Print

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

[justforkix]

Otherwise, with YP out 2nd ball, it would have been difficult for RR to make 10 of 4 balls.

I think the opening 6 nailed the match. 15 in 6 was a challenge but not impossible. DM could have easily converted the 10 in 4 if required. I would have gone with Ishant though especially after seeing that YP was to open.

Against Mendis, not sure if DM would have eben able to read him well enough. And it was 10 of 4 with 1 wkt in hand. The batting team gets to pick the batsmen and batting order after knowing the bowler. But I guess, it was obvious that YP was going to open in a super over, irrespective of the bowler. Also, to be fair to Mendis, he did deceive YP in the 2nd ball, pulled back his length, but the catch went down.

[dextrous]

Kban, On the Hodge ahead of Ganguly issue

A) I disagree with your view that ODI skills can determine who is a better T20 player. Put Swapnil Asnodkar in an ODI squad - even in India - and he'll hardly have the same success as he had in the IPL last year. Yusuf Pathan is a match winner in T20, again unable to be called that in ODIs. I don't think Jayawardhane will be as good a T20 player as Dilshan despite being better in ODIs. The value of a high impact 20-30 is much higher in a T-20 - and that is not the basis on which SG has built his superior ODI record. Anyway, if you do not agree, I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one.

B) I would give far more credence to performance in an actual match where the pressure was fully on than practice matches where we do not even know the quality of the opposition. And, if I were to take your point that SG was mentally affected by all the captaincy and other issues, how can anyone (including the coaching staff) take a call as to when those would stop harming his game? If that were the case, all the more reason to push him lower.

C) Yes, Warne can adapt ...that is always how the game has been ...then you would hope that even if Warne got Shukla early, there is SG left in the dugout to come out and tackle him ...much better than had he been dismissed upfront by one of the pacers.

Wrong.
Ganguly stays ahead of Hodge, becoz he can carry the team to victory from any stage.......that is important. Hodge is a very good player, but I haven't seen him carrying the team to victory....the way SG has done before.
Even if you choose to limit your scope to 20-20 only, I can give you last years' Punjab-XI match, where Ganguly and Umar Gul, did the same.
KKR could have easily done the same today....all thanks to Ganguly, otherwise KKR had lost the match already.
I am not aware what Hodge has done or not done in his domestic cricket league, by virtue of which, one has to place him ahaead of SG.
I hear even Moses Henrique is a prodigy of sorts in 20-20....but I haven't seen anything of that on display....I would always select Ganguly to play for my team in any form of cricket ahead of such prodigies.

It is precisely the same muddled thinking of Buchanan, that is resulting in KKR's poor results in this tournament...and the last years' one.
SG is trying to out-shine the mediocracy around him. Gayle seems to be the only other bright spot.
I don't think...Buchanan will last more than another year....if all his theories result into loses.
Unfortunately, SG too won't last beyond that as a player...he too is getting old.

I just couldn't believe what he did yesterday...or that, he is still capable to produce the same magic.

one only wonders how good he'd have been in the last 2-3 years of his career had he been allowed to play with a clear mind

[broadbat]

Otherwise, with YP out 2nd ball, it would have been difficult for RR to make 10 of 4 balls.

I think the opening 6 nailed the match. 15 in 6 was a challenge but not impossible. DM could have easily converted the 10 in 4 if required. I would have gone with Ishant though especially after seeing that YP was to open.

Against Mendis, not sure if DM would have eben able to read him well enough. And it was 10 of 4 with 1 wkt in hand. The batting team gets to pick the batsmen and batting order after knowing the bowler. But I guess, it was obvious that YP was going to open in a super over, irrespective of the bowler. Also, to be fair to Mendis, he did deceive YP in the 2nd ball, pulled back his length, but the catch went down.

Actually 10 was not required after the first six because if the scores are tied in the super over then the count back starts with the number of sixes hit. Therefore 9 of 4 would be correct.

[justforkix]

Otherwise, with YP out 2nd ball, it would have been difficult for RR to make 10 of 4 balls.

I think the opening 6 nailed the match. 15 in 6 was a challenge but not impossible. DM could have easily converted the 10 in 4 if required. I would have gone with Ishant though especially after seeing that YP was to open.

Against Mendis, not sure if DM would have eben able to read him well enough. And it was 10 of 4 with 1 wkt in hand. The batting team gets to pick the batsmen and batting order after knowing the bowler. But I guess, it was obvious that YP was going to open in a super over, irrespective of the bowler. Also, to be fair to Mendis, he did deceive YP in the 2nd ball, pulled back his length, but the catch went down.

Actually 10 was not required after the first six because if the scores are tied in the super over then the count back starts with the number of sixes hit. Therefore 9 of 4 would be correct.

how KKR had 6 6s and RR had 5 - so RR would have lost if game was tied after super over

[broadbat]

Is it sixes in the match or super over?

[dextrous]

Is it sixes in the match or super over?

match+so i think

[broadbat]

In which case having the super over itself seems superfluous. Just count back to the sixes after the match and decide the winner.

[justforkix]

as per the commentators it is in the match and ot super over !! I'm not surprised given that this is a ICC rule which will be followed in T20 WC too 

[Cover Point]

Seriously, which laptop program or Sun Tzu manual would have said "bowl Kamran Khan" in the super over

which was the wrong thing to do. and would have lost them the game if Bucky hadnt made a worse decision of bowling mendis.

While it made logical sense to have Kamran bowl the last over .... since Ganguly and the tail was around and it was clear that ganguly was having trouble facing real pace and tail always struggles against fast bowlers. So having KK bowl the last over made sense and to Kamran's credit he delivered.

It was moronic to give that same kid the Super Over and he almost lost them the game. His second ball was a marginal call that went his way. It could have been called a no ball any other day. He gave up three fours and a wide in the other balls he bowled.  Giving 15 is a terrible over really.  The difference this time he was bowling to a genuine batsman in Gayle. There were some strange fields too (No mid wicket).

Ofcourse with Bucky giving the ball to Mendis it made it moot. Did they forget that they use a new ball in the super over? How can a spinner be effective with such a new ball ... this a genuine spinner (and not the accurate type). Yes this was a tough one . Mendis was their best bowl in the regular game ... but I would have still given the over to Ishant. U can expect a strike fast bowler to keep u under 15 runs.

Bucky too has gone mad

Since you're typing out such long posts, I'm assuming you want the reader to come out of the post with something more than the "cp-ganguly" analogy...and yet, you cannot resist, which makes the rest of point just a big ol' joke that we simply cannot take seriously. why?!

i see ... in a post any line written against Ganguly makes it a joke. And I guess it is a breaking news that Ganguly is uncomfortable against genuine pace.

[Blwe_torch]

Seriously, which laptop program or Sun Tzu manual would have said "bowl Kamran Khan" in the super over

which was the wrong thing to do. and would have lost them the game if Bucky hadnt made a worse decision of bowling mendis.

While it made logical sense to have Kamran bowl the last over .... since Ganguly and the tail was around and it was clear that ganguly was having trouble facing real pace and tail always struggles against fast bowlers. So having KK bowl the last over made sense and to Kamran's credit he delivered.

It was moronic to give that same kid the Super Over and he almost lost them the game. His second ball was a marginal call that went his way. It could have been called a no ball any other day. He gave up three fours and a wide in the other balls he bowled.  Giving 15 is a terrible over really.  The difference this time he was bowling to a genuine batsman in Gayle. There were some strange fields too (No mid wicket).

Ofcourse with Bucky giving the ball to Mendis it made it moot. Did they forget that they use a new ball in the super over? How can a spinner be effective with such a new ball ... this a genuine spinner (and not the accurate type). Yes this was a tough one . Mendis was their best bowl in the regular game ... but I would have still given the over to Ishant. U can expect a strike fast bowler to keep u under 15 runs.

Bucky too has gone mad

Since you're typing out such long posts, I'm assuming you want the reader to come out of the post with something more than the "cp-ganguly" analogy...and yet, you cannot resist, which makes the rest of point just a big ol' joke that we simply cannot take seriously. why?!

i see ... in a post any line written against Ganguly makes it a joke. And I guess it is a breaking news that Ganguly is uncomfortable against genuine pace.

I too want to be uncomfortable against genuine pace, if I am given all the runs that Ganguly has scored in international cricket.

[ganavk]

Poor SG.. I really feel for him. All the hard work and no cigar. Specially  due the treatment that the coaching staff and management are meting out to him.

:'( awww..how is that treatment different from the treatment meted out to VVS or RD! I did not see them sulking.

Is he sulking or letting his bat do the talking?

Look I have criticized SG in the past .. but in this case, JB/SRK et al are so screwed up in their thinking.. you have to pity him and the circumstance he is in. Despite all that, he is doing what he has to - bat and bowl.

hmmm..even in yesterday's match he was so alone out there once he is off the pitch...not smiling, not joking...very unlike SG and we all know the tension before this match. if that is not sulking you can call in some other way.
needless to say it was a good innings yesterday but still no victory

[gouravk]

I dont mind "sulking" in this manner. You have to retain your individuality even in a team sport. Given the abuse he has been through this is very understandable.

[Blwe_torch]

Poor SG.. I really feel for him. All the hard work and no cigar. Specially  due the treatment that the coaching staff and management are meting out to him.

:'( awww..how is that treatment different from the treatment meted out to VVS or RD! I did not see them sulking.

Is he sulking or letting his bat do the talking?

Look I have criticized SG in the past .. but in this case, JB/SRK et al are so screwed up in their thinking.. you have to pity him and the circumstance he is in. Despite all that, he is doing what he has to - bat and bowl.

hmmm..even in yesterday's match he was so alone out there once he is off the pitch...not smiling, not joking...very unlike SG and we all know the tension before this match. if that is not sulking you can call in some other way.
needless to say it was a good innings yesterday but still no victory

well, he was not alone where it mattered right?....the cricket pitch...where he was constantly guiding and encouraging the younger players.....trying to get the best out of them.......all for the benefit of the team, whose management has betrayed his faith.

[Cover Point]

Poor SG.. I really feel for him. All the hard work and no cigar. Specially  due the treatment that the coaching staff and management are meting out to him.

:'( awww..how is that treatment different from the treatment meted out to VVS or RD! I did not see them sulking.

Is he sulking or letting his bat do the talking?

Look I have criticized SG in the past .. but in this case, JB/SRK et al are so screwed up in their thinking.. you have to pity him and the circumstance he is in. Despite all that, he is doing what he has to - bat and bowl.

hmmm..even in yesterday's match he was so alone out there once he is off the pitch...not smiling, not joking...very unlike SG and we all know the tension before this match. if that is not sulking you can call in some other way.
needless to say it was a good innings yesterday but still no victory

well, he was not alone where it mattered right?....the cricket pitch...where he was constantly guiding and encouraging the younger players.....trying to get the best out of them.......all for the benefit of the team, whose management has betrayed his faith.

hmmm ... i do that here all the time

[ramshorns]

I dont mind "sulking" in this manner. You have to retain your individuality even in a team sport. Given the abuse he has been through this is very understandable.

Come..on..Now the way some of you guys make it sound one feels that Ganguly was in a concentration camp.   What abuse?  He can always walk away remember if that was the case.   Not everything that is done with a team interest in mind is liked by every one.  Fact of the matter.

[Blwe_torch]

I dont mind "sulking" in this manner. You have to retain your individuality even in a team sport. Given the abuse he has been through this is very understandable.

Come..on..Now the way some of you guys make it sound one feels that Ganguly was in a concentration camp.   What abuse?  He can always walk away remember if that was the case.   Not everything that is done with a team interest in mind is liked by every one.  Fact of the matter.

there is no visible team-interest, that you seem to be suggesting.

[12th_Man]

KKR does not seem like a team to me. Not even BRC that way. The spirit is really missing.

[12th_Man]

In which case having the super over itself seems superfluous. Just count back to the sixes after the match and decide the winner.

Why not the wickets lost in that case 

[12th_Man]

Otherwise, with YP out 2nd ball, it would have been difficult for RR to make 10 of 4 balls.

I think the opening 6 nailed the match. 15 in 6 was a challenge but not impossible. DM could have easily converted the 10 in 4 if required. I would have gone with Ishant though especially after seeing that YP was to open.

Against Mendis, not sure if DM would have eben able to read him well enough. And it was 10 of 4 with 1 wkt in hand. The batting team gets to pick the batsmen and batting order after knowing the bowler. But I guess, it was obvious that YP was going to open in a super over, irrespective of the bowler. Also, to be fair to Mendis, he did deceive YP in the 2nd ball, pulled back his length, but the catch went down.

Mendis was obvious choice, given the length he had bowled at. After reading Warnies comment about balls slipping die to dew(reason for Khan from RR), may be why Mendis could not get them right. But again , It also came down to KKR goofup. BM missed a fulltoss on the legs, that was a sure six.

[Blwe_torch]

Otherwise, with YP out 2nd ball, it would have been difficult for RR to make 10 of 4 balls.

I think the opening 6 nailed the match. 15 in 6 was a challenge but not impossible. DM could have easily converted the 10 in 4 if required. I would have gone with Ishant though especially after seeing that YP was to open.

Against Mendis, not sure if DM would have eben able to read him well enough. And it was 10 of 4 with 1 wkt in hand. The batting team gets to pick the batsmen and batting order after knowing the bowler. But I guess, it was obvious that YP was going to open in a super over, irrespective of the bowler. Also, to be fair to Mendis, he did deceive YP in the 2nd ball, pulled back his length, but the catch went down.

Mendis was obvious choice, given the length he had bowled at. After reading Warnies comment about balls slipping die to dew(reason for Khan from RR), may be why Mendis could not get them right. But again , It also came down to KKR goofup. BM missed a fulltoss on the legs, that was a sure six.

With the advantage of  hind-sight, Mendis was the wrong choice, unfortunately. Ishaant would have been more effective, imo................but no point crying over spilt milk.

[gouravk]

i think ajit agarkar would have been the best choice. seriously. what experience the guy has.

if only they had joginder in the side. i think CSK will now always play joginder given the possibility of his services being required in such a scenario.

[12th_Man]

Otherwise, with YP out 2nd ball, it would have been difficult for RR to make 10 of 4 balls.

I think the opening 6 nailed the match. 15 in 6 was a challenge but not impossible. DM could have easily converted the 10 in 4 if required. I would have gone with Ishant though especially after seeing that YP was to open.

Against Mendis, not sure if DM would have eben able to read him well enough. And it was 10 of 4 with 1 wkt in hand. The batting team gets to pick the batsmen and batting order after knowing the bowler. But I guess, it was obvious that YP was going to open in a super over, irrespective of the bowler. Also, to be fair to Mendis, he did deceive YP in the 2nd ball, pulled back his length, but the catch went down.

Mendis was obvious choice, given the length he had bowled at. After reading Warnies comment about balls slipping die to dew(reason for Khan from RR), may be why Mendis could not get them right. But again , It also came down to KKR goofup. BM missed a fulltoss on the legs, that was a sure six.

With the advantage of  hind-sight, Mendis was the wrong choice, unfortunately. Ishaant would have been more effective, imo................but no point crying over spilt milk.

I don't know when the names are given to the officials. With 16 runs on board, a pace bowler seem a better thought. Also if the opposition knows YP will bat, his spin hitting skills are no secret.
If we start looking abck in hindsight, there are quite few mistakes KKR did. Instead of sending SB to bat at the scenario, I would have preferred Ajit Agarkar given his intl experience. I still don't understand after those two huge game changing sixes why KKR did not try to wrap up things with so many wickets in hand ?

[gouravk]

i think the bowling team has to nominate the bowler first and the batting team can choose its batters accordingly.

[Cover Point]

Mendis was the wrong choice. As was Kamran.

These are pressure things.

WN, come on ... if you are told at the start of a super over that you can have 15 runs irrespective of who the bowler is every team would take it in a heart beat. Add to that the full toss that could have been given as no OR could have gone for a six ... it truly was a poor over! The fact that YP saved the day or should I say Bucky made a mistake of bowling AM should not take the point away from Warne's mistake.

Warne is a risk taker. Makes some very very aggressive decisions (am being charitable here). Some of his field placings are bizzarre. When they come off he appears brilliant but there is a reason why people dont go that aggressive all the time. Things dont always work. He had No long on and then no midwicket. Both cost him. I would call it stupid. I am not one to go after traditional stuff but there is a reason fields are set in traditional manner. That works. You can change things around a bit for shock but have to recognize that you are taking a chance. Sometimes a huge chance.

[kban1]

Kban, On the Hodge ahead of Ganguly issue

A) I disagree with your view that ODI skills can determine who is a better T20 player. Put Swapnil Asnodkar in an ODI squad - even in India - and he'll hardly have the same success as he had in the IPL last year. Yusuf Pathan is a match winner in T20, again unable to be called that in ODIs. I don't think Jayawardhane will be as good a T20 player as Dilshan despite being better in ODIs. The value of a high impact 20-30 is much higher in a T-20 - and that is not the basis on which SG has built his superior ODI record. Anyway, if you do not agree, I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one.

Your comments about Asnodkar are speculative given that we have not had a chance to watch him in limited over games. Even so, its not as if he does not have the skills or the game to play 50 over cricket --if anything, your assumption would be based on the perceived transition --mental makeup and innings planning. (Note --I am not talking about his technique on faster / bouncier wickets).

The above is also more or less true about Yusuf Pathan -- he has the game, he needs to mentally adjust and plan his innings differently to be successful in the limited over format.

Your opinion about Jayawardene's potential success and failure in T20 vis-a-vis Dilshan isnt necessarily the absolute truth -- Jayawardene's class and his incredibly successful transition into the limited overs game points to the fact that a similar transition to T20 is very much possible. As is true of almost every player with class --given a little time, players with the talent make the mental adjustment -- think gavaskar & Dravid in ODI's as an example.

Another reason why your argument cuts little ice is that you are comparing non proven, non tested younger players like Yusuf pathan and Asnodkar to someone like Ganguly who has played 300+ limited over games against world class opposition. By doing so, you ignore the immense beneficial effects of experience, which allow a batsman to make such mental and planning adjustments as the duration of the game changes.

Finally, you ignore completely that SG has already played a full season of T20 (IPL 2008) which showed that he has managed to make the transition.

So, sorry, I cannot agree with this speculative line of reasoning.

B) I would give far more credence to performance in an actual match where the pressure was fully on than practice matches where we do not even know the quality of the opposition.

Just like I would give  a lot more credit to performances against international class opposition -- Hodge's results aernt that great in matches he has played for Aus. We can keep arguing around in circles but the fact remains that in those 3 matches, both Hodge and SG played the same bowlers. And 2 of those 3 matches were actual matches against Free State, the SA local side rather than being inter-squad practice games.

And, if I were to take your point that SG was mentally affected by all the captaincy and other issues, how can anyone (including the coaching staff) take a call as to when those would stop harming his game? If that were the case, all the more reason to push him lower

Erm, since when is a player temporarily affected by extraneous issues ever demoted as a means for him to gain back his mental balance ? Under which tenet of pyschology is that the recommended solution ?

I believe in that case, the player is sent at his normal position for at least a few more times --a sign of confidence being reposed in him, before a call for demotion down the order / dropping is taken if the player continues to struggle.

if your read is that one failure should lead to demotion --whether for mental turmnoil (and there were a lot of reasons for it) or for just plain failure, then you are definitely reading from a different sports pyschology book.

C) Yes, Warne can adapt ...that is always how the game has been ...then you would hope that even if Warne got Shukla early, there is SG left in the dugout to come out and tackle him ...much better than had he been dismissed upfront by one of the pacers.

And why would SG be dismissed by one of the pacers ? Is it a given that this would happen ?

On the other hand, chances are quite high that these guys will struggle against Warne. Sending SG in earlier neutralizes that threat or mitigates it at least (probabilistically speaking) while not leaving one of your top order bats for the no 5 spot, where he has to do a rear guard operation.

The logic is simple -- in general, you play your best bats early on so that they have the max overs to utilize (given a limited over scenario).

In this line up, the best bats are CG, SG, BM.  Thats who you send in.

And based on the form in the first matches, I wouldnt even send BM in ahead of SG given that he is struggling to even get the ball off the square.

[kban1]

KKR does not seem like a team to me. Not even BRC that way. The spirit is really missing.

Yes. And Warne's comments were telling -- he said the reason a team wins is team spirit. Introducing far flung multiple captain theories, changing captains, and dividing the team is not the way to build team spirit.

Mendis was obvious choice, given the length he had bowled at. After reading Warnies comment about balls slipping die to dew(reason for Khan from RR), may be why Mendis could not get them right. But again , It also came down to KKR goofup. BM missed a fulltoss on the legs, that was a sure six.

I Think Warne was very unequivocal about Mendis being the wrong choice because of the large amount of due which was making it hard to grip the ball.

I agree.

In fact, the TV commentators were talking during the KKR main innings about how wet the ball had become and how Warne had asked his fielders not to rub off the ball, so that he could show the umpires the wet ball and get them to change it (the umpires did change the ball in the 18th over --  wah Warne )

Also with Yusuf batting (it was a given that he would be there), sending a  spinner didnt make sense since that is Yusuf's strength (pace isnt) and given the fact that Yusuf has played mendis before (less mystery factor). But the decision was taken by Buchanan.

Also, the batting order was wrong too -- why send MC ahead of SG in the Super over. MS has struggled to middle the ball in 3 consecutive matches. Whats more, SG was probably sighting the ball like a football, he was into the groove, and he should have been sent with Gayle. That 1 run return off the leg stump full toss by MC, one could argue, did have an effect.

[ganavk]

Poor SG.. I really feel for him. All the hard work and no cigar. Specially  due the treatment that the coaching staff and management are meting out to him.

:'( awww..how is that treatment different from the treatment meted out to VVS or RD! I did not see them sulking.

Is he sulking or letting his bat do the talking?

Look I have criticized SG in the past .. but in this case, JB/SRK et al are so screwed up in their thinking.. you have to pity him and the circumstance he is in. Despite all that, he is doing what he has to - bat and bowl.

hmmm..even in yesterday's match he was so alone out there once he is off the pitch...not smiling, not joking...very unlike SG and we all know the tension before this match. if that is not sulking you can call in some other way.
needless to say it was a good innings yesterday but still no victory

well, he was not alone where it mattered right?....the cricket pitch...where he was constantly guiding and encouraging the younger players.....trying to get the best out of them.......all for the benefit of the team, whose management has betrayed his faith.

really..so now these kinds of things are ok from a team player because of the way SG is treated by this management. No wonder SG fans does not believe that he will be in the team next year.
Personally for me, this is not the way to treat your icon but once that is done and in public you have accepted it then don't go sulking. Continue to show the same spirit!

[Blwe_torch]

Poor SG.. I really feel for him. All the hard work and no cigar. Specially  due the treatment that the coaching staff and management are meting out to him.

:'( awww..how is that treatment different from the treatment meted out to VVS or RD! I did not see them sulking.

Is he sulking or letting his bat do the talking?

Look I have criticized SG in the past .. but in this case, JB/SRK et al are so screwed up in their thinking.. you have to pity him and the circumstance he is in. Despite all that, he is doing what he has to - bat and bowl.

hmmm..even in yesterday's match he was so alone out there once he is off the pitch...not smiling, not joking...very unlike SG and we all know the tension before this match. if that is not sulking you can call in some other way.
needless to say it was a good innings yesterday but still no victory

well, he was not alone where it mattered right?....the cricket pitch...where he was constantly guiding and encouraging the younger players.....trying to get the best out of them.......all for the benefit of the team, whose management has betrayed his faith.

really..so now these kinds of things are ok from a team player because of the way SG is treated by this management. No wonder SG fans does not believe that he will be in the team next year.
Personally for me, this is not the way to treat your icon but once that is done and in public you have accepted it then don't go sulking. Continue to show the same spirit!

but who is sulking?!

not SG.

We the fans may be sulking...but then fans normally sulk or rejoice one way or the other.
SG never sulks, he lets his bat do the talking, as he has done on so many previous occasion.

[kban1]

ganavk:

I am not sure what you are talking about ?

Ganguly has always been animated when he is captaining and has usually been subdued when he is not captaining.

That has been the same issue here. Just like at other times when he was a non captain, he does offer advice from time to time.

Which he has been doing here too --he has offered advice to McCullum (quite clearly visible on screen), he has offered encouragement to the bowlers, he guided Yashpal and Agarkar when he was batting -- I am not sure what you are taking about.

If keeping quiet or being subdued or looking serious is a cue for being accused of being a sulker, then every quiet player in the world would be accused of being a sulker.

For the record, here is what the dictionary meaning of sulk is:

"To be sullenly aloof or withdrawn, as in silent resentment or protest."

The key here is the reading of the mental state -- you are first drawing the conclusion that he is withdrawn (which evidence suggests is not correct) and then you are assuming that such withdrawal is based on anger or protest.

Just doesnt fly.

[ganavk]

ganavk:

I am not sure what you are talking about ?

Ganguly has always been animated when he is captaining and has usually been subdued when he is not captaining.

That has been the same issue here. Just like at other times when he was a non captain, he does offer advice from time to time.

Which he has been doing here too --he has offered advice to McCullum (quite clearly visible on screen), he has offered encouragement to the bowlers, he guided Yashpal and Agarkar when he was batting -- I am not sure what you are taking about.

If keeping quiet or being subdued or looking serious is a cue for being accused of being a sulker, then every quiet player in the world would be accused of being a sulker.

For the record, here is what the dictionary meaning of sulk is:

"To be sullenly aloof or withdrawn, as in silent resentment or protest."

The key here is the reading of the mental state -- you are first drawing the conclusion that he is withdrawn (which evidence suggests is not correct) and then you are assuming that such withdrawal is based on anger or protest.

Just doesnt fly.

The reaction shown in press meet where multiple captaincy theory and numerous other incidents mentioned by IPL Fakeplayer (now more or less everyone agrees that it is not written by some blogger who has too much time in hand!) are nothing but type of sulking!
anyway..BLWE defends the sulking on this very same forum based on what has been done to him and that's what we should be discussing about

[Blwe_torch]

ganavk:

I am not sure what you are talking about ?

Ganguly has always been animated when he is captaining and has usually been subdued when he is not captaining.

That has been the same issue here. Just like at other times when he was a non captain, he does offer advice from time to time.

Which he has been doing here too --he has offered advice to McCullum (quite clearly visible on screen), he has offered encouragement to the bowlers, he guided Yashpal and Agarkar when he was batting -- I am not sure what you are taking about.

If keeping quiet or being subdued or looking serious is a cue for being accused of being a sulker, then every quiet player in the world would be accused of being a sulker.

For the record, here is what the dictionary meaning of sulk is:

"To be sullenly aloof or withdrawn, as in silent resentment or protest."

The key here is the reading of the mental state -- you are first drawing the conclusion that he is withdrawn (which evidence suggests is not correct) and then you are assuming that such withdrawal is based on anger or protest.

Just doesnt fly.

The reaction shown in press meet where multiple captaincy theory and numerous other incidents mentioned by IPL Fakeplayer (now more or less everyone agrees that it is not written by some blogger who has too much time in hand!) are nothing but type of sulking!
anyway..BLWE defends the sulking on this very same forum based on what has been done to him and that's what we should be discussing about

Arre...I never said, SG is sulking whether justifiably or not.
I said, his fans may be sulking.
As far as SG's behaviour is concerned, I think he is spot-on.!

[kban1]

The reaction shown in press meet where multiple captaincy theory and numerous other incidents mentioned by IPL Fakeplayer (now more or less everyone agrees that it is not written by some blogger who has too much time in hand!) are nothing but type of sulking!

Mighty leap of faith to assume what SG's mind set at that point is. Rather than being aloof or withdrawn, SG appeared stunned, surprised and terribly disappointed to thos of us who saw it.

Not to mention the fact that sulking is usually associated with some behavior --verbal or non verbal which indicates resentment. There was very little of that in SG's body language at the press conference.

If thats your definition of sulking, you need lessons in English.  Or maybe we should use your definition of English and include practically every living moment of Dravid's career to define sulking in perpetuity.

After all, using your definition he fits the bill. He is dour, always serious, does not smile, stays to himself, does not mingle around much, is withdrawn, etc. So by your definition, he is sulker extraordinaire, the original mold destroyed post creation. As a matter of fact, lets extend that to say, since he was stripped of his captaincy, he showed his anger and sulking through exaggerated bat pointing at the audience after scoring a 50, and furthermore decided to take off the entire IPL once his wife delivered a baby -- as an act of petulance.

Lets also bring into evidence his comments at press conferences when he has spoken unkindly to others such as speaking of people whose names do not appear in cricketing history books and use such indignant expressions (irrespective of the provocation and / or justification) as evidence of him being a sulker extraordinaire.

Heck, by your folly of a definition, lets show Sachin, Anil, Laxman, and the rest of the Indian team as the Band of Sulkers, while we are at it.

See, derogatory and untruthful slander is so easy. And I dont need to do anything but use your own definitions to do that.

And since you are clutching at straws by quoting some anonymous blogger (true or false is not known) to pick on the fact that SG "sulked" (you obviously don't understand the difference between a) maintaining dignity through silence & distance and b) sulking), perhaps you would have the honesty to also point out that the same anonymous blogger profusely praises SG for getting over his disappointment and offering his full support to Brendon McCullum.

But I guess the expectation of an honest argument from someone  with a bent agenda is too much anyways.

anyway..BLWE defends the sulking on this very same forum based on what has been done to him and that's what we should be discussing about

WTH !!

How does it concern me what Blwe thinks or says. Irrelevant to the discussion about sulking, and your overeagerness to slander selectively and without uniformity of standards.

[Cover Point]

have to agree. Liked the passion on SG's face when he came back to the bench. He threw that red cap or bandana or whatever real hard on the floor. Loved that look

[Libran]

ganavk:

I am not sure what you are talking about ?

Ganguly has always been animated when he is captaining and has usually been subdued when he is not captaining.

That has been the same issue here. Just like at other times when he was a non captain, he does offer advice from time to time.

Which he has been doing here too --he has offered advice to McCullum (quite clearly visible on screen), he has offered encouragement to the bowlers, he guided Yashpal and Agarkar when he was batting -- I am not sure what you are taking about.

If keeping quiet or being subdued or looking serious is a cue for being accused of being a sulker, then every quiet player in the world would be accused of being a sulker.

For the record, here is what the dictionary meaning of sulk is:

"To be sullenly aloof or withdrawn, as in silent resentment or protest."

The key here is the reading of the mental state -- you are first drawing the conclusion that he is withdrawn (which evidence suggests is not correct) and then you are assuming that such withdrawal is based on anger or protest.

Just doesnt fly.

The reaction shown in press meet where multiple captaincy theory and numerous other incidents mentioned by IPL Fakeplayer (now more or less everyone agrees that it is not written by some blogger who has too much time in hand!) are nothing but type of sulking!
anyway..BLWE defends the sulking on this very same forum based on what has been done to him and that's what we should be discussing about

If you look at it that way, it will seem that SG was sulking...

Look at VVS when he gets a great ball and gets out...if you think he was genuinely outwitted , you will see it that way.. if you think he looks like a rabbit in head lights...you will see it that way...

Look at RD's dropped catch y'day...if you think he genuinely misjudged, you will see it that way... if you think he was not really disappointed after dropping the catch, that is what gets embedded in the brain...

So...it is all in the mind...

And before the 'hard core lovers' jump in, VVS and RD are just a case in point... SRT could have been brought in ...but, will let the birthday boy be

[Blwe_torch]

ganavk:

I am not sure what you are talking about ?

Ganguly has always been animated when he is captaining and has usually been subdued when he is not captaining.

That has been the same issue here. Just like at other times when he was a non captain, he does offer advice from time to time.

Which he has been doing here too --he has offered advice to McCullum (quite clearly visible on screen), he has offered encouragement to the bowlers, he guided Yashpal and Agarkar when he was batting -- I am not sure what you are taking about.

If keeping quiet or being subdued or looking serious is a cue for being accused of being a sulker, then every quiet player in the world would be accused of being a sulker.

For the record, here is what the dictionary meaning of sulk is:

"To be sullenly aloof or withdrawn, as in silent resentment or protest."

The key here is the reading of the mental state -- you are first drawing the conclusion that he is withdrawn (which evidence suggests is not correct) and then you are assuming that such withdrawal is based on anger or protest.

Just doesnt fly.

The reaction shown in press meet where multiple captaincy theory and numerous other incidents mentioned by IPL Fakeplayer (now more or less everyone agrees that it is not written by some blogger who has too much time in hand!) are nothing but type of sulking!
anyway..BLWE defends the sulking on this very same forum based on what has been done to him and that's what we should be discussing about

If you look at it that way, it will seem that SG was sulking...

Look at VVS when he gets a great ball and gets out...if you think he was genuinely outwitted , you will see it that way.. if you think he looks like a rabbit in head lights...you will see it that way...

Look at RD's dropped catch y'day...if you think he genuinely misjudged, you will see it that way... if you think he was not really disappointed after dropping the catch, that is what gets embedded in the brain...

So...it is all in the mind...

And before the 'hard core lovers' jump in, VVS and RD are just a case in point... SRT could have been brought in ...but, will let the birthday boy be

Have you noticed the birthday boy is still only 36, while his contemporary SG is pushing 38.
Another 'evolution' of our Indian cricket circus.

[Cover Point]

ganavk:

I am not sure what you are talking about ?

Ganguly has always been animated when he is captaining and has usually been subdued when he is not captaining.

That has been the same issue here. Just like at other times when he was a non captain, he does offer advice from time to time.

Which he has been doing here too --he has offered advice to McCullum (quite clearly visible on screen), he has offered encouragement to the bowlers, he guided Yashpal and Agarkar when he was batting -- I am not sure what you are taking about.

If keeping quiet or being subdued or looking serious is a cue for being accused of being a sulker, then every quiet player in the world would be accused of being a sulker.

For the record, here is what the dictionary meaning of sulk is:

"To be sullenly aloof or withdrawn, as in silent resentment or protest."

The key here is the reading of the mental state -- you are first drawing the conclusion that he is withdrawn (which evidence suggests is not correct) and then you are assuming that such withdrawal is based on anger or protest.

Just doesnt fly.

The reaction shown in press meet where multiple captaincy theory and numerous other incidents mentioned by IPL Fakeplayer (now more or less everyone agrees that it is not written by some blogger who has too much time in hand!) are nothing but type of sulking!
anyway..BLWE defends the sulking on this very same forum based on what has been done to him and that's what we should be discussing about

If you look at it that way, it will seem that SG was sulking...

Look at VVS when he gets a great ball and gets out...if you think he was genuinely outwitted , you will see it that way.. if you think he looks like a rabbit in head lights...you will see it that way...

Look at RD's dropped catch y'day...if you think he genuinely misjudged, you will see it that way... if you think he was not really disappointed after dropping the catch, that is what gets embedded in the brain...

So...it is all in the mind...

And before the 'hard core lovers' jump in, VVS and RD are just a case in point... SRT could have been brought in ...but, will let the birthday boy be

Have you noticed the birthday boy is still only 36, while his contemporary SG is pushing 38.
Another 'evolution' of our Indian cricket circus.

huh?

[keep-it-cool]

Kban,

Since I can't quote here, I'll just have my last say on the Hodge v/s SG issue here.

I disagree that SG's intl record in ODIs makes him automatically better in T20 - esp compared to Hodge who has a very good T20 record in some very tough leagues. Forget the two, if I had to pick between a Raina or Yusuf v/s Ganguly, I'd pick the former any day.

How do I know SG could get out against the pacers? I don't, for sure. But he surely did not look good against the DC and got out to that kid.

Anyway, this is moot - if you look at the scorecard, Hodge played 3 deliveries before SG came in - that is all the difference there was. Hardly something that one can conclusively argue had a game changing effect.

I agree SG should probably have opened ahead of BM in the super over - but JB probably went by your own logic - despite lack of form he gave more credence to BM's better hitting capabilities - esp when he saw that the bowler was KK, who SG had failed to get away for much thru the game, including the last over.

Mendis would have been a wrong pick had there been better alternatives but I am not so sure about Ishant any longer. He was in fact carted all over the park by Yusuf in the match. But that was a marginal call.

[kban1]

kic:

Kban,

Since I can't quote here, I'll just have my last say on the Hodge v/s SG issue here.

I disagree that SG's intl record in ODIs makes him automatically better in T20 - esp compared to Hodge who has a very good T20 record in some very tough leagues. Forget the two, if I had to pick between a Raina or Yusuf v/s Ganguly, I'd pick the former any day.

How do I know SG could get out against the pacers? I don't, for sure. But he surely did not look good against the DC and got out to that kid.

Anyway, this is moot - if you look at the scorecard, Hodge played 3 deliveries before SG came in - that is all the difference there was. Hardly something that one can conclusively argue had a game changing effect.

I agree SG should probably have opened ahead of BM in the super over - but JB probably went by your own logic - despite lack of form he gave more credence to BM's better hitting capabilities - esp when he saw that the bowler was KK, who SG had failed to get away for much thru the game, including the last over.

Mendis would have been a wrong pick had there been better alternatives but I am not so sure about Ishant any longer. He was in fact carted all over the park by Yusuf in the match. But that was a marginal call.

At this point, in a T20 game, I wouldnt disagree with you if you put Y Pathan / Raina ahead of SG either, depending on the match situation. I would be reluctant to allow the same latitude to Hodge (based on what I have seen of him). And my issue with the Batting order was in total context --sending first Shukla and then Hodge was just wrong thinking because that relegated a top order bat to no 5.

Most of the other points, we agree more or less with only marginal differences, if any.

[keep-it-cool]

The respective T20 stats (all first class)

Ganguly :: Matches - 34 :: Average - 25.8 :: SR - 110.6 :: Centuries - 0 :: Fifties - 4

Hodge :: Matches - 59 :: Average - 41.0 :: SR - 133.8 :: Centuries - 1 :: Fifties - 14

I wonder why Hodge does not bowl ...he seems to have a decent bowling record as well.