Rahul Dravid thinks himself to be the best T20x20 player in the world
kevin....@gmail.com
"After the first round of auction in Mumbai, a few friends
congratulated me on my Test team," Vijay Mallya, the franchise owner,
said before the IPL. " I mentioned this to our captain Dravid and he
laughed it off and told me that Test cricket is the ultimate test for
any cricketer and if a player can do well in that format, then he can
do well in all other formats, be it one-day matches or Twenty20; Me,
Kallis and Jaffer are some of the best in business of Test Cricket; We
all capable of adjusting to any kind of situation. If you really want,
We can hit six sixes in an over."
Did you hear that?
Test cricket is the ultimate test for any cricketer and if a player
can do well in that format, then he can do well in all other formats,
be it one-day matches or Twenty20!
Jack of all trades
<kevin....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6cf9f563-f702-4541...@l17g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> "After the first round of auction in Mumbai, a few friends
> congratulated me on my Test team," Vijay Mallya, the franchise owner,
> said before the IPL. " I mentioned this to our captain Dravid and he
> laughed it off and told me that Test cricket is the ultimate test for
> any cricketer and if a player can do well in that format, then he can
> do well in all other formats, be it one-day matches or Twenty20; Me,
> Kallis and Jaffer are some of the best in business of Test Cricket; We
> all capable of adjusting to any kind of situation. If you really want,
> We can hit six sixes in an over."
If they all combined can hit six sixes in six matches, i would consider that
a success.
If he was so good at adjusting, he wouldn't have had to keep wickets to earn
his
place in the ODI team.
Mohan
> <kevin....@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6cf9f563-f702-4541...@l17g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>> "After the first round of auction in Mumbai, a few friends
>> congratulated me on my Test team," Vijay Mallya, the franchise owner,
>> said before the IPL. " I mentioned this to our captain Dravid and he
>> laughed it off and told me that Test cricket is the ultimate test for
>> any cricketer and if a player can do well in that format, then he can
>> do well in all other formats, be it one-day matches or Twenty20; Me,
>> Kallis and Jaffer are some of the best in business of Test Cricket; We
>> all capable of adjusting to any kind of situation. If you really want,
>> We can hit six sixes in an over."
>
> If they all combined can hit six sixes in six matches, i would consider that
> a success.
> If he was so good at adjusting, he wouldn't have had to keep wickets to earn
> his
> place in the ODI team.
I think he saw this as a grand experiment, conducted at Mallya's
expense, to show the world that those who are good at Test cricket are
best suited for limited overs too. He probably thought that by the end
of IPL first season everyone will be praising his visionary thinking and
boards all over the world will be packing one-day teams with Test
players. And this would be his revenge for all that humiliation he had
to endure when he was dropped from one-day teams, when Lele's of this
world used to question his suitability for limited overs format, when he
had to keep wickets to save his place in the one-day team, etc.
Instead, he has managed to achieve the opposite. Pretty soon coaches
will be telling a kid who plays a defensive shot, "Zor se maaro, varna
tu bhi Dravid jaise ban jayega" (Emphasis from the hit, or else you too
will become like Dravid - Google).
Mohan
Jayen
<snip>
> when he
> had to keep wickets to save his place in the one-day team, etc.
>
When was this?
Regards,
Jayen
Andrew Dunford
"Jayen" <rsc_p...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:585958ab-fc0a-4b6e...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> When was this?
Fair question. I can remember Dravid standing behind the stumps wearing
pads on many occasions, but I can't ever recall him keeping wicket as such.
Andrew
Jack of all trades
"Jayen" <rsc_p...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:585958ab-fc0a-4b6e...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>When was this?
> Regards,
> Jayen
2001-2003
raghu.sa...@gmail.com
wrote:
Dravid is a goner. If he was really the brainchild for the selection
of this team Mallya should be firing him instead of the hapless CEO,
whose existence no one knew of until he got fired :)
Raghu
Jayen
> "Jayen" <rsc_pos...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Average in 2001: 43.5
Average in 2002: 48
Average in 2003: 41.5
SR was around 73 for the period.
If he had to keep wickets to save his place, it meant that there were
four MO bats who were better than he was. Who were they?
Dravid's biggest fault seems to be that he causes a steep fall in his
critics' IQ, causing otherwise reasonable individuals to morph into
drooling morons.
Regards,
Jayen
Jack of all trades
Regards,
Jayen
Random numbers like that don't mean much to me. Dravid repeatedly mentioned
during that time that he does not want to keep, then why did he have to keep
wickets? Official answer was to bring the flexibility. But the real reason
was that He was the most expendable batsman in the team then. Had they found
dhoni then, It would have been bye-bye dravid around then. Ofcourse he came
back strongly later somewhat re-inventing his game, but he was still the
weakest link in ODI batting order.
-J
Jayen
Random numbers such as runs scored? What, in your opinion, would a
meaningful quantification of a batsman's contribution to the side?
> Dravid repeatedly mentioned
> during that time that he does not want to keep, then why did he have to keep
> wickets?
Because it freed up a batsman's spot for the team?
> Official answer was to bring the flexibility. But the real reason
> was that He was the most expendable batsman in the team then.
Real reason = the voices in your head told you so.
> Had they found
> dhoni then, It would have been bye-bye dravid around then. Ofcourse he came
> back strongly later somewhat re-inventing his game,
2001-2003 was close to his peak. He played a little better in
2004-2006, but not by much. "came back strongly later somewhat re-
inventing his game" is not borne out by facts.
> but he was still the
> weakest link in ODI batting order.
In general, there are two kinds of debates about batsman. One where
you take a batsman close to the top of the heap and argue fiercely
about whether he was the best. Examples would be the Viv Richards-Greg
Chappell-Sunil Gavaskar debate about the best batsman of the late
seventies, the Gavaskar-Viswanath debate from the seventies and the
May-Barrington debate of the late fifties and early sixties. The other
is where you take a batsman close to the bottom and argue about
whether he deserves to be dropped from the side or retained. An
example is the Ganguly debate from mid-2005. Dravid in ODIs is a
unique case of taking a batsman who should be close to figuring the
first category and including him in the second.
Regards,
Jayen
Moksh
Jayen
> Why was Dravid dropped from One-Dayers in the middle of his career?
What's meant by "middle of his career"?
He was dropped in 1997/98, deservedly, because he sucked. He
established his spot with some good performances in 1999 and never had
a problem retaining it until he was dropped in mid-2007, again because
he sucked.
Regards,
Jayen
Jayen
> On May 11, 10:36 am, Jayen <rsc_pos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > 2001-2003
>
> > Average in 2001: 43.5
> > Average in 2002: 48
> > Average in 2003: 41.5
>
> > SR was around 73 for the period.
>
> > If he had to keep wickets to save his place, it meant that there were
> > four MO bats who were better than he was. Who were they?
>
> Yuvraj-en-kaif (as they were known back then) were these young stars
> and couldn't be dropped. Mongia scored a huge ton against Zimbabwe
> making use of Tendulkar's absence due to injury, so he couldn't be
> dropped either. That's when Ganguly had this brainwave of
> accommodating Dravid in the team by making him keep.
As an example, Yuvraj had sucked for practically the whole of 2001
(after a brilliant start in the Champions 2000). He even ended up
missing a few ODIs in end-2001. However, we had tried out a whole
bunch of MO guys in 2001 who were absolutely horrible amongst whom
Yuvraj showed a lot of promise. Kaif and Mongia were pretty raw then,
but had started well. A different way of looking at this is, in order
to accomodate all of them (among other things), Dravid doubled up as
keeper. But somehow, this is always rendered as, "From 2001 to 2003,
in order to save his ODI spot, Dravid was forced to keep".
> We beat WI in WI
> with that combination, then won the Natwest in England, Dravid too
> started batting more freely than he used to and they just continued
> with this arrangement till the WC in South Africa and beyond.
He batted better, but his improvement as an ODI bat had started much
before, and in 2001, he was behind only Ganguly and Tendulkar.
Regards,
Jayen
raghu.sa...@gmail.com
Jayen,
So you agree that Dravid's elimination from the ODI squad was
in the best interest of the team. Would you then have a problem withe
statement made in the subject of this thread?
Raghu
Jayen
> On May 11, 12:21 am, Jayen <rsc_pos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On May 11, 12:01 pm, "Moksh" <invalid.em...@spam.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Why was Dravid dropped from One-Dayers in the middle of his career?
> >
> > What's meant by "middle of his career"?
> >
> > He was dropped in 1997/98, deservedly, because he sucked. He
> > established his spot with some good performances in 1999 and never had
> > a problem retaining it until he was dropped in mid-2007, again because
> > he sucked.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jayen
>
> Jayen,
> So you agree that Dravid's elimination from the ODI squad was
> in the best interest of the team.
If you mean his dropping from the ODI squad in 2007, I had no problem
with it. He was struggling in tests and had had a poor run in a few
ODIs. One way of looking at this is that he was freed up to
concentrate on regaining his form in tests without worrying about
ODIs.
> Would you then have a problem withe
> statement made in the subject of this thread?
Dravid has said nothing of the kind. I have no idea what Dravid
thinks. The OP in a noted loon. The statement made in the subject of
the thread is not worth commenting on.
Regards,
Jayen
kipps
The owner has to take more interest and hire experts to advise him.
Imagine Steinbrunner of the NY Yankees just listening to his GM!
Macjoubert
wrote:
Mallya was perfectly right in firing Charu Sharma, he is also
justified if he fires Dravid.
Here's what Dravid has done, he introduced a lackadaisical attitude
towards the format by getting all his friends on board , he has
helped Jaffer,Joshi, helping them out with retirement.
When he was granted icon status he immediately had a fiduciary
responsibility towards the corporate body that bought him.
He thus violated ethics by his team selection.
How he justified selecting Kallis, Jaffer and Joshi is astonishing.I
can see an argument for Kallis, but Jaffer and Joshi are inexusable
choices.
Mallya has to steady this ship and how he will do it will be brutal,
after this edition he will invest a further million or so and buy out
Dravid, Kallis, Joshi and Jaffers contracts. Other IPL teams will be
anxious to get rid of their fluff and their performers will be traded
for top $.
Mallya will then reach across the aisle and buy performers paying a
higher price i.e. Australians, Dhoni Gambhir, Jayasurya and the likes.
At million a pop anyone will be tempted to release these players.
spadma...@blgcanada.com
LOL...that's a priceless theory. If they found a guy like Dhoni then,
they would have punted Dravid instead of 2 or 3 other guys in the MO
with much lower batting averages. The indian selectors do a lot of
goofy things but this is beyond even them.
Also, the guy you term the weakest link in the ODI batting order was
probably India's best ODI player from about 2004 to 2006.
spadma...@blgcanada.com
> 2001-2003 was close to his peak. He played a little better in
> 2004-2006, but not by much. "came back strongly later somewhat re-
> inventing his game" is not borne out by facts.
>
Never saw Dravid play before 2003 but he played great from 2004 to
2006. IMO, India's most valuable player during that time in tests and
ODIs.
His IPL performance has basically killed his chances of ever wearing
India blue again but some of the replacements look promising i.e.
Sharma, Badrinath, Raina etc.
tendulkar.com
Thats strategy is as stupid as someone chasing last year's hot stock.
Macjoubert
>
> - Show quoted text -
Any better ideas?
Jayen
> On May 8, 9:21 pm, "kevin.zer...@gmail.com" <kevin.zer...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > "After the first round of auction in Mumbai, a few friends
> > congratulated me on my Test team," Vijay Mallya, the franchise owner,
> > said before the IPL. " I mentioned this to our captain Dravid and he
> > laughed it off and told me that Test cricket is the ultimate test for
> > any cricketer and if a player can do well in that format, then he can
> > do well in all other formats, be it one-day matches or Twenty20; Me,
> > Kallis and Jaffer are some of the best in business of Test Cricket; We
> > all capable of adjusting to any kind of situation. If you really want,
> > We can hit six sixes in an over."
>
> > Did you hear that?
> > Test cricket is the ultimate test for any cricketer and if a player
> > can do well in that format, then he can do well in all other formats,
> > be it one-day matches or Twenty20!
>
> Mallya was perfectly right in firing Charu Sharma, he is also
> justified if he fires Dravid.
> Here's what Dravid has done, he introduced a lackadaisical attitude
> towards the format by getting all his friends on board , he has
> helped Jaffer,Joshi, helping them out with retirement.
He could only play 4 overseas players at a time, so he had to select a
bunch of Indians. Someone needs to tell me - was it mandated that
there needed to be so-and-so many Karnataka players in the Bangalore
team? Even if not, before IPL started there was no guarantee of local
support and every team selected a bunch of local players to get it.
Uthappa got purchased for a fat sum by Mumbai, so the low-level Ranji
players were the only ones left.
Was Joshi really worse than Akhil? Is there any other local player who
was better?
> When he was granted icon status he immediately had a fiduciary
> responsibility towards the corporate body that bought him.
> He thus violated ethics by his team selection.
If you can't come up with a set of better Karnataka players than Akhil
and Joshi, then this isn't correct. Remember than Chennai recruited
Srikkanth's son, even though Srikkanth is "brand ambassador" or some
such rubbish.
>
> How he justified selecting Kallis, Jaffer and Joshi is astonishing.I
> can see an argument for Kallis, but Jaffer and Joshi are inexusable
> choices.
>
I vaguely remember that everyone ran out of money in the end and had
to cut some bargains. Jaffer was bought for $150,000 USD (the lowest
amount paid for any current international player) and there doesn't
seem to be a better Karnataka player than Joshi. Whom would you have
picked?
Not that it matters much, but Kallis was a worse pick than the other
two.
Regards,
Jayen