…
I’m a sucker, I knew this would happen, but I allowed it to anyway.
John started it, always questioning my disdain, then yesterday some guy who questioned “whether my mother had slept with him” tried to fire me up, still I stayed removed.
Then I woke up this morning and Soulberry and Big Daddy were on about it, and finally I cracked.
This is a blog on Sourav Ganguly. This is probably the only in depth one I will put up here (i may go into it in my book Balls & Natalie Portman), so for all the Indians and non Indians who will disagree with me, you better put all your comments on this blog, cause I am so sick and tired of explaining my position on this man.
Firstly I don’t hate Sourav because he drew a series in Australia, or because he “gave back our own medicine”. Because I hated him well before that tour.
I don’t hate him cause I hate sub continental cricketers. Yuvraj and Kumar are my two favourite cricketers right now. And I don’t hate him cause he stuck it to the Australians with agression, cause I loved when Kumar and Freddy Flintoff did it.
I hate him for reasons beyond his control and for reasons he can very much control. The fact he can’t play short bowling, the fact he is mentioned in the same sentence as Kumble, Dravid and Tendulkar, the fact that for all the talk about him he won jack sh1t as captain. The fact he is talked about as a captain and not as an elitist, which is what he is. I hate the fact he is still grabbing at his career, even though India have Yuvraj Singh waiting to go. The fact he has a website that says he’s an amazing captain. The fact that he treated his county cricket team mates as servants, and that he rides in Limo’s while team mates ride in buses.
His Indian supporters talk about how he brought the team together, but he did this by elevating himself above everyone else, something that is not justified by his skill as a batsmen or a captain. It seemed to stem from the fact he has always thought he was better than everyone, even when common sense and logic proved otherwise.
As a captain, he was uninspired on the field, he didn’t come up with any Arjuna or Taylor style tactics that won games. His captaincy style was basic, at best. He lost the 2003 world cup final at the toss, and his side were humiliated by an Australian side than had limped to victory in their last two games against Sri Lanka and Kenya.
His major claim is the 2003 tour that India drew with Australia. Warne & McGrath did not play. Lee played two tests, one in which he injured himself. That test series had very little to do with captaincy. It was about flat wickets, and the fact India had a great batting line up and Australia had the worst bowling attack it has probably had since world series cricket days.
Dravid batted as well as any touring batsmen I’ve seen that series, and there was no way a half fit Jason Gillespie was going to get him out. Add to that, Tendulkar, Sehwag, Laxman and even Ganguly got a hundred in Brisbane. Australia was lucky to get a draw from that series, but that had nothing to do with the captaincy.
The one major captaincy decision in the whole series, was the one he got wrong, allowing his batsmen to prod along to over 700 in Sydney. Effectively allowing Australia to always have the luxury of, if we can’t make the runs, we can always draw the match and save the series, which is exactly what happened.
Indian supporters always say to me, well Ganguly almost beat Australia at home, no one else has done that of recent times.
This is not true.
New Zealand drew the 2001 tour of Australia. They went within 3 wickets of winning it at the Waca, With Warne, McGrath & Lee playing. Stephen Fleming had about one third the amount of talent in his team that Ganguly had. Like Ganguly their were things that went his way, like rain, but regardless of that, on the final afternoon of the series had they got Gilchrist out they would have won against a full strength Australian side.
Of his 15 test centuries, 12 of them have been in draws. 2 of the 3 centuries what have come in winning sides are against Zimbabwe. To me that says a lot about him as a batsman.
Until the Greg Chappell experiment (don’t get me started on his credentials as a coach) Ganguly had mostly kept his place in the side even though he averages low 40’s. While during his career, Kambli, Laxman and Sehwag have all been dropped.
There are things I like about him, he is an aggressive dude, I like that, he bowls more than handy medium pace, I like that. But these are not things that mean he should be put up on pedestal, he is an averagely talented cricketer who has been lucky to play at this level for more than 3 or 4 years. I put him on the same level as Jimmy Adams or Graeme Hick. I can’t think of a single time he was in the best 20 cricketers in the world.
The main reason I hate Ganguly is I believe India deserve better. They are the most talented cricketing nation on earth, and yet somehow they cannot provide great captains. Ganguly comes along and really does very little and gets thought of as the Messiah. Why hold this man up the clouds because his record is better than other captains.
Had Bedi, Dev, or Sunny had Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman, Sehwag and Kumble in their team, they would have had a far superior record to Ganguly.
Anil Kumble has toiled for years, he is probably, pound for pound, the second best bowler India has ever had, and yet because he is soft spoken and doesn’t pump up his own tyres, he had to wait until he was older than Yoda to captain the side. Ganguly is not one third the cricketer, and one eighth the man Anil Kumble is. And don’t give me rubbish about the fact bowlers can’t captain, because Imran and Dev proved that wrong.
If the Indian team were a boy band, Ganguly would be the ugly one that couldn’t sing, but who always hogged the mike at press conferences. While the other guys provided the talent and magic.
Since you were writing such a long post, you could have told us your opinions on his ODI record as well.
Uncle J, you compared Ganguly to Kambli, now thats comparing orange to apples. Kambli was never a real Test batsman, he feasted upon Zimbabwean and England attack of 1993 which included DeFritas, Jarvis, Lewis and Emburey. None of reasons you mentioned are convincing enough to believe Ganguly is a lesser batsman than the ones you mentioned. Average of 44 isnt bad in cricket, given that so many Aussies too have it, but yet they are called greats (Langer, Junior, Gilly etc etc in 40s)……I would consider his contribution as a batsman and as a captain to judge his greatness. and if u understand indian cricket in late 90s and now, then the man is an indeed great.its tough for an Aussie to understand Indian cricket. Chappell tried it, burned his hands , you too not getting it, though i m sure you not eyeing any coaching job in India…..And for sure SG is better batsman than Kumar Sangakara who has got 4 of 6 double centuries against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.
John, I agree I could have gone into his one dayers, but i was a bit hung over, and one dayers bore me. Sam, i wasn’t trying to convince you, i was merely giving my opinion. As i would give you my opinion that Kumar is 4 times the batsmen that Ganguly is. Oh and by the way Langer was not a great cricketer, and i never said he was. As for Gilly and Junior, they both made hundreds when Australia won tests, which is what batsmen are supposed to do. How many times has Ganguly done that against real test nations? Once.
while there are merits in some of your points but you will have to agree that even before him we had greats who were duds overseas (result wise)…we were called soft tourists…lions at home…and it can not be this simplistic that he just happened to be there…he definitely brought some aggressions in to team and some of the players who went on to have good careers were fought and picked by him…this man has written his own script ,though note being as talented as his colleagues, through his grit…and lets give him this credit…
“leaders, not necessarily are the fittest and strongest of lot”
SP, I definitely give him credit, look at his career compared to adams or hick, and they are both as talented as he was. And I even agree with you when it comes to leaders, Taylor and Ranatunga are perfect examples, but they both won major tournaments. Ganguly has not.
True story:When India toured NZ just before the 2003 World Cup they played an ODi in Napier. A nice place but an outpost all the same.Prince Surav was horrified by this, and arranged for a limo to carry him (and family) from the airport to the hotel while the rest of the team (inc such no-names as Tendulkar, Kumble, John Wright etc) caught the bus.The length of the journey?About 5 minutes; 6 if there was a jam in the airport car-park.
uncle…if winning world cup is only criteria of great captaincy and leadership than i am sure, you would come up with more names than me who are considered great captains…
who have not won a major or minor cups…i.e.
SP, the list of great captains in world cricket is a very small one. The list of great players in world cricket is a very small one.
Uncle, I understand your views. E verybody has one and we only exchange each other’s. I can understand that’s how it appears to those who look from without. That’s what I mentioned in my comments. I think that’s fair…one doesn’t expect those unfamiliar with things here to be able to grasp it straightaway. What Saurav managed to do is quite abstract and Indians sense it and its importance. He may have had support of the then BCCI prez…but we know now that it wasn’t always so.He didn’t use the said closeness to power to institutionalize nepotism but he went around the country picking the best players of the day. He may have been the least shrewd of all captains ever, he may have been the worst cricketer ever to have don national colours, but what he did for the Indian team cannot be guaged in these terms.Films, cricket, music…these are some things that are seen with a national identity in India, which is otherwise deeply fragmented by fissures of anyone’s imagination. Cricket too was similar…during Ganguly’s tenure, he was able to erase some of these long-standing fissures…Ask any Indian, 80% will tell you he’s the best…ask them why? They’ll try and find the words to express it. As far as the 20% is concerned…that makes the 80 more credible.
Messiah, he isn’t, Uncle…true or false. He was just a guy entrusted with a job and he did it way better than one expected.Never a saint…legbreak..you have had your own experiences…perhaps the devil to some, but for many he was simply a person who did his job of building a team sincerely and with passion.
You can at least like for not being a probot.Cheers
You can at least like him for not being a probot.Dinnie, typo queen
I remember when Ganguly was selected for the England tour in ’95, there was a lot of acrimony over it among the Indian media and fans. Who the heck was Ganguly, they asked. On the tour, he struck a century on debut.That’s the kind of man he is.P.S. I am very excited about India’s upcoming tour of Australia, and I have started blogging fervently on that topic. Feel free to stop by sometime. :)http://clean-bowled.blogspot.com
Sb, i know what your saying, but you have to look at him in context with world cricket and not from an indian standpoint. And as for 80% of peoploe saying he’s the best, ive never trusted the thoughts of the majority, these are the same people that said, the earth was flat, god controls all and that watch reality tv.
My comments on Saurav were always purely from an Indian viewpoint. I think it is bit of a bother to scroll through all of them everywhere, but if it is done, you’d know what I’m saying is true.As far as his intenational stature is concerned, he hasn’t been any worse than any international captain in recent times. If Mahela could lead his team to the WC finals, Saurav did so more convincingly.Of course, the Australian team is at a different level.The fruits of Saurav’s vision and efforts are seen today – India no longer steps out to tour just to be nice gentlemen tourists…they actually are looking to win the series irrespective of whether they actually do or not.Not sure Arjuna or any Sri Lankan other than Duleep Mendis, ever came over to India believing they could win a series. The last time any English captain came to these shores believing he could win must have been 1984. The Saffers do believe they can win some on tour anywhere and so do the Australians…barring them, who else, which team, stepped out on tour firm in their commitment to win? Internatinally, so Saurav brought India at least on par with most teams from a situation where they never believed they could win on tour…leave alone overseas, even in neighbouring sub-continental Pakistan! Today if things are different, the kids playing the game are thinking differently, it is because of the spirit Saurav brought to Indian cricket and implemented with the likes of Tendulkar, Dravid, Kumble,Sehwag,Srinath and so on.He changed the way an Indian captain viewed cricket abroad forever. If this contribution to a regular cricket playing team doesn’t count…the transformation of character of a regular cricketing nation doesn’t mater…I see no worth if Ashraful does something for Bangladesh, Arjuna for Lanka, or for that matt er, even the hold Sir Don created over England for Australia!The point is people do different things in their own individual ways…Sir Don did so with his individual brilliance, like Lara did for a while for WI. Some do with their bowling, some do with their leadership skills and a few, like Ricky Ponting, do with all of those, including fielding skills.I am not for a moment comparing Saurav to Sir Don…please do not jump to that conclusion, it is to illustrate what players have done for their countriues through the skills they possessed. Naturally, since they play on an international stage, any such effort is bount to create ripples on that stage as well. The degree of which can vary and is influenced by many factors which could be a topic for a regular post (too long it will be for a reply).The argument against majority is just for well…argument. You know what I meant there pretty well. Same goes for the views on the universe, which we know today is not what it was five years ago….forget about medieval times or before.I respect your views UJR…they are yours and it is not my intention to force any change in them. But I’m amused to read that an influence of a captain on his team is a local Indian phenomenon when the team is actually competing with every other from around the globe.
Sb, what i mean by looking at it from an indian point of view is that world wide Sourav hasn’t really made much of a splash. If you look at cricket on a whole, he didn’t beat anyone.The four series he won away from home are bangladesh twice, zimbabwe and pakistan. He may have drawn series in england and australia, but he didn’t win them. So in a world sense he beat pakistan away from home and kept India’s great home record in tact. Statistically he is the best indian captain ever, but i would argue that if you captained that side your record would be similar. Maybe even better. India is a massive under achiever in cricket, they always have been. You say sourav got his team to the final more convincingly than Mahela did. Difference was that Australia in 2003 were not playing well, they almost lost to new zealand, england and pakistan, they sturggled against kenya and then rain may have helped them against sri lanka. When they got to the final they killed india. Slaughtered them. Mahela’s team played Australia when they completely dominated the world cup and still got closer to winning than India.You say he brought a winning mentality to India, but i still don’t see it. In Sydney it was the cautious approach that cost you the series. Even in India Kumble was defensive when he could have attacked. What i see is a man who was backed by a good team that started winning. The one thing he has done is stand up for himself. but that alone does not make a captain. Isn’t this fun Soul…
You have extrapolated your bias and chosen stats to justify them retroactively. Fair enough. You hate Sourav Ganguly. So do many (most) of the Aussie and British press. Wonder why though…As for the Captain Snooty canard, that has been too thoroughly discredited by subsequent unbiased reports, at least in India. Of course the western journos/bloggers continue to believe the stories. All the limo rides talk and the “refuses to carry kit bags” talk was just the product of a fertile western journo’s brain who had probably been denied an interview by Ganguly.As for his cricketing abilities, I guess you have to be Indian to really envisage his contribution to cricket in the country. He changed a culture and very, very few people can claim to have done that practically singlehandedly in any field, let along cricket. I really don’t expect you to understand.The mental strength of the man is amazing. Even when he was chucked out of the team after the fight with Greg, and when NO ONE ever thought he would make a comeback, he never allowed his self belief to waver. He knew in his mind he would be back and he proved to everyone that he was far from finished as a cricketer. And what a comeback it was, His return is being now regularly described in terms like “fairytale” by the same journalists who had written his epitaphs. His story of one of undaunted courage in the face of extreme adversity, again and again and again.But of course you dislike him, and that is your prerogative. There are lots of cricketers I hate, some for subjective, illogical reason as well, just like you do Ganguly. One example would be Shane Warne who always came a cropper against India and whose personal life was far worse than wanting to travel in a limo. However, I still respect some bits of him as a cricketer and for his mental strength on the field. I just wish you could see that aspect of Sourav Ganguly. But it’s your blog and you are entitled to your biases.PS: Sourav was the best cricketer in the world in ODIs for almost two years at one time. Right now he is in the top 20 test players list as well.
Oh, and as far as Indian and Australia is concerned, read this:http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/columns/content/current/story/326631.html
Shan, Saying my reasons are illogical is a bit harsh. It’s not like this is just a rant, i even said parts of him i like. I read that article you linked to. it lists the best 10 batsmen against Australia since 2000, 4 Indians, no Ganguly. And remember, there are no facts, only opinions.
Hi,It is understandable why Ganguly is revered in Indian cricket and not by outsiders. His contribution cannot be measured by stats alone. To understand this phenomenon, one needs to understand the History of Indian cricket. I’ll call it BG(Before Ganguly) and G (during Ganguly’s reign)During the BG phase, Indian cricket suffered from severe Intra Regional Bias, insecurity of senior players and an inferior complex in front of white skins.Regional bias – Regional politics had a big say in the Indian team. While Mumbai used to be powerful early on the tables turned during the later phase. Selection into the Indian team was not based on peformance alone but it also depended on how strong the respective board was. Likewise many successful domestic players never got selected in the Indian team. Kapil promoting Chetan Sharma. Gavaskar promoting Shastri and other players from his region. There is a famous incident when Raju Kulkarni, a fast bowler from Mumbai was selected in the Indian team. Kapil ensured that he never played for India after a few matches.Insecurity of Senior players – There was no concept of resting players. Established players would never take a break even if the series was one for the newcomers to get a feel. There was insecurity that the new guy would replace him. There was no concept of nurturing players. Each man for himself.Inferiority complex – While Indians within India are extremely racist, they had a sever inferiority complex when it came to foreigners and would cry like a baby whenever some White guy would say a word.The G period.Mr.Snooty Ganguly didnt care a damn, he broke all regional barriers and promoted players from any state if they were good. eg. Zaheer, Yuvraj, Sehwag, to name a few. He was very good at nurturing new players and absorbing them within the setup.Insecurity – Apart from himself, he made sure that everybody got a chance. During his reign senior players too realised that he’s not playing games and everybody gets a chance. This is the first time Indians started playing as a team and not as individuals. he gave the team a go.Inferiority complex – The snootiness and the bloated sense of superiority complex actually helped. He didnt give 2 hoots to the Aussies and English and gave it back. This helped the Indians get rid of the inferiority complex and get aggressive.I also agree that tactically he was quite ordinary. While stats may show him to be an ordinary leader, it’s what he has done to the Indian mindset and the culture that he has brought in, that makes him truly a great leader. The culture of the present Indian team is mainly due to the wave of change brought in by Ganguly’s snootiness. Also remember, that Ganguly inherited the team after it was ravaged by the match fixing controversy. That’s what makes Ganguly a great captain in the Indian mindset.
Uncle
One thing you dont understand is that before ganguly came along, the Indian people were sodomised by the likes of Azzurdin, Jadeja and evn Dev & Gavaskar. The national sport sold to the highest bidding bookie and a nation betrayed. Most of them were also “Yes sir” men and bowing to the colonial powers at every opportunity…..they were basically arse lickers.
Yea Kapil won the world cup, you may wel be aware that match fixing rumours extend to that far back….so I dont give him that much credance.
Ganguly changed all of that. He bowed to nobody, he taught his team not to bend to anyone. He brought about loyalty within his ranks and a pride in playing for the country. He has a huge heart and we all saw that in his hundred at Brisbane. He was having a torrid time off the field and facing hostile bowling on a fast track…and he scored a hundred.
What ever you say about him and his extravagance, I once saw him walking out of the Leicestershire ground, in his playing kit, with a bag over his hsoulder, walking up the road, without any fuss and looking just like a guy who had just finished playing in the park, and nobody even noticed him.
My nephew (about 9 at the time) stopped him for an autograph. They guy not only signed it but took time to speak to him. A moment later, a crowd started gathering and harrassing him, his attitude changed and he just walked straight on up the street without signing another autograph. I dont blame him for his attitude.
From what I understand, the guys that played for him all worshipped him. I dont see the likes of Yuvraj and Harbhajan being arse lickers to anyone. It was genuine admiration.
Sometimes, it is just a means to an end.
I realise this post is a few years too late, but then i just saw it, and the Ganguly paradox has always bugged me.
I always thought he was overrated as a batsman, and should never have been in the same category as Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman. People got excited with his “exquisite touch” outside the off stump, but hey, if you never bother to try and figure out how to play the pull shot, you are always going to be a limited batsman.
Rating his captaincy is much harder. First and foremost, he was one of the luckiest captains. His captaincy coincided with Dravid’s rise (the real architect of India’s overseas competitiveness, in my opinion), Sachin’s return to form after his captaincy tenure, Laxman’s dogged and genius attempts to stay in the team, Sehwag’s, Harbhajan’s, Yuvraj’s and Zaheer’s debuts, and the sensible and professional coaching of John Wright. The “sense of belief” that he apparently instilled in the team was, i think, more the result of that amazing Kolkata test, and the Indian tour of New Zealand. Anyone would have done well with that bunch of players coming through at the same time.
Having said that, Ganguly did have the good sense to realize his luck and shepherd this team. The concept of the “team” is not new to most, but in India we had problems of match fixing, regionalism, favoritism, administrative apathy, a collective lack of ambition, to name a few. Ganguly was the first captain to say – “hey we have a great team. Lets see what we can do with it”. He was the face of the team – to the BCCI, the selectors, the press, opposing captains, you name it. For example, he did something unheard of in Indian cricket those days – he courted disfavor with the board and insisted that Harbhajan and Yuvraj, then still youngsters and going through lean phases, stay in the team. A few years earlier, one of these two may have been sacked to make way for someone from another part of the country.
This is not new in a professional sports set up, but it was new in India at the time. And Im sure someone like Kumble could have done it, probably done it much better. But though credit can be taken away from Ganguly because he was in the right place at the right time, he cant be faulted for making the most of that opportunity.
Therein lay the charm of Ganguly – for being as arrogant a prick as he was, he was a team man. And for all his limited talent, you could sense how he punched above his weight as a batsman at crucial moments – the timing of that century at Brisbane at the start of the 2003 tour was immense. India were at the home of the best team in the world, on a bouncy track, with a reputation for folding on such tracks. His century came in the face of huge amounts of national baggage, and his own limited talents. Similar too is the century against Kenya in the semi final of the 2003 world cup – sure it was Kenya, but it was a moment when so much could have gone wrong, and he made sure it didn’t.
There is much to dislike about the man, and he’s definitely not the messiah that some regard him to be, but he presided over the beginnings of a cricketing revolution in India, and presided over it well.