Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[ruchir]

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/talk/content/current/multimedia/310952.html

Manjrekar on RD resignation:

Dravid should reconsider

Sambit Bal: Rahul Dravid's decision to resign from captaincy has come as a bolt from the blue. A lot of us thought he would continue at least in the short term. What is your take on this?

Sanjay Manjrekar: It took me completely by surprise. You start wondering what could be the reasons behind the decision. If you take a simplistic look, then his desire to relinquish the captaincy is what he has stated in his letter - his batting has been affected by the captaincy. Dravid has always been a player who has put a lot in his batting and has great success with the limited talent he has - he hasn't had the talent of the Tendulkars - but he has achieved an astonishing amount of success and all this comes down to the sheer hard work he has put in. And if the captaincy was affecting his batting, then I can understand his decision.

SB: I interviewed Dravid in Australia, just after he had struck that double hundred in Adelaide to help India win the Test and the thing that struck me was the amount of preparation that he invests in his batting. I always wondered how he could captain India if he was so intense about his preparation. Do you think his batting form has dipped since he became captain, particularly in the last two overseas tours?

SM: It's for everyone to see that his batting form has dipped slightly. It is something that will happen to any batsman especially with the kind of form that Dravid has shown for such a long - the word Bradmanesque comes to mind - so it was bound to happen and I would attribute that as a natural phenomenon. If you have to connect that with the Indian leadership, then yes, that could be a reason. But as you've mentioned, the amount of work that he puts into his bating it could seem that, looking at Dravid as an individual, the Indian leadership role wasn't helping him. It's far easier captaining an Australia or an England than it is captaining India.

SB: He gave an interview to Michael Atherton recently where he was asked about the pressures of Indian captaincy and he said that the lack of proportion among the Indian fans, in their expectations was sometimes more difficult to deal with than being the captain of the Indian cricket team...

SM: I think it's also time now to assess Indian leadership and why a lot of Indian captains have given up their captaincy and have struggled with it. You have to look at it as a really tough job which only few people can do effectively over a period of time. I think that's the real test of a leader, if he can lead the team over a period of five to six years - something that Sourav Ganguly, Mohammad Azharuddin did - to some extent even Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev. So I think the next time a player is being selected as the captain, the selectors need to look at his temperament and see whether he can take on this responsibility, the kind of following Indian cricket has. It has to be somebody who can not only lead a team of 14 people but also handle the emotions of a billion people along with it.

I wonder though, whether it was the just the batting aspect or there were some other frustrations that came along with the leadership which also made it difficult for his to continue as captain. I think that is something that needs to be probed. Dravid has written a letter to the Board, but the Board hasn't really accepted as yet. Maybe it's time for Sharad Pawar to get on the phone and speak to Dravid and get to know the real reasons behind his decision. I think Dravid also owes it to the Board and Indian cricket to be really honest and candid and lay his cards on the table. My question is: where is Dilip Vengsarkar when these things happen? These are important cricketing matters. After the debacle of the World Cup we had a review committee set up to look at the various cricketing matters - well, Dravid resigning from captaincy and the search for a new captain - these are important cricketing decisions as well and we don't seem to hear Vengsarkar's views at all. It's important now, that Sharad Pawar involves Vengsarkar in this matter and speaks to Dravid and asks him to reconsider his decision, because we don't have an obvious leader in the team right now. The fact that there is no obvious candidate to take over makes things all the more challenging for the BCCI. 

SB: They have to now go backwards, with Sachin Tendulkar or Ganguly or just fast forward someone into the hot-seat...

SM: This is where the chairman of selectors should come in because he has been in close contact with the team and the selections and this is where he should step in and persuade Dravid to reconsider his decision and hang for a year at the most and ask him what are the issues that have been troubling him and work together. You can't just accept his resignation and make somebody captain by default. This is what I think the BCCI should do, but if Dravid still stands by his decision, then fair enough.

SB: Dravid, when he became captain, had a vision for the team..

SM: That is what I think Sharad Pawar needs to find out - whether there is more to it than the captaincy affecting his batting. He should find out if Dravid had a vision, that has remain unfulfilled because he wasn't getting enough help in achieving the goals he had set for Indian cricket and he was unable to achieve those goals because of lack of support. This is the time to sit across the table and talk about all these matters.

SB: Perhaps this is a time to introspect and look at whether our flaws are being papered over by our performances in the field...

SM: This is what the masses may think. We may have had a relatively good tour of England but lets not forget that when Sri Lanka were in England, they beat a slightly better England team 5-0 in the one-day internationals. The people might think that we have had a good tour of England but what if Dravid himself felt that we needed to achieve more. These are the things that Sharad Pawar needs to find out.

[ramshorns]

Before Kaif and Sehwag are brought into the captaincy discussion they should first be evaluted and see if they even command a place in the team.  Honestly they don't.  Plus I never thought Sehwag to be a captaincy material anyway.

[justforkix]

The way Kaif was mishandled in tests by all and sundry and in ODIs during GC/RD era hurts even more now.....

[WicketView]

Before Kaif and Sehwag are brought into the captaincy discussion they should first be evaluted and see if they even command a place in the team.  Honestly they don't.  Plus I never thought Sehwag to be a captaincy material anyway.

It seems foolhardy to even afford a place in the squad to Kaif. I would consider Sehwag as captaincy material, but don't know where Sehwag stands in comparisonas a player.  Partly because he was not even in India A team, though I doubt that this implied that he was not good enough to make the squad. Rather, I thought that it was deemed that it was not necessary for him to play for India A, something that I can't agree to in any way.

[fineleg]

Atleast he had the luxury of resigning. SG was unceremoniously removed by a particularly unsympathetic and callous selection committee.

Yep, the politician was kicked out, and I see you are now requesting a comeback of the political era

[LosingNow]

One last thing..

I am going to miss those predictable "we were short by 25 runs" speeches

Bye Bye Rahul!!

[kban1]

Vengsarkar's barbs may have hurt Dravid

KOLKATA: National selection committee chairman Dilip Vengsarkar's sharp criticism of Rahul Dravid's captaincy may have triggered `The Wall's decision to step down as skipper of the Indian cricket team.

Following India's defeat in the seventh and final one-day international (ODI) at the Lord's last Saturday after they levelled the series 3-3, Vengsarkar clearly gave the impression that he was unhappy about Dravid not batting at number three in the ODIs and sending others in that position.

Such remarks came in the wake of apparent disenchantment in a section of the media about Dravid's move not to enforce a follow-on in the third and final Test match at the Kennington Oval, to field first in the ODI at Birmingham and choose Yuvraj Singh rather than Ramesh Powar to bowl the final over in the crucial sixth ODI. 

In the course of the England tour, Dravid was visibly becoming distressed by the fact that people, including former players, had not fully appreciated India's Test series win last month.

He felt the Indian public, influenced by commentators and reporters, would probably forget this feat just because the team lost the ODI series.

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) was undoubtedly stung by Dravid wanting to quit immediately after attending Thursday's announcement of a Twenty20 league.

However, BCCI president Sharad Pawar's hasty statement, without any regret or tribute to the outgoing captain, generally a civilised thing to do, could be misinterpreted as he was not disappointed by Dravid's sudden departure.

Whether true or not, Pawar's critics have long suspected that he has had an agenda to appoint Sachin Tendulkar as skipper during his term.

In a TV serial entitled 'Indian Pioneers' broadcast by Britain's Sky TV during the recent Test series, Tendulkar categorically remarked he had not enjoyed his previous tenures at the helm. It will be interesting to see if he now accepts the job.

 http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1121474

[Vick]

The way Kaif was mishandled in tests by all and sundry and in ODIs during GC/RD era hurts even more now.....

but what about domestic and A tour where he has been captain for some time now. He hasnt scored their either. IMO his selection was pre mature he wasnt allowed to remove his chinks in batting before he was rushed to big boys game.

[kban1]

A legacy that lost its way

Right or wrong, Dravid quit while he was ahead

Siddhartha Vaidyanathan

September 14, 2007

"Sadly he runs the risk of being remembered as a batsman who always stood up to a challenge and a captain who chose the wrong time to back away"

Mobile phone statistics aren't for public consumption but it wouldn't come as any surprise if the number most sought after on Friday' was that owned by Rahul Dravid. The words "Dravid" and "jolt" are rarely used in the same sentence but his resignation has left most in a daze. Dravid the batsman has thrived in adversity, soaking up every ounce of pressure and adopting trench warfare, but Dravid the captain seems to have exhausted his last drop of patience. And he's switched his phone off.


There are two ways to view this decision. An empathetic stance would consider his position, his pressures and the system he needs to work with. In early April he was appointed captain till the end of the England tour. By the end of three series nothing much had changed with the system supporting him.

At the review committee meeting after the World Cup debacle, he had put forward a few demands. A couple of them - seeking specialist bowling and fielding coaches - were met. But the team continues to carry administrative managers who vary from plain incompetent to Machiavellian, and there is no trace yet of a media manager. The process of appointing a new coach has ranged from farcical to indifferent. Dravid has not been in sync with some of the selectors' choices, and he's probably realised, as his official reason suggests, that his batting is being affected after all.

During the England tour he spoke about the lack of proportion among Indian fans. His every move is dissected threadbare and, for the first time in his career, he is being roasted for an aspect of his game other than his batting. His frustrations were apparent during the England tour: he lambasted a television reporter for running a speculative story and, at Old Trafford, left the post-match press conference in a huff after being constantly being interrupted.

Yet the move can also be seen as ill-timed and disappointing. Some may even call it a tad selfish. India are currently in a period of transition that needs some solidity at the top and Dravid was providing a calming influence. Neither Mahendra Singh Dhoni nor Yuvraj Singh - the captain and deputy for the ICC World Twenty20 - are ready to lead the Test side and going back to Sachin Tendulkar or Sourav Ganguly would set the team back. Had Dravid continued till the end of the Australian tour, India would have the time to groom a younger successor.

More interestingly, for the first time in a while, the England tour saw a much happier Indian dressing-room. The seniors appeared to be chipping in with valuable advice and Dravid, who'd long missed a vice-captain of the sort that he was to Sourav Ganguly, had Ganguly, Tendulkar and Anil Kumble to fall back upon. Did Dravid's personal batting form take precedence over the team's needs? Wasn't he a good enough batsman to overcome these pressures? (Incidentally his one-day average jumps by two points when he leads). Somewhere it all doesn't add up.

So what could possibly have prompted one of India's most dependable cricketers to leave them in the lurch? We don't know yet but it's probably something to do with the word 'legacy'. He inherited the captaincy with a vision, wanting to revolutionise Indian cricket and put together systems that would make it a world-beating force. "Our cricketing culture has to change to some extent," he said in an interview to Michael Atherton in the Sunday Telegraph and it's no secret he strongly believed good systems make successful teams. As Atherton himself wrote in that piece: "The removal of a visionary like [Greg] Chappell has probably ended whatever chance Dravid has of making a revolutionary impact on Indian cricket as captain."


Somewhere along the line, especially after Chappell's departure, Dravid probably realised he couldn't achieve what he set out to. It is also possible - though this is admittedly a far-fetched theory - he also feared going the Ganguly way: holding his place by virtue of being a captain alone. His legacy as captain dotted with a few question marks, he perhaps decided to give his batting his all. He's talked about the focus his batting needs - "I try to slow things down a couple of days before the game" - and would have had to change his method while leading the side.

In an ideal situation Dravid would have wanted to be remembered as an Indian captain who ushered in a new age. He would have also wanted to end his career as the country's greatest batsman. He is astute enough to see that the first dream is now a mirage and focussing wholehearted on the second makes the most sense. It may be a decision that's puzzling to most but Dravid, who's normally two moves ahead of the rest, must know exactly what he's doing. Sadly he runs the risk of being remembered as a batsman who always stood up to a challenge and a captain who chose the wrong time to back away.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/columns/content/current/story/310994.html

[LosingNow]

It is also possible - though this is admittedly a far-fetched theory - he also feared going the Ganguly way: holding his place by virtue of being a captain alone.

I have heard this somewhere before.

[kban1]

Rahul Dravid: A dignified exit 

By Rohit Brijnath
 
A thoughtful, intense cricketer has handed back the Indian cricket captaincy because some of the enjoyment had been leached out of his game.

As befits a quiet, dignified man, there was no fanfare. Rahul Dravid wanted to announce his decision on Thursday, then realised it might take some shine off the launch of the Champions Twenty20 League, and instead spoke privately to Indian cricket board chief Sharad Pawar and that was it.

As he said to this writer on Friday evening: "I enjoyed the captaincy, I loved it, but it can get tough after a while and some of the enjoyment can go away. So I thought it was the right time to step aside.''

Surrounded by his team, or in the dressing room, Dravid found the ultimate contentment, but like most Indian captains it is the off-field demands/politics/chaos that wearies the mind and greys the hair. Leading India ages men before their time. In some ways, ironically, perhaps a thoughtful man was guilty of taking his job too seriously.


Fair time to leave

So buried in cricket was he that even the smallest pleasures seem to have escaped a rounded man.

When this writer, aware of Dravid's fondness for browsing bookshops, inquisitively asked mid-summer what he'd bought, he said he hadn't even had time to get to a bookshop. (It tells you something about Dravid that when he eventually did, 10 days before he left England, he bought Ramachandra Guha's India after *hi).

It is a fair time for Dravid to leave for many reasons. Victory in the Test series in England has been his redemption song after a dismal World Cup. Some hours after India exited that tournament, a phone call found him in his room in the West Indies, a man alone, sounding like death must. He briefly contemplated his future as captain then, but pride and resoluteness have been the signatures of his career, and he soldiered on.

His resignation is a challenge to the young men in the team to take responsibility. It also means in his remaining cricketing time, Dravid will concentrate on matters limited to the crease: it is where India requires his skills, and where he is happiest.

Dravid won series and Tests abroad as captain, but no consensus is to be found on his ability as leader, as tactician, as communicator. Forever it will be argued whether he let Greg Chappell go too far. One person will not care: his son, Samit, will be pleased to have more time with his father.


'India cannot go backward'

Young men have not pushed persuasively for the captaincy, yet a young man must get it. Sehwag, Dhoni, Yuvraj and Kaif have not convinced us completely of their Test qualifications in recent times, yet one of these men must lead, slip, fall, learn. India cannot go backwards and rely again on its older men. They have done enough. Now they must be on-field tutors during Test matches.

If anything, a generational change is required and it should not halt with Dravid's relinquishing of the captaincy.

Unseemly as it sounds, especially since they were three of the four top scorers in the England one-day series, Dravid-Tendulkar-Ganguly should be given a wall clock with a nice inscription and a collective hug by the nation, and sent into one-day retirement.

In Tests, we will pull them out of the moth balls, dust them off, and thrive on their experience. In the shorter form, we can't afford them.

Fielding is scarcely the cause for it's not as if India's young men are athletic warriors, nimble of feet and strong of arm. Ramesh Powar, for instance, is an improving spinner, and an inspirational tale, but no man with such a physique should be playing one-day cricket for India. Blocky we understand, paunch we don't.

India displayed flashes of competitiveness in the one-dayers, and while spirit can take a team some distance, it cannot make a good team a great team. Only disciplined talent, admittedly armed with spirit, can. And India lacks this talent. What it has, is greying.

As it stands this precise Indian one-day team cannot get better.

Confronted with the two tests of cricketing greatness it would fail, for this team cannot beat Australia on a consistent basis, and it cannot win the 2011 World Cup. Change, thus, is mandatory.


Substantial Vacuum

Dravid, Ganguly, Tendulkar will not that play in that World Cup, and that is the issue. It might not matter so much if currently they played minor roles in the team, but on the contrary these well-worn Musketeers remain the talent in this one-day team. Pointedly no young Indian player dominated the one-day series, though Robin Uthappa's cameo dazzled (still, two matches was inadequate evidence of anything).

To replace the finest one-day opening partnership of the modern era, and a finisher whose cool steadiness allowed our heart rates to settle, is a trying job.

It is a substantial vacuum, requiring a careful search. For the trio to retire with only, say 18 months left for the Cup, would instigate a panic. In a country where glaciers flow faster than cricketing decisions, there is not much time to waste. Young men must be tried, and captains must be tested, and the quicker India moves, the better chance it gives itself.

One might argue that retiring the trio is hasty, that no such similar call has gone out in Australia about Gilchrist (36 in November) and Hayden (36 in October) and Michael Hussey (32). But there are substantial differences.

Firstly, the rules for winning teams are always different. Second, Australia's keen bench (at most times) ensures vacancies are not just swiftly filled but adequately. In India, the hole Pathan left is yet to be plugged. Imagine the chasm Tendulkar, Ganguly, Dravid will leave?

It is an unfortunate moment, proof of sports' unending cruelties. It is no good trying to placate Ganguly, Tendulkar, Dravid by saying you have earned enough money, you've played so much, the one-day rest will elongate your Test careers.

Nothing can camouflage the truth which is that wonderful cricketers, who deserve to be in the team now, need to retire for the sake of the future. Maybe they, who've faced so many of sports' harshest truths with dignity, will understand: sometimes to find victory, sentiment has to stand aside.

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6994609.stm

[kban1]

Rahul Dravid piqued at Vengsarkar criticism, resigns as skipper

Shantanu Guha Ray

NEW DELHI: Rahul Dravid does not want to lead India.

The genial skipper has resigned as India captain and sent a letter to that effect to the Board for Control of Cricket in India (BCCI). In the letter, Dravid has asked to be relieved of the captaincy before Australia's forthcoming tour of India, beginning later this month.

In a statement from Nagpur, BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah said Dravid met Sharad Pawar, the board president, in New Delhi and expressed his desire to step down as the captain and requested that he should not be considered for the job any more.

"Dravid wants to concentrate on his game," Shah said in the statement.

Dravid, 33, has captained India in 25 Tests and 79 ODIs. He took over the captaincy from Sourav Ganguly two years ago, following India's tour of Zimbabwe. Under his captaincy India won eight Tests, including series wins in Pakistan, West Indies, Bangladesh and England.

The decision started intense speculation as to who will succeed Dravid. But Shah told TEHELKA over the phone that the BCCI was yet to find one. "Currently, Dhoni is leading the side and there is no immediate crisis. But the Board will take up the issue soon."

Informed sources told TEHELKA that the skipper was upset over the criticism of his captaincy by Dilip Vengsarkar, chairman of the selection committee. "This was the first time India won a series in England after 1986 and the public criticism was somewhat unwarranted." a board official told TEHELKA.

Vengsarkar had questioned the Indian skipper's decision not to bat at the crucial number three slot during the one-day series against England.

Vengsarkar had told a wire agency that India's fortunes in the one-day series against England banked on the form of Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Ganguly and each time they clicked, the team won handsomely. But each time they failed, the batsman at number three failed to stand up and be counted.

The chief selector had expressed surprise on the choice of Dinesh Karthik, Yuvraj Singh and Gautam Gambhir being tried at number three when the team had an automatic choice in the skipper himself. Critics found merit in his criticism since the Indian skipper has had a proficient run at the number three slot and has been involved in every century stand for the second wicket in the last twenty one-dayers. Interestingly, in the last ten innings at number three, Dravid has averaged 40 with five fifties. India went on to win seven of those games.

Repeated attempts to reach Dravid proved futile.

Former Team India captain Rahul Dravid was born in Indore in 1973, but grew up in Bangalore. Dravid, who started his international career in 1996, is ranked among the top 10 batsmen in the world by ICC currently. He is the highest-ranked Indian batsman in the ICC Test rankings and thye second-highest rated Indian batsman in the ICC ODI rankings. Along with Sachin tendulkar and Sunil Gavaskar, Dravid is the one of only three Indian batsmen to have scored over 9,000 in Tests. On February 14, he became the sixth player in history and the third Indian after Tendulkar and Saurav Ganguly to have scored over 10,000 runs in ODIs. Dravid was declared the captain of the Indian team in 2005. Dravid, under whose captaincy India won the historic Test series against the West Indies on their home soil in for the first time since 1971 last year, resigned from captaincy on September 14.

According to Dravid, he wanted to concentrate on his game. Under him, India also tasted series victories in Pakistan, Bangladesh and England. According to BCCI secretary Niranjan Shah, Dravid has expressed that he should not be considered for captaincy in the upcoming Australia tour. Dravid, who captained India in 25 Tests and 79 ODIs, came in for criticism in 2004, when he was a stand-in captain for Ganguly. Under him, the Indian first innings was declared at a point when Sachin Tendulkar was at 194 with 16 overs remaining on the second day. Even after becoming captain, he had his share of criticism.

After India failed to qualify for the finals of the DLF Cup, Indian skipper Rahul Dravid was criticised by former all-rounder Ravi Shastri who said that he was not assertive enough and let then coach Greg Chappell make too many decisions. When asked for a response, Dravid said that Shastri, while a “fair critic”, was “not privy” to the internal decision-making process of the team. Under his captaincy, India exited from the 2007 World Cup in the first round itself.

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main34.asp?filename=Ne220907Rahul.asp

[ramshorns]

For anyone reading the above article with common sense it appears that the reason given for Dravid's resignation is rather weak.  I think this is where a smart reader would make a distinction between a credible report to something out of garbage.  This report appears to be absolute garbage.

[kban1]

Wall Done

Rahul Dravid’s resignation yesterday leaves India in a lurch; stop-gap arrangement expected
 
Ehtesham hasan
 

Rahul Dravid’s decision to abdicate the captain’s throne has only raised the brows of the Indian cricket fraternity to unprecedented heights.

The few who matter are treating his decision with sheer contempt as they feel he has abandoned the ship when his stewardship was needed most.

“We have an important series against Pakistan and Australia coming up and it is not that the team was doing badly under him... he has clearly left us in the lurch,” is how an important board functionary reacted to the news that stumped the cricketing world yesterday.

“I personally feel that he should have resigned immediately after the World Cup. Relinquishing the position following a tough test series win over England gives the impression that he wanted to prove the world that he was a capable captain after all,” the source added.

However, not many Dravid followers subscribe to the above notion and some of them defended his decision spouting the the famous sporting cliche of “Why” rather than “Why not?”

“He wanted to pass over the baton with his head held high and the win in England provided him the opportunity. He has always maintained that he wants to quit when with the cries of ‘why’ around him and not ‘why not?,” someone very close to Dravid said.

Dravid’s official line that the pressure of captaincy was affecting his batting were taken with a pinch of salt as he was not the first leader to have gone through a lean patch. His batting records show otherwise.

The 34-year-old, by the way, was appointed as the skipper till the tour of England and another point of view is that he had given up on perfecting the rigor mortis-like system around him.

Ever since he took over from Sourav Ganguly in September 2005, he was never really allowed to settle in by the circumstances that prevailed. With Greg Chappell playing ‘Big Daddy,’ Dravid was clearly overshadowed. His demands for a permanent manager and a media manager for the team were never taken seriously

If that wasn’t sufficient the BCCI’s apathy to get a new coach on board five months post a disastrous World Cup campaign wasn’t helping matters. In all fairness, the Board did heed to his request and agreed to appoint Graham Ford as the coach but the latter backed out after developing cold feet. Since then, however, things have moved at a slower pace and the idea of appointing different cricketing manager for every series hasn’t gone down too well.

Former Chairman of selectors Kiran More, who had appointed Dravid as the skipper was scathing in his criticism for the BCCI.

“I think we need to go deep into it and find out why a tough guy like Rahul decided to quit. Clearly, there’s more than meets the eye,” said More. “There’s absolutely no professionalism in the board. Dravid had requested the board to let the team have a permanent manager for the team and media but they did not provide him with that. I think all these factors played a part in his quitting.”

The way forward

Sources, however, indicated that the board may appoint two separate skippers for the test and one-dayers. Sachin Tendulkar, who was present at the party hosted by BCCI in Delhi on Thursday night, was sounded out for the job by top BCCI officials, including Sharad Pawar. Whether or not he has agreed to take over is still isn’t clear but those in the know said that it would take a lot of convincing from the men in suits to make Tendulkar agree for a stop-gap agreement.

If he doesn’t, the crown may be placed on Sourav Ganguly’s head by default.

There is also a likelihood that the selectors will give the captain’s armband permanently to Mahendra Singh Dhoni for one-day cricket.


The Contenders 
 
MS Dhoni
Looks like the only option among the youngsters. He was elevated to the vice-captaincy for the ODI squad for the England tour this year ahead of Yuvraj Singh. Captaincy for the World Twenty20 followed but has he garnered enough experience over the last three years to take over the Test captaincy of the squad for a tough tour like Australia?
 
Sachin Tendulkar
In recent times, Tendulkar has revealed that he isn’t exactly averse to the idea of captaincy if the time is right. Well, India is in need and there is no better time to put his hand up. His experience is still valued highly. If there is one aspect of cricket in which Tendulkar hasn’t tasted success, it is captaincy and he will be keen to that right that wrong.
 
Sourav Ganguly
The former skipper is the only other option that India has. His no-holds-barred style of captaincy won a lot of fans as did his ability to inspire the younger players to produce their best. Another thing in his favour is that the team did pretty well on their Test tour of Australia under him. But making him captain again is a gamble.

http://www.mumbaimirror.com/net/mmpaper.aspx?page=article&sectid=59&contentid=2007091520070915041035609854eb2c4

[Aloo Kashmiri Ul Haq]

Dravid, 33, has captained India in 25 Tests and 79 ODIs.

Dravid is 34 and not 33 

[kban1]

Dravid’s parents stand by son

PTI
 
Bangalore: Sharad Dravid today backed his son Rahul’s decision to quit Indian cricket team’s captaincy, saying he knew what he was doing.

“It is his own decision. Why should one be saddened about it. He knows it... he knows what he is doing,” Sharad Dravid, Rahul's father, said when scribes sought his reaction at their Indiranagar residence.

Sharad, who went out for shopping to buy the idol of Lord Ganesh, on his return told waiting reporters “no comments.”

 Just Two Minutes

Later, he came out to answer few questions for “two minutes”, on the advice of the police officials posted there.

Sharad said Rahul had not discussed his plans to quit the captaincy with him or any of the family members.

On being asked whether Rahul chose to step down as he was under pressure, Sharad replied, “I don’t know. I can’t say anything on that by any stretch of imagination. I am not a cricketer. He knows it better. He should be in a better position to explain it.”

To another query on the whereabouts of his son, he remarked, “Maybe he is here (in Bangalore). But not in this house right now.”

 http://www.mumbaimirror.com/net/mmpaper.aspx?page=article&sectid=59&contentid=200709152007091504103157884707c33&pageno=1

[poondu]

Dravid's resignation

Quitting when ahead

Ian Chappell

September 15, 2007


 
Rahul Dravid won't be remembered as India's best captain, but at least he left the job with his dignity intact © AFP
 
 

If you give the captaincy your all, there is a definite use-by date. Rahul Dravid, an intense and thoughtful individual, has obviously reached the end of the line as captain.

As is the case with retirement for a regular player, for a captain it is better to resign when people are asking, "Why did you?" rather than "Why don't you?" Dravid certainly achieved that aim, having just completed a memorable Test series win over England and then pushing the hosts to the limit in the seven-match one-day international series.

Many people will wonder why Dravid has resigned from the most prestigious sporting job in India after only two years. I'm not surprised, because Dravid is the kind of person who puts his heart and soul into any job he tackles. When you do that, especially in a country where a billion people all think they can do the job better or at least as well, it can wear you down mentally.

Dravid is a man of great integrity and if he feels he's no longer capable of doing the job to his satisfaction and in a manner that will serve India best, he is not going to keep doing it for any kudos that may come his way. He won't be remembered as the best Indian captain but he'll be recalled as one who left the job with his dignity intact.

He was a solid captain, and there were times when he threatened to be an aggressive captain with oodles of flair, but in the end there was always the feeling that the extra pressure that comes with being Indian captain generally stifled those urges. It may also have been that captaining a side containing one superstar and a number of high-profile players wasn't conducive to Dravid always doing what his instincts told him was best to claim victory. Dravid is a strong and honest character but he is more inclined towards consensus than confrontation.

Because there is no obvious successor, the selectors may think about splitting the captaincy as a short-term solution. On that basis VVS Laxman would make a good Test captain; it may just be the confidence boost his batting needs, and it would give the selectors time to find a long-term, full-time captain. Mahendra Singh Dhoni has been earmarked for future leadership and the one-day captaincy would be a good way to test his mettle.

In September, 1975, I resigned from the Australian captaincy after four years in the job, feeling a sense of satisfaction and relief. In the modern game with all the extra matches and duties, two years of Indian captaincy is the equivalent of four in the Australian job. I empathise with Dravid's decision and think he has made the correct call.

© Cricinfo

[colonel]

Why hasn't anyone made the obvious (bad) pun and headlined the press resports as "Dravid: Chuck De Captaincy"?

[colonel]

Or have they?

[kban1]

For once, the timing’s off

Kunal Pradhan
 
Adelaide, Kolkata, Leeds, Rawalpindi. Rahul Dravid has ensured he will be remembered when, years from now, proud grandfathers tell stories of what had happened in those cities in the early 2000s. It’s his flashing blade that has scripted some of India’s greatest test wins of our era.

Until a few seasons ago, being Dravid was very easy. He worked hard on his batting, sure, but what he did with the willow was always enough to make him the darling of millions. He was ideal son-in-law material, a perfect role model, a man who gave the impression that he would be good at anything he did.

Being the Indian captain, however, is not easy. Ask anyone who has been in that position and he’ll tell you. You are held responsible every time the team loses, you have to face scathing criticism and you have to be prepared to hear things you thought your loving admirers would never say about you. In his new role, Dravid found that scoring runs alone was not enough. Suddenly, for the first time in a long while, things started to become really difficult.

Blame it on stress

Yesterday, after two infuriatingly eventful years, he decided he couldn’t take it anymore. Conspiracy theorists will talk of politics but, for once, we’re willing to take the Indian board’s statement on face value. In the end, it was nothing but the stress that got to Dravid.

He has walked away despite a test series win in England, and there’s no shame in that. To be fair, however, Dravid never really faced the condemnation that some of his predecessors have had to endure. He came out of the Chappell era and the World Cup debacle squeaky clean. It was the other “seniors” who were blamed for all that. It was only the late declaration at the Oval last month that made people speak out against him. As it turns out, it was enough.

It is unfortunate that one of India’s greatest batsmen in history will never be remembered as a great captain. His chance to be considered a leader of men has gone forever now and he himself has to take a lot of the blame for that.

Dravid’s first and most catastrophic error was that he genuinely believed Greg Chappell’s methods could turn the Indian cricket team into a world-beating force. Not only did he allow the coach to become the face of Team India, he also ended up alienating a lot of his colleagues by going whole-heartedly with a system that ended up dividing the side and making an insecure, nervous wreck of a group that had made the World Cup final just four years before they were unceremoniously dumped out in its first stage.

Lacking stamp of authority

Then, he never managed to stamp his own character on the side. Any top team, from Clive Lloyd’s West Indies to Steve Waugh’s Australia to Stephen Fleming’s New Zealand to Sourav Ganguly’s India to Ricky Ponting’s Australia, has the personality of its skipper embossed on it. You can describe the nature of the whole team by describing the man who is leading them. Dravid was so different from the rest of his boys that he could never bridge the gap.

And finally, when push came to shove in the middle, despite the one-day triumphs at home and the test series wins in West Indies and England, he was always perceived as a man who was too soft to lead. That was the one word that his critics had used when he had been given the job. Being soft is not a character flaw; some of the great leaders of the world would warm the cockles of your heart when you gaze upon them. But in two years - while he was doing the job and with the reason that he has finally given for quitting - Dravid ended up proving his detractors right.

India need to find a successor now and there aren’t too many options. Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Ganguly are the obvious choices but neither of them are long-term picks.

The younger players are not ready to be given the responsibility: Mahendra Singh Dhoni is barely three years into his career, Yuvraj Singh hasn’t cemented his place in the test team and Virender Sehwag is far for being a contender any more. The next few days will be interesting.

India have always needed Dravid, the batsman. They still need him desperately. He’s made a personal decision by quitting and he can’t be faulted for that. But this was the one time when we wished that Dravid, the captain — despite his shortcomings - would’ve stayed for a little while longer.

 http://www.mumbaimirror.com/net/mmpaper.aspx?page=article&sectid=59&contentid=20070915200709150410295621e62d65e&pageno=1

[LosingNow]

Decision was made long ago
TNN / Bobilli Vijay Kumar
PrintSaveWrite to EditorMail

For three full months, indeed more, Rahul Dravid guarded his secret zealously. He didn't give any indication of it as he led Team India single-mindedly and passionately, plotting the downfall of England and motivating his own mates to surpass themselves.

Yet, in his mind, an even more far-reaching and startling plot had already taken shape. He disclosed it fully only on Thursday, taking even the PCL-intoxicated BCCI by total surprise. But he had already and quite firmly decided to give up the crown of thorns.

"There is no suddenness to all this," a source very close to Dravid revealed. "He had decided to give up the captaincy a long time back," he added. "He just wants to get back to doing what he likes doing: bat and contribute to the team's cause as a player."

The source, who was one of the few privy to Dravid's decision and his deepest thoughts, clarified even the team had no inkling of his plans. "No. He didn't discuss it with anybody at all (even though he may have hinted about it to Pawar in England)." Probably, because nothing in the dressing room remains a secret any more.

Interestingly, it is now learnt Dravid had seriously offered to quit after the World Cup debacle itself. "It had nothing to do with the team's exit. It's just that he wasn't comfortable with all the other things that come along with captaincy," he said.

He was, however, persuaded to stay on as Indian cricket was going through a major crisis. With Greg Chappell already going out ingloriously, with almost all the seniors under severe attack and with talk of rifts among the players, he also agreed it wasn't a good time to leave the team headless.

He promised to stay on for six months. As the tenure came to an end, coincidentally with a stunning display in England, he was ready to put his plan into motion. On Thursday morning, as the BCCI unveiled its grand Twenty20 plans, he told Sharad Pawar of his plans; by the evening, he was back with his resignation letter.

Dravid requested the president to hold on to his secret for one more day to avoid a full-scale drama and the agony of facing intrusive television cameras once again. Pawar kept his promise and made the announcement on Friday, once the captain had got into his hideout.

"I have always been single-minded," Dravid had told TOI during an exclusive interview in England. "I take great joy in doing things well. Whether it's studies, playing any sport or captaining, I like to be focused and enjoy doing things nicely, to the best of my ability," he explained.

Dravid clearly wasn't enjoying the various chores and responsibilities that he had to perform as captain. Among other things, he didn't particularly seem to relish the constant grilling at the hands of the media, especially when it assumed a personal nature.

He often showed exasperation when stories were distorted, manipulated or concocted by a few. He expressed helplessness too as he often had to come out to defend either himself, his decisions or the actions of his players. Amazingly though it never looked like he had reached the end of his tolerance.

Even though India won a Test series after 21 years, he was criticised for not enforcing the follow-on in the third Test at the Oval; even after coming back strongly to take the One-day series into the deciding game, he was found guilty of not batting at Number Three; on many occasions there were insinuations about the players chosen or fielded too.

Dravid absorbed everything in his inimitable style: calmly and with dignity. He did everything within his means to be seen as an aggressive leader ("One doesn't have to show one's emotions on the field to be considered aggressive"), to show he was not a loner ("I may not hang out at discos or pubs but that doesn't mean I am not a team man"), to show he can take the dirt ("I am not foolish enough to think I won't be criticised").

Yet, in the end, it had clearly got too much. He has led the side for two years and seen a fair share of controversies too. His record is as good as it can get: 35-24-3 in ODIs and 8-6-11 in Tests. More importantly, he has won series in West Indies and England and facilitated a maiden Test win in South Africa too.

Dravid has made up his mind and one can be sure he will not regret it. Even if he does, he shall guard it equally zealously.

[feverpitch]

Good decision!

I'd have called it brave had it come after the W.C. There is speculation on the papers that he had actually offered to step down then but was forced to keep on. If true, I have nothing to say, else, hanging on after the WC debacle, and sitting for meetings between players and board immediately after [esp the way in which they seemed to take place] carried a message to the public: that he is the turncoat, the mole in the team for the board; besides being craven and pusillanimous, a fact that has subsequently been highlighted in the T3 declaration issue in England.

I guess we'll have to wait for his authorized biohagiography by Harsha Bhogle/ Dileip Premachandran [note the numerology inflected spelling  ] for the scoop on what REALLY drove him to renounce the crown. My speculation is it's his batting form, and the impending Australia visit, where both his team and his own batting stands a high chance of being exposed. To that extent, he is prudent and canny, but lets not forget that he keeps to his word too [he had promised to give up Captaincy if it affected his batting form].

I just wonder how anyone in the future will ever dare to call him courageous again. Guy just runs away from a challenge. What a pussy!

[feverpitch]

wat is a tl ? and i think this is rather a selfish decision in some sense ... i would have applauded it but for the fact that i dont see any natural successor.

 

good sense prevails. heartily agree.

[LosingNow]

My speculation is it's his batting form, and the impending Australia visit, where both his team and his own batting stands a high chance of being exposed.

Batting is one thing where RD has excelled and shown his incredible technique and ability. I think he will be the last player on that plane to Australia to worry about "being exposed" when comes to his batting. This speculation is not fair!

[feverpitch]

My speculation is it's his batting form, and the impending Australia visit, where both his team and his own batting stands a high chance of being exposed.

Batting is one thing where RD has excelled and shown his incredible technique and ability. I think he will be the last player on that plane to Australia to worry about "being exposed" when comes to his batting. This speculation is not fair!

I agree with the first part... but I am really concerned about his current form, esp in tests. If his cameos in odis are an indication, he has lost his capacity to concentrate in the longer form. I do hope he gets it back soon.

[indcric]

Good decision. At least he was honest. Stepped down immediately after WC. Now, realizing that the team is going nowhere with these 34+ guys, resigned from captaincy and more importantly, advised the board that the captaincy be given to a younger guy. His decisions as a captain might have been worst, but not his intentions. He sincerely tried to improve the team, tried to build a team for future, but failed.

[gouravk]

forget the decision ... what does this say abt the bcci's vision and long term planning ?

[justforkix]

The way Kaif was mishandled in tests by all and sundry and in ODIs during GC/RD era hurts even more now.....

but what about domestic and A tour where he has been captain for some time now. He hasnt scored their either. IMO his selection was pre mature he wasnt allowed to remove his chinks in batting before he was rushed to big boys game.

Yes, he did not help his case at all with a poor run so far after being dropped.

[LosingNow]

The way Kaif was mishandled in tests by all and sundry and in ODIs during GC/RD era hurts even more now.....

but what about domestic and A tour where he has been captain for some time now. He hasnt scored their either. IMO his selection was pre mature he wasnt allowed to remove his chinks in batting before he was rushed to big boys game.

Yes, he did not help his case at all with a poor run so far after being dropped.

Jfk: I feel for Kaif.. if he had done well in these A tours.. he would have been an automatic. As we speak, he is leading his team to another innings victory!!

[justforkix]

The way Kaif was mishandled in tests by all and sundry and in ODIs during GC/RD era hurts even more now.....

but what about domestic and A tour where he has been captain for some time now. He hasnt scored their either. IMO his selection was pre mature he wasnt allowed to remove his chinks in batting before he was rushed to big boys game.

Yes, he did not help his case at all with a poor run so far after being dropped.

Jfk: I feel for Kaif.. if he had done well in these A tours.. he would have been an automatic. As we speak, he is leading his team to another innings victory!!

Well - SG got into the team in 2006 via TINA. So, perhaps, Kaif will too sometime this season

But then, SG has a lot of backing, but Kaif does not. So, what worked in some sense for SG, will work against Kaif.

[pieterSAN]

The way Kaif was mishandled in tests by all and sundry and in ODIs during GC/RD era hurts even more now.....

but what about domestic and A tour where he has been captain for some time now. He hasnt scored their either. IMO his selection was pre mature he wasnt allowed to remove his chinks in batting before he was rushed to big boys game.

Yes, he did not help his case at all with a poor run so far after being dropped.

Jfk: I feel for Kaif.. if he had done well in these A tours.. he would have been an automatic. As we speak, he is leading his team to another innings victory!!

Well - SG got into the team in 2006 via TINA. So, perhaps, Kaif will too sometime this season

But then, SG has a lot of backing, but Kaif does not. So, what worked in some sense for SG, will work against Kaif.

Being a fan of Kaif, I am half-hoping they make some controversial decision to get him back for Tests. On the other hand it would much better if he can find some form before that.

[kban1]

Well - SG got into the team in 2006 via TINA. So, perhaps, Kaif will too sometime this season

But then, SG has a lot of backing, but Kaif does not. So, what worked in some sense for SG, will work against Kaif.

I sincerely hope Kaif does come back -via TINA or otherwise.

But I dont think SG had any more or any less backing than Kaif, given the current administration.

[LosingNow]

Well - SG got into the team in 2006 via TINA. So, perhaps, Kaif will too sometime this season

But then, SG has a lot of backing, but Kaif does not. So, what worked in some sense for SG, will work against Kaif.

I sincerely hope Kaif does come back -via TINA or otherwise.

But I dont think SG had any more or any less backing than Kaif, given the current administration.

Frankly administration is one aspect of the backing.. but one's sponsorship clout matters too.

Clearly, SG has more sponsorship $s riding on his back than Kaif ever would ..

[kban1]

Frankly administration is one aspect of the backing.. but one's sponsorship clout matters too.

Clearly, SG has more sponsorship $s riding on his back than Kaif ever would .

Is sponsorship clout in selection matters a given ? Or is this the general Indian cricket fan conspiracy theory by joining the dots ?

If sponsor clout was a given, SG as captain would never have been dropped. Neither would SRT and SG been rested for Bang.

Excuse me if I am more than skeptical about the sponsor-selection nexus theory, especially its increasing clout in conspiracy theory circles post the WC disaster.

[LosingNow]

Frankly administration is one aspect of the backing.. but one's sponsorship clout matters too.

Clearly, SG has more sponsorship $s riding on his back than Kaif ever would .

Is sponsorship clout in selection matters a given ? Or is this the general Indian cricket fan conspiracy theory by joining the dots ?

If sponsor clout was a given, SG as captain would never have been dropped. Neither would SRT and SG been rested for Bang.

Excuse me if I am more than skeptical about the sponsor-selection nexus theory, especially its increasing clout in conspiracy theory circles post the WC disaster.

I think you are selectively choosing to ignore this aspect .. clearly, this cannot be proven... but if you believe that this influence doesn't exist... your choice.

It is very similar to corruption in high places (not as sinister, mind you) .. no one can "definitively" prove it (the tracks are well covered), but we all know it exists.

[broadbat]

Now that he is not captain, can he retain his spot in the ODI side?

[dextrous]

Frankly administration is one aspect of the backing.. but one's sponsorship clout matters too.

Clearly, SG has more sponsorship $s riding on his back than Kaif ever would .

Is sponsorship clout in selection matters a given ? Or is this the general Indian cricket fan conspiracy theory by joining the dots ?

If sponsor clout was a given, SG as captain would never have been dropped. Neither would SRT and SG been rested for Bang.

Excuse me if I am more than skeptical about the sponsor-selection nexus theory, especially its increasing clout in conspiracy theory circles post the WC disaster.

I think you are selectively choosing to ignore this aspect .. clearly, this cannot be proven... but if you believe that this influence doesn't exist... your choice.

It is very similar to corruption in high places (not as sinister, mind you) .. no one can "definitively" prove it (the tracks are well covered), but we all know it exists.

how does vegasarkar exactly profit from sponsorship of sachin/saurav? i haven't understood, please explain.

[top cricketer]

I said this earlier and will say it again.  RD should take a few months off from cricket and let his detractors run the team without him for a while. 

More and more it seems his resignation is due to undue criticism by vested interests.  Vengsarkar was openly gunning for him (when was the chairman of selectors that vocal against another sitting captain?).  In addition to the mumbai lobby there was the ganguly lobby that had an axe to grind for RD's support for GC  or his policies.

Basically most of the criticism of RD have been over the top.  Even on this board over the last couple of weeks I have seen so much written about him and his captaincy.  In the ODI's the same people who complained about his chosing to bat first earlier in the series were the same people complaining about him chosing to field. 

RD was right that the public or the media did not give him enough credit for winning the test series.  It seems that all people wanted to do was to gun for him. 

I say it is good for him if he takes some time off.  Let SRT or SG lead the team in tests without him and we can see how good their captaincy would be. 

I think it would be good for him if he takes a few months off. 

[Debkumar]

I said this earlier and will say it again.   RD should take a few months off from cricket and let his detractors run the team without him for a while.   

More and more it seems his resignation is due to undue criticism by vested interests.   Vengsarkar was openly gunning for him (when was the chairman of selectors that vocal against another sitting captain?).   In addition to the mumbai lobby there was the ganguly lobby that had an axe to grind for RD's support for GC  or his policies. 

Basically most of the criticism of RD have been over the top.   Even on this board over the last couple of weeks I have seen so much written about him and his captaincy.   In the ODI's the same people who complained about his chosing to bat first earlier in the series were the same people complaining about him chosing to field.   

RD was right that the public or the media did not give him enough credit for winning the test series.   It seems that all people wanted to do was to gun for him.   

I say it is good for him if he takes some time off.   Let SRT or SG lead the team in tests without him and we can see how good their captaincy would be.   

I think it would be good for him if he takes a few months off.   

If he actually does that that would be something interesting to see. . . . But dont think he will do that

[top cricketer]

I said this earlier and will say it again.   RD should take a few months off from cricket and let his detractors run the team without him for a while.   

More and more it seems his resignation is due to undue criticism by vested interests.   Vengsarkar was openly gunning for him (when was the chairman of selectors that vocal against another sitting captain?).   In addition to the mumbai lobby there was the ganguly lobby that had an axe to grind for RD's support for GC  or his policies. 

Basically most of the criticism of RD have been over the top.   Even on this board over the last couple of weeks I have seen so much written about him and his captaincy.   In the ODI's the same people who complained about his chosing to bat first earlier in the series were the same people complaining about him chosing to field.   

RD was right that the public or the media did not give him enough credit for winning the test series.   It seems that all people wanted to do was to gun for him.   

I say it is good for him if he takes some time off.   Let SRT or SG lead the team in tests without him and we can see how good their captaincy would be.   

I think it would be good for him if he takes a few months off.   

If he actually does that that would be something interesting to see. . . . But dont think he will do that

Agree. He is too much of a team man to do that. He cant play the same politics. I just wish he would