If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed or email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
The ‘Maharaja’ thinks he really is one. Ganguly refuses to subject himself to the ‘lowly’ level of playing Ranji matches even when specifically asked by the selectors. But honestly, the first question on my mind is why was he brought back? After unceremoniously dropping him after the second test, the Indian selectors brought him back to the national cricket team. But at least then they offered valid excuses of him not playing well enough and being the cause for dissent in the team. The fact that neither Dravid nor Chappell fancied his presence also was evidently clear. What followed later was a pure circus in the classical mold of Indian politics. Right from Kolkatans protesting on the streets (honestly after the disgraceful display of ‘love for cricket’ when India played SA, I have little respect left for the fans out there) to the Lok Sabha speaker trying to introduce a motion in the house, the issue was debated hotly. Honestly, I cared less if he has in the team or not. His inclusion had been a bone of contention ever since his tiff with Chappell went public.
However, I couldn’t approve of the way in which Ganguly’s supporters banded against the nation’s interest and painted the issue in regional hues. Selectors have a specific job of fielding the best team and although, they tend to be influenced by behind-the-scenes political mechanisms, the general public is largely unaware of the realities. Ganguly wasn’t helping his cause by not scoring enough or shooting off his mouth when it was unnecessary to do so. Finally, as the team for Pakistan was declared, Ganguly found himself in the team albeit with the enormous pressure to perform. I couldn’t understand why Tendulkar gave his former captain a clean chit when Dravid and Chappell have made it amply clear that Ganguly is a negative influence in the team. Like it or not, if he scores anything short of a century (commanding one, not like the one he scored in Zimbabwe) in the upcoming tour, he is history. And honestly, I believe he is part of history anyway so why delay the inevitable.
Go out with grace, Dada.
by Patrix | on Monday, December 26th, 2005 at 3:00 pm | 
India, Sports . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
December 27th, 2005 at 7:21 pm reply
Patrix,
Its sad to see that while if this was a minority taking out processions on a Pakistan victory, you would point out that it was a “section” of the community that does so—indeed I am the first person to say that it is a minority. Yet you are loathe to grant the crowd at Eden the same privilege.
One thing you should know—Sachin was never booed at Eden. Not even by one person. It was Rahul Dravid who was booed when he made 6 out of 34 balls—-was he expecting to be cheered? Sourav has been booed countless number of times at award ceremonies all over India—-I never noticed outrage from anyone.
BTW latest reports indicate that Dravid argued for Sourav’s return for Pakistan—so we really dont know what happened. Whether Sourav succeeds or bombs is not the question, the question here is selective memory.
I of course dont expect to hear any words of denouncement when Pawar wants to construct a stadium of the size of Eden in Goa ! Or wants to construct an even bigger stadium in Mumbai. Or when Kiran More’s statemate Parthiv, the Oops I dropped it again man make it back to the side over the legit claims of Dinesh Kartik (a far far better keeper than Parthiv can hope to be, a man who did nothing wrong). Or when Nehra and Balaji cool their heels while Agarkar has a permanent place in the side. I dont see any outrage for the parochialism/regionalism there. I wonder why.
December 28th, 2005 at 12:28 am reply
GreatBong, Although it may have been a minority as you claim at Eden Garden, they sure hog all the attention with the vociferous protests against non-inclusion of Ganguly, constant sloganeering that led to the finger, etc. The fact that players are booed elsewhere doesn’t cut it because it happens almost regularly at Eden Garden - Gavaskar’s vow not to return, WC’96 semi finals…and honestly, I think it is an awesome venue but such crowd behavior makes me feel that no matches should be played there until they clean up the act.
As for your other reasons, I agree with some (Why Parthiv?) but thos have political reasons behind them not so much regionalism there.
December 28th, 2005 at 10:45 am reply
Cleans up its act? Booing Dravid is that reprehensible ? But booing Sourav at Wankede is fine of course. What about Shastri? Booing Shastri was a national pasttime in the 80s—Shastri Hai Hai…the moment he came out to bat !
As to crowd trouble during WC 96 yes it was a disgrace. But there was crowd trouble at Bangalore…when Azhar protested a decision and Sachin had to come out to pacify the crowd. Also Winston Davis was hit by a bottle in , if my memory serves me correct, in Chennai(Llyod staged a walkout—in today’s match referee days that incident would have stopped the match). Crowd trouble has also erupted in Ahmedabad. Again no mention of them (again these incidents dont justify what happened at Kol 96)—selective memory as I pointed out before.
I also fail to see why you dont see regionalism in More championing his statemate Parthiv—when Kirmani was the chairman of selectors, More abused our greatest keeper ever calling him a “goalkeeper” and this was when he was arguing for Parthiv’s selection even after his horrible glovework. Pawar setting up huge stadiums in his own state and in another which has very close ties to his, players from a particular region having a free hand in the team —-I dont see why there is no regionalism here.(but only the “watered down” word—politics, the underlying assumption being that only one part of the country has a preserve over parochialism while the others merely play politics)
If Dalmiya had planned an expansion to the Eden and the setting up of a huge stadium in Agartala and then selector Pronob Roy had gotten Deep Dasgupta into the side as a second keeper, Devang Gandhi had been recalled as an opener and Laxmi Ratan Sukla deemed an automatic selection—-then you wouldnt have been saying “politics”.
You would have been crying murder.
:-)
I oppose parochialism in all forms—Bengali as well as that prevalent in other parts of India (which again is not “mere” politics) And my only intention is not to justify but to set the record straight
December 28th, 2005 at 11:14 am reply
These Selectors and Sharad Pawar are just a bunch of p****.
They don’t have what it takes 2 make a strong n firm decisions.
Ganguly sucks and thats the truth
December 28th, 2005 at 9:48 pm reply
GreatBong, I guess you are right! Regionalism is to blame for all actions in cricket politics. But then it pervades almost all kinds of administrative work in India. I picked on Eden Gardens because it has been a repeat offender and in news more often. In addition to the general public, actors, MPS jumped to Saurav’s defense reinforcing my belief. Other venues as you mention have been guilty of the crime as well.
That aside, do you think that quick denouncement of players has been an increasingly trend in Indian cricket? Has it been known to produce quick results? E.g. Saurav now playing the Ranji, stone-throwing on players homes after the first two matches in 2003 WC, etc. Of course, fans actions are not appropriate but then are players acting too high-handed especially the well established ones? Remember Kapil’s breakdown on BBC just because he thought he shouldn’t be asked to explain just because he was a ‘national hero’. Heroes are forgotten as quickly as they are made. This has been a digression but kinda related.
December 29th, 2005 at 1:10 am reply
Patrix,
A valid digression. Both players as well as the press are to blame. Players think they are “higher beings” and the press, most of the time, is hypercritical with much of what passes for analysis in the cricket media being plain and simple Monday morning quaterbacking. Added to that is the fact that many of our pressmen have hidden agendas of their own—and you can see why the problem becomes even more confounded.