A new low in Indian cricket

By John Cheeran
Sourav Ganguly, I'm told, has undergone a sex change operation yesterday.
From a middle order batsman he has been transformed to an all rounder by the five-man National selection committee.
That has been quite a bold step to play Test cricket, I must say. But one fact remains. After such an operation, the person can't be productive.
So selectors have given Rahul Dravid an all rounder's effigy along with 14 cricketers to take on Sri Lanka in the first Test at Chennai.
The game is not yet over, mates.
Kiran More flattered Indian cricket followers on Tuesday only to deceive them on the very next day. Sourav Ganguly is back. I'm told he is back in the Indian Test squad as an allrounder. This should qualify as the biggest joke 2005 has seen.
The biggest ofthem all will be when Ganguly pads up for the Chennai Test.
Now it is clear that which forces were at work to bring Ganguly back. Only on Tuesday chief selector More described Ganguly's performance far from satisfactory.
What forced this volte-face?
My sources indicate that BCCI top brass had briefed the selection committee to bring Ganguly back into the Test fold, though the current team equation does not offer him a place. Selectors say he is not a batsman good enough to find a slot in the middleorder; he is not a bowler who is good enough to walk into the Indian team.
So what do you do?
Accommodate him as an all rounder, who can neither bat nor bowl. Jagmohan Dalmiya's and Ranbir Singh Mahendra's solution offered through the selection committee -meeting in Chennai lasted for four and half hours - is ridiculous at its best.
It is amazing that the man who reduced Sourav Ganguly to a jerk at Ahmedabad during the Duleep Trophy final could not find favour with the National selectors. Zaheer Khan, who dismissed Ganguly for a duck twice in the Duleep final, is out.
Can there be any more travesty of justice?
More said: "We had to leave out Zaheer Khan although it was a tough call to make. Ganguly was taken as a batting all rounder instead of having Zaheer who is a bowler."
Well, soon Ganguly will be in the Indian team for his wicket keeping abilities.
It clearly emerges that under pressure from the ruling faction in Indian board, may be an offer of another term, selectors stooped to pick Ganguly.
Can there be a better insult to the intelligence of Indian cricket fan?
Ganguly an all rounder!
An idea that was never thought of from 1996 June to 2005 November 22!
And this trick is to deny Zaheer Khan his rightful Test place, who had a rich haul of wickets in this year's Duleep Trophy?
Let me give you an independent perception about Ganguly as a cricketer. TheReuters report from Chennai states thus "the 33-year-old batsman had not made a Test hundred since December 2003 until he scored a laboured 101 in the first match against Zimbabwe at Bulawayo in September, increasingly looking shaky against short pitched deliveries."
The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has disgraced itself.
Here I'm wrong. They never had any grace to begin with.
But there is no doubt that by picking Ganguly selectors - those who have votedfor Ganguly - have debased themselves.
S. Karunakaran Nair, the BCCI secretary, put up a feeble defence when he said,"picking the team was the selectors' prerogative and it would remain that way. No board official has involved in the selection process."
But Nair should realize that picking the final eleven is captain's prerogative.
The Power Play is yet to begin.

Give us more, Kiran

By John Cheeran
Chief selector Kiran More has put Sourav Ganguly's captaincy record straight.
Not a ball was bowled in Chennai on Tuesday but More bowled a yorker at theGanguly Gang. The message is loud and clear. Rahul Dravid is the new captain of India. For Tests. For One-dayers.
Hear it. Ganguly was sacked. There is no comeback for Maharaj as Indian captain now. Much had been made about Sourav Ganguly's leadership skills by media, former players, Jagmohan Dalmiya, Ranbir Singh Mahendra and Arjuna Ranatunga.
More, to his everlasting credit, has showed immense courage to rise above partisanship, above his Ganguly-backing colleagues. He sensed the mood of cricketing India to thwart the plot against Dravid.
As selection committee -- with four known Ganguly sympathisers -- met in Chennai, Ganguly's backers had not ruled out the possibility of Maharaj returning to his 'rightful place' as captain.
I'm not privy to what happened inside the selection committee meeting. I hopesomeone will leak the proceedings and let us know.
But More's words' have come as a dampener to those irrational believers in Ganguly.
Let me quote More. "We are looking ahead to the future and I must say Rahul isgoing to be our future captain."
More did not stop there. "Sourav has not performed that well. We do acknowledgethat he scored a century against Zimbabwe. But we are not very happy with his performance during the last two to three years."
Yes....So chief selector Kiran More says Ganguly's performance in the last three years was not encouraging.
Thank you for telling us that truth. But we all knew his performance was far from the best. We also knew that powerful backers, within the selection committee and within in the cricket control board propped up Ganguly every time he was in danger of losing captaincy and his place in the side.
I'm not paying More. But he said: “In contrast, Dravid had performed well. He won matches against Pakistan and Australia as stand-in captain (in Tests). Winning matches against Zimbabwe should not be the criteria. We should be winning our matches and series against teams like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. The fact is that we have not won a series on foreign soil in 19 years. Looking at the overall performance of Sourav, we are not happy."
There was a minority in the media who were ready to believe that Ganguly would lose Indian captaincy. But none would have bargained for the kind of plain-speak More indulged in. Ganguly's Gang would have expected More at least to extol the virtues of Maharaj, to say what a great captain Ganguly has been.
He has refused to pay tributes to Maharaj. So with only one selection committee meeting left to preside, More has gone bold. One should also remember that it was only Kiran More who brought to light the Abhijit Kale bribery incident.
If anyone thinks that Ganguly's spat with coach Greg Chappell had played a role in Maharaj losing the captaincy, they are mistaken. "We did not discuss the issue. We discussed only cricketing matters."
Finally verdict is out.. Ganguly is not fit to lead India.
Give us more, Kiran.

The plot against Rahul Dravid

By John Cheeran
The Times of India reports that there are three selectors who are known backers of Sourav Ganguly. That itself constitutes simple majority in a five-man selection committee.
Then, I am told, there is one fence sitter. So that means selection committee is full of Ganguly supporters.
Jagmohan Dalmiya runs BCCI by remote control. BCCI President Ranbir Singh Mahendra assures Calcutta that Ganguly can walk into the Indian team, provided Rahul Dravid's India loses one more match.
The board elections will take place only on November 29 and 30 when Sharad Pawar might get a chance to wreck Dalmiya's dirty designs on Indian cricket. There is not much time left now to ensure that Maharaj returns to his fiefdom. So a selection committee meeting which was initially earmarked for November 28, after the Mumbai one-dayer, has been brought forward. Now National selectors will announce the captain for the Test series against Sri Lanka tonight -- after the end of the third ODI against South Africa --.
And on Wednesday they will declare the team for next two one-dayers and Test series against Sri Lanka.
Take a pause.
Whose idea is it that selectors have to wait till the end of the third one-dayer against South Africa, -- till midnight -- to declare the captain for the Test series? Can the difference of one run between India and South Africa determine who should lead India into the future?
I admire Rahul Dravid for having the courage to deal with the snakes in the Indian cricket control board room.
It all fits neatly into the Ganguly Gang's design. After Ganguly's miserable pair against Zaheer Khan in Ahmedabad, Board President Mahendra makes noises about Maharaj's imminent return in New Delhi.
Then in Calcutta, Ganguly says he is ready to do anything, to play anywhere the team wants him. He declares that he has no problem with Greg Chappell.
Oh really...As for Dalmiya, he consoles Ganguly every night that he will be given his favourite toy, the captaincy soon.
All sorts of theories are floated by the email-leaking media lobby. Separate captains for one-dayers and Tests!
Well that idea has been killed even by Australia after Steve Waugh's exit. So be ready for surprises tonight. Will Sourav Ganguly be brought back as captain for the Test series against Sri Lanka by a selection committee in which majority root for a man out of form and out of touch with realities?
Can Kiran More-led committee go against the grain? Are they foolish enough for a move that will drag India to the depths of defeats? It is possible. In fact the only way Ganguly can return to Indian team now is by the privilege of captaincy, especially into the Test team.
Everytime Ganguly was left out of the one-day squad, the Calcutta chorus has been singing "He has got 10,000 runs."
The consensus has been that Ganguly is a good one-day player. He can hit out against spinners. The pluses of his batting are neutralized by his lazy attitude on the field. And Rahul Dravid's Team India has proven that without the burden of Maharaj, they can win in a much more authentic fashion. So a good one-day player was ignored during the ODI series. Nothing happened. Except, India’s wins.
So why should he play in Tests at the cost of youngsters like Gautam Gambhir, Yuvraj Singh and Mohammad Kaif? Should India leave out VVS Laxman and bring in Ganguly?
As the final card, Ganguly Gang has even issued an empty threat to find Maharaj at least a place in the Test side, if not in the ODI squad—Calcutta would erupt when Dravid’s India play South Africa at Eden Gardens on November 25.
Who knows, this may be the first time mobsters will be selecting an Indian team.
There may not be a match in Chennai today. But there will be enough drama when Kiran More opens his mouth.

Dravid deconstructs 'brave cricket'

By John Cheeran
It was a reassuring win in Bangalore, an effort that signals that Team India is on the right path to success.
India needed to bounce back quickly in this series against South Africa, a much stronger rival than Sri Lanka and the world number two side. And India have done it in style.
It was a confidence trick.
South Africa’s much touted unbeaten streak –20 games – has been broken. The credit for it fully goes to skipper Rahul Dravid and his boys.
The Bangalore win now should act as the turning point for Team India.
Even the defeat in Hyderabad, however, had illustrated the resilient qualities of this fighting side. At Bangalore, more than the mere six-wicket win, the manner in which it was achieved holds hope for the future.
India, given the opportunity by the toss, proved their bowlers can too expose the chinks in the South African batting armour to great effect.
In the post-Ganguly era, everyone has chipped in with decent and creditable performances for this Indian team. That had left Sourav Ganguly Gang, in the aftermath of Hyderabad defeat, to point fingers at opener Virender Sehwag. Sehwag has been playing his shots all the while but a half century had eluded him in the recent past.
One more Sehwag failure at the top of the order, they were ready to ask for his head when the selection committee sits together in Chennai to identify the team for the last two day-nighters – at Kolkata and Mumbai.
An unbeaten 77 has been Sehwag’s answer.
Well. It also shows skipper Dravid’s ability to understand his colleagues’ needs and the room he creates for those who are in need.
Dravid protected Sehwag from the fury of Shaun Pollock and Ntini by keeping the Delhi Dazzler down the order to let him regain his taste for the big innings.
That in effect rules out Ganguly’s comeback for Kolkata and Mumbai matches. If one batsman who had struggled in Bangalore as well as in a few earlier matches that was none other than Sachin Tendulkar. Do Ganguly Gang have the guts to ask for Tendulkar’s head so that Maharaj can laze around in the Eden Gardens?
Even if India go down with a whimper in Chennai on Tuesday I can’t see More and friends daring to upset what Ranbir Singh Mahendra had described as a “winning combination.”
Bangalore was just not Sehwag half-century.
Murali Kartik was a revelation to South Africans. In his ten overs, Kartik yielded 16 runs, throttling Justin Kemp and company. Kartik didn’t buy wickets but he didn’t let them breathe either. Their much vaunted ‘brave cricket’ was no where to be seen against Kartik and Harbhajan Singh.
Graeme Smith must be realizing now what they missed in Hyderabad.
If India want to win the series against South Africa, Kartik and Harbhajan will have to play stranglers’ role to perfection.
Now, the Man-of-the Match.
Irfan Pathan found his rhythm as bowler to knock the stuffing out of South African top order but later played a superb innings when the match still could have turned the other way. Pathan cleared the cobwebs of doubt from the batting crease after Tendulkar’s dismissal with some swift blows.
True, for India, these days there are Men-of-the-Match.
See you in Chennai.

Sudarshan's vision

By John Cheeran
If you can't beat them, join them.
That seems to be the sentiment that is driving Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh (RSS) supremo K S Sudharshan these days. Otherwise he would not have bothered to tell his brethren to quicken the Hindu rate of growth.
Reports say that RSS Chief K S Sudarshan in Delhi asked Hindus to produce not less than three children and called for an end to the majority-minority concept. He has expressed serious concern over India's changing demographic profile. I don't know about the changing demographic profile. It must be changing, but the only question in whose favour.
Whichever community stands to benefit in the body count, I'm not greatly interested. I'm, however, interested in what Sudarshan said.
Here are the quotes: “Don't get into the trap of two child or one child norm. If you go by the one child norm, in the next 120 years, there won't be any successors in your family. You should not have less than three children and if you have more, the merrier it is,” he said after releasing a publication 'Religious Demography of India 2001' brought out by the Centre for Policy Studies in New Delhi.
I can't agree with Sudarshan more.
But Congress spokesperson Ambika Soni, UP Chief Minister and Samajwadi Party leader Mulayam Singh Yadav and a host of others have ridiculed Sudarshan for making such an appeal.
Ambika said such sentiments have no relevance in a modern India. She feels Sudarshan's opinion is too conservative.
Really?
Some others point out Sudarshan's appeal is in opposition to Indian state's declared family planning programme which gives stress not to overshoot the two children norm. TV channels that make Sania Mirza turning 19 their lead story have reacted in predictable fashion. So are rest of the media.
I ask what do they know about life?
I believe 40 per cent of Indian couples battles infertility. Leave alone three and two, they can't have one. So what's the harm in Sudarshan urging those who can, really go for it? More the merrier is not a bad idea at all.
I salute Sudarshan especially in the aftermath of devastating tsunamis and earthquakes which have left many childless. I think natural calamities are taking care of population explosion much better than India's family planning.
At the other end of the spectrum we have female infanticide and foeticide. Would you call it family planning? If not, what's the harm in having three or more children, Congress Party?
So if you are conscientious objector to foeticide, aren't you opposing family planning? If you are campaigning against the trend to kill the girl child, aren't you at some level agreeing with uncle Sudarshan?
Yes, you are. Those who can afford it, let them do it.
Fuck the family planning.

Running backwards made simple

By John Cheeran
Sourav Ganguly has broken his vow of silence.
But that comes only after Ranbir Singh Mahendra looked into the future for him. It is bright, Mahendra has assured him.
May be, Mahendra can peep into the future better than Bejan Daruwala, especially at a time when the Indian cricket board elections are coming closer.
The time these two great men in Indian cricket have chosen to speak their mind is crucial. Both of them spoke after Indian top order’s meltdown in Hyderabad and India lost the opener in the one-day series to South Africa.
Mahendra with his perspicacity as an observer has hit on the nail.
Ganguly’s is out just because selectors do not want to disturb the winning combination now. In Mahendra’s opinion, Ganguly is fit and in form.
I have great pleasure to quote Mahendra on Ganguly. ‘‘He is a great player, he has also been a great captain. We are proud of him and he will definitely make a comeback to the team.“I don't think anybody believes that Sourav does not deserve to be in the team. His performances in Zimbabwe and in Duleep Trophy have been good. I think he'll make a comeback.”
Really?
Does he know how Zaheer Khan exposed Ganguly, the batsman, in the Duleep Trophy final last week?
Is that an indication of Ganguly’s form? If he can’t handle Zaheer, can he handle Shaun Pollock?
Much has been made by Maharaj’s PR network of the century Ganguly hit in Bulawayo Test. Against a dispirited and depleted Zimbabwean bowling attack Ganguly had to labour six hours for his unforgettable ton.
And the series gone before that?
Ganguly contributed just 48 in three home Tests against Pakistan. Is that the yardstick for greatness for Mahendra?
Then what about attitude?
Let me quote coach Greg Chappell on the subject. In his interview to cricinfo.com he said: “As a coach, one thing that I do know is that you can’t teach anything to anyone who doesn’t want to be taught. These young guys…They want to know more and are trying to fund out what they can do to be better. That’s the attitude that makes coach’s life much easier.”
Apparently, Mahendra has developed amnesia about the tumultuous weeks preceding the one-day series against Sri Lanka. One should spot the note of desperation in both Mahendra’s and Ganguly’s statements. So far Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell has kept the winning combination intact. At the first hint of trouble Ganguly Gang are swift to redraw the selection equations.
And look the humble cloak the Lord Snooty is wearing now. “I’m willing to play at any position, am prepared to perform any role that team wants me to.”
Circumstances have forced Ganguly to pretend that has not lost anything. “Rahul is doing a great job as captain.”
Is he telling Kiran More that he will not have any problems in playing under Dravid?
Keep this in your calculations. Which way the BCCI elections go on November 29 will have implications on Ganguly’s future. If Dalmiya camp wins, Ganguly will sneak into Team India. If not, former Indian captain will have to let his bat do the talking.

Ranatunga has Indian media in a spin

By John Cheeran
I'm not surprised at former Sri Lankan skipper Arjuna Ranatunga batting for an out-of-form Sourav Ganguly. Ranatunga has been supporting former Indian captain for reasons best known to him for the last couple of years.
What has surprised me is this -- why do Indian media -- newspapers, television channels, websites, magazines -- treat the opinion of such a biased individual as the most important item of the day.
I was shocked to see Ranatunga's abuse distributed through Press Trust of India becoming the lead in the main sports page of Hindustan Time's Delhi edition on November 15, 2005. All of them - Times of India had limited the trumpeting to single column in Mumbai – had allowed Ranatunga to highjack the debate on Indian cricket.
Support for Ganguly coming from Ranatunga? Why do our celebrated sports writers go on vacation and let the likes of Ranatunga hold the reader to ransom?
Who is ghost writing for Ranatunga? When not a single former Indian cricketer -- except Sambaran Banerjee, a former national selector from East Zone -- did not find fault with Kiran More-led current selection committee, this gentleman from the island nation is allowed to pour scorn on the way India play and plan its cricket?
Can't some of Indian sports journalism's best minds can't see through this worst spin?
Throughout the Ganguly In, Ganguly Out debate I have come across opinions from such greats MAK Pataudi, himself former editor of Sportsworld, Bishan Singh Bedi, Ajit Wadekar, Mohinder Amarnath, Syed Kirmani, Anshuman Gaekwad, Madan Lal and Chandu Borde. They all were unanimous in their opinion that Ganguly did not deserve a place in the Indian side in the current scheme of things.
Even Salim Durrani, a self-proclaimed Ganguly fan, agreed with the situation. Now lo, behold, comes Ranatunga, who had identified Ganguly as the best captain in the world, singing Ganguly's trumpet.
Who is Ranatunga to deride Indian cricket officials? He had indulged in enough politics in an attempt to share the spoils of Sri Lankan cricket control Board.
Let me quote from Ranatunga's wisdom which has appeared in HT, Indian Express Times of India, Asian Age, etc. "His (Ganguly's) exclusion and the manner of it is unbecoming on the part of Indian cricket officialdom. I wonder if he has received any phone call from selectors, captain or coach; or even seniors like Tendulkars and Sehwags. It is one thing to believe that he does not have anything to offer, it is quite another to act as if he was just an illusion all these years.
“Wish as anyone might, nobody can take away his record or the esteem in which he is held worldwide. India must learn to respect its heroes lest they look like pirates who can only destroy a legacy."
Who are the pirates?
Why should a known Ganguly-backer's opinion, which goes against Indian cricket's larger interest, deserve such loud, uncritical space in Indian media?
I’m sure you have the answers.

Hyderabad Blues

By John Cheeran
Let's accept defeat. After all it was an honourable defeat.
South Africa's 'brave cricket' gave a shock and awe treatment to Indian batsmen at Hyderabad. On the day, visitors played better cricket and have extended their unbeaten one-day international record to 20 games. Can India break South African's invincible aura now?
We will get the answer soon as remaining four day-nighters wait to rush past us.
India almost had a brush with glory in Hyderabad. After tottering at 35 for five in 11.1 overs, setting the No.2 one-day squad 250runs as winning target illustrates this side's fighting qualities.
From there --35 for five -- winning would have been delicious. I would have traded rest of the four matches to South Africa for a win at Hyderabad. For Hyderabad was more than a match.
Winning there would have meant coming backfrom the dead, a trick Team India still not mastered.
Look at these factors. India lost a toss which they should have won while playing against a very strong fast bowling attack. They had worthy rivals this time. Rivals who represent an entirely differernt culture from that of India. In attire and attitude India and Sri Lanka are not poles apart; shades of blue run through them. Not Graeme Smith's men in green. This has been truly the point of departure. Their bellicose approach to all aspects of the game does not augur well for India.
Despite the big margin of defeat -- five wickets-- India's spirit should remain buoyant. As skipper Rahul Dravid pointed out, it is heartening that India managed to stretch the match into the 99th over.
On a day when Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Virender Sehwag, Mohammad Kaif and Gautam Gambhir failed to reach double digits, India posted a decent total; though not a safe one.
But let's be honest. 249 for nine in 50 overs is much better than 125 all out in 25 overs.
Yuvraj Singh played a tantalising innings; taking his chances and repaying Rahul Dravid for sticking with him during the Sri Lankan series. An innings such as Yuvraj played under pressure holds greater meaning for India's future battles.
Not often do ODIs throw up such golden opportunities for a batsman to reveal his mettle. Yuvraj did grab his chance, and Lion of Punjab will hopefully roar forIndia again.
Irfan Pathan had a forgettable day as a bowler but batting alone should seal his place in the side. The grit and gumption showed by Pathan and Harbhajan Singh at the batting crease should keep India's hopes and spirit alive for the rest of the series.
There is no excuse for top order's failure in the first ten overs, though context mattered in this contest. What mattered in the end was batting failure. Indian batsmen's lack of ability to negotiate the disciplined and aggressive fast bowling, backed up by athletic and alert fielding has had tragic results in the past.
Yuvraj made amends for his predecessors' sins. But the Morning Mayhem had forced team management to use Gautam Gambhir as Super Sub, which left India with just four regulars as bowlers.
Now, that was a gamble Dravid and Greg Chappell had to make; it backfired on twocounts. Gambhir himself failed with bat and the move deprived India the services of left-arm spinner Murali Kartik.
But, then, you shouldn't expect all experiments to succeed.

Let's run with Team India

By John Cheeran
MK Gandhi had his enlightenment in South Africa.
South Africans and Indians have shared ideas when it came to fixing cricket matches in the past. They are no strangers at all when it comes to cricket.
So is there anything that separates now Graeme Smith’s South Africa from Rahul Dravid’s India?
South Africa have come to India with an impressive one-day record which Dravid can only envy at the moment. They are on a roll. South Africans have extended their unbeaten streak in one-dayers to 19 matches. Only Australians have done better.
That bit of statistics should give some sense of proportion for Indian fans rooting more wins from Dravid.
When Sri Lanka came to India for the Videocon Cup series, they were the No.2 ranked one-day team in the world. A 4-0 thumping of New Zealand has taken South Africans to No.2 slot.
So South Africans must be worthy rivals for India to carry out their experiments.
India, curiously, remain at the No.7 spot.
Can the No.7 pummel No.2 as in the Sri Lankan encounter?
India enjoy the home advantage. As for the confidence level, both team are on a high.
South Africans have come prepared and come with three spinners ready to take the battle into Indian camp.
But if Graeme Smith believes he can tie down Indian batsmen with his spin trio -- Justin Ontong, Robin Peterson and uncapped Johan Botha -- that would prove to be a folly. Four out of the five matches are day-nighters and bowling in the second phase of the game would present spinners with gripping problems.
Well, India have in their ranks only Harbhajan Singh and Murali Karthik.
South Africa would do well to play to their strength, which is pace.
In one sense, this series hold much less meaning for Dravid and Chappell, compared to the Sri Lankan affair.
Whatever the reverses in this five-match series, which are bound to come, India cannot afford to change the direction of its path to future now.
Let us walk with Team India.
Or better, run, as they say in cricket.

Of rectitude and Presidents

By John Cheeran
What exactly is rectitude? Moral uprightness is the toughest of business calls.
I was watching Rajiv Mehrotra’s interview with late former Indian President K.R. Narayanan on Doordarshan last Sunday.
There is no need to list Narayanan’s achievements here.
During the interview Mehrotra quite interestingly brought to Narayanan’s attention the citation of the Rajiv Gandhi International award committee which spoke about late President’s moral rectitude, great quality if you actually possess it.
The Rajiv Gandhi award committee’s reference was Narayanan’s intervention during the Gujarat riots in 2002.
But I always had doubts on the rectitude part. Was it rectitude or was it diplomacy or was it helplessness?
Let me quote former President from his interview on DD.
“People were watching the Gujarat events and were not intervening at all.” So that’s why President spoke to Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee on the riot management.
President’s helplessness comes through in these words. “Most of the times I had to keep my anguish to myself.”
Narayanan spoke to Mehrotra without rancour, without bitterness. “I told Prime Minister that military should be introduced. PM almost always agreed with me during the conversation. But agreements did not follow up with action.”
Context matters here. Gujarat was ruled by a BJP Chief Minister, the Centre had a BJP Prime Minister and President was former Congress MP.
I thought if you had praiseworthy rectitude, you would have gone beyond diplomacy. Narayanan could have resigned as President; but he chose otherwise.
There were not many, however, there were a few who said what they believed and took orders from their conscience during the Gujarat riots.
And as for rectitude, temptations of a possible second term at Rashtrapathi Bhavan took care of it all.
May his soul rest in peace.

What now for Sourav Ganguly?

By John Cheeran
What now for Sourav Ganguly?
One cannot evade this question any longer.
Former skipper’s absence has proved to be a blessing for Team India as the resounding
6-1 series win over Sri Lanka shows.
As Rahul Dravid’s India was conducting its experiments against Sri Lanka, Ganguly was having his own experiments in Duleep Trophy.
Only difference was this – Ganguly’s experiments have backfired and national selectors are justified in ignoring the Maharaj for the entire Sri Lankan series.
Kiran More has retained the same squad which completed the series win against Sri Lanka at Baroda for the first three one-dayers against South Africa.
More, however, has left enough room for drama.
Selectors are due to announce the squad for the last two one-dayers – Kolkata and Mumbai—at Chennai on November 22.
At the moment my bet is that Eden Gardens won’t get to see Maharaja in his pomp.
It would be a pity, I must say.
The clamour for Ganguly’s inclusion is not yet over; its tone has however turned from demand to wailing.
Look at what happened in the first two days of the Duleep Trophy final which is being played out at the Motera Stadium in Ahmedabad.
What Vikram Rajvir Singh and Amit Bhandari failed to do in Rajkot, Zaheer Khan has done in Ahmedabd. Khan has put Ganguly in his place.
In East Zone’s first innings Ganguly was clean bowled by Khan for a duck. Ganguly’s innings lasted seven balls.
How unsuitable Ganguly is for competitive cricket right now was proved in East Zone’s second innings. This time Ganguly couldn’t survive the first ball he faced from his former colleague Zaheer Khan. Khan trapped him lbw.
These two dismissals are clear proof that Ganguly is out of touch with cricketing realities. The sooner Ganguly realizes that he can’t claim a place in the Indian side on his past glory, the better for him.
I believe Zaheer was desperate to get the prize wicket of Ganguly at Motera. His earlier show in the Duleep Trophy semifinal against Central Zone at Aurangabad was ignored by selectors when they announced the one-day squad to take on the South Africans.
Now by giving Ganguly a Duleep pair Khan can be positive that More will turn towards him when he next sits together with Dravid and Chappell.
But nothing is certain in this world.
The likes of Zaheer Khan must be watchful. After his failure to win back a place in the Indian side as a batsman, Ganguly is now retrofitting himself as a bowler. Throughout the Duleep Trophy contests, Ganguly, ever the shirker, has grabbed the ball to transform himself as a bowler.
Delusions can have no limits, I presume.

Let there be more experiments!

By John Cheeran
The biggest gain for India from the one-day series against Sri Lanka is the increase in their confidence level. Some times score lines do matter. Especially if it is a tennis score (6-1) in a cricket series.
The series was a story of experiments that worked; experiments that did not turn into disasters. With a new captain showing the resolve to bring in the necessary changes, and players responding in splendid fashion, India, the No.7 team in One-Dayers outclassed and out-thought the No.2 side in the world. It really is an achievement.
One shouldn’t grudge skipper Rahul Dravid and coach Greg Chappell their success.
Dravid was willing to experiment; Team India was determined to execute it.
Dravid’s and Chappell’s approach to the team composition had some thought behind it, which was revealed as the seven-match series unfolded.
The one-day series began in Nagpur with Irfan Pathan coming in as No. 3.
As the series finished off at Baroda, Pathan was brought back to No. 3 and youngster affirmed his potential as an all rounder. The team management has convinced fans, critics and most crucially, the players themselves, that changes are part of a grand design.
This is in sharp contrast with some of the desperate ploys employed by Sourav Ganguly in the past such as Parthiv Patel being made an opener in the Rawalpindi Test just to ensure that skipper played the match!.
Now Pathan knows he will be there as an all rounder in the team; not just as a bowler.
Same goes for Mahendra Singh Dhoni.
Dhoni, pushed up to No. 3 at Jaipur, found himself at the same spot on quite a few occasion as the series progressed. As it all ended in Baroda on a happy note Dhoni, though lower down the order, underlined his batting prowess.
Yet I feel there is more room for experiments.
Now Indian batting has enough catalysts to quicken the scoreboard. There is a scramble outside the batsmen’s tent to get in. That’s quite a positive sign.
We have bowlers who are capable of manipulating the 50 overs to bring success. But I believe for a long time bowlers in one-day cricket have been doing just the secondary role; defending the batsmen’s effort.
India should add variety and depth to its arsenal so that Dravid could dictate terms to the Goliaths of the crease as the battle scenes differ.
The South Africans are here for the five-match series, for of them day-nighters, and I expect Dravid and Chappell to infuse some bold thinking into our bowling.
Young pacer Rudra Pratap Singh has taken wickets and his chances. Sreesanth has showed promise but India still need bowlers with big heart.
The invitation is out. Please join the Team India.

Opinion and the other opinion

Al Jazeera is the biggest and loudest thing that has happened in the Arab media. Hugh Miles, a British journalist, has written Al Jazeera which claims to be the inside story of the Arab news channel that is challenging the West.
Miles has succeeded in his work; a great PR job for the Doha-based TV channel.
Miles says in the acknowledgements section of Al Jazeera that he has never received any payment from Al Jazeera in connection with this book.
If Miles’ book had taken a critical look at Al Jazeera, he would not have attempted to assert his independence as a journalist.
There is no doubt that author’s sympathies lie with Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera, definitely, is a big thing in Arab world. It merits a book. The question is does the book Al Jazeera sound like Al Jazeera, the channel?
Al Jazeera has kept its journalism simple. It gives everyone air time. And if it is to spew venom at the US it gives you unlimited hot air.
You can say anything on the channel as long as you haven’t got anything to say on Qatar’s rulers. Sorry, I meant if you haven’t got anything negative to say on Qatar.
Al Jazeera first talks to A, who has an axe to grind against B. A says all sorts of things about B. Then Al Jazeera goes to B, says that A has said all these things about you, what have you to say now? Another round of unbridled opinion.
Al Jazeera, and many of its viewers take this for balanced journalism. As the channel proudly proclaims in their logo, it is the opinion and the other opinion.
It does not hurt Qatar or Al Jazeera but this brand of journalism irritates all involved parties. Hence the all round condemnation of the channel by those who control the levers of power in Arab nations, and also by the United States.
Miles brings attention to the point that it was Al Jazeera who first let the Arab world hear the Israeli point of view through their channel. Much has been made about that. But to rest of the world who are not obsessed with Israel, it matters little.
But Al Jazeera’s USP is that it has proved to be a megaphone for Osama Bin Laden. A star Al Jazeera reporter – Taysir Alluni – is still awaiting trial in Spain for being an active member and recruiter for a Spain-based Al Qaeda cell.
I believe you are free to make your own inferences.
Miles makes much noise about Al Jazeera’s independent mode of journalism. It means letting involved parties to hurl accusations against each other. Miles is reluctant to state that Al Jazeera is owned by Shakih Hamad Bin Khalifa Al Thani, who practically owns Qatar.
But on Page 337 of Al Jazeera he admits
“Not one Arab satellite channel, including Al Jazeera could survive without political and financial support either from an Arab government or from a wealthy member of the Arab elite who has close ties to its government.”
So tell me Miles, where is the free speech?
How free, how intrepid is Al Jazeera’s journalism? They can rail against Saudi Arabia, they can rail against the US. But how deep Al Jazeera want to look within, look inside Qatar? Al Jazeera, of course, has to be and is reverential towards Qatar government.
On another front, Miles is all sympathies for the Arabs in the US. They (Arab-Americans) are feeling like second class citizens in the post-9/11 atmosphere. Miles talks about his visit to Detroit to gauge the impact of Al Jazeera’s telecast among the Arabs in the US.
In a chapter called “Watching from the West” Miles writes:
“ Citizenship, I was told, had now been subdivided into grades and Arab-Americans had become something less than full citizens. People had been picked up at bus stops and deported without a trial or even the chance to make a single phone call or collect their belongings from home.”
Sad, indeed.
But I assume as part of his Al Jazeera project, Miles would have spent time in quite a few Arab nations. Did he see any non-Arab faces there? Did they have any tales to tell him? I wonder why didn’t those faces interest him?
Is it because they are the Asian coolies serving the Arab agenda?
Do Asian coolies abroad have any human rights?
Unlike those Arab-Americans, these Asian coolies can’t claim even a hyphen to their status.
They can’t be interesting subjects to journalists like Miles, when there are no petrodollars to oil their agenda.
Certainly there are Miles to go before things can change.

The vanishing smile

Once upon a time Rajkot used to be a land of Kings. Someone in the Indian dressing room might have reminded Yuvraj Singh about the place.
On Wednesday Yuvraj ensured that he will not lose his place in the Team India, with a glittering all-round display.
Young pacer Rudra Pratap Singh took four wickets, but to me the biggest performer of the day was Yuvraj. It was not his unbeaten 79 that mattered most; it was the approach he brought on to the field.
Though Sri Lanka had lost wickets, they were not really struggling. The way Tillakaratne Dilshan batted, he could have turned to naught all the good work done by Indian bowlers. He was scoring run-a-ball, Indian bowling had realized his explosive finishing off abilities at Ahmedabad and now appeared bereft of ideas.
Then came Yuvraj Singh’s direct hit that went swifter than Dilshan to the stumps. Sheer opportunism and athleticism were the factors that terminated the most threatening innings Sri Lankans dared to produce in Rajkot. And the fact that it came from Yuvraj, a young man struggling to regain his batting touch, a man not riding on the highest levels of confidence, tells it all. Such an attitude to survival fits best in the scheme of things of any winning team. And you just imagine Sourav Ganguly coming up with that kind of plebeian effort!
After such a bright, swift, show of his commitment to Team India’s cause runs were bound to come for Yuvraj. That Yuvraj outpaced Mohammad Kaif at the batting crease was not a surprise at all.
Kaif appeared solid; Yuvraj beaming.
The smile and swagger must be vanishing from Sourav Ganguly’s mien.

Yuvraj stays, Maharaj stays outside

Sourav Ganguly must have realised by this time that the door to Indian team does not open if he knocks with his reputation.
National selectors have kept Ganguly sulking again. Selection Committee chairman Kiran More was at his ambiguous best when asked about former Indian skipper’s future.
He wasn't willing to let us know if the selectors had discussed Ganguly's future and added, “Any cricketer can make a comeback and we haven't ruled anyone out.”
It is as candid as your weekly horoscope can get.
Please take note, Mr Bejan Daruwala.
It is not that More did not disrupt the Indian side at all. At Ahmedabad, after burning the midnight oil, More opened the door only to let in Mohammad Kaif and Vikram Rajveer Singh, the rookie fast bowler from Chandigarh.
Now Kaif has proven his form and fitness much after Ganguly did so, in the Duleep Trophy semifinal against West Zone. Kaif managed 54 in Central Zone’s first innings on a terrible track at Aurangabad.
Sunil Gavasakar in his column last week had talked about National Selectors’ double standards. Now as far as the comeback procedure is concerned I can’t spot any double standards by the More-led committee. Selectors have waited, and watched Kaif in action in Duleep Trophy.
If selectors have decided that Kaif’s half-century is better than the century Ganguly scored against North Zone in the Duleep Trophy quarterfinal, I can’t quarrel with them.
It’s their prerogative to decide between them. I’m sure, compared to Maharaja, Kaif’s athleticism would have persuaded the selectors to go for the Uttar Pradesh youngster.
And it’s quite obvious that Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell would like to have Kaif’s dynamism rather than contend with Ganguly’s arrogance.
Though India lost Ahmedbad match, the happenings there also went against Ganguly. A glorious innings from Gautam Gambhir makes comeback all the more difficult for Ganguly. When Sachin Tendulkar returns, Dravid must be keen to accommodate the flamboyant Delhi youngster in the middle order in one-dayers. With a fit Kaif back in the fold, skipper has more selection options.
The Ganguly Gang was building their case for a swap between a struggling Yuvraj and the Maharaj. But skipper Dravid has decided to back his players on their bad days. It indeed is an effective of dose Ganguly medicine, to assure the seniors that they will get justice in the New Order.
Now remember Dravid’s words, post-Ahmedabd. “We have a young batting lineup and we need to give them some time and chances.”
Even Venugopala Rao, who has lost his so-called protection, can take heart from Dravid’s words. But not for the Maharaj. Not certainly.

Where are our spinners?

The defeat at Ahmedabad is the best thing that has happened to Team India in recent times. This is a defeat – by five wickets –India can take in its stride and think about the positives of the outcome.
Victories often conceal the cracks and repairmen never arrive on the scene.
India should use the Ahmedabad defeat to rectify its fatal flaws.
India lost because it did not have adequate bowling resources. India missed Irfan Pathan and Harbhajan Singh while defending 285.
And it was such a pity that two brilliant centuries – from Rahul Dravid and Gautam Gambhir, of same value but that came in contrasting styles -- went in vain.
Skipper Rahul Dravid, however, has backed his boys. He did not blame his bowlers but was all praise for the job on the field.
“It's not easy to say what went wrong but I think we were 25-30 runs short. I thought we had a lot of positives form the game - the attitude and the fielding were good and the young boys did a great job.”
Well, it is a great approach from a captain to his teammates in the aftermath of a 'soft defeat'.
Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell were right to make the changes to the squad that played in Ahmedabad. Since series victory has been achieved there was no harm in disrupting the winning combination.
After all, if we did not try out players now, then when?
Of the three changes effected, one clicked while other two may lead to more churning of the bowling options.
Giving Sachin Tendulkar time to breathe did not affect the content of Indian batting. I feel Gautam Gambhir, Tendulkar’s replacement, played a better knock than Mumbai Master tend to play now.
Indian batsmen played out one of their plans to perfection –they denied Muralitharan wickets. But that was little consolation as Gambhir, Rao, Raina and Agarkar perished to super-sub Maharoof who should have been blasted out of the Moetra Stadium on Sunday to give the Indian total an imposing look.
Reining in Sri Lankan batsmen without Harbhajan Singh and Irfan Pathan was tough for Virender Sehwag. Though India succeeded in prising out the so called Lankan dangermen, they missed the kind of pressure tactics Harbhajan could have applied in the middle overs.
It also brings in the big question. Where are our spinners?
Those who know the answer should contact Dravid immediately.

Future..It is very exciting!

It wasn't easy.
It took effort. It took team effort.
Very rarely has India outclassed its rivals in a one-day international series in such a convincing manner.
A new captain, a new order. And world's second best one-day team.
The manner in which Rahul Dravid has led India to an unassailable 4-0 lead is impressive to saythe least.
Skipper Dravid's words during the presentation ceremony shall set aside theworries of many a doubting Thomas. "That (Dhoni's innings) was simply brilliant. In the last two games in Dhoni, Venugopala Rao and Raina we have seen the future of Indian batting. It is very exciting." Indeed! May not be, for a few.
Pune was the toughest Test Sri Lanka put India through so far in this One-day series for the Videocon Cup. Winning the Pune match was vital for Sri Lanka to keep the seven-match series alive. This was supposed to be the turning point of the series.
In sharp contrast from the first three matches, Indian batting was asked some searching questions, first by pacers Chaminda Vaas and Ranjit Fernando.
As Muttaiah Muralitharan gleefully applied the brakes on Indian chase, suddenly 261 looked a tantalizing score.
The early loss of Tendulkar and a sedate Virender Sehwag were not the thingsIndian management was looking for. The usual No-3 experiment did not work either as Yuvraj Singh perished in his attempt to quicken the chase.
Time had come for Dravid to lead from the front. Pressure was building and captain had to build his side's innings. He did an admirable job by putting India on the right track.
Yet neither Dravid nor Venugopala Rao could finish off the chase on their own.
How lucky that eventually proved for the Indian team. Crisis situations provide the stage for the unsung to have their say.
At Pune, Rao and Raina grabbed their chances. The ease and élan with which Raina and Mahendra Dhoni scripted the win augur well for India.
Dhoni showed he can read the game and play accordingly. Here was Mr Sixer urging Raina to steal singles and keep the scoreboard moving. Such a long distance from Jaipur to Pune!
Many were convinced that the young man at the crease with flowing mane was Dhoni only when he hit Russel Arnold for two consecutive sixes in the 46th over, to seal the win.
Victory has many facets, victors have many faces.

An SMS to Mr Ganguly

I'm just curious.
What was Sourav Ganguly doing when India played Sri Lanka in Pune on Thursday?
For that matter, what what was he doing when India played Sri Lanka at Nagpur, Mohali and Jaipur?
Was the former Indian skipper watching the match on TV? I wish he was. Because more than anyone in India -- there I include both Rahul Dravid and GregChappell -- Ganguly has reasons to be interested in what happens out there in the middle when Indians are sweating it out.
The shape of former Indian captain's future depends on how good or how bad India performs. So Ganguly, definitely, was a party keenly interested in the proceedings. Living through these four days, away from the Indian dressing room, would have been more harrowing to Ganguly than facing up to some of the fastest bowlers inworld cricket. Against bowlers he could have walked away to square leg.
Now there are no such luxuries. At its best he could switch TV channels. India, the Team India that is, did not miss Ganguly at all. I have no reasons to believe even his thickest buddy in the dressing room - Harbhajan Singh -- would have missed his former skipper.
A lot has happened in these four match days.
The so-called weakest links in a performing -let me put it winning -team proved too strong against Sri Lankan assault in Pune.Venugopala Rao, whom Ganguly was desperate to ease out, came good on the right time.
I hope Sunil Gavaskar did watch Venugopala bat out there.
So did the left-hander Suresh Raina, who displayed his mettle, in a very crucial juncture.
For Ganguly to sneak back into the Indian team now seems a tall order. But he is a brave man.
I know. But does he really have the courage to ring up Rahul Dravid and tell him "Rahul, you have done a fabulous job. Indian cricket will be safe in your hands. All of you have performed so well so that I don't think Indian cricket needs me anylonger. I wish all the best for you guys."
I have just sent an SMS to Ganguly.
I have wished Ganguly all the best for his future.
I wish he does the same to Rahul Dravid and his colleagues.

Thus wrote Sunil Gavaskar

When Sunil Manohar Gavaskar talks about double standards, one should listen.
Former Indian cricket captain, who thought it fit to keep quiet when Shiv Sena hoodlums ransacked the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s office in Mumbai in 1990s, preaches about double standards!
I reckon SMG as one of the finest batsman India has produced. I think SMG is a much better batsman than Sachin Tendulkar.
Gavaskar, though he hasn’t entered politics, remains an ace manipulator of men and media. He knows pretty well where is the epicenter of power in Indian cricket. He only wants a slice of it in the form of a few committees. A small man with a smaller agenda.
So I wasn’t surprised when he wrote in his syndicated column about National selection committee’s double standards. SMG is well qualified to talk about double standards, indeed.
His problem is Venugopala Rao.
Let me quote from SMG’s column that Hindustan Times’ New Delhi edition carried. “The start that the openers gave meant (in Mohali) the time was ripe for Venugopala Rao to be given a promotion, for there was no pressure and to be able to bat along with little champion would be a great learning experience. Instead, it was JP Yadav who was sacrificed, and at this rate it looks Rao will make it to the 2007 World Cup without batting for India, for he seems a protected specie.
“The form he showed in the Challenger means he (Rao) does not need the protection, but it may have been the worry that if he failed then there could be a case for a change in the team. The selectors have decided not to change a winning combination, but would they have done that if Kaif had been declared fit?”
Now we know. SMG’s problem is not Rao but Sourav Ganguly.
Had Rao failed at No.3 slot in the first two one-dayers, Gavaskar could have advocated Ganguly’s cause. Gavaskar, rightly or wrongly feels, Rao gets protection.
First, he says batting along with Tendulkar would have been a great learning experience for Rao at No.3. But if that is really the case, why does SMG write that JP Yadav was sacrificed at no. 3? What then about the learning experience? Should we leave JP Yadav uneducated?
SMG, with all his experience, should have known that national selectors don’t play dice with batting order. It is clear that captain and coach, in this instance, Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell, push the men up and down. That’s their prerogative.
Venugopala Rao is protected by Dravid and Chappell. Why doesn’t SMG say it so? Say it. Say it loud.
If you believe in the cause you want to espouse, you will have the guts to say it so.
It is safe to rail against National selectors who remain faceless to the large number of Indian cricket fans. There are five of them and SMG can always say I didn’t mean you. Not so if you train your guns at Dravid and Chappell. SMG jumps his gun in Mohammad Kaif’s case. He brings in the quite useful ‘if’ to buttress his point there. If Kaif had been declared fit. Let’s wait for him to regain the fitness.
Why the hurry? A man who waited throughout his cricket career for the suitable ball, can’t wait for Kaif to regain fitness?
Is there any crisis in the team?
It is SMG’s prerogative, if he thinks so, to bat for his friends. May be Sourav Ganguly is SMG’s friend.
I just wanted to add that when Rohan Gavaskar could not find a place in the Mumbai Ranji Trophy squad it was Cricket Association of Bengal who opened the doors for SMG’s son. Ganguly and Dalmiya even made room at the top for Gavaskar junior in the ODIs. Well, how can I blame Gavaskar, if he decides to bat for his friends in their hour of distress?
To their credit, Dravid and Chappell seem to have ignored SMG’s barbs. They apparently read SMG’s outpouring of grief and worsened it by protecting Rao at Jaipur too.
Gavaskar should advise Ganguly and Rohan to drink more milk.