Selectors stick with Ganguly…


Like a Bollywood formlua-movie that can never disappoint, the new selection committee deferred hard/bad decisions for a while yet and delivered a “formula-selection” instead. Perhaps this selection committee did not like arguments either, for, according to Niranjan Shah, former-Secretary of BCCI, talking to “players about their retirement plans which may lead to arguments!”

The selection is along predictable lines with the likely XI (in batting order) as follows:

Virender Sehwag
Gautam Gambhir
Rahul Dravid
Sachin Tendulkar
Sourav Ganguly
VVS Laxman
Mahendra Singh Dhoni (wk)
Anil Kumble (capt)
Harbhajan Singh
Zaheer Khan
Ishant Sharma
Bench-warmers: Munaf Patel, RP Singh, S Badrinath, Amit Mishra

Perhaps a really strong performance from Badrinath in the Irani Trophy might have edged out Ganguly. However, in the absence of that, the selectors may have gone down the “formula” route!

What is worrying to read is that the selectors went down the reinstate-Ganguly route because they feared that Ganguly might retire if not picked! According to reports, Ganguly had reportedly considered quitting cricket after being overlooked for the Irani Cup match between RoI and Delhi. So?

While it is nice to see S. Badrinath enter the fray, he may hang around like Yuvraj Singh and Mohammed Kaif did and whither away. So the only change from the team that fared badly in Sri Lanka is that Rohit Sharma and Pragyan Ojha make way for Badrinath and Amit Mishra, while Dinesh Karthik and Parthiv Patel make way for M. S. Dhoni.

There is nothing imaginative about this selection. It is disappointing that a bold and dashing cricketer like Kris Srikkanth did not use this opportunity to strike a bold and courageous path forward. Selectors get paid to set future directions, develop a strategy and then implement them. This selector has aparently thought that his task is to assemble together a bunch of people to play the next game. And if that is the metric, my nine year-old nephew would have done a similar job — and could also do with the 25 lakhs in his back pocket!

Meanwhile, Australia’s already depleted spin-stocks took a turn for the worse when Bryce McGain was ruled out of the first (and maybe even the second) Test with a back strain. This will mean a Test debut for Jason Krejza. I can’t see Jason Krejza doing much damage and Australia may make a Gavin Robertson out of another spinner after all!

— Mohan

Advertisements

37 responses to “Selectors stick with Ganguly…

  1. Selectors had no choice at all, Mohan.

    Did any of of the prospects come up with strong performance to make a compelling case for themselves? No.

    So obviously, selectors had to go back to the tried and tested players for this important series.

    Few newschannels have also been running the story that the selectors have put a retirement plan for all the aging players and apparently this might be the last series that Ganguly plays.

    I’m not sure how true is this news, but if is, then the process has started. A TN selector thought that a TN player was the best of the prospects (just kidding) but I have no doubt that Badrinath falls short od international quality. He could not face Bollinger and Siddle in the FC match in Ind A side. Then he fell flat on his face vs Tait in the A one dayers and then was a cat on hot tin roof against Ishant in the Irani match.

    I suppose we have to give as much exposure to Rohit, Raina and few others like Tiwari who fell off a little last year due to a shoulder injury. These guys have to be ready by next season.

  2. @Chandan

    I know you said as much in the other thread. I did not want to buy into your argument. But I have, now!

    Firstly, I did not see Badrinath’s performance in the Irani game in the same way as you did! It was a track on which almost everyone had problems — Dhoni in the second dig and Gambir in the second dig excepted. If you single out Badri’s performance in that one game, I’d similarly question Sehwag’s, Dravid’s (1st inn) and Gambhir’s (1st Inn) performances in that one game. And by the same token, I’d ask if Dravid, Sehwag and Gambhir needed to be selected! Perhaps we could go with Suresh Raina who scored a century against NZ-A and Sethalapathy Sivalingam who scored a century for Vyalikkaval Gymkhana against Sivajinagar Robots in a tennis ball tournament game!

    Ok. I am being facetious. But just to prove a point…

    If we select players on the basis of one performance, we will have a revolving-door policy that will deliver dizzy players and dizzier selectors — not to mention dizzy fans, who won’t know who is going and who is coming!

    We need to select on the basis of current capability and future potential marrying future need. This needs vision. This needs courage.

    Ganguly wasn’t Ganguly when Ganguly was selected to become Ganguly! I hope you get my drift.

    Selection policies that are based on putting a team on the park for the next game is naive, immature and flawed, in my view. Badrinath is not selected on the baisis of his Irani performance although I’d venture to suggest the following
    Proposition:
    EVENT: If Badrinath had scored a century in the Irani game
    OUTCOME: Ganguly would probably have played his last Test match against Sri Lanka!

    This proposition is based not on the assumption that that Event-Outcome decision (a Badri Irani century resulting in an edge-out-Ganguly selection) would have been the right one by the selectors. In my view, that would have been the right action! However, I suspect that the Event-Outcome decision would have been seen as the right decision because that event would have given the selectors the courage to act in India; courage to stand up to the ire of the “What raaa? Is Badri better than Ganguly-aaa? Tell me raaaa? Then why drop Dada raaa?” irate effigy-thrashing fans! A selection policy that is based on such a shallow lack of vision is, in my view flawed.

    India needs to move on beyond the Flab Four. And of the Flab, Ganguly looked the most vulnerable. Anyone that saw the Sri Lanka Tests can’t really say Ganguly belonged. He seemed to have lost it. He was sluggish. He did not belong at the highest level, in my view.

    And yes, he may come back and score a century or two. The guy is a fighter and will want to prove his detractors wrong.

    But is that what our future-selection should be about? If we are paying 25 lakhs to put the best team on the park for the next game, Boycott’s by-now-legendary grandmother would be able to do it in her sleep!

    — Mohan

  3. Good to move away from fab 4 when we have replacements ready. Unfortunately selectors didnt agree with the opinion that most of the bloggers and media writers had!!

  4. Homer,

    Perhaps you did not read my entire post. I saw Badri against

    1.in a FC match vs Bollinger, Siddle and McGain : Outcome –Failure

    2. In a One day game against Tait : Out come : a hilarious terror in his eyes with legs rooted to leg stump and playing far far away from body reaching out to a ball outside the off stump, edging to keeper.

    3.Irani trophy vs Ishant.

    Okay so I saw 3 failures from him against international class bowlers. Please mention 3 successful knocks from him against such bowlers.

    I can mention 10 knocks for the batsmen you mentions, who should not be excluded on the basis on one knock!

  5. Sorry, it was addressed to Mohan.

  6. Ganguly sucks. He shouldn’t have been in the side. And Srikant and his selection panel.. well, they’ve made a huge blunder.. one they and future selectors will forever regret.

  7. @Chandan

    I have seen the entire series that India-A played against South-Africa-A. Badrinath and Pankaj Singh were the standout performers. Enuff said. As I said, if Badrinath has to be singled out for the Iranis, I will question Sehwag’s, Gambhir’s and Dravid’s position in the team. Moreover, as I said, Ganguly was not a Ganguly before Ganguly actualy became Ganguly. You have not responded to that!

    — Mohan

  8. The Indians can not win with a team like that. It reminds me of Dad’s Army. Instead of playing test cricket 6 or 7 of these players should be sitting in a rocking chair wearing a dressing gown, pipe in one hand, mug of hot horlicks in the other, waiting for the nurse to tell them its time for their daily sponge bath.
    The new selectors are afraid of making the tough decisions. Krish Srikanth was a talented, but ordinary, mediocre and over-rated player that refused to do the hard things when on the ground. I don’t know why the BCCI would expect anything less of him as chairman of selectors.
    The BCCI had the perfect opportunity to farm/pension at least 4 of these players off in the last 2-3 years and have avoided doing so. If they had done what a strong, tough and credible cricket association should have (and like Cricket Australia has done recently and in the past) India would have young batsmen established in the team ready to dominate Australia.
    India need youthful exuberance in the field and running between the wickets, not creaking bones and walking frames.
    Just another example of India making poor selection choices, remember Sadagopan Ramesh, David Johnson, Debashish Mohanty and the unlucky SS Das…?
    The Australians are the best team in the world because they are willing to make the tough decisions. India will realise this soon when they are comprehensively beaten.

  9. // if Badrinath has to be singled out for the Iranis, I will question Sehwag’s, Gambhir’s and Dravid’s position in the team//

    Guess who is winking? The elephant in the room that conveniently keeps declaring itself fit or unfit at will. And worse, if you dare bring up the ‘R’word (retirement) you’ll get thrown out of the press conference! This is going to be more pathetic than watching Michael Jordan’s 3rd stint.

  10. If you saw the entire A series and did not notice his bad rtechniques vs Bollinger, Siddle and Tait, I don’t have much to say.

    BTW, you must have seen his inning today vs the Australians for BP XI? You are satisfied with that ?

  11. Awesome blog.
    I really think that cheeka and the other four wise men have chosen a perfect team. But I wanna see how well Ganguly plays in MAC, Chennai against NZ to see if he is in any form. Amit Mishra is a suprise I thought they would have gone with a xtra wicketkeeper.

    Check out my blog, I too write bout cricket.

    http://www.christopherdavid007.blogspot.com/

  12. Aussie selectors have made a few blunders as well–there have been players who have been sacked after just one or two tests–

    Selector’s job in any country is not that easy–on any given day, all being equal, some players do need a bit to luck to stay in

    Rohit Sharma , to me, is a package of Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman ALL rolled into one—yet he has been overlooked for the past 12 months—he could easily replace any one of the FAB 4 or 5 or 6!!

    K Srikkanth wouldn’t have played more than 10 tests in the current climate–even he is a selector!!! Very average average. His motto was that if the ball is there to be hit, it should be hit–not unlike Seeru. However, these fellows forget that there are 6 balls in an over and that there is at least one more ball to come!!

  13. It is a typo

    Not Seeru but VEERU!!

  14. @Sam: No need to apologise for typos!

    @Chandan: Badrinath was unlucky. If that was LBW, we are all jackfruits! But hey! Them’s the breaks!

    But Chandan, how can I communicate better to you that this is not about the last innings? If it was about that, Boycott’s dead great grandmother could pick the team from her grave!

    I personally don’t care about Badrinath or Surendranath or Amarnath or Rajindernath. I just want the selectors to have a vision, communicate that vision and act with courage in getting the team moving forward.

  15. theblackirishman

    @Chandan:

    I believe Mohan has a point in terms of selectorial direction. The previous selection committee specifically said that the Irani Trophy would be basis for selection and went about droping SG out of the Irani Trophy.
    That sent out a clear message. However, the new selection committe, has , without any explanation included SG.

    This is not calculated to send out any consistent message.

  16. Mohan,

    Every selection panel has different ideas from the previous one. Had More continued, we might not have seen Ganguly back who scored more than 1000 runs in a year after coming back. Even Vengsarkar put Ganguly on notice after his first series failure, and I say it was quite fair since past works don’t matter much as these seniors don’t have a long future ahead of them anyway.

    But Srikkant was left with no choice as both the players selected to succeed the seniors one by one failed at a crucial juncture and there was nothing in their batting which could give confidence that despite these failures, they’d succeed against a much better quality attack.

    Vision? Well the vision is apparent even if they have not communicated it to media.

    They are looking for worthy candidates who’ll play test cricket for India. They’ve even identified them as Badri, Kaif, Raina, Rohit as you can see from various A teams and I’m sure that Tiwari will start knocking on the door too after this season.

    Chawla was identified as Kumble’s heir apparent but he has disappointed and they’ve gone to the FC and A team veteran Mishra who is a better bowler than Chawla in longer version of the game in my opinion.

    And just tell me which board communicates the vision with fans and media?

  17. @Chandan

    I am stunned. Are you suggesting that Badrinath’s (close to) 7300 runs in List-A and First Class matches count for nothing? And that the only thing that got the selectors’ collective knickers in a knot were the two bad showings he had against Delhi and Aus ‘A’?

    If you have a ‘vision’ you’d stick to the path you are headed in despite the odd setback. John Eales, the great Australian Rugby captain used to always say, “Once you develop a commitment for a goal, all you need is to stick to it with courage even when you are under pressure.” (I have paraphrased here).

    By running back to an easy solution that would keep the effigy-burners at bay, the selectors have indeed demonstrated to me that they do not have a vision! Please tell me how you are confident that it is “apparent”? It is a hand-wave and an assertion, at best.

    You can have Badri, Kaif, Rohit and Tiwary in ‘A’ Teams till they and the Flab Four lose their legs. That is not progress to me!

    Australia regularly communicates its vision with fans and media — either implicitly or explicitly. I can cite numerous examples. I have never ONCE heard any official here say that in order to achieve progress “they are looking for selectors who like to have arguments”!

    Anyone that thinks “do nothing” is always a viable option is doomed to mediocrity. If we wish for mediocrity, we can get it in spades by sitting on our fingers — all we will do then is collect ring marks on our bums! Excellence requires clarity (of thought), commitment (to the goal) and courage (to make decisions).

    — Mohan

  18. Srikkanth and co had a vision of sorts–they didn’t see Mendis, Murali, Vaas, McGrath, Warne, Sachin’s tormentor in Bracken and not the least Bucknor in the Australian team

    As Dada has done well against all others on this planet , he just got in. Effigy burners don’t need excuses. Just an old shirt, a tin of petrol and matches—and a few TV crew alerted in advance..

    The Indian way was and is –as shown against Pakistan especcially over the past century–have a team that will draw the first two tests, let or get Varuna Bhagwan to spoil the third test and then make a couple of bold changes–including change of umpires and match referee–, win the last test and then win the series!

    Then every player gets 10 lakhs, a block of land and an around the world ticket for two, flying First Class in Air India!!

  19. Mohan,

    are you really stunned at the fact that Ranji runs don’t mean much apart from saying that the batsman has patience and concentration if he hits a double ton?

    Than you are yet to “see” a ranji match where competition is so poor that even regular gully cricketers fancy their chances too.

    Have you not witnessed the utter failures of Ranji giants like Devang Gandhi? The team to Australia in ’99-00 would have been the best had Ranji performance really held a meaning.

    I don’t care about effigy burners. If they’ll not burn the rffigy of Srikkanth, they’ll burn an effigy of Mayavati or Manmohan Singh or NOIDA police or whatever. I don’t think anyone cares for them here in India.

    Just because India has such a poor domestic system, that the selectors task is made even more tough. Now they have to watch the player play and then decide on their hunch. There was a reason why Badri was chosen earlier. And if you are not convinced as yet, you will get soon if you keep a track of his performaces WHENEVER he faces a QUALITY PACE ATTACK.

    I was a Badrinath supporter too when I followed the Ranji matches but after watching him on 5 instances consecutively against quality bowlers, I’m forced to change my view.

  20. @Chandan

    Let me delve into the record books again ok? Hang on a minute…

    Ok, so I was right…

    It seems that Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Ganguly, Laxman, Tendulkar, Zaheer Khan, Kumble, Ishant Sharma and Harbhajan Singh did indeed play the Ranji Trophy before they were selected. The sudden allergic rash that you seem to have developed for the Ranji system seemed to confuse me. I thought that Sehwag, Dravid, et al had made it big in the Vyalikkaval Sixteens Floodlight Tennis Ball Tournament before they were selected to play for India! But no? They indeed did make big scores in the Ranji Trophy. So, why this sudden step-motherly treatment when it comes to a Badrinath or a Surendranath? Is it that you have run out of arguments and are clutching at non-existent straws?

    — Mohan

  21. Mohan,

    Just playing in Ranji will not secure you a place or tell me why Shivalkar, Sharath and even even recent Ranji performers like Majumdar, Sriram, Powar etc did not get a chance? Or when they were given a chance, they blew it straightaway?

    Pietersen has also come through playing 5 years of county cricket, but there is a huge difference between him and Graham Hick who has scored 30,000 FC runs or even Mark Ramprakash! We can call the latter two as domestic bully who were found wanting when they confronted a quality attack. What were they lacking? Perhaps their technique just fell short of international standard, or perhaps they had no clue how to tackle short deliveries, or perhaps their temperament was not that good or something.

    When Sehwag played his first inning, it looked so odd to the perfectionists. But he has his technique which suits him. And he never looked back. The first inning which Ganguly or Dravid played at Lords announced that Indian cricket had got something special. Kumble’s was an initial struggle but still he excelled at home tracks in those early days.

    Does any of Badrinath’s inning give you that much confidence? I’m willing to bet more on Sharma and Tiwari instead who have shown sparks of brillince and if they go in the right direction, ie, show patience, concentration and get a bit more selective in short making.

    I was much more hopeful for Rayudu, whom I had seen in the U-19 tour to England, smashing 177 runs. The conditions were unknown but so was the quality of opposition. Still the talent that shone there is unfortunately absent in Badri.

    Still without taking this argument further, I’ll tell you, just watch. If Badrinath scores big against any quality pace bowling attack, I’ll take my words back.

  22. @Chandan

    I am not sure what you are arguing for (or against) now? I am not sure even you know!

    My interpretation of your latest offer reads: “Ok, I will agree to a change of Ganguly for Badrinath IF the BCCI agree to revamp the Ranji Trophy”!

    My points (succinctly):
    – I don’t care if it is Badrinath or Surendranath,
    – Courage is required and action needed,
    – Progress requires change,
    – Ganguly wasn’t Ganguly before Ganguly became Ganguly,
    – Ganguly, like Badrinath, came from the Ranji system,
    – You don’t make selection decisions on the basis of the last (few) innings,
    – Badrinath has got tons of runs against good opposition.
    – I am not anti-Ganguly (indeed, I have ‘batted for him’). I am pro-change.

    As I said, I am not sure what you are arguing for or against.

    — Mohan

  23. @TBI

    Read Bhogle’s That’s is precisely what I meant when I asked Chandan where he saw that the vision was apparent!

    And by the way, you think Kaif is the only one who is confused? I am sure Ganguly himself is confused.

    Two weeks prior to being named selector, Srikkanth, in a TV show, blazed his way through the Ganguly issue. He said he supported Vengsarkar’s decision to drop Ganguly from the RoI team wholeheartedly and felt that there should be a slow phasing out of weary bones.

    And a day after being selected, Ganguly is given another go by Srikkanth.

    So Chandan, if there vision I think it is somewhat obscured, if not impaired?

    — Mohan

  24. 1.I agree completely with the revamping of Ranji which will provide better competition and will help the cream rise to the top instead of dilute milk giving the illusion of cream.

    2. I also agree with changes and this was a perfect series where we could have phased out Ganguly who has a poor record against Australia.

    3. Selectors were moving in that direction too when the replacement prospect’s failure sowed enough seeds of doubt in their mind and perhaps their instincts told them to stick with the tried and tested for the time being.

    4. All this while I was arguing that Badrinath is NOT a batsman who’ll bring any success at the international field because of some kind of flaw in his technique which doesn’t let him get on top of the bounce, if there is extra bounce.

    5.I think there is a vision but there is no hard copy of it. Each selection panel deals with the problem according to their wisdom and herein comes the difference between a very professional board like CA and unprofessional board like BCCI. Selectors do not change after every two years in Australia.

    6.As I said, the replacement prospects are identified. Now it is upto them to rise to the challenge and knock the seniors from the test team. Rohit Sharma’s knock gave me a lot of confidence and I’d like to see him perform that strongly in some of the A matches too.

    I hope you are clear what I was discussing.

    One day I’d love to have a discussion here about how to make our domestic cricket more competitive.

  25. @Chandan

    I ask again, where is the “vision” apparent? I do not need it on paper, but where is it “apparent” to you?

    – one selector (S1) says Ganguly is “not up to the mark”,
    – the selector-in-waiting (S2) agrees with S1.
    – the day after S2 gets in, Ganguly is in?
    – Kaif is drafted in to the RoI squad.
    – Badrinath is not in the RoI squad.
    – One assumes that S1 has anointed Kaif as the person who has his hand on the door-knob.
    – Tendulkar gets injured and Badrinath gets into the RoI side.
    – When both Kaif and Badrinath play badly in that Irani game, the latter who was second in the queue (presumably) gets the call into the team.
    – Kaif, who had made himself available in Bangalore packs his bag and heads home.
    – S1 and S2 did not want Ganguly. But he is in the team.

    Where is the vision “apparent” to you in all of this? Either you are a mystic or you are supernatural!

    The only “sion” that is clear in all of the above is utter confusion!

    In response to your point-3, if you get distracted by momentary deviations from a plan, you lack either the courage or conviction in your own vision. “Courage under fire” is what John Eales talks about.

    I am not as concerned about our domestic system as I am of the people who are running cricket in our country by sitting on their fingers. The domestic system is what exists. It is this very system that gave us Kumble, Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly, Laxman, Harbhajan, Zaheer, et al. And that is not a bad lot! Moreover, it is what is there and changing it will take far too much time/effort.

    Mohan

  26. Srikanth Mangalam

    I’d have better success in Vegas compared to predicting the decisions of BCCI’s selection committee. To the BCCI and its committees, having a vision means seeing an optometrist…

  27. Mohan,

    The vision is apparent in the way the youngsters are identified. Along with identifying, they are making sure that get to be tested by international teams through the shorter formats in which they are representing India and in the A teams where they are representing the country as the second string India, playing the FC matches.

    The probable best candidates will be picked from those which is ” apparent”. You saw how Uthappa was discarded as the long term prospect. You also must have seen as to how Kaif is still in the scheme of things as far as tests are concerned.

    The plan gets muddled when one selection panel is changed altogether just before a new test series is to start. But I’m sure even Vengsarkar would have fallen back on Ganguly because the prospects of replacements didn’t give enough confidence.

    Then there is slight problem of quota system as well, in which Srikkanth had to pick one player from his zone and he preferred Badri the fringe player to Rohit the fronge player.

    Small problems like these come to Australia as well as White had come as an understudy to Warne but was never thought for tests. Now he is chosen once again and will be discarded once again as Australia will never consider him as their premier spinner. So what is their vision for the spinners?

    As for India, they have identified Chawla, Ojha and Mishra as Kumble’s replacement. Whoever is in the best of forms will get a chance. This is ‘apparent’.

  28. Ok, I get the “apparent” vision now.

    Now that Yuvraj, Jaffer, Chawla, Ojha, Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli have received the Chandan-tick of approval after doing well in the game against a full-strength Australia, should they be drafted into the Indian team for the 2nd Test? Who will they replace?

    — Mohan

  29. Nope.

    Not just vs Australia but A tours too. And I don’t include Jaffer and Yuvraj in the batsmen who are good for test cricket, no matter how many runs they’ll make against this Australian side.

    I think selectors will do that as well after these players’ failures many times in test cricket especially in conditions unknown to them. These can’t be long term replacements.

    I’m not including Kohli so soon too.

    Team for Australia has been chosen for two tests. So don’t think any of the heir apparent would get a crack till then.

    I’m all for replacing whoever fails.

    BTW, what is your vision? Who would you have included and in whose place? BTW, please give me the vision of CA and ECB selectors too regarding their players. I couldn’t find it anywhere on their sites or articles. You must be knowing it, no?

  30. @Chandan: I suggest you read my posts again.

    BTW, who will Ojha, Chawla, et al replace for the 3rd Test? And why not Yuvraj and Jaffer? After according to your “apparent” vision of the selectors, these guys would have been in BUT for a minor hiccup in the Iranis. Well that hiccup seems to be over. So clearly one ought to be ushering everyone in hollus-bollus?

    — M

  31. Yuvraj will not be given a chance till he shows in the FC cricket that he has improved and got over his inconsistency.

    Jaffer, will not be chosen because he was given a fair run and counld not hold his place in unknown conditions, ie, Australia and SA. If selectors would like to replace either Gambhir or Sehwag and if the match is being played in the subcontinest or in WI, selectors “might” pick him if they go for horses for courses policy.

    So there you go.

    I’ve read your posts and could not find the names whom you want to include apart from some Badrinath or Surindernath or any TDH to be precise.

    That can’t be a vision. You have been following Indian domestic cricket too. You should have a clear idea as to the selectors should go for in your opinion.

  32. As if we quote you :

    My points (succinctly):
    – I don’t care if it is Badrinath or Surendranath,

    I do care. I will not like any Tom Dick or Harry to play for India.

    – Courage is required and action needed,

    Agree

    – Progress requires change,

    Agree

    – Ganguly wasn’t Ganguly before Ganguly became Ganguly,

    Ganguly wasn’t a test player who had scored neearly 7000 test runs, when he debuted-sure. But there was a certain talent in him. Many such players have been tried when selectors saw a certain talent in them when some succeeded and some failed badly. This is how selection will go–it’ll always be a trial and error thing.

    – Ganguly, like Badrinath, came from the Ranji system,

    True. But more than 1000 batsmen have also come from Ranji. Not all went to play for India and even those who did, not everyone succeeded.

    – You don’t make selection decisions on the basis of the last (few) innings,

    That is true. In India the selection is always on the basis of potential.

    – Badrinath has got tons of runs against good opposition.

    Not that I have seen any apart from that one good knock vs SA where the only recognised bowler was Charles Langervelt.
    Can you tell me of other instances where he scored big against quality pace bowlers?

    – I am not anti-Ganguly (indeed, I have ‘batted for him’). I am pro-change.

    So am I. I wanted change too. And I think the selectors did so as well. The change in selection panel put Indian cricket back a bit. Otherwise I was all for blooding a young talented guy in form.

    As I said, I am not sure what you are arguing for or against.

    I was arguing that Kaif could have been a better choice than Badrinath since Badrinath will not succeed against good pace bowlers, in my opinion. He seems to have some flaw.

    But you tell me which other country has a vision for selection? Why is Australia not able to choose a spinner after Warne’s retirement? What is ECB’s vision for replacing freddie? Where is it communicated?

  33. Chandan

    Apparently Gavaskar has scored tons of runs too. Why do we not bring him back. Why don’t we get back Chandu Borde, give him a runner and a walking stick too? He can bat as well. Anyone for Amarnath? I mean the father. He is in the grave, I hear? But why not? Get the skeletons. That will do.

    Ganguly got run out in the NZ-A game. Anyone surprised by that?

  34. Pingback: Why should they leave? « i3j3Cricket :: A blog for fans of Indian cricket…

  35. Any explanation for comments of Mr Geoffry Boycott about the fabulous four. Who should be first to leave in fab 4

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s