Alltime XI challenge

[Muloghonto]

BS. I think to me my opnion matters more than what Boycott has to say about Ganguly. He perhaps has seen lesser number of games, than I did in which Ganguly played in, for example. So just because he played international cricket, does mean what he says is gospel. Ask him to call me and I will change his opinion, with proper reasoning. Ganguly as I said sucks and you should be ashamed of yourself, for selecting him on the 2nd all-time team. Perhaps you need to watch more than Bengal cricket and listen a little less of what the old ***s, Gavaskar or Boycott has to say about some 'X', 'Y', 'Z' player. Now go get some sleep. You look a little stressed to me.

1. Your opinion matters more to you than Boycott`s because you are a typical teen or tween kid who thinks he knows it all. As i said, don`t worry you will outgrow the tendency to take yourself more seriously than experts in their field of expertese. Its called maturity. 2. Whether Boycott has seen him bat one-fourth as much as you have, does not outweigh the fact that Boycott is a far greater & astute judge of batsmanship than you are. Whether a batsman got dismissed by a brilliant ball or due to his pre-meditated movement(which would imply a flaw in batting) or because the pitch did something completely unexpected, etc. are all something you are ill-qualified to judge at, nomatter how much you `watch`a sport. Just like, i dont care how long you've spent staring at the underside of your car, i would rather take my mechanic's opinion after a 5 min glance than your pondering after looking at it for the rest of the day. You and Boycott are not equal judges of batsmen or bowlers and i wouldn't be surprised if there are aspects of batting & bowling you will be blissfully unaware of for the rest of your lifetime, which would be instantly visible to Boycott. This is what the small matter of 'been there, done that and am an expert' lends itself to, that you do not have, kiddo. That is why, bachchey, pro-scouts are former players, not rabid fans. They know what to look for, you, dont. 3. Ganguly is an alltime great, regardless of what you say. A guy who averages 50+ in world cups, has one of the best records in the game and has done better than most against the quality opponents of his time, most certainly deserves consideration. Now, if you wanted to make it an issue of whether you want two `wham bam 20 ball 30`openers, ala Jayasurya or Sehwag over the role of a Sheet anchor at the top of the order, you may have a point, based on preference (provided you compensated for the sheet anchor role in the middle order). But question Ganguly`s place in an alltime XI on the basis of his batsmanship ? Sorry, that is garbage.

[harmuk]

1. Your opinion matters more to you than Boycott`s because you are a typical teen or tween kid who thinks he knows it all. As i said, don`t worry you will outgrow the tendency to take yourself more seriously than experts in their field of expertese. Its called maturity. 2. Whether Boycott has seen him bat one-fourth as much as you have, does not outweigh the fact that Boycott is a far greater & astute judge of batsmanship than you are. Whether a batsman got dismissed by a brilliant ball or due to his pre-meditated movement(which would imply a flaw in batting) or because the pitch did something completely unexpected, etc. are all something you are ill-qualified to judge at, nomatter how much you `watch`a sport. Just like, i dont care how long you've spent staring at the underside of your car, i would rather take my mechanic's opinion after a 5 min glance than your pondering after looking at it for the rest of the day. You and Boycott are not equal judges of batsmen or bowlers and i wouldn't be surprised if there are aspects of batting & bowling you will be blissfully unaware of for the rest of your lifetime, which would be instantly visible to Boycott. This is what the small matter of 'been there, done that and am an expert' lends itself to, that you do not have, kiddo. 3. Ganguly is an alltime great, regardless of what you say. A guy who averages 50+ in world cups, has one of the best records in the game and has done better than most against the quality opponents of his time, most certainly deserves consideration. Now, if you wanted to make it an issue of whether you want two `wham bam 20 ball 30`openers, ala Jayasurya or Sehwag over the role of a Sheet anchor at the top of the order, you may have a point, based on preference (provided you compensated for the sheet anchor role in the middle order). But question Ganguly`s place in an alltime XI on the basis of his batsmanship ? Sorry, that is garbage.

I am glad you used Ganguly and alltime great in the same sentence, because it clearly shows how little you understand cricket or know about cricket. :hehe::hehe::hehe:. Even Ganguly will be embarassed at your stupid rating. Case closed.

That is why, bachchey, pro-scouts are former players, not rabid fans. They know what to look for, you, dont.

That is not true at all. Some of the former players that includes Ganguly (KKR, PWI teams were a joke - the way he picked the players and manipulated) are such bad judges of talent. There are ton of non-players who are GM's, scouts of pro-teams. You are so stupid and senile you will not understand or will know it.

[Muloghonto]

Alltime Subocontinent XI vs ROW XI: Tests: S.Gavaskar V.Sehwag K.Sangakkara S.Tendulkar J.Miandad VVS.Laxman M.Dhoni+ I.Khan W.Akram B.Chandrasekhar M.Muralitharan R.O.W: A.Morris B.Richards I.V.A.Richards B.Lara G.Chapell G.Sobers A.Gillchrist+ A.Davidson S.Warne M.Marshall M.Holding

[Muloghonto]

I am glad you used Ganguly and alltime great in the same sentence' date=' because it clearly shows how little you understand cricket or know about cricket. :hehe::hehe::hehe:. Even Ganguly will be embarassed at your stupid rating. Case closed. [/quote'] Case closed only in the kangaroo court of kids like you. Make a case for how is Ganguly not an alltime great- he has failed against only one team: Australia. If failure against one team only is the criteria for debarrment from alltime great status, then Saeed Anwar, Mark Waugh,Inzamam, all disqualy themselves, which is absurd. Your contention that he did not handle fast bowling well is nonsense. A guy who does not handle fast bowling well does not get to average 40+ in Alan Donald & Shaun Pollock's backyard. I am yet to see a pro scout or GM or Head Coach in any sport- NHL,NBA or NFL not have a pro or college career background as a player. I would rather go for Ganguly's judgement of players than yours, kiddo.

[harmuk]

As far as field setting, rotating bowlers and such go, which is the tactical aspect of captaincy, Ganguly was better than Dhoni. Most are.

Who said that? Gavaskar? He would because Ganguly and CAB have gotten his medicore son a safe haven, when he would not get selected in the Mumbai Ranji team. You are so dumb and stupid, you have no clue about cricket and respect for results. MSD - Skipper of a WC winning team twice, Skipper of No.1 Test team for the first time in Indian cricket history, Skipper of IPL winning team twice. There are more. Ganguly record is one of losing most finals and creating needless controversies. Also MSD has more ODI and Test wins with better win percentage, and more series wins than Ganguly. Between the two of them MSD wins hands down. Ganguly is a bad leader of men, as IPL brought into the forefront thankfully, when he did not have RD, AK, VVS etc. at their best on his side all of a sudden.

Hindsight is 20-20. Had Gilly and Hayden been gone inside of 5 overs, the match would`ve swung our way. Not many were critical of his choice to field before the match started, several astute observers such as Barry Richards and Tony Greig were supportive of it, for in Saffie pitches, batting first is not always the right choice as it is in the subcontinent. Too bad it didnt work out because our bowlers couldnt bowl better.

Had India had better batsman than Ganguly may be they could have chased the runs down after making such a boneheaded decision to bowl upon winning the toss., since you are basing everything based on conjecture - Hayden failed, Gilly failed etc etc. What a stupid way to look at things. But that is not surprising, coming from you.

[harmuk]

Case closed only in the kangaroo court of kids like you. Make a case for how is Ganguly not an alltime great- he has failed against only one team: Australia. If failure against one team only is the criteria for debarrment from alltime great status, then Saeed Anwar, Mark Waugh,Inzamam, all disqualy themselves, which is absurd. Your contention that he did not handle fast bowling well is nonsense. A guy who does not handle fast bowling well does not get to average 40+ in Alan Donald & Shaun Pollock's backyard. .

His medicore S/R of 70 is enough, in the same era when Tendulkar, Jaya and Gilly all are over 85 S/R, with an average of 32+, in which a team is only allowed 50 overs with 6-7 batsman, to rule him out of the alltime great status. He is not even a great one day batsman let alone an all-time great. Of course you will never understand any of this, so I would rather not dwell much. And you are using ODI cricket to judge a players ability to play short pitched stuff (WOW), given one day game is a batsmans game for most part with tailored made pitches and rules heavily stacked against the bowlers. Man you have no understanding of the game, excepting getting brainwashed by the opinions of the so called experts.

I am yet to see a pro scout or GM or Head Coach in any sport- NHL,NBA or NFL not have a pro or college career background as a player. I would rather go for Ganguly's judgement of players than yours, kiddo

You said former players and now you are changing. You have no clue about sports. Shut the F--k up and go get some sleep now.

[harmuk]

I am yet to see you geniuses specify how you are discerning tactical nous from match results. As i said earlier, Ricky Ponting has a better captaincy record than Mike Brearley. Yet, if you want to argue that Punter was a better captain than Brearley, even Punter would laugh at you morons.

Yeah like you know it. Brearley is definitely a great captain without a doubt - but why would Ponting take exception if he is rated very highly. He got a very good team and he managed the egos of all the great players brilliantly, and got them the results expected of the team and even exceeded them. How many screw ups have people seen of great talent and teams before, gone to waste because of poor leadership. That Ponting got to almost 50 Test wins as captain, and 2 WC wins is a great accomplishment and he is a great captain, for keeping the team motivated and focussed through out. Again you are so dumb, you will say some 'X', 'Y', 'Z' did not rate Ponting highly - so you will go with it, instead of using common sense and analysis of things that are obvious.

[BeautifulGame]

So what....he still has an excellent record against Test playing nations in world cups.

But he was a liability most of the during 2003 World Cup with his batting.

Sri Lanka won it practically at home (2 out of the entire matches they played in 1996 were outside SL) too.

And the two games were semi final and final which are the most important games.

Whichever way you wish to slice and dice it, fact remains that India won because: a) it was at home

Yet no team has ever won a World Cup at home.

b) India did not run into an ATG team like the Aussies of 96-2008 period,

Neither did we run into any all time great teams in 87 and 96 world cups at home. I don't remember winning them either.

[c) India had two of the ATG best middle order batsmen in the game- Yuvraj and Dhoni, which India did not have prior.

We had both the players in 07 World Cup too yet couldn't even get past Bangladesh . Also we are the only team apart from 87 Aussies to win a World Cup without single ATG bowler. Shows how great Dhoni's captaincy played a part for us to win despite having one of the weakest attacks in the tournament .

As far as field setting, rotating bowlers and such go, which is the tactical aspect of captaincy, Ganguly was better than Dhoni. Most are.

So why has Ganguly never won a test series outside India (non-minnow) despite having the greatest middle order in Indian history ?

Hindsight is 20-20. Had Gilly and Hayden been gone inside of 5 overs, the match would`ve swung our way. Not many were critical of his choice to field before the match started, several astute observers such as Barry Richards and Tony Greig were supportive of it, for in Saffie pitches, batting first is not always the right choice as it is in the subcontinent. Too bad it didnt work out because our bowlers couldnt bowl better.

It's not about hindsight but about ****ing common sense. No captain apart from idiotic Gamguly would have chooses to bowl first against that Aus side. So what if we had taken Gilly and Hyden ? They still bat till no.8 in that World Cup FFS. U think we would have chasen 250 let alone the 350 we chased against that Aus bowling attack? Don't make me laugh. With our great choking record in finals under Gamguly and the Aussie attack it was utter pathetic decision to field .Just check the semi vs Srl (who batted till no.9 it that match) to see how good Aussis were at defending totals. We had Sachin and Dravid two players with unparalleled technique in modern history. Also had Ganguly and Sehwag pretty decent openers too. Yet he couldn't back them to out the first 5 -6 overs where the new ball at most would have swung? It was cowardice decision that cost us the World Cup however u want to cover it up.

I am yet to see you geniuses specify how you are discerning tactical nous from match results. As i said earlier, Ricky Ponting has a better captaincy record than Mike Brearley. Yet, if you want to argue that Punter was a better captain than Brearley, even Punter would laugh at you morons.

Actually Punter is one of the most underrated captains of all time . Never got the credit he deserves becoz of the team he had. Arguably the most attacking and positive captain in recent memory. Just check his captaincy in the 4th ashes test in 2005 series. Both Dada and Dhoni could learn a thing or two from Punter about attacking captaincy and field settings actually. And even get started on his selfishness which hurt India time and again throughout the captaincy period.

[harmuk]

BeautifulGame, I like the way you reason and the fan perspective. You seem to be a great follower of the game and know your stuff. :two_thumbs_up:

[Muloghonto]

His medicore S/R of 70 is enough' date=' in the same era when Tendulkar, Jaya and Gilly all are over 85 S/R, with an average of 32+, in which a team is only allowed 50 overs with 6-7 batsman, to rule him out of the alltime great status. He is not even a great one day batsman let alone an all-time great. Of course you will never understand any of this, so I would rather not dwell much. [/quote'] Laughable, really. A strike rate of 72-80 is the role of a sheet anchor in the side. Had you been old enough to watch ODIs for more than just a few years ago, you'd realize that on pitches and against attacks where 250 is a defendable score, the role of a sheet anchor is imperative. Players like Inzy,Steve Waugh, Kallis, Ganguly,Haynes are all anchors of the innings, around which batsmen revolve around. As for Jaya being a better batsman than Ganguly, LOL. ODI opening is more than scoring 20 off of 21 balls, ala Jaya style. Yes, Jaya was a demon against us and in the subcontinent but against genuine pace in overseas conditions, Jaya was only good for the quick 20 and the very occasional 50. Ganguly on the other hand, actually scored runs. Ofcourse, you will not understand that strike rate is fundamentally secondary to average. Who cares if your team is full of guys who are good for 20 in 15 balls. Then you are all-out by the 30th over for 180 runs. As such, strike rate is important, but only so much. It cannot and never can substitute cold,hard runs beyond a certain point. Hey moron, I selected Ganguly for the ODI team. Not the test team. As such, your comment of whether he is good against short pitched bowling or not, is relevant only to ODI scene. Nobody said that Ganguly is your man for smashing runs against brutal pace bowling in test cricket. What I did say, is that Ganguly is an alltime great in ODIs. You chose to contest that on the basis of his ability to play short pitched bowling. Turns out, as far as ODIs are concerned, short pitched bowling has never been a problem for Ganguly to dominate. So this leads to the logical conclusion that: Your premise for refusing Ganguly ATG status in ODIs is faulty, since it has nothing to do with ODI cricket Yet another childish lie. Lets examine the conversation: " I said:" That is why, bachchey, pro-scouts are former players, not rabid fans." You said:"There are ton of non-players who are GM's, scouts of pro-teams." I then said: "I am yet to see a pro scout or GM or Head Coach in any sport- NHL,NBA or NFL not have a pro or college career background as a player." To which, you said the abovementioned lie. I did not change anything, i simply reiterated the point that there isnt a single pro scout,coach or any such person in professional sport who is not a former player who has persued a professional career in sports. Not fans. As usual, you resort to blatant lying and manipulating a conversation just to satisfy your innane childish desires.

[Muloghonto]

Who said that? Gavaskar? He would because Ganguly and CAB have gotten his medicore son a safe haven' date=' when he would not get selected in the Mumbai Ranji team. You are so dumb and stupid, you have no clue about cricket and respect for results. [/quote'] So you claim to know Gavaskar's inner workings to attribute his comments to an ultreior motive. Arrey bachchey, grow the eff up. So you think when an ATG differs in opinion with you, its not because the great kid named harmouk, who's never played the sport professionally can be wrong. It is because the ATG clearly must have an ulterior motive. LOL. Talking to you is funny. Hey kid, i asked you a question. Tell us how you are extrapolating a captain's tactical nous from match results ? How does being a better captain on a crappier team than a crap captain on a better team be differntiated from statistics ? If you can answer that question bachchey, then tell us about Dhoni's win-loss records and such. Till then, bachchey, shut up. The entire point of decieding at the toss to bowl, is the conjencture that your bowlers will fire and put the opposition under pressure right away. If that conjencture is not valid, then what possible reason would anyone ever bowl after winning the toss ? Grow a brain. And no, if India had a so-called better batsman like Jayasurya as you like to mention, we'd have done worse.

[Muloghonto]

Yeah like you know it. Brearley is definitely a great captain without a doubt - but why would Ponting take exception if he is rated very highly. He got a very good team and he managed the egos of all the great players brilliantly' date=' and got them the results expected of the team and even exceeded them. [/quote'] The australia captain is not the manager of egos in the team. Aussie team manager does that. Australia's captain is the guy who makes the command decisions during play. My point was, since you are so keen to point out Dhoni's superior record to support the idea that Dhoni is better than Ganguly, how on earth would you deal with the fact that the arguably greatest captain the game has ever seen played for a mediocre team and thus, is not the best on stats ?! Ponting's job is not to keep the team motivated or focussed. I have no idea why you'd think so. he has a lot of wins because he inherited a great team. If he was a Kiwi, his record would've been far worse. So how is it fair to Ponting to evaluate his captaincy on the basis of results,which is fundamentally determined by how good the 11 players are. Common sense and analysis makes it obvious that a crappy captain on an amazing team will have a better record than an amazing captain on a crappy team. Therefore, common sense dictates that using win-loss record to talk about captaincy is a logical fallacy.

[Muloghonto]

But he was a liability most of the during 2003 World Cup with his batting.

So what ? I got news for you buddy. Even Sir Don bradman was a liability for half the time he walked out to bat. The most conistent batsman of his era, Tendulkar, is a liability 65% of the time he bats. Batsmen are a liability most of the time, so pointing out how Ganguly was a liability in a particular world cup does not do much. Batsmen are allowed to be out of form. There are only two batsmen in the history of the game who's not been a liability in a single world cup and they are Richards and Tendulkar. So does that mean every single batsman is a liability to their team ? Yes, Gangu was bad in 2003. He was pretty freaking awesome in 1999. That compensates for it.

And the two games were semi final and final which are the most important games.

Thats more or less a technicality. Sri Lanka were a co-host, they played most of their matches on home and Lahore was a 'home venue' relative to Sri Lankans than the Aussies. You can't really argue that anytime India,Sri Lanka or Pakistan plays South Africa,Australia , etc. anywhere in the subcontinent, it is virtually home situation due to the types of pitches in the subcontinent. In anycase, they were a co-host and technically, they are the first host nations of a world cup to win a world cup.

Yet no team has ever won a World Cup at home.

See above.

Neither did we run into any all time great teams in 87 and 96 world cups at home. I don't remember winning them either.

What does that have to do with Ganguly again ? FYI, sri lanka in 96 was a mini great team. They'd been in domination mode since early 95 when they won the series in Australia and till early 98, they were an exceptionally dominant team.

We had both the players in 07 World Cup too yet couldn't even get past Bangladesh .

So ? Even Brazil has crashed out in qualifying stages of a world cup. When you have 2 matches to lose and you are out of the cup, thats when '***** happens'. Nobody ever considers those players or teams to be crappy just because of that. Ganguly barely got a chance to showcase anything in 2007.

Also we are the only team apart from 87 Aussies to win a World Cup without single ATG bowler. Shows how great Dhoni's captaincy played a part for us to win despite having one of the weakest attacks in the tournament .

False. Sri Lanka won it when Murali had less than 100 ODI and test wickets. How on earth were Sri Lanka a side with ATG bowling in 96 ? Sure, Murali turned out excellent but he was not an ATG in 96.

So why has Ganguly never won a test series outside India (non-minnow) despite having the greatest middle order in Indian history ?

Because Ganguly has never played overseas against a team with weaker bowlers than his. You win cricket matches on the basis of your bowlers, especially test cricket. The fundamental equation to winning in tests is to take 20 wickets for less runs than the opposition conceded. Not scoring more runs than the opposition while losing less wickets (that amounts to a draw or a win, the former ALWAYS amounts to win). So what is an ATG middle order have to do with winning overseas ?

It's not about hindsight but about ****ing common sense. No captain apart from idiotic Gamguly would have chooses to bowl first against that Aus side. So what if we had taken Gilly and Hyden ? They still bat till no.8 in that World Cup FFS.

Not true. We are talking about batting first up in South Africa here, where traditionally it favours the fast bowlers most on a fresh pitch with the new ball. Consider this: Pakistan won the toss against the Same Aussies in 2003 world cup and chose to field. So it definitely was not an unthinkable idea to let the Aussies bat first. Considering that India had chosen to bat against Australia earlier in the tournament and they won comfortably, it wasnt a bad decision.

U think we would have chasen 250 let alone the 350 we chased against that Aus bowling attack? Don't make me laugh. With our great choking record in finals under Gamguly and the Aussie attack it was utter pathetic decision to field .Just check the semi vs Srl (who batted till no.9 it that match) to see how good Aussis were at defending totals.

Australia was unbeaten that entire tourney. They were also undefeated at chasing totals. So the point is rather moot. We thought plan A would be to play to our strengths and bat first against them- hopefully our batting strength would maul their bowlers enough to put the total beyond their batsmen. That plan totally failed in the group stages. So Ganguly tried plan B. In hindsight, that may look like a silly decision but as i said, none other than Tony Greig supported the decision and he knows Saffie pitches better than most. This is what makes Ganguly a better captain than Dhoni, IMO: Ganguly was not averse to initiating plan B or plan C when plan A did not work. Dhoni instead, makes plan A and sticks to plan A nomatter what.

We had Sachin and Dravid two players with unparalleled technique in modern history. Also had Ganguly and Sehwag pretty decent openers too. Yet he couldn't back them to out the first 5 -6 overs where the new ball at most would have swung? It was cowardice decision that cost us the World Cup however u want to cover it up.

Again, i think you are seeing it in hindsight and are being excessively harsh. I dont blame Ganguly for wanting to bowl first in South Africa where our bowlers could've done early damage on the fresh pitch. Aussies were undefeated the whole tournament and the first time we tried batting first against them, we couldnt even go past 150. So second time we faced them, we decieded to bowl first. I dont see what is so terrible about this decision. If Indian pacers are not going to reduce Aussie batsmen bowling first in South Africa, they are not going to do it bowling 2nd either.

Actually Punter is one of the most underrated captains of all time . Never got the credit he deserves becoz of the team he had. Arguably the most attacking and positive captain in recent memory. Just check his captaincy in the 4th ashes test in 2005 series.

Its hard to evaluate Punter. A combination of factors, such as Pakistan's terminal decline and the Saffers moving into a post Donald-Pollock transition made the Aussies a gulf apart from every other team for a while and Punter essentially had a team that a monkey could've auto-piloted to victory. Throw in the fact that the Aussies are one of the most professional establishments, where team managers and coaches ahve very specific roles ( its the team manager in Aussie cricket that 'manages' egos. Not captains like subcontinental teams do) and it just isnt the same for Punter. I'd say he was a competent captain but not very imaginative. He had a plan A and was often found a step too slow to initiate plan B. probably because thanks to the team he had, plan A worked 95% of the time. Either way, i rate Steve Waugh, Ganguly, Cronje, Fleming,Atherton,Graeme Smith,Ranatunga,Azharuddin and Moin Khan as better captains than him.

[harmuk]

Laughable, really. A strike rate of 72-80 is the role of a sheet anchor in the side. Had you been old enough to watch ODIs for more than just a few years ago, you'd realize that on pitches and against attacks where 250 is a defendable score, the role of a sheet anchor is imperative. Players like Inzy,Steve Waugh, Kallis, Ganguly,Haynes are all anchors of the innings, around which batsmen revolve around. As for Jaya being a better batsman than Ganguly, LOL. ODI opening is more than scoring 20 off of 21 balls, ala Jaya style. Yes, Jaya was a demon against us and in the subcontinent but against genuine pace in overseas conditions, Jaya was only good for the quick 20 and the very occasional 50. Ganguly on the other hand, actually scored runs. Ofcourse, you will not understand that strike rate is fundamentally secondary to average. Who cares if your team is full of guys who are good for 20 in 15 balls. Then you are all-out by the 30th over for 180 runs. As such, strike rate is important, but only so much. It cannot and never can substitute cold,hard runs beyond a certain point.

Ganguly is a sheet anchor? Says who? Who assigned him that role? You or one of those dumb experts that you refer to before posting here. If a player has the ability no one would stop him from doing what he is capable of. The mediocre player that Ganguly is can never get up to a S/R that other openers who are contenders for an all-time team could get to. Keep someone like a Gilly aside, whose class or calibre the stupid Ganguly would never measure up to. Hayden, Waugh, Gayle, Sehwag, Gibbs are all better bets (do not even want to mention Haynes and Greenidge as it an insult to those seasoned pros). Heck, even GG is a better bet excepting he did not play as many games to get up there statistically (but enough to put him ahead of Ganguly and his mediocrity). So keep all the sheet anchor BS to yourself. The very fact you selected Ganguly based on Gavaskar/Boycott opinions, tells you are just a book worm, never watched or played any cricket.

Hey moron, I selected Ganguly for the ODI team. Not the test team. As such, your comment of whether he is good against short pitched bowling or not, is relevant only to ODI scene. Nobody said that Ganguly is your man for smashing runs against brutal pace bowling in test cricket. What I did say, is that Ganguly is an alltime great in ODIs. You chose to contest that on the basis of his ability to play short pitched bowling. Turns out, as far as ODIs are concerned, short pitched bowling has never been a problem for Ganguly to dominate. So this leads to the logical conclusion that: Your premise for refusing Ganguly ATG status in ODIs is faulty, since it has nothing to do with ODI cricket

I know being dumb is your forte. You would never understand what I said and why I said the stuff I said about the scary cat Ganguly, and handling pace bowlers/short pitch bowling. So keep your stupid bookish wisdom to yourself. Ganguly would make the all-time team only if one is playing Kenya (that should make you happy), versus the rest we have some excellent choices (as I noted above) to make the all-time team.

Yet another childish lie. Lets examine the conversation: " I said:" That is why, bachchey, pro-scouts are former players, not rabid fans." You said:"There are ton of non-players who are GM's, scouts of pro-teams." I then said: "I am yet to see a pro scout or GM or Head Coach in any sport- NHL,NBA or NFL not have a pro or college career background as a player." To which, you said the abovementioned lie. I did not change anything, i simply reiterated the point that there isnt a single pro scout,coach or any such person in professional sport who is not a former player who has persued a professional career in sports. Not fans. As usual, you resort to blatant lying and manipulating a conversation just to satisfy your innane childish desires

No matter how you spin, a scout does not have to be former player (as in noted pro or college teams) as you first seem to suggest. Cornered you are twisting things. For example I can easily scout players better than most of these former players who played for India. I know it for a fact, I can do it. So you can have that loser mentality and somehow think that Boycott or Gavaskar are gospel. They dole out a lot of BS, just as you do it here.

[Muloghonto]

Ganguly is a sheet anchor? Says who? One of those dumb experts that you refer to before posting here. If a player has the ability no one would stop him from doing what he is capable of. The mediocre player that Ganguly is can never get up to a S/R that other openers who are contenders for an all-time team could get to. Keep someone like a Gilly aside' date=' whose class or calibre the stupid Ganguly would never measure up to. Hayden, Waugh, Gayle, Sehwag, Gibbs are all better bets (do not even want to mention Haynes and Greenidge as it an insult to those seasoned pros). Heck, even GG is a better bet excepting he did not play as many games. So keep all the sheet anchor BS to yourself. The very fact you selected Ganguly based on Gavaskar/Boycott opinions, tells you are just a book worm, never watched or played any cricket.[/quote'] Ganguly has a better record against quality team than even Mark Waugh and Mark Waugh;s strike rate is hardly better than Ganguly's. If you are gonna argue that 76 strike rate is so much better than 73, then its ridiculous. Its like saying one player who averages 39 in 51 balls (Mark Waugh) is an ATG but the guy who averages 42 in 58 balls is not an ATG. I am sorry, but that is dumb. As for GG,Hayden,Sehwag Gayle- they were not openers in the mid/late 90s when scores of 250 were a lot more competetive than they were in the 2000s. Not to mention, Ganguly played far more matches against quality opposition than Hayden or Gayle or Sehwag in the ODIs. Hayden barely caught the tail end of Donald-Pollock and Wasim-Waqar, Ganguly dominated them at their pomp. Kid, have the grace to admit you effed up. You said that Ganguly isnt fit to be an ATG player in an ODI team because of 'cat on hot tin roof against pace vowling' but then i PROVED to you that Ganguly is as great as any against pace bowling in ODIs. So you brought in test cricket, which is competely irrelevant to the selection of Ganguly in ODIs. You = logic fail. period. \ Ganguly would make an alltime XI before any other opener in the history of the game, barring Tendulkar and Gillchrist from his era and Haynes & Greenidge if we merged the eras. Ie, top 5. He is ahead of Jayasurya,Anwar,MEW by the virtue of his much superior performance against pace heavy teams such as Australia,South Africa,England, West Indies, etc. combined. Sonny, i have been involved in coaching junior high school hockey here for 10+ years now and i am yet to find ANY coach or scout for AHL league teams that wasnt a former player, nevermind NHL league. I also dare you to find me an IPL scout who has zero cricketing background. You may think you can scout players better than pros. That is because you are a kid who has no idea how real world works. When you find a job being a pro scout, please let us know and i will happily kiss your **** in apology. Till then, you are just a two-bit kid who thinks too highly of his two-bit opinion. And you can continue to demonstrate that, bachchey. You can have the ignorant childish mentality that you know more about cricket than Gavaskar or Boycott. I will go with expert opinion, as every responsible adult does. PS: I would rather assume that *YOU* dole out BS on cricket, not Gavaskar or Boycott. I see no logic in taking your opinion ahead of theirs If you think there is a logical reason why you know more about cricket than two ATG batsmen, let us know. Till then, shut up and go away from my thread. PPS: As usual, you cannot answer the cricketing questions posed to you. Shows that beneath the bluster, you are nothing more than an ignorant kid.

[Crookbond]

SachinLara, I would like to take you up on the argument of "Ganguly as an ODI captain". I would like to keep it separate from the rest of the thread due to the muck created already. Is this ok?

[harmuk]

So you claim to know Gavaskar's inner workings to attribute his comments to an ultreior motive. Arrey bachchey, grow the eff up. So you think when an ATG differs in opinion with you, its not because the great kid named harmouk, who's never played the sport professionally can be wrong. It is because the ATG clearly must have an ulterior motive. LOL. Talking to you is funny. .

No you dumbo. If Gavaskar rated (since you go by what others say) Ganguly being a better tactician than MSD, when the results do not add up, then people have to think why would a normal thinking human would do such a stupid thing. Rohan Gavaskar being given a freebie would not be a bad guess and Gavaskar is such a snitch IMO. Got it moron (since you like to be called one).

Hey kid, i asked you a question. Tell us how you are extrapolating a captain's tactical nous from match results ? How does being a better captain on a crappier team than a crap captain on a better team be differntiated from statistics ? If you can answer that question bachchey, then tell us about Dhoni's win-loss records and such. Till then, bachchey, shut up.

You know what, the term crap and Ganguly go together, firstly. Between him and MSD, MSD wins hands down in all aspects of captaincy. Keeping that aside, just call and ask PWI front office or KKR front office to know what a piece of crap Ganguly is. You will know the answer. Got it. There is the answer to that dumb question.

The entire point of decieding at the toss to bowl, is the conjencture that your bowlers will fire and put the opposition under pressure right away. If that conjencture is not valid, then what possible reason would anyone ever bowl after winning the toss ? Grow a brain. And no, if India had a so-called better batsman like Jayasurya as you like to mention, we'd have done worse

Do you know the the definition of BS? If you do not know this is a good time to know. I have bolded it for you.

[Muloghonto]

SachinLara' date=' I would like to take you up on the argument of "Ganguly as an ODI captain". I would like to keep it separate from the rest of the thread due to the muck created already. Is this ok?[/quote'] Yup.

[Muloghonto]

No you dumbo. If Gavaskar rated (since you go by what others say) Ganguly being a better tactician than MSD' date=' when the results do not add up, then people have to think why would a normal thinking human would do such a stupid thing. Rohan Gavaskar being given a freebie would not be a bad guess and Gavaskar is such a snitch IMO. Got it moron (since you like to be called one). [/quote'] Because it is not a stupid thing. Results are not relevant to which captain is a better/worse tactician. I am sure you would agree that King Kong captaining a team filled with 10 Gary Sobers will have a better record than Mark Taylor captaining 10 Dodda Ganesh. Therefore, it is not a stupid thing to rank a captain with inferior record ahead of a captain with a superior record. That is why Gavaskar is an analyst and you are not. You keep saying Ganguly is crap but have presented no evidence so far. You even said that he is a cat on a hot tin roof against pace bowling but refused to share the evidence for such an allegation. As for calling KKR and PWI, those are just baseless claims from a kid like you. You are claiming he is crap, the onus is on you to provide the evidence. Definition of BS is mostly anything you post on the cricket forum. PS: I am still waiting for my answer. I will ask the question again, bachchey: how do you extrapolate captaincy accumen from match results, given that a duffer with 10 sobers will have a better record than a genuis with 10 dodda ganesh. Answer that question, i have been waiting for it the whole day, only receiving more BS from you by the minute. So far, every single argument you've made has a logical flaw in it which i've pointed out and you've ran away from it.....like a kid. Tatte abhi utrey nahin ?

[Crookbond]

Yup.

Just to ensure that this discussion doesn't go into 'BS' mode, I want to make 3 ground rules - [1] No ad hominem (in the strictest sense) viz. no calling names, mature disagreement [2] No pedigree arguments viz. I have played xyz years of cricket, coached etc. [3] One point at a time Deal?