Two things un-Indian about Rahul Dravid

[head coach]

He did two things distinctly un-Indian. When he was captain, he didn't give himself a fixed position at the top of the order. As India's most consistent batsman he could have had the No. 3 position by right, but he chose to bat at five, sometimes even six - positions where consistent scores are least likely - because he wanted his stroke-makers to get more overs. He didn't see it as a sacrifice but a decision taken in the best interest of the team and with an eye towards the development of young players. Two, he gave up the captaincy when he could have had it for another year at least. This was a decision he made more for his own sake. When he was re-appointed captain after the World Cup disaster, Dravid had laid out his expectations and given himself a time allowance. Despite the Test-series victory in England and the closeness of the one-day series, he perhaps didn't see Indian cricket moving in the direction he would have liked it to head in.

An Excellent write -up by Mr. Bal at http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/columns/content/current/story/317499.html

The team for the first two one-dayers has five openers, none of them, apart from Tendulkar, capable of being a mid-innings builder. And it's been clear for a while that Tendulkar doesn't want to bat down the order. No successful one-day team in the history of cricket has been built around dashers: from Larry Gomes to Michael Bevan to Damien Martyn to Michael Hussey, every successful side has had an accomplished accumulator in the middle. If we look around today, Sri Lanka have Mahela Jayawardene; South Africa, Jacques Kallis; and Pakistan, Younis Khan and Mohammed Yousuf. And England are beginning to realise just how valuable Ian Bell is. It's no one's case that India must plan their one-day future around Dravid. In fact, they must start looking beyond him and Tendulkar and Ganguly. But the transition must be planned with thought and care. When Dravid plays well, he lends balance to the team. When he goes, he must be replaced with someone who is suited to playing his role.

[head coach]

This is where Rahul Dravid stands out among his peers He took decisions in the best interest of the team and with an eye towards the development of young players where as some of his team members chose to safe guide their position in the team by playing in their favorite position and playing with a low strike rate when the team demanded higher run rate.

[yoda]

That's why he is out of the team. Nice guys always finish last.

[King Tendulkar]

Dravids treatment has been a digrace, Vengy is a ###########:angry_smile:

[Anakin]

There was no need to "rest" RD at all :sad_smile:

[Lurker]

I have braced myself for such articles really. The way I see it, the senior lot should have been chugged out of Indian LOI team right after the WC. That the Selectors/Administrators did not have the guts to do it then has ensured that the Indian team selection is going to be a mess with the Big 3 being a part of it. And when one of them shall be dropped/rested you would have myriad of opinions as up above.

[veer]

RD is not into politics.. and hence he will be treated badly by management.. he will take it on chin in interest of team and country.. i knew it..

[head coach]

I have braced myself for such articles really. The way I see it, the senior lot should have been chugged out of Indian LOI team right after the WC. That the Selectors/Administrators did not have the guts to do it then has ensured that the Indian team selection is going to be a mess with the Big 3 being a part of it. And when one of them shall be dropped/rested you would have myriad of opinions as up above.

Lurker, If the intention is to groom youngsters then there should be a good replacement for Dravid who can provide stability to middle order. I hope you agree with me that Gambir or Sehwag is not going to provide that much needed stability that Dravid offers. I would have been happier if Dravid was rested/dropped for Badrinath or Tiwary(a middle order player). Now the question is: Is it Dravid or Gangully who should have be chucked out first?

[Lurker]

Lurker, If the intention is to groom youngsters then there should be a good replacement for Dravid who can provide stability to middle order. I hope you agree with me that Gambir or Sehwag is not going to provide that much needed stability that Dravid offers. I would have been happier if Dravid was rested/dropped for Badrinath or Tiwary(a middle order player). Now the question is: Is it Dravid or Gangully who should have be chucked out first?

HC, I loath to rake up history and put blame game but I would say that the best chance to breed in youngsters was post WC. Indian team, led by Dravid, had very clearly falted and it was as good a chance to sulk as it was to take tough decisions. Sadly the former happened but not the latter. Onto your question about Dravid vis a vis Gambhir and Sehwag. Yes I do agree that it is not a one-on-one replacement. Sehwag is hardly a youngster, I mean he has been around for 7-8 years plus now, bulk of them as certainty in Indian team. Plus his style of cricket is hardly similar to Dravid..and his present form sucks! Gambhir is thus far good in 20/20 but otherwise the jury is still out on him. He needs to be persisted with but one can also not deny that he has had given some decent chances too. xxx

[head coach]

Good to see that streets are not on fire when Dravid is dropped!:two_thumbs_up:

[talksport]

Congress losing out in a political game in Bangalore and Dravid being dropped same day ....Coincidence !!!