dada vs dhoni

[The Outsider]

Forget about all the fighting spirit and other intangible qulaities for a sec,the only reason why the debate is always between dada and Dhoni is because of their accomplishments. The only other name that might sneak up in these debates once in a while is may be Kapil Dev. You might have your reasons to rathe the other 3....dravid especially for his overseas victories but at the end of the day it's overall accomplishments that matter. Now you might say Dhoni will be the clear winner if we just talk in terms of accomplishments,that is where the debate starts and we start measuring accomplishments+intangibles. So that is where Dhoni and Dada lead the pack,followed by others. Now I personally rate Kumble as a very under-rated captain,for the respect he commanded with all his team-mates and how most of them credit him in one way or and just the way he handled transition....Again not a lot to show for

You can't rate captains in terms of overall accomplishments - a captain can enhance or pull down the performance of a team by a few percentage points. Really, Ponting as the best captain world cricket has seen if we measure in terms of accomplishments? Even the most hardcore Ponting fans won't rate him above Border, Taylor, or Waugh as captain. Kumble is definitely underrated and was a very good captain - agree with you there. Now in terms of accomplishments he does not have much to show for, but for anyone who followed the '07-'08 tour to Australia and still say that Kumble was a poor captain would be surprising.

[Ram]

Your last line is always debatable - in any aspect of life' date=' if one makes a path he should get credit for making the path not for the fact that others led through the path. Ganguly was fantastic in terms of many things but to attribute success of Kumble, Dravid et al to Ganguly is being a bit arrogant. To put my point, Ganguly had a player like Dravid who averaged 102 under his 21 Test match wins. I don't think any other captain in the history of Test cricket has that statistic. So, I can extend your line of thinking and attribute Ganguly's success to Dravid but that would be quite naive. In summary, you get credit for what you do - not for what others have done even if you are the first one to do it.[/quote'] There's this famous saying - A lot guys have scaled the everest, but Sir Edmund Hillary is the most famous one of 'em all. Same with Roger Bannister and the 4 minute mile. The contrast b/w the Indian team of the 90s and 2000s was like the contrast b/w night and day. And this was no accident.

[The Outsider]

Not surprisingly' date=' your assessment of captains is unfairly weighted towards test cricket (not that Ganguly as a test captain was a shrinking violet either..). Ganguly and Dhoni have presided over two of the most successful eras in the history of Indian ODI cricket, only interrupted by the under-average time under Dravid, which was punctuated by an embarrassing first round exit in WC 2007. Look what we were able to do either side of that (in 03 and 11)[/quote'] Unfairly or fairly, I don't know but in making in cricketing judgment I tend to weigh test cricket much more than other forms. And to be frank I did not even think about ODI cricket in the context of the discussion till now because there is a high profile test series going on, so I just assumed that we are talking about test cricket. But since you brought ODIs into the discussion, I won't rate Dravid much as an ODI captain. Not because of the World Cup results and despite the fact that India chased some unprecedented 15(?) totals in ODIs with him at the helm. I just found him to be too predictable in ODIs and felt that 50 overs did were not enough for him to implement the kind of strategies he wanted to as the game changes every 5-10 overs. So yeah, in ODIs I have no issues conceding that Ganguly and Dhoni were better captains.

[The Outsider]

There's this famous saying - A lot guys have scaled the everest, but Sir Edmund Hillary is the most famous one of 'em all. Same with Roger Bannister and the 4 minute mile. The contrast b/w the Indian team of the 90s and 2000s was like the contrast b/w night and day. And this was no accident.

Yaar, please don't start with the fanboy stuff! Correlation is not causality. Unless you can prove that Laxman's 281, Dravid's 231, Dravid's 148, Dravid's 271, Tendulkar's 196, Tendulkar's 117, Tendulkar's 241, Laxman's 148 etc. etc. were somehow causally connected to Ganguly being the captain it makes much less sense than the natural assumption that these great batsmen played and achieved great feats when Ganguly was captain.

[Ram]

Unfairly or fairly, I don't know but in making in cricketing judgment I tend to weigh test cricket much more than other forms. And to be frank I did not even think about ODI cricket in the context of the discussion till now because there is a high profile test series going on, so I just assumed that we are talking about test cricket. But since you brought ODIs into the discussion, I won't rate Dravid much as an ODI captain. Not because of the World Cup results and despite the fact that India chased some unprecedented 15(?) totals in ODIs with him at the helm. I just found him to be too predictable in ODIs and felt that 50 overs did were not enough for him to implement the kind of strategies he wanted to as the game changes every 5-10 overs. So yeah, in ODIs I have no issues conceding that Ganguly and Dhoni were better captains.

You gotto take all forms into consideration dude, especially when the top 2 standout moments of Indian cricket (in my opinion) are both WC triumphs. Ganguly presided over what I'd call the first true golden era of Indian ODI cricket, b/w 2003-04. Our performance in the 2003 WC should rank among the best feats of any Indian team, ever. Ironically, It was Dravid's incredibly selfless decision to keep and bat at no.7 that really propelled that team then. Of course, Ganguly was also helped by the emergence of Irfan as an all-rounder and the Yuvraj Singh as a punishing lower middle order bat. This is precisely the reason why I'd rate Ganguly over Dravid. He presided over many firsts of Indian cricket. And dont forget that the circumstances when he took over as captain 99 was a world away from Dravid/Kumble did. The whole country was reeling from the match fixing controversy and things were falling apart. Ganguly put a floor underneath the crash and began the healing process.

[Ram]

Yaar, please don't start with the fanboy stuff! Correlation is not causality. Unless you can prove that Laxman's 281, Dravid's 231, Dravid's 148, Dravid's 271, Tendulkar's 196, Tendulkar's 117, Tendulkar's 241, Laxman's 148 etc. etc. were somehow causally connected to Ganguly being the captain it makes much less sense than the natural assumption that these great batsmen played and achieved great feats when Ganguly was captain.

I have made this point before and I will make this again. Our away record in test cricket started turning around in 2002. As a combination, Sachin, Dravid, VVS and Ganguly were in the team since six years before that. Nuff said. I am not naive enough to credit Ganguly with all of the credit. Like I said, a certain Virender Sehwag is the true hero of this turnaround. But Ganguly instilled the belief that we not only compete abroad, but also win.

[Yoda-esque]

You gotto take all forms into consideration dude, especially when the top 2 standout moments of Indian cricket (in my opinion) are both WC triumphs. Ganguly presided over what I'd call the first true golden era of Indian ODI cricket, b/w 2003-04. Our performance in the 2003 WC should rank among the best feats of any Indian team, ever. Ironically, It was Dravid's incredibly selfless decision to keep and bat at no.7 that really propelled that team then. Of course, Ganguly was also helped by the emergence of Irfan as an all-rounder and the Yuvraj Singh as a punishing lower middle order bat. This is precisely the reason why I'd rate Ganguly over Dravid. He presided over many firsts of Indian cricket. And dont forget that the circumstances when he took over as captain 99 was a world away from Dravid/Kumble did. The whole country was reeling from the match fixing controversy and things were falling apart. Ganguly put a floor underneath the crash and began the healing process.

The first golden Era of Indian ODI cricket was when we won the world cup and then the Benson and Hedges in England and Australia.

[CG]

Sachin during dada's day v Sachin now Dravid in 2002 v Dravid of last 3 years VVS of 2002 v VVS of 2011-12 Kumble v Ashwin :hysterical: Ojha v Bhajji of 2002. Zaheer of 2002 v Zaheer of now.

1.Sachin Of the 2008-2011 was better than Sachin under Ganguly . 2.Dravid Was not the same player agreed 3.VVs Had some the best and most consistent years in 2008-2011 4.Kumble was not the preffered spinner for ganguly.But still agreed 5.Zaheer of 2002 was not even half the bowler he was after his comeback. Added with a 2nd seamer and 3rd seamer like sreesanth,R.p singh,ishant sharma who have had moments under the sun . 6.Ganguly never has settled opening pair like gambhir and sehwag 7.Ganguly never had Wicketkeeper of the level of dhoni and had likes of ratra ,patel . So give some due to ganguly. BTW I Also Rate Dravid higher than both Gnaguly and dhoni.

[Ram]

The first golden Era of Indian ODI cricket was when we won the world cup and then the Benson and Hedges in England and Australia.

Check that. You are correct - that was the first true golden era of Indian ODI cricket. The only problem - I wasnt even born then. :--D

[Yoda-esque]

Check that. You are correct - that was the first true golden era of Indian ODI cricket. The only problem - I wasnt even born then. :--D

Whaat? Am I the oldest guy here? :((

[The Outsider]

I have made this point before and I will make this again. Our away record in test cricket started turning around in 2002. As a combination, Sachin, Dravid, VVS and Ganguly were in the team since six years before that. Nuff said. I am not naive enough to credit Ganguly with all of the credit. Like I said, a certain Virender Sehwag is the true hero of this turnaround. But Ganguly instilled the belief that we not only compete abroad, but also win.

Again correlation is not causality. Dravid, Ganguly, Laxman were all players with potential but even players with potential need 4-5 years before they can bring their best across. Tendulkar's performance actually wasn't as great during those years as in the years when India was losing. Sehwag's best years came after Ganguly's captaincy. Maybe Ganguly did instill the belief that we can win outside (I am not a psychologist), but by the time we actually won outside Ganguly was gone and was hardly able to win at home. How do you reconcile that?

[Crookbond]

You gotto take all forms into consideration dude' date=' especially when the top 2 standout moments of Indian cricket (in my opinion) are both WC triumphs. [b']Ganguly presided over what I'd call the first true golden era of Indian ODI cricket, b/w 2003-04. Our performance in the 2003 WC should rank among the best feats of any Indian team, ever. Ironically, It was Dravid's incredibly selfless decision to keep and bat at no.7 that really propelled that team then. Of course, Ganguly was also helped by the emergence of Irfan as an all-rounder and the Yuvraj Singh as a punishing lower middle order bat. This is precisely the reason why I'd rate Ganguly over Dravid. He presided over many firsts of Indian cricket. And dont forget that the circumstances when he took over as captain 99 was a world away from Dravid/Kumble did. The whole country was reeling from the match fixing controversy and things were falling apart. Ganguly put a floor underneath the crash and began the healing process.

How do you call it the TRUE golden era of ODI cricket? I would rather say India under MS Dhoni from 2009-2011 was the real Golden era of ODI cricket. We hardly lost anything!

[Ram]

Again correlation is not causality. Dravid' date=' Ganguly, Laxman were all players with potential but even players with potential need 4-5 years before they can bring their best across. Tendulkar's performance actually wasn't as great during those years as in the years when India was losing. Sehwag's best years came after Ganguly's captaincy.[/quote'] Huh? Sachin, as a batsmen, was at his peak from 95-99. This was his absolute best as a batsmen. Before that, Lara was the lone best batsmen of the world. Sachin's performance in the 96 WC, England tour of 96 and his test exploits against Aus at home in 98 was what really helped establish him as the best batsmen of the world and create separation b/w himself and guys like Anwar and De Silva. Remind me how many tests we won abroad in this time-frame? I dont care about results. I go by how I see the team perform on the field. I'd easily rate our performance in Aus in 2003-04 as the single best performance by an Indian team abroad in the last decade, even higher than England 2007 and South Africa 2011. We came this close to toppling australia at home when all other teams were getting mullered by them down under. The Indian team under Ganguly was the first team to challenge the dominance of the Aussies in Australia.

[The Outsider]

You gotto take all forms into consideration dude, especially when the top 2 standout moments of Indian cricket (in my opinion) are both WC triumphs. Ganguly presided over what I'd call the first true golden era of Indian ODI cricket, b/w 2003-04. Our performance in the 2003 WC should rank among the best feats of any Indian team, ever. Ironically, It was Dravid's incredibly selfless decision to keep and bat at no.7 that really propelled that team then. Of course, Ganguly was also helped by the emergence of Irfan as an all-rounder and the Yuvraj Singh as a punishing lower middle order bat.

You're dictating to me as to what I should consider and what not and with what weight? I just don't rate the role of a captain in the shorter versions of the game as in Test matches and I have some reasons for it on which we could have a discussion, but I won't automatically start rating ODIs at par with test cricket. And you've known me enough that this is not a bandwagon stand - I've voted on ICF polls saying I would prefer a test series win in Australia and South Africa over the World Cup.

This is precisely the reason why I'd rate Ganguly over Dravid. He presided over many firsts of Indian cricket. And dont forget that the circumstances when he took over as captain 99 was a world away from Dravid/Kumble did. The whole country was reeling from the match fixing controversy and things were falling apart. Ganguly put a floor underneath the crash and began the healing process.

I gave you a list of a lot of firsts Dravid presided over as well, but you dismissed them as something along the lines of statistical accomplishments. And no where have I denied Ganguly's contribution to Indian cricket and his strengths as a captain for you to pull up the melodrama about matchfixing and carpets.

[Ram]

How do you call it the TRUE golden era of ODI cricket? I would rather say India under MS Dhoni from 2009-2011 was the real Golden era of ODI cricket. We hardly lost anything!

Clearly, either you were not around in 2003-04, (or) you were not watching (or), you watched and forgot.

[Crookbond]

Clearly' date=' either you were not around in 2003-04, (or) you were not watching (or), you watched and forgot.[/quote'] You are in no position to make that comment. Anyways, here's some proof which can debunk your claim [table=head]Team Mat Won Lost Tied NR W/L Ave RPO HS LS Year India 29 19 8 0 2 2.37 35.99 5.53 387 103 2008 India 34 21 10 2 1 2.10 35.85 5.51 418 146 2011 India 31 17 10 0 4 1.70 41.19 5.88 414 149 2009 India 27 17 10 0 0 1.70 37.32 5.50 401 88 2010 India 28 16 10 0 2 1.60 30.56 4.82 353 108 2003 India 35 19 13 0 3 1.46 34.93 5.43 333 108 2002 India 37 20 15 0 2 1.33 35.78 5.34 413 148 2007 India 27 15 12 0 0 1.25 35.82 5.35 356 144 2005 India 24 12 12 0 0 1.00 32.09 4.89 351 127 2001 India 32 15 16 0 1 0.93 32.93 5.24 349 127 2004 India 30 13 15 0 2 0.86 29.71 4.94 328 91 2006 India 34 15 19 0 0 0.78 30.27 4.83 310 54 2000[/table] The highest W/L ratio in the 2000s were in the years 2008-2011 like I said earlier.

[The Outsider]

Huh? Sachin, as a batsmen, was at his peak from 95-99. This was his absolute best as a batsmen. Before that, Lara was the lone best batsmen of the world. Sachin's performance in the 96 WC, England tour of 96 and his test exploits against Aus at home in 98 was what really helped establish him as the best batsmen of the world and create separation b/w himself and guys like Anwar and De Silva. Remind me how many tests we won abroad in this time-frame?

And how was I saying anything different? I was saying that the peak of Tendulkar was gone before Ganguly became captain. Please read again what I've written above.

I dont care about results. I go by how I see the team perform on the field. I'd easily rate our performance in Aus in 2003-04 as the single best performance by an Indian team abroad in the last decade, even higher than England 2007 and South Africa 2011. We came this close to toppling australia at home when all other teams were getting mullered by them down under. The Indian team under Ganguly was the first team to challenge the dominance of the Aussies in Australia.

You don't care about results? In your first post in the thread you started boasting about results under Ganguly. And yeah, I'll agree with you that the '03-'04 performance of the team would be the highlight of the last decade along with the 2001 win at home against Australia. But since you don't care about the results, can you tell me how much can it be attributed to Ganguly?

[Ram]

You're dictating to me as to what I should consider and what not and with what weight? I just don't rate the role of a captain in the shorter versions of the game as in Test matches and I have some reasons for it on which we could have a discussion, but I won't automatically start rating ODIs at par with test cricket. And you've known me enough that this is not a bandwagon stand - I've voted on ICF polls saying I would prefer a test series win in Australia and South Africa over the World Cup.

I dont dictate anything. I do find it quite amusing that, when rating the legacies of captains, you'd sort of simply gloss over their accomplishments in the forms of the game other than test cricket. This when two of our crowning achievements since we have been part of the international game have been in the limited overs format. Go figure! And to think you started factoring in ODI cricket into this discussion as an afterthought! And yes, I know this aint an opportunistic stand from you. Like I said, this is not the first time I have seen exhibit this tendency (and sure not the last either).

I gave you a list of a lot of firsts Dravid presided over as well, but you dismissed them as something along the lines of statistical accomplishments. And no where have I denied Ganguly's contribution to Indian cricket and his strengths as a captain for you to pull up the melodrama about matchfixing and carpets.

What Dravid did was an extension, and in some occasions, an improvement of what ganguly was able to do before. I wouldnt call them 'firsts' in the real sense.

[Ram]

You are in no position to make that comment. Anyways, here's some proof which can debunk your claim [table=head]Team Mat Won Lost Tied NR W/L Ave RPO HS LS Year India 29 19 8 0 2 2.37 35.99 5.53 387 103 2008 India 34 21 10 2 1 2.10 35.85 5.51 418 146 2011 India 31 17 10 0 4 1.70 41.19 5.88 414 149 2009 India 27 17 10 0 0 1.70 37.32 5.50 401 88 2010 India 28 16 10 0 2 1.60 30.56 4.82 353 108 2003 India 35 19 13 0 3 1.46 34.93 5.43 333 108 2002 India 37 20 15 0 2 1.33 35.78 5.34 413 148 2007 India 27 15 12 0 0 1.25 35.82 5.35 356 144 2005 India 24 12 12 0 0 1.00 32.09 4.89 351 127 2001 India 32 15 16 0 1 0.93 32.93 5.24 349 127 2004 India 30 13 15 0 2 0.86 29.71 4.94 328 91 2006 India 34 15 19 0 0 0.78 30.27 4.83 310 54 2000[/table] The highest W/L ratio in the 2000s were in the years 2008-2011 like I said earlier.

Like I said before my man, I do not need to resort to cricinfo statsguru to know what i am talking about. I watched these games. I did not claim the 2003-05 was the 'best' golden era of Indian ODI cricket. I said it the was the first true golden era of Indian cricket. Of course, Yoda-esque corrected me saying that would be the 83-85 era, but like I said, I wasnt even born then, so i wouldnt know.

[Crookbond]

Like I said before my man' date=' I do not need to resort to cricinfo statsguru to know what i am talking about. I watched these games. [b']I did not claim the 2003-05 was the 'best' golden era of Indian ODI cricket. I said it the was the first true golden era of Indian cricket. Of course, Yoda-esque corrected me saying that would be the 83-85 era, but like I said, I wasnt even born then, so i wouldnt know.

Fair enough - I read your post wrong and you could've pointed me out in the first place rather than being caustic. Have a nice day!