothing and yet it meant so much.
Sourav Ganguly came to Rajkot under fire, which over the past 13 years has probably become his natural state of being. At the best of times he hasn't been the most loved of cricketers. Leave aside his fielding and running between the wickets, your average watcher is annoyed with the way he blinks (he wears contact lenses) or smirks.
On the lamentable television show, Match ke Mujrim (Culprits of the Match), he has been voted chief culprit so often that they disqualified him on the last occasion. Nowadays you can log on to the dismal website www.************.com, which advertises itself as "a place to mourn, condemn and discuss the pathetic state of Indian cricket embodied by Sourav "No-Fast-Bowling-Please" Ganguly".
Ganguly arrived here in absurdly challenging circumstances. Everybody seemed to know the complete truth about his elbow injury, never mind that the doctors themselves regard such a condition impossible to pronounce on with certainty.
Besides, the absolute absence of vision from the board meant that Indian cricket has been beset with a bizarre captaincy shootout for four months running. Even now, despite the precedent-breaking appointment of Rahul Dravid for two series - in fact, it is just 12 back-to-back one-dayers - nothing is clear. Dravid has virtually not reacted to what should have been a watershed in his life because he doesn't know whether he will be in the seat for the Tests that follow.
Ganguly himself has not said whether he is prepared to forgo captaincy ambitions or not - though his silence probably indicates the latter. Neither the chairman of selectors or the board has bothered to clarify whether India indeed has a new captain or merely a man in charge for the next month. As ever, it has been a case of waiting and watching, cussing and laughing.
So there were the circumstances, and there was the setting - the emptiness at a stadium that is approached through a garden, the one man selling freshly limed chana chorgaram outside the gate, the one lad with the poster professing his willingness to die for Maharaj if needed, the warm and dusty breeze of pure sleep, the blissful languor of proceedings within the larger drama of Indian cricket.
Ganguly was greeted by a pitch several shades greener than is normal for the venue: the association is a rival to the Jagmohan Dalmiya camp. Nor was he up against, like they say hereabouts, a poppatwadi attack. The opponents picked five specialist bowlers. Three have played international cricket, the other two should do soon.
Ganguly countered them with a superb innings from a tricky position. Good and bad, there was all of him here. He converted threes to twos with perfect earnestness. He was clunked on the head. He French-cut often enough. He also played strokes lesser talents can only dream of.
He began last evening with the most emphatic of statements, a rousing slap in front of square. Soon he was in a flap but he stayed alive. He started this morning with swollen feet and poked VRV Singh just fine of gully. Within thirty minutes, on an easing pitch, he was occupying a plane comfortably higher than anyone else in the match - and there are half a dozen here who are or have been in or on the fringes of the national team.
Sarandeep Singh was hoisted onto the shamiana, burnt on the side of his turban and dabbed past slip. Amit Mishra was cut repeatedly in front of square and once inside-outed. Off Amit Bhandari came the sweetest of drives on the rise. Gagandeep Singh, the standout bowler along with VRV, was pulled with something approaching glory.
On 86 Ganguly was dropped but by now he'd begun making room to hit through off. At quarter to twelve he reached a hundred, and his second fifty had come from 44 balls. Soon after lunch he was gone for he does not build big first-class innings. But remember that of the 22 players on either side, only one other pipped fifty in the first innings. Unsurprisingly, he didn't take the field for an hour after tea.
What's left to say about Ganguly? Attacking and defending him have become cottage industries in India. He is deemed to be one thing or the other, rarely both, which, of course, he is, like the rest of everyone. He may have abandoned Freddie Flintoff to his curry. He also makes tea for visitors to his hotel room. He may have rubbed innumerable people the wrong way, but he has also the invaluable facility of making several feel special, a trait that served him remarkably well while shaping a properly motley bunch of individuals into a team worth challenging the best. He has been the most human of leaders.
Alas somewhere he failed to regenerate himself. In about six years his Test and one-day averages fell nine and four points, an indictment particularly severe when you consider that it has been a period of incomparable bounty for batsmen the world over. Coaches more lenient than Greg Chappell could rightly be appalled with his levels of fitness. He scarcely remained in a position to demand more from his players.
What Ganguly has shown at Rajkot without doubt that he is here is to be counted. It is also likely, if not certain, that he will not be able to channel the same kind of intensity into his craft when in charge of a team, particularly one in disarray. Can he withstand the allround physical rigours of international cricket? Is he not, like Nasser Hussain said, fighting the wrong battles? Would he not be better off diverting all his energy to become the very best batsman and fielder and bowler that he can be? Will it not be best for all concerned?
It is high time that he, Dravid, the coach, the team, and indeed, the millions who follow Indian cricket, know exactly what the score is. It would be good to watch Ganguly bat well again. It would be good to see the Indian team happy again.
Rahul Bhattacharya is author of Pundits from Pakistan: On tour with India 2003-04.
© Cricinfo
Ganguly refuses to fade away
-----------------------------------------
Rahul Bhattacharya at Rajkot
October 21, 2005
Sourav Ganguly: dividing opinions and stoking the argument © Getty Images
The most fascinating Indian cricketer of his generation made an innings today that must count among the more poignant in recent times at any level of cricket. It could mean nothing and yet it meant so much.
Sourav Ganguly came to Rajkot under fire, which over the past 13 years has probably become his natural state of being. At the best of times he hasn't been the most loved of cricketers. Leave aside his fielding and running between the wickets, your average watcher is annoyed with the way he blinks (he wears contact lenses) or smirks.
On the lamentable television show, Match ke Mujrim (Culprits of the Match), he has been voted chief culprit so often that they disqualified him on the last occasion. Nowadays you can log on to the dismal website www.************.com, which advertises itself as "a place to mourn, condemn and discuss the pathetic state of Indian cricket embodied by Sourav "No-Fast-Bowling-Please" Ganguly".
Ganguly arrived here in absurdly challenging circumstances. Everybody seemed to know the complete truth about his elbow injury, never mind that the doctors themselves regard such a condition impossible to pronounce on with certainty.
Besides, the absolute absence of vision from the board meant that Indian cricket has been beset with a bizarre captaincy shootout for four months running. Even now, despite the precedent-breaking appointment of Rahul Dravid for two series - in fact, it is just 12 back-to-back one-dayers - nothing is clear. Dravid has virtually not reacted to what should have been a watershed in his life because he doesn't know whether he will be in the seat for the Tests that follow.
Ganguly himself has not said whether he is prepared to forgo captaincy ambitions or not - though his silence probably indicates the latter. Neither the chairman of selectors or the board has bothered to clarify whether India indeed has a new captain or merely a man in charge for the next month. As ever, it has been a case of waiting and watching, cussing and laughing.
So there were the circumstances, and there was the setting - the emptiness at a stadium that is approached through a garden, the one man selling freshly limed chana chorgaram outside the gate, the one lad with the poster professing his willingness to die for Maharaj if needed, the warm and dusty breeze of pure sleep, the blissful languor of proceedings within the larger drama of Indian cricket.
Ganguly was greeted by a pitch several shades greener than is normal for the venue: the association is a rival to the Jagmohan Dalmiya camp. Nor was he up against, like they say hereabouts, a poppatwadi attack. The opponents picked five specialist bowlers. Three have played international cricket, the other two should do soon.
Ganguly countered them with a superb innings from a tricky position. Good and bad, there was all of him here. He converted threes to twos with perfect earnestness. He was clunked on the head. He French-cut often enough. He also played strokes lesser talents can only dream of.
He began last evening with the most emphatic of statements, a rousing slap in front of square. Soon he was in a flap but he stayed alive. He started this morning with swollen feet and poked VRV Singh just fine of gully. Within thirty minutes, on an easing pitch, he was occupying a plane comfortably higher than anyone else in the match - and there are half a dozen here who are or have been in or on the fringes of the national team.
Sarandeep Singh was hoisted onto the shamiana, burnt on the side of his turban and dabbed past slip. Amit Mishra was cut repeatedly in front of square and once inside-outed. Off Amit Bhandari came the sweetest of drives on the rise. Gagandeep Singh, the standout bowler along with VRV, was pulled with something approaching glory.
On 86 Ganguly was dropped but by now he'd begun making room to hit through off. At quarter to twelve he reached a hundred, and his second fifty had come from 44 balls. Soon after lunch he was gone for he does not build big first-class innings. But remember that of the 22 players on either side, only one other pipped fifty in the first innings. Unsurprisingly, he didn't take the field for an hour after tea.
What's left to say about Ganguly? Attacking and defending him have become cottage industries in India. He is deemed to be one thing or the other, rarely both, which, of course, he is, like the rest of everyone. He may have abandoned Freddie Flintoff to his curry. He also makes tea for visitors to his hotel room. He may have rubbed innumerable people the wrong way, but he has also the invaluable facility of making several feel special, a trait that served him remarkably well while shaping a properly motley bunch of individuals into a team worth challenging the best. He has been the most human of leaders.
Alas somewhere he failed to regenerate himself. In about six years his Test and one-day averages fell nine and four points, an indictment particularly severe when you consider that it has been a period of incomparable bounty for batsmen the world over. Coaches more lenient than Greg Chappell could rightly be appalled with his levels of fitness. He scarcely remained in a position to demand more from his players.
What Ganguly has shown at Rajkot without doubt that he is here is to be counted. It is also likely, if not certain, that he will not be able to channel the same kind of intensity into his craft when in charge of a team, particularly one in disarray. Can he withstand the allround physical rigours of international cricket? Is he not, like Nasser Hussain said, fighting the wrong battles? Would he not be better off diverting all his energy to become the very best batsman and fielder and bowler that he can be? Will it not be best for all concerned?
It is high time that he, Dravid, the coach, the team, and indeed, the millions who follow Indian cricket, know exactly what the score is. It would be good to watch Ganguly bat well again. It would be good to see the Indian team happy again.
Rahul Bhattacharya is author of Pundits from Pakistan: On tour with India 2003-04.
© Cricinfo
Last edited:
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
No that would mean that India is so diverse that a state in south is totally different from east, west & north in almost every way. If one part of India cant be like another part of the country how can we say that a neighboring country which is (equally diverse) is similar to India ? If you ask pakistanis, many of them find it pretty offensive and imperialist.Pratyush said:
Even the british shared 200 years of history with us, does that mean that India and britain are similar ? As for the history of India Pakistan - There was no united India before the British came, There were Independent kingdoms. Besides just because that region was part of India doesn't mean India/Pakistan are similar. the fact is that they are not.
??? Dude ever watched PTV or any Pakistani channell ?? If not then go and watch it and then compare it to Indian TV channels..you will know the difference between the two countries..the language, tehzeeb, food, religion and almost everything..
And I can tell you that there are no similarities in Tehzeeb,food, language or anything between a Bengali & a Tamilian or between a Maharastrian and a Bihari or between a Goan and Bhaiya of UP, or between a keralite and an manipuri.....Now dont tell me that the tehzeeb of NEFA (I hope being a kolkatan, you know what it stands for) is similar to that of Pakistan.
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Many Pakistanis also find the two countries similar. So they would not consider similarities between the two countries offensive.Sanz said:
Britain and Pakistan comparison does not hold good because their roles, capacities with India were very different.
I find the two countries are very similar and so do many other people.
Last edited:
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Baltis, curries - what's the difference?Sanz said:
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
There isnt really much to argue about as its a fact that India and Pakistan have a lot of similarity and the Britain comparison was odious because ruling a country and being together as one have very different connotations.Sanz said:And you clearly ignored the most relevant part...
exactly..so just being together for 100s of years doesn't mean we are similar.
Well I dont and I guess we can agree to disagree.
And yes, we agree to desagree.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
It's not a fact, its your opinion. As for the British example, may be that was not acceptable for you, but ever heard the name Burma (or Myan Mar) ?? It was part of India for close to 100 years and hardly be said similar to India.Pratyush said:
Although it must be noted that Myanmar is much closer culturally to NEFA than rest of the India in the same way that Pakistan's Border areas are similar to Punjab, Kashmir etc, BD is similar to West Eengal, Nepal is similar to Bihar & UP, SriLanka is similar to TamilNadu etc.But to say that all these countries (Pak, BD, SL, Myanmar, Nepal, Bhutan) are similar to India is nonsense. You may feel close to a particular country because their tehzeeb, language or culture is similar to yours.
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
I have not said that so dont try and put words in my mouth. What was nonsense was you comparing Britain in India with Pakistan and India.Sanz said:But to say that all these countries (Pak, BD, SL, Myanmar, Nepal, Bhutan) are similar to India is nonsense. You may feel close to a particular country because their tehzeeb, language or culture is similar to yours.
You do not believe Pakistan and India are similar. Believe what you want. Its not my problem.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
jlo33692 said:Nothing,they are more or less the same,we can agree to disagree if you wish?
However curries are better, but i will agree to disagree only if you conceed that im right or you agree with me?
LOL..... now thats a hot topic eddie........
:
Well I dont even know what Balti is, but let me guess, is it something similar to curry and known as Balti in pakistani restaurants.
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
I reckon you're right. I've only ever seen 'Balti' in Pakistani, Kashmiri or Bangladeshi restaurants.Sanz said:Well I dont even know what Balti is, but let me guess, is it something similar to curry and known as Balti in pakistani restaurants.
I'm not really 100% sure of the derivation, but I was told that the word 'Balti' refers to the pot it's cooked in (like tandoori cooking is done in a tandoor (clay oven).
I suppose the english equivalent would just be 'stew'
(Translation for Steds and other Lancastrians: 'otpot)
Edit:
I did once write about a Balti, in the days when I was funny.....
Some ducky rubbish
Last edited:
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Thanks Eddie, Okay here are the few meanings of Balti that I know of :-
1. Balti - a Language in Kashmir/Pakistan
2. Balti - a tribe in pakistan
3. Balti - a bucketl, which Indians use to fetch water from a well, and it is also used to serve food in villages during small functions
Link doesn't work for me.
1. Balti - a Language in Kashmir/Pakistan
2. Balti - a tribe in pakistan
3. Balti - a bucketl, which Indians use to fetch water from a well, and it is also used to serve food in villages during small functions
Link doesn't work for me.