Contrary to popular opinion... Ganguly was never the best capatain.. he was plain lucky.. he had RD and VVS at their peaks.... SO INDIA COULD COMPETE ABROAD and hAd PICTHCES IN INDIA TAILOR MADE for spin.. other than that he was never inventive or lead by example...
Re: Ganguly
by Amitabh on Jan 30, 2012 02:07 PM
That way all successful captains are plain lucky my dear man ! You name any one. The names of Ponting and Clive Loyd cross my mind. They both had wonderful teams, batsmen, bowlers, all in great form. So we shouldnt give them credit for their victories ?
Re: Ganguly
by rajan raja on Jan 31, 2012 03:21 AM
Who is lucky Saurav or Dhoni. Dhoni has much plain luck. Dhoni won most of the matches because of Yuvraj. But Yuvraj was mentored by Saurav. Go and watch 20-20 Worldcup final. Dhoni won that based on pure luck. Dhoni wont 50over WC because of home advantage.
No one can deny that Saurav is the best India captain ever produced. Saurav is the person brought in many youngsters and mentored them.
Dhoni just inherited a high class team and with his more luck started winning the match and he got more credit.
It is the time to carefully analyse and find the real deserved person. Saurav is the real deserved captain and because of humangous politics he was thrown out.
Re: Ganguly
by balaji gururajan on Jan 31, 2012 04:10 AM
i am not a from bengal and not a very big fan of ganguly since his test record and overseas record / hopping aginst fast bowlers like Shoaib Akhthar and Brett Lee is very well known. Contrary to Azhar, Dhoni, Ganguly got a team well in shambles after all the match fixing shame - confidence was totoally down - every single loss was scrutinized. Where Ganguly excelled was his ability to spot and pick talent - he did not push on for Bengali players like Sachin did picking useless players like Kambli/Kuruvilla etc from Mumbai ranji team - It was Ganguly who tought India and other teams not to get bogged doen by Aus and give it back to them! In whole decade of 90s, india won only some 12 odd test matches abroad that too Vs not so gr8 countries - but under Ganguly's captaincy, from 2001 to 2006, India won abt 10 odd abroad test matches! So facts and logic always will say Dada was a gr8 captain and what dhoni enjoyed was fruits bore by Ganguly and John Wright !
Re: Ganguly
by Ravi Talekar on Jan 31, 2012 08:51 AM
Rubbish...talking...Ganguly had the guts as a captain...before blaming him and calling him lucky..you should check your records or whatever knwoledge you have abt the game....it will be fine you check your mind as well....foolish...
Re: Ganguly
by Story editor on Jan 31, 2012 12:48 AM
The problem with democracy is that we have to listen to views of the painfully idiotic and ill informed.
Go and ask any great player or cricket player worth his salt and they would tell you what Ganguly did for Indian cricket.
Re: Re: Ganguly
by xvcxvxvv vxvxvxvx on Jan 31, 2012 01:51 AM
Ramesh...I don't know where you formed your opinion? Are you angry because a player from Bengal was successful? I think so! Pathetic! Go cry in the lap of regionalism. I haven't seen one good captain from south till now!!! They just want to pile their money in the bank. Bunch of chickens!
Re: Re: Re: Ganguly
by babu raghunathan on Jan 31, 2012 02:02 AM
@above, you are the one who is stuck with 'regionalism'. no one talked about region and you assume (with lots of insecurity) that people criticize saurav and so bengal and start talking about south. In this process, you have shown your color.
Re: Re: Re: Ganguly
by rajan raja on Jan 31, 2012 03:16 AM
You are the most fu** bulsh** No one talked about regionalism. I think the guys like you are threat to the nations secularism.
Re: Re: Re: Ganguly
by Ramesh bharat on Jan 31, 2012 09:25 AM
Dont bring in regionalism here.. i only stated my opinion.. in general capataincy is a very overrated.. capatains having great teams become great captians.. having said that.. imran and ranatunga were great captians.. beyond that there isnt much to choose..
First select some good bowlers who can bowl take wickets when needed. Batsman will perform automatically. To win a test match you need to take 20 wickets not 500 or 600 runs. Actually we miss kumble a lot. We need two zaheer khan and one kumble type of bowler.
Re: need some good bowler.
by Prem Kumar on Jan 30, 2012 01:33 PM
well said.. Praveen Kumar is badly missed, who can swing more than aussie bowlers. In England, Zaheer was missing. If both play overseas together, we will get a chance to get 10 wickets within 200 or 300. Ishanth is just a fast bowler, anyone can bat, who can watch the line of his bowling.
Frankly, I dont understand what a coach can do under the circumstances.. 1) He does not have the right to choose the players. 2) He has not spent enough time with the team to get to know the psychology of each closely 3) He is not there to teach batting or bowling techniques. We have cricketers in the team (atleast 8 of them) who have played more number of tests and more ODI's than Fletcher 4) Coach may not decide or take on match calls on behalf of the captain,
Honestly, if the team performs then the coach is seen in good light, if it fails (due to inherent problems and issues ) then the coach is blamed.
I dont see a reason in Ganguly blaming the Indian coach for the debacle. I think there is a serious lack of form or potential with the indian team that is the cause for this failure..
The players experienced enough to require any special coaching.
Re: What is the role of a coach?
by nanjangud industries on Jan 30, 2012 12:24 PM
Basically, we need capablity to take 20 wickets. If bowling is not good and opposition piles up runs, it puts inordinate pressure on the batsmen.
So, really, the blame should be on bowling strength and not on batsma=en, not on coach. To some extent coach to be blamed for not giving tips. A good teacher need not be a rank student himself! He should know how to teach.
Re: What is the role of a coach?
by nanjangud industries on Jan 30, 2012 12:26 PM
Basically, we need capablity to take 20 wickets. If bowling is not good and opposition piles up runs, it puts inordinate pressure on the batsmen.
So, really, the blame should be on bowling strength and not on batsma=en, not on coach. To some extent coach to be blamed for not giving tips. A good teacher need not be a rank student himself! He should know how to teach.
Frankly, I dont understand what a coach can do under the circumstances.. 1) He does not have the right to choose the players. 2) He has not spent enough time with the team to get to know the psychology of each closely 3) He is not there to teach batting or bowling techniques. We have cricketers in the team (atleast 8 of them) who have played more number of tests and more ODI's than Fletcher 4) Coach may not decide or take on match calls on behalf of the captain,
Honestly, if the team performs then the coach is seen in good light, if it fails (due to inherent problems and issues ) then the coach is blamed.
I dont see a reason in Ganguly blaming the Indian coach for the debacle. I think there is a serious lack of form or potential with the indian team that is the cause for this failure..
The players experienced enough to require any special coaching.
Re: What is the role of a coach?
by mohammed akhter on Jan 30, 2012 12:45 PM
apart from potential,track record of coach has to be taken into accout.english team bit the dust when fletcher was it's coach.indian tam was performing well under gary,all of a sudden it can not become this bad.loosing is not an issue now,but the way they are loosing is important.under gary this never happened.
Re: Re: What is the role of a coach?
by pravin sarode on Jan 30, 2012 01:17 PM
first thing is players like sachin sehwag do not listen to the coach as they are much more experience than the poor coach that is why indian team does not need coach at all when senior most players are there in team like sachin sehwag dravid laxman who are capable of coach of international team like west indies zimbabwe afganistan to promte game of cricket as main purpose of playing test matches
