Print

[Total Members Voted:]

Yes

13 (28.3%)

No

30 (65.2%)

Not Sure

3 (6.5%)

Total Members Voted: 44

Voting closed: May 30, 2006, 04:07:08 AM

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

[pieterSAN]

This poll asks you to decide whether Ganguly being dumped from the Indian team permanently would be fair. He did not work on his game and performed sub-par for about 18 months. Does this mean that he should never be back in the Indian team? Or is that too harsh a punishment?

I urge you to consider two things

- The fact the gave well below his best when he was captain.
- The harshness of the punishment (compare with match-fixers and dopers).

and not to think of how useful his contributions may be in either form of the game.

[fineleg]

This is being made too dramatic - there is NO "harsh" "punishment" given to SG by "dumping" him etc.
Its a question of who comprises the 15 and who comprises the 11 based on form/technique etc.

And is this below stmt a typo or do u actually mean it:
" not to think of how useful his contributions may be in either form of the game."

Why should we  not think of how useful his contributions may be in either form of the game?

Infact, that is the main thing we should think abt before we can decide on whether he can make it to the squad or not!?

[kban1]

jiet,

Its a very appropriate topic at this point in time.

he made a lot of mistakes in the past regarding his game. But when does the atonement end ? or does it not end at all ?

So the questions are very pertinent --applause

my 2 cents: I would rather he perform or perish by his bat rather than he be kept out for eternity just because.

[kubukde]

Pros
- Gutsy player who plays from the heart
- Great to watch when he gets going
- Good captaincy record

Cons
- Poor fielder
- Quite the prima donna
- [How about his 'form', 'match exposure' et al.]
- He is not getting any younger

Other
- With so many youngsters, experienced hands can help settle them quickly
- Will it take attention away from Team India to the SG-RD-GC relationships?

On balance, with ST injured, giving SG another chance is worth it.
May be this time he will act his age and we can give him a better 'farewell'

[pieterSAN]

kban,

Thanks and I personally voted "No". I feel that there have been greater mistakes commited by cricketers that have been unnoticed.

[pieterSAN]

fineleg and kub

I wanted the emphasis to be placed on his past mistakes and the seriousness of the mistakes. I think Ganguly made some very, very stupid choices and he has had to pay for them. But he should not pay for them with his career in my opinion.

Please re-read the first post if the point is not clear.

[ramshorns]

Here is my take on SG.

1) Over the last 2 years at the helm he neglected by not working on his game like he should have.  The reasons.  He definitely had the teams interests in mind when he promoted the likes of Sehwag and encouraged and helped the likes of Yuvraj and Kaif through the ranks. 

2) Due to 1 he fell off the charts as a batsman and after the change of the regime fell out of favor as well.  Again he is partly to blame for that fiasco with GC.  Add to that his woeful form he was in.

3) Now he is in a perfect position as a player.  No limelight kind off rode off into the sunset.  All he has to do now is re-invent himself.  By that I mean he need to score runs by the tons for Northamptonshire.  Also come back and do the same in domestics.

4) That puts the onus squarely back on the team management's/selectors shoulders.  Then it becomes a pressing case rather than a borderline one which it is now IMO.

5) I think if he can do 3 well, I think we have not seen the last of SG.  If 3 for some reason does not happen then good luck to SG to represent India again.  It will be awfully tough.

Either way Goodluck to Sourav in England.

[fineleg]

i voted not-sure, since it depends on sg's form.

[kubukde]

fineleg and kub

I wanted the emphasis to be placed on his past mistakes and the seriousness of the mistakes. I think Ganguly made some very, very stupid choices and he has had to pay for them. But he should not pay for them with his career in my opinion.

Please re-read the first post if the point is not clear.

You ask three questions, so it is not quite clear to me.  Anyway, to me, the bottomline, is it useful to have SG back from Team India's point of view?  I do not really care about SG as a person or how fair he is/was treated, given the prima donna that he was.

'Is it fair to Ganguly should he never be selected for India again?'
Life is never fair.  Many who have the ability did not get the chances SG did.  Given his famous disdainfulness, I'd say it is not unfair if SG is not given another opportunity despite what he may be able to offer to the team now.

'He did not work on his game and performed sub-par for about 18 months. Does this mean that he should never be back in the Indian team?'
No.  He is raring to go, wants to prove that he belongs again (the lack of captaincy burden may be helpful here) and wants to put his mistakes behind him, or at least seems to on all counts.  His experience would be useful, too.  And who knows he may even field better and be a better soldier this time, now that he is not leading it.

Or is that too harsh a punishment?
Punishment?  Well, he got what he deserved from a behavioral point of view.  But, question to me is, would he be useful for another 1-2 years.  May be so.

[C'mon boys, let the smite count rip.  It was 3/-2 to begin with.  I'd like to know how childish this board is.  Not that I care.]

[dextrous]

[C'mon boys, let the smite count rip.  It was 3/-2 to begin with.  I'd like to know how childish this board is.  Not that I care.]

That is quite funny 

[keep-it-cool]

Here is my take on SG.

1) Over the last 2 years at the helm he neglected by not working on his game like he should have.  The reasons.  He definitely had the teams interests in mind when he promoted the likes of Sehwag and encouraged and helped the likes of Yuvraj and Kaif through the ranks. 

2) Due to 1 he fell off the charts as a batsman and after the change of the regime fell out of favor as well.  Again he is partly to blame for that fiasco with GC.  Add to that his woeful form he was in.

3) Now he is in a perfect position as a player.  No limelight kind off rode off into the sunset.  All he has to do now is re-invent himself.  By that I mean he need to score runs by the tons for Northamptonshire.  Also come back and do the same in domestics.

4) That puts the onus squarely back on the team management's/selectors shoulders.  Then it becomes a pressing case rather than a borderline one which it is now IMO.

5) I think if he can do 3 well, I think we have not seen the last of SG.  If 3 for some reason does not happen then good luck to SG to represent India again.  It will be awfully tough.

Either way Goodluck to Sourav in England.

This is well put Rams. Applause.

[ramshorns]

Thanks K-I-C.

[keep-it-cool]

This poll asks you to decide whether Ganguly being dumped from the Indian team permanently would be fair. He did not work on his game and performed sub-par for about 18 months. Does this mean that he should never be back in the Indian team? Or is that too harsh a punishment?

I urge you to consider two things

- The fact the gave well below his best when he was captain.
- The harshness of the punishment (compare with match-fixers and dopers).

and not to think of how useful his contributions may be in either form of the game.

Jiet,

On the basis of what he has done in the past, he should not be disbarred from being in contention for a place the team ... i.e. he should be eligible for selection. I assume that is what you are aiming to figure out rather than whether SG should be selected. If that is the question, then obviously the answer is NO.

But whether he should be selected or not does depend on
a) his usefulness to the team in either or both forms of the game
b) is he or is he likely to be (in the near future) more useful than the other contenders in whatever role he can perform
That is something that cannot be kept aside. I assume you did not want to go there coz it is a debate that we've had endlessly. And I believe you deserve 10 applauds for that - unfortunately can give you only one ..

[sudzz]

I have read a lot of posts on this issue here in this thread and in general all over the website. Everyone seems to agree that SG comitted a lot of sin of omissions and commissions in the past.

I would like to draw your attention to one basic issue, that of not forsaking the teams interest at any point in time. He may have promoted a player or two or even deprived a player or two but never did he do things that were anti team (other than not playing at Nagpur on a green top).

Compare to him a certain captain right now who seems to be mouthing platitudes about building a team for the future getting youngsters involved early etc. This guy walked away fromt the team on issues of pay seniority etc and when he played he avowedly played for his own records. The played in question is BC Lara.

If he can be given a second, third, fourth chance giving SG another go is by no means a great thing. More importantly our much vaunted youth policy has revealed that while talent exsits temprament is something that will take time to develop and we still need a solid experienced player in the middle order. With SRT out of actions there is no better than choice than SG.

[arjun]

The whole debate is a waste of time. It is plain as daylight that cricketing acumen has had nothing to do with Ganguly's ouster. If and when he comes back, that would also be for non-cricketing reasons. His scoring runs by the ton in the domestics or the county cricket would count for zilch in this context. End of debate.

[CLR James]

fineleg and kub

I wanted the emphasis to be placed on his past mistakes and the seriousness of the mistakes. I think Ganguly made some very, very stupid choices and he has had to pay for them. But he should not pay for them with his career in my opinion.

Please re-read the first post if the point is not clear.

You ask three questions, so it is not quite clear to me.  Anyway, to me, the bottomline, is it useful to have SG back from Team India's point of view?  I do not really care about SG as a person or how fair he is/was treated, given the prima donna that he was.

'Is it fair to Ganguly should he never be selected for India again?'
Life is never fair.  Many who have the ability did not get the chances SG did.  Given his famous disdainfulness, I'd say it is not unfair if SG is not given another opportunity despite what he may be able to offer to the team now.

'He did not work on his game and performed sub-par for about 18 months. Does this mean that he should never be back in the Indian team?'
No.  He is raring to go, wants to prove that he belongs again (the lack of captaincy burden may be helpful here) and wants to put his mistakes behind him, or at least seems to on all counts.  His experience would be useful, too.  And who knows he may even field better and be a better soldier this time, now that he is not leading it.

Or is that too harsh a punishment?
Punishment?  Well, he got what he deserved from a behavioral point of view.  But, question to me is, would he be useful for another 1-2 years.  May be so.

[C'mon boys, let the smite count rip.  It was 3/-2 to begin with.  I'd like to know how childish this board is.  Not that I care.]

Dear K,

You seem to find all the non-cricketing reasons to address this issue -- disdainfulness, prima donna, bad behavior etc. Interestingly, it is upstarts like Flintoff and 'gentlemen' like Waugh who have had a taste of the famous Princiness. It goes without saying that the Aussies especially, were irked enough to let it affect their game. As I am sure you will agree, this so called nawabi attitude did not have too much of an adverse effect on the Indian team. On the contrary, seniors like RD, SRT, and Kumble played out of their skins. Juniors like HS, YS, VS, flowered and gained confidence because they were backed to the hilt. And then there was that small matter of winning 21 test matches and reaching the finals of the 2003 WC.

I was wondering if you, along with platitudes like "life is never fair", would bring in more cricketing reasons to address the topic. The only one you did was actually pro-Ganguly. The thing is, SG, or for  that matter other 'bad boy' cricketers like Ian Botham, Imran Khan, Viv Richards, Ricky Ponting, Flintoff...whoever, do not really need a character certificate from you, me, or their high school principle to make it to the side. They play, rule, and then fade away according to their cricketing abilities. It seems only highly principled, humorless person like you would speak of a "behavorial point of view" above everything else.

BTW, I did not smite you. I am sure Dex or kban can vouch for that. And pray, save your penetrating intelligence, high homilies, and patronizing attitudes for things other than this "Childish board". Here we disagree with each other, but have a stimulating discussion in the process, much richer than most of the garbage I read in the papers. 

[MockTurtle]

well said, CLR. applause for you.

[CLR James]

Thanks Mock!

[kubukde]

fineleg and kub

I wanted the emphasis to be placed on his past mistakes and the seriousness of the mistakes. I think Ganguly made some very, very stupid choices and he has had to pay for them. But he should not pay for them with his career in my opinion.

Please re-read the first post if the point is not clear.

You ask three questions, so it is not quite clear to me.  Anyway, to me, the bottomline, is it useful to have SG back from Team India's point of view?  I do not really care about SG as a person or how fair he is/was treated, given the prima donna that he was.

'Is it fair to Ganguly should he never be selected for India again?'
Life is never fair.  Many who have the ability did not get the chances SG did.  Given his famous disdainfulness, I'd say it is not unfair if SG is not given another opportunity despite what he may be able to offer to the team now.

'He did not work on his game and performed sub-par for about 18 months. Does this mean that he should never be back in the Indian team?'
No.  He is raring to go, wants to prove that he belongs again (the lack of captaincy burden may be helpful here) and wants to put his mistakes behind him, or at least seems to on all counts.  His experience would be useful, too.  And who knows he may even field better and be a better soldier this time, now that he is not leading it.

Or is that too harsh a punishment?
Punishment?  Well, he got what he deserved from a behavioral point of view.  But, question to me is, would he be useful for another 1-2 years.  May be so.

[C'mon boys, let the smite count rip.  It was 3/-2 to begin with.  I'd like to know how childish this board is.  Not that I care.]

Dear K,

You seem to find all the non-cricketing reasons to address this issue -- disdainfulness, prima donna, bad behavior etc. Interestingly, it is upstarts like Flintoff and 'gentlemen' like Waugh who have had a taste of the famous Princiness. It goes without saying that the Aussies especially, were irked enough to let it affect their game. As I am sure you will agree, this so called nawabi attitude did not have too much of an adverse effect on the Indian team. On the contrary, seniors like RD, SRT, and Kumble played out of their skins. Juniors like HS, YS, VS, flowered and gained confidence because they were backed to the hilt. And then there was that small matter of winning 21 test matches and reaching the finals of the 2003 WC.

I was wondering if you, along with platitudes like "life is never fair", would bring in more cricketing reasons to address the topic. The only one you did was actually pro-Ganguly. The thing is, SG, or for  that matter other 'bad boy' cricketers like Ian Botham, Imran Khan, Viv Richards, Ricky Ponting, Flintoff...whoever, do not really need a character certificate from you, me, or their high school principle to make it to the side. They play, rule, and then fade away according to their cricketing abilities. It seems only highly principled, humorless person like you would speak of a "behavorial point of view" above everything else.

BTW, I did not smite you. I am sure Dex or kban can vouch for that. And pray, save your penetrating intelligence, high homilies, and patronizing attitudes for things other than this "Childish board". Here we disagree with each other, but have a stimulating discussion in the process, much richer than most of the garbage I read in the papers. 

Yo,

Woke up on the wrong side of the bed again?  The question was 'Is it fair to Ganguly should he never be selected for India again?', which imo is a non-cricketing question.  You're welcome to your opinion, as am I, no?  If you love SG and can't stand others putting him down with their opinions, stay out of it.  Htf do you know read so much that I did not write.  Read what was written.  And get a life.

[CLR James]

Right, the question of 'fairness' in selection can of course be decided on non-cricketing grounds. Maybe it can be settled through SG's Karma and his astrology chart.

[CLR James]

And besides, who, pray are you sir, to call this board 'childish' and tell me to keep out of things? But I must admit that I cannot figure out this sentence of yours "Htf do you know read so much that I did not write." I will get a life, as you advise, but perhaps you should get a language before that?

[kubukde]

You are illustrating what it means to [be] childish.

[pieterSAN]

CLR,

Ganguly as the captain of India had the responsibility leading the side and taking care of his game. He clearly neglected his duties as an player of the Indian Team. Some may argue that he set a poor example for youngsters in the side. My question - Has he has done his time for these mistakes? Some think he has and others feel he has not.

[kban1]

calm down guys

[kubukde]

Since you obviously can't stand criticism of your beloved SG, here is more.  Keep your BP in check.


[Nov 2005]
Those who revel when the crowd deifies them should not whine when the adulation turns to dislike. Those who live by sword deserve to be cut by it. Ganguly has instigated the crowd to behave like a mob more than once. Now, he may know what it is to suffer its wrath. To top it off, some of his personal qualities make him justifiably worthy of being trashed: a princely disregard for others and an unctuous desire to hold on even as he became a liability. Had he stepped off quietly and/or had chosen to prove his worthiness by staking a substantive claim, he would have won the admiration and gratitude of most everyone. Instead, the pampered 'prince' chose to commit the cardinal sin of making private discussions public, ultimately bringing Indian cricket to a critical impasse. Enough with the pampering. We need steely characters who make a sincere effort to be the best they can be instead of resting on yesteryear laurels. Being a poor fielder is one thing, being indifferent to fielding and practising is a cardinal sin, esp. since he was the Captain. And there is evidence that he is given to the sort of cronyism that is not unlike Indian politics. I laugh at those who make it seem like everyone is out to get him. What he is going through now he brought it upon himself for the most part.

[kban1]

Wow!!

Did you actually write that ?

[kubukde]

Wow!!

Did you actually write that ?

Elsewhere, in a different avatar.

Btw, I'm calm as can be.  But it is useful to know what pricks different folks.

[kban1]

Well written from a prose point of view.

I am pretty sure some of the assertions there might be hard to substantiate -- but its an opinion and you are entitled to it. Having said that I am sure, your opinion will have lot of takers and lot of dissenters --perhaps a topic for a different thread, simply because I do not wish to see this thread lose its purpose.

To that effect, may I request that you and CLR calm down ?

[back2grave]

Since you obviously can't stand criticism of your beloved SG, here is more.  Keep your BP in check.


[Nov 2005]
Those who revel when the crowd deifies them should not whine when the adulation turns to dislike. Those who live by sword deserve to be cut by it. Ganguly has instigated the crowd to behave like a mob more than once. Now, he may know what it is to suffer its wrath. To top it off, some of his personal qualities make him justifiably worthy of being trashed: a princely disregard for others and an unctuous desire to hold on even as he became a liability. Had he stepped off quietly and/or had chosen to prove his worthiness by staking a substantive claim, he would have won the admiration and gratitude of most everyone. Instead, the pampered 'prince' chose to commit the cardinal sin of making private discussions public, ultimately bringing Indian cricket to a critical impasse. Enough with the pampering. We need steely characters who make a sincere effort to be the best they can be instead of resting on yesteryear laurels. Being a poor fielder is one thing, being indifferent to fielding and practising is a cardinal sin, esp. since he was the Captain. And there is evidence that he is given to the sort of cronyism that is not unlike Indian politics. I laugh at those who make it seem like everyone is out to get him. What he is going through now he brought it upon himself for the most part.

Wat r u ? Son of Mike Selvey .....

[kubukde]

No.  I know who my initial comes from.

Are you?

[fineleg]

Well written from a prose point of view.

I am pretty sure some of the assertions there might be hard to substantiate -- but its an opinion and you are entitled to it. Having said that I am sure, your opinion will have lot of takers and lot of dissenters --perhaps a topic for a different thread, simply because I do not wish to see this thread lose its purpose.

To that effect, may I request that you and CLR calm down ?

[Nov 2005]
Those who revel when the crowd deifies them should not whine when the adulation turns to dislike. Those who live by sword deserve to be cut by it. Ganguly has instigated the crowd to behave like a mob more than once. Now, he may know what it is to suffer its wrath. To top it off, some of his personal qualities make him justifiably worthy of being trashed: a princely disregard for others and an unctuous desire to hold on even as he became a liability. Had he stepped off quietly and/or had chosen to prove his worthiness by staking a substantive claim, he would have won the admiration and gratitude of most everyone. Instead, the pampered 'prince' chose to commit the cardinal sin of making private discussions public, ultimately bringing Indian cricket to a critical impasse. Enough with the pampering. We need steely characters who make a sincere effort to be the best they can be instead of resting on yesteryear laurels. Being a poor fielder is one thing, being indifferent to fielding and practising is a cardinal sin, esp. since he was the Captain. And there is evidence that he is given to the sort of cronyism that is not unlike Indian politics. I laugh at those who make it seem like everyone is out to get him. What he is going through now he brought it upon himself for the most part.

Well written kubukde. You make some good points.

[CLR James]

No.  I know who my initial comes from.

Are you?

OK, I need to clarify three things.

1. The discussion was not about whether SG was out of form or not. He evidently was. He deserved to be dropped. As to the next question, whether he should be picked again, we have discussed it a lot in this DG over the last few months.

2. What irritated me was kubukde's patronizing homilies about SG's character (we have traditionally picked players by form and class, not by their 'behavior'). Interestingly, when the going was good for SG, fair weather cocks would call his behavior 'aggression' whenever he took off his shirt. I am thus not interested in any metaphysical notion of fairness pertaining to how much of a 'good person' SG is. Much less in non-cricketing matters like 'admiration' and 'gratitude'. I am willing to talk about SG's fitness and fielding abilities, or the lack thereof. I will be the first one to concede that there were enough grounds to drop him and put him under the scanner.

3. Thirdly, I did not initiate the rudeness. Even before anyone responded to k's message, he piously stated that he expected to be smited by this 'childish' board. My blood pressure is absolutely fine, but my juvenile hormones are not working as well as kubukde's.

[bouncer]

Since you obviously can't stand criticism of your beloved SG, here is more.  Keep your BP in check.


[Nov 2005]
Those who revel when the crowd deifies them should not whine when the adulation turns to dislike. Those who live by sword deserve to be cut by it. Ganguly has instigated the crowd to behave like a mob more than once. Now, he may know what it is to suffer its wrath. To top it off, some of his personal qualities make him justifiably worthy of being trashed: a princely disregard for others and an unctuous desire to hold on even as he became a liability. Had he stepped off quietly and/or had chosen to prove his worthiness by staking a substantive claim, he would have won the admiration and gratitude of most everyone. Instead, the pampered 'prince' chose to commit the cardinal sin of making private discussions public, ultimately bringing Indian cricket to a critical impasse. Enough with the pampering. We need steely characters who make a sincere effort to be the best they can be instead of resting on yesteryear laurels. Being a poor fielder is one thing, being indifferent to fielding and practising is a cardinal sin, esp. since he was the Captain. And there is evidence that he is given to the sort of cronyism that is not unlike Indian politics. I laugh at those who make it seem like everyone is out to get him. What he is going through now he brought it upon himself for the most part.

A flowery post. But not sure how mcuh is based on facts. Well the claim about Jesus having appendicitis- may be the only one that comes close.

[dextrous]

The funniest one being..."Ganguly has instigated the crowd to behave like a mob more than once."

[kubukde]

No.  I know who my initial comes from.

Are you?

OK, I need to clarify three things.

1. The discussion was not about whether SG was out of form or not. He evidently was. He deserved to be dropped. As to the next question, whether he should be picked again, we have discussed it a lot in this DG over the last few months.

2. What irritated me was kubukde's patronizing homilies about SG's character (we have traditionally picked players by form and class, not by their 'behavior'). Interestingly, when the going was good for SG, fair weather cocks would call his behavior 'aggression' whenever he took off his shirt. I am thus not interested in any metaphysical notion of fairness pertaining to how much of a 'good person' SG is. Much less in non-cricketing matters like 'admiration' and 'gratitude'. I am willing to talk about SG's fitness and fielding abilities, or the lack thereof. I will be the first one to concede that there were enough grounds to drop him and put him under the scanner.

I was stating that, in my opinion, it would not be unfair to not pick SG because of, among other things, his behaviour.  What makes you think others should consult with you before stating *their* opinion?

3. Thirdly, I did not initiate the rudeness. Even before anyone responded to k's message, he piously stated that he expected to be smited by this 'childish' board.

Can [you] prove the second part of your statement?  About 10 minutes after I post Reply #3, I was smited twice I guess for stating a point of view that the smiters disagreed with.  So, I figured I'd rile them a little bit.  Apparently, I succeeded too well.

[kubukde]

Since you obviously can't stand criticism of your beloved SG, here is more.  Keep your BP in check.

[Nov 2005]
Those who revel when the crowd deifies them should not whine when the adulation turns to dislike. Those who live by sword deserve to be cut by it. Ganguly has instigated the crowd to behave like a mob more than once. Now, he may know what it is to suffer its wrath. To top it off, some of his personal qualities make him justifiably worthy of being trashed: a princely disregard for others and an unctuous desire to hold on even as he became a liability. Had he stepped off quietly and/or had chosen to prove his worthiness by staking a substantive claim, he would have won the admiration and gratitude of most everyone. Instead, the pampered 'prince' chose to commit the cardinal sin of making private discussions public, ultimately bringing Indian cricket to a critical impasse. Enough with the pampering. We need steely characters who make a sincere effort to be the best they can be instead of resting on yesteryear laurels. Being a poor fielder is one thing, being indifferent to fielding and practising is a cardinal sin, esp. since he was the Captain. And there is evidence that he is given to the sort of cronyism that is not unlike Indian politics. I laugh at those who make it seem like everyone is out to get him. What he is going through now he brought it upon himself for the most part.

A flowery post. But not sure how mcuh is based on facts. Well the claim about Jesus having appendicitis- may be the only one that comes close.

How about we simply agree to disagree and leave it at that..

[bouncer]

Since you obviously can't stand criticism of your beloved SG, here is more.  Keep your BP in check.

[Nov 2005]
Those who revel when the crowd deifies them should not whine when the adulation turns to dislike. Those who live by sword deserve to be cut by it. Ganguly has instigated the crowd to behave like a mob more than once. Now, he may know what it is to suffer its wrath. To top it off, some of his personal qualities make him justifiably worthy of being trashed: a princely disregard for others and an unctuous desire to hold on even as he became a liability. Had he stepped off quietly and/or had chosen to prove his worthiness by staking a substantive claim, he would have won the admiration and gratitude of most everyone. Instead, the pampered 'prince' chose to commit the cardinal sin of making private discussions public, ultimately bringing Indian cricket to a critical impasse. Enough with the pampering. We need steely characters who make a sincere effort to be the best they can be instead of resting on yesteryear laurels. Being a poor fielder is one thing, being indifferent to fielding and practising is a cardinal sin, esp. since he was the Captain. And there is evidence that he is given to the sort of cronyism that is not unlike Indian politics. I laugh at those who make it seem like everyone is out to get him. What he is going through now he brought it upon himself for the most part.

A flowery post. But not sure how mcuh is based on facts. Well the claim about Jesus having appendicitis- may be the only one that comes close.

How about we simply agree to disagree and leave it at that..

agree to disagree on what? that hypothesis/claims need to be verified by facts?

[kubukde]

Bite me.

[Shukla]

CLR, I have been a big fan of your writing since the PP blog days. I have always held your ability to put your ability of clear expression in high regard. But of late, i sense a certain sense of frustration creeping into your posts. It is understandable especially given the provocation of often  unreasonable arguments from the 'other side' (kubukde's post is a classic example) and a feeling of 'helpnesses' at being unable to prevent the seeming violation of justice with regards to SG. However, I sincerely hope that you are able to maintian the qaulity of your posts by your own high standards. This DG will benefit a lot from it.

[Blwe_torch]

The helplessness is about getting SG his rightful place in the team. If the current team mangement do not see reason, then there is nothing anyone else can do.....no performance from SG can get him back into the team.
Really, we posters can do precious little for SG at this point.
In this situation, it is rather easy to sound patronizing and 'principled' and comment on an ex-player's behaviour from a high moral ground.
Anyone can do this and we have to bear with it unfortunately.
I don't see CLR has said anything wrong. His frustrations may have arised from the collective unfairness of the sutuation, which is loaded against SG and one has to bear with all kind of nuisence.

There is a saying in hindi, 'jab haathi girta hai, tab kutta bhi usse laath maarta hai'!