Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Anatomy of an omission  (Read 7673 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

kban1

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,966
Anatomy of an omission
« on: February 25, 2006, 10:17:06 PM »

From ABP dated 2/24/06 -- (translated into English, so advance apologies if some of you find minor errors)

***********************************************************************************************************************
http://www.anandabazar.com/archive/1060224/24khela1.htm

Reported by Sabyasachi Sarkar in Vadodra


GC arrived exactly at 11:25 am at the stadium in Vadodra and left by the same car at 6:15PM.

Within the 6 hours and 35 minutes that elapsed between his arrival and departure, several established processes regarding Indian cricket team selection were discarded along with SG’s test career prospects.

The timeline:
11:26: As soon as GC stepped out of his car (surrounded by security), Kiran More stepped out to the gate, shook his hands and welcomed him, and asked him to take a seat in the VIP section next to the BP XI players.

12:00 noon: With Ian Frazier in tow, GC went to observe the pitch. On his return, he called VRV Singh, put his hand around the India cap aspirant and spoke a while. Later on SS Paul confirmed that GC told him “You’ve taken a lot of wickets in domestics, hang on, your chance will come in the near future. In the meantime, Biswal, Bhupinder Singh, and Jagdale were hanging around GC, waiting for an opportunity to speak as GC was signing autographs for youngsters.

12:45 PM: Lunch, over, GC sat down to watch the game, laptop in tow, communicating with Frazer from time to time.

1:15AM: GC called the selectors aside and sat with them with a file in hand which included various printouts from the computer. The unofficial meeting continued for more than an hour with GC explaining to the selectors what he was loking for and what he wanted.

3:05 AM: With one hand draped around KM’s shoulder. GC emerged from the main pavilion –the destination, the IPCL conference room belonging to the Ambani’s, located approx 200 metres away. The goal of course was to avoid the crowd and the media and since the destination had the best security cover, this was the place chosen as venue for the selection meeting by KM.

3:15 PM: Niranjan Shah entered the conference room to start the meeting. Before entering, he mentioned to the journos, RD’s opinion will obviously be taken, we shall speak with him over the telephone.

3:20 PM: GC began his presentation at the beginning. He mentioned the reasons why India lost the test series against Pak and the reasons for the turnaround in the ODI’s. As per Chappel, India lost the Karachi test because the team could not play proper openers which was necessitated by the need to include SG in the playing 11. GC explained that continuously excluding openers in order to accommodate a crowded middle order is a backward looking step and that the time had come to move forward, look towards the future casting aside sentiments. RD was called on the phone, and the captain accepted the coach’s logic.
GC added that the more the emphasis on youth, the more forward the team is likely to go. As per the coach, the average age of the team should be 23 –24. The coach was effusive in his praise of Raina and said that not giving him a chance now would be a mistake because later would be too late for a talent like him. As per GC, Chawla’s inclusion will be a good surprise for an England team not very adept at playing spin.

KM later on, in conversation with ABP, added – “The reason it was a marathon meeting was because we were listening to the coach about Pakistan, and he took about an hour explaining that”.

5:20 PM: Niranjan Shah announces that the team selection is unanimous. Pawar has been informed via phone and he has given his approval.

5:40 PM: More and Niranjan Shah attend the joint press conference. More says “there is no question of looking back. We are attempting to build a team where there will not be much difference between the test and ODI teams.

6:15 PM: Chappel leaves via car, security detail in tow. In response to a question about whether he is happy with the team, Chappel replies “of course”, before leaving.

As it turns out, there were not that many opportunities for debate specifically over SG in the meeting. GC’s explanations and presentations convinced the selectors and any debate about the SG issue were stifled at the nascent stage. As Biswal commented after the meeting “Whatever has to be said will be said by KM, please let me go”. Jagdale mentioned “the team has been selected unanimously, we are looking forward”.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2006, 12:23:09 AM by kban1 »
Logged

bouncer

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,033
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2006, 10:24:42 PM »

Let's question the assumptions.  Did we lose Karachi test because we could not play a specialist opener? sounds like a convenient excuse to me.


Logged

dextrous

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,763
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2006, 10:25:49 PM »

Quote
As per the coach, the average age of the team should be 23 –24. The coach was effusive in his praise of Raina and said that not giving him a chance now would be a mistake because later would be too late for a talent like him. As per GC, Chawla’s inclusion will be a good surprise for an England team not very adept at playing spin.
What kind of model is this? This isn't the Australian model for sure. They don't hand out caps to boys for the hell of it. And what does it mean for player career span--2-3 years? till they become 28?

Worse, still, what does it mean for the 28 year olds (the Hussey generation of India) that never got a chance because of the packed star middle-order--will they never get a chance, ever?
Logged

dextrous

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,763
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2006, 10:27:16 PM »

Let's question the assumptions.  Did we lose Karachi test because we could not play a specialist opener? sounds like a convenient excuse to me.


Yeah, I totally don;t understand that logic. So we lost because Dravid failed. Nothing to do with 600 runs Pakistan scored. And given the scores of other batsmen, how long would've Gambhir survived?

And even then it makes no sense because Yuvraj is injured.
Logged

CLR James

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,007
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2006, 10:27:46 PM »

Oh brilliant. The average age of the team should be 23-24! May I ask which world beating side in the past or the present, beginning from Don Bradman's Australia of 1948, to Clive Lloyd's West Indies, to Steve Waugh's Australia of the late nineties had an average age less than 28-29?
Logged

dextrous

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,763
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2006, 10:29:00 PM »

hey, let's not underestimate the mighty zimbabwe of 2006. they beat kenya. :)
Logged

CLR James

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,007
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2006, 10:35:03 PM »

Everything is pure rhetoric marshalled conveniently towards a single point agenda: keep SG out by hook or crook. First it was "Done't disturb the winning combination" then it was "We will need his experience" then it is now back to "We are looking to the future". All this while, SG was not given two matches in succession to prove himself, while AA and Kaif seem to have a rope longer than half a career.

The thought that this is an Australian model is rubbish. GC made a statement to this effect a while back (2-3 players in their thirties with pamolive beards; the rest with runny noses and emergency diapers in their kit bags) that this was the Sussie way. That is an out and out lie. I proved in the other DG that the average age of the last two world cup winning teams of Australia had an average age of 30 and 31.

If 23-24 is the holy norm, then why not play the under 25 team straight away? Why bother with this charade?
Logged

bouncer

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,033
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #7 on: February 25, 2006, 10:49:33 PM »

The sad part is that all this nonsense from GC is taken as Godspeak by those 5 nincompoops and he is never challenged.

Do you think anyone challenged him on his "optimum age is 23-24" theory?
Did anyone remind him that Pakistan scored 600 odd runs in Karachi and "no specialist opener" excuse just doesn't cut it?

You can almost see the selection team meetings. Those who are supposed to make decisions are lapping up everything that is being said by this white saviour. Saving Indian cricket is again a white man's burden
Logged

gouravk

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,199
  • Which way will this ball swing ?
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #8 on: February 25, 2006, 11:53:44 PM »

nothing of this is nonsense. this is perfect sense.
Logged
...Tvameva Vidya Dravidam Tvameva ... Tvameva Sarvam Mama Deva Deva !!

bouncer

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,033
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2006, 12:03:20 AM »

lapping up continues...........
Logged

kban1

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,966
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2006, 12:08:40 AM »

The assumption whether the lack of openers cost us the test may be debated on cricketing grounds.

More pertinent are the assumptions underlying that logic:

If specialist openers had to be played, why was SG included ? This is a logic which has never made sense to me --all teams keep senior players in the 15 /16, so this fuss about keeping SG out of the 11. they did that In the Faislabad didn't they --so why not do the same in Karachi if specialist openers were so important.

This reasoning --that SG has to be played if he is in the team of 15/16 has been propagated since the SL series -in turns by GC, More, and indirectly by RD. Why ? By what logic ? The initial reasoning was SG contributes poorly to dressing room spirit, which was refuted by SRT and other senios and finally by RSD in his capacity as manager.

So why the persistence with the implicit assumption that he has to be played ? Did he not sit out Faislabad ? And if you did make a decision to go into the Karachi test with SG in the playing 11, make the decision to open with RD, why blame the failure of that decision on SG ?All of this is convenient -- fire a gun but if it backfires, blame it on SG's presence in the team.

No one forced you to take him in the team --In fact the captain overruled the coach in selecting SG.

And once selected, who held a gun to your head to send him in the middle order ? Why couldnt you send SG to open ? That would be the norm wouldn't it ?
he is being selected (by sacrificing a regular opener), he should be made to open. SG is fighting for hios spot --he should be made to open.

I made this argument before about RD's capaincy shortcomings (see thread below) where I had argued that RD's decision to open was based not on cricketing logic but on the presumption that since SG did not open on featherbeds or even get the chance to play on them, sending SG to open on a greentop would have been perceived by media / fans as an effort to undermine him and thus the decision for RD to open. I said that was the wrong decision then, i maintain it is a wrong decision now.

http://www.votegupta.com/cricketf2orum/index.php?topic=638.0

Seems like now I have RD and GC agreeing with me but with a twist -- they do not want to be held responsible for the decision, it was something that SG's presence in the team forced them to do. Sweet, convenient and slick!!
Logged

gouravk

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,199
  • Which way will this ball swing ?
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2006, 12:11:47 AM »

Indeed this keeping on the bench tabo has to stop.
Logged
...Tvameva Vidya Dravidam Tvameva ... Tvameva Sarvam Mama Deva Deva !!

ramshorns

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13,029
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2006, 12:12:40 AM »

I agree with bouncer about the fact that Karachi test was not lost because of the regular openers were not there but for the various other reasons.
1) Choosing to bat last as a visting team, despite the so called no green top.  Mind you it was no green monster by any stretch of the imagination
2) Conceding 600 in the 3rd innings.
3) For reason 1 we created a mountain which we could never climb.

Apart from that the rest of the selection committee meeting looked OK to me.  The man made the call(GC) and let us see how much forward he can carry Indian cricket with his approach.   Let us know hope too far that brings lots of smiles to the Indian cricket fans.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2006, 04:01:05 AM by ramshorns »
Logged

justforkix

  • Global Moderator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14,896
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2006, 04:04:23 AM »

"GC added that the more the emphasis on youth, the more forward the team is likely to go. As per the coach, the average age of the team should be 23 –24."

What crap. I hope GC is not serious about this age thingie !!! 23-24 !!! 27-29 is about par. Also it is a known fact that you peak around 26-28 in any professional team sport. Emphasis must be on fit players, not young players. who cares if the average age is 18 or 32 if you can field well apart from being good batsmen / bowlers.

"As per Chappel, India lost the Karachi test because the team could not play proper openers which was necessitated by the need to include SG in the playing 11."

GC is slowly becoming as illogical in his explanations as Kiran More. So, in Lahore, SG had to included because he couldn't be kept out of the playing XI. But in Faisalabad, SG could be kept out of the playing XI. In Karachi, again, SG could not be kept out of the playing XI. SO, only possible reason is SG's behavior was abysmal when he was on the bench in Faisalabad. However, there has been no reports to suggest that.

Also, seems from the timeline that Munaf had taken 5 wickets and VRV had figures of 9-0-63-0 before the squad was announced..... I may be wrong here.
Logged

ramshorns

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13,029
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2006, 04:08:14 AM »

"GC added that the more the emphasis on youth, the more forward the team is likely to go. As per the coach, the average age of the team should be 23 –24."

I missed that one.  For the sake of the good of Indian Cricket let us hope it is a misquote.
Logged

kban1

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,966
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #15 on: February 26, 2006, 04:10:44 AM »

Yep,

just rechecked the report -- it says 23-24. I hope it is a misquote too but won't wager on it.
Logged

cardus

  • One Day Star
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 307
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #16 on: February 26, 2006, 06:16:26 AM »

A sad day indeed for Indian cricket.


1. A captain who decides to avoid a crucial selection meeting because:
a. He likes to skirt controversy [ie, lacks moral courage]
b. He's too much in the thrall of the kangaroo court that he knew would judge and hang his former comrade

2. A selection committee that basically acts as a rubber stamp for a hired coach who is a foreigner.

3. A blinkered selectorial policy that believes in the cult of youth [like the Nazis]

4. A group of fanatic supporters that are ready to lap up anything served up to them, as long as their favourite media manipulated punching bag is finished careerwise and scarred psychologically.

5. And a particular fan [Teddy] who deems it his duty to start a thousand threads on innane issues in order that pertinent threads get hidden under the pile of trash!


The makings of a Bollywood potboiler, except that once again I have to emphasise, the end result is really tragic for Indian cricket!
Logged
"To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal": Henry Kissinger

cardus

  • One Day Star
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 307
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #17 on: February 26, 2006, 07:45:01 AM »

bump!
Logged
"To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal": Henry Kissinger

sudzz

  • Member
  • Team of the Century
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,061
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #18 on: February 26, 2006, 09:47:00 AM »

The sad part is that all this nonsense from GC is taken as Godspeak by those 5 nincompoops and he is never challenged.

Do you think anyone challenged him on his "optimum age is 23-24" theory?
Did anyone remind him that Pakistan scored 600 odd runs in Karachi and "no specialist opener" excuse just doesn't cut it?

You can almost see the selection team meetings. Those who are supposed to make decisions are lapping up everything that is being said by this white saviour. Saving Indian cricket is again a white man's burden

Ok what do you expect from these 5 luminaries of Indian cricket. Iam sure they understand not more than 35% of GC speaks and therefore they cant confront him so what else have they got but to accept the drivel that he dishes out.
Logged

jks61

  • Test Match Star
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 465
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #19 on: February 26, 2006, 12:34:08 PM »

/quote

Ok what do you expect from these 5 luminaries of Indian cricket. Iam sure they understand not more than 35% of GC speaks and therefore they cant confront him so what else have they got but to accept the drivel that he dishes out.
[/quote]
I do not like the sub-servience of the 5 liminaries. They are too tongue tied and flabbergasted to counter - the  computer print outs, graphics (all given by Ramki to GC) and vision speeches of GC. They neither have the confidence nor the vision to really address any issue. I still feel that GC's intentions are fine but it is increasingly becoming one sided, as days go by.
how can u explain Munaf's exclusion..? By all accounts, the selectorial huddle began around 320 PM and by that time Munaf had already proved to be better than VRV but he had not yet done the tail demolition. But, by the time of announcement - 5 pm, the 1st day play was over and More could have easily pencilled in Munaf ahead of VRV since by then, Munaf had cleaned up 5.
So, who decided on VRV? from all accounts, GC endorsed VRV's name on the basis of familiarity. Perhaps he was not that familiar with Munaf and the 5 wise men, who are tongue tied at best- hardly could have argued in favor of Munaf.
Logged

bouncer

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,033
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #20 on: February 26, 2006, 02:33:22 PM »



5. And a particular fan [Teddy] who deems it his duty to start a thousand threads on innane issues in order that pertinent threads get hidden under the pile of trash!



LOL ;D
Logged

CLR James

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,007
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #21 on: February 26, 2006, 02:52:30 PM »

A sad day indeed for Indian cricket.


1. A captain who decides to avoid a crucial selection meeting because:
a. He likes to skirt controversy [ie, lacks moral courage]
b. He's too much in the thrall of the kangaroo court that he knew would judge and hang his former comrade

2. A selection committee that basically acts as a rubber stamp for a hired coach who is a foreigner.

3. A blinkered selectorial policy that believes in the cult of youth [like the Nazis]

4. A group of fanatic supporters that are ready to lap up anything served up to them, as long as their favourite media manipulated punching bag is finished careerwise and scarred psychologically.

5. And a particular fan [Teddy] who deems it his duty to start a thousand threads on innane issues in order that pertinent threads get hidden under the pile of trash!


The makings of a Bollywood potboiler, except that once again I have to emphasise, the end result is really tragic for Indian cricket!


Wonderfully put Cardus. To this you can add:

1. Hyperbolic rhetoric and outright lies to build a Fox Channel like support for the war. Good example of this would be the ideal team with an average age of 23-24 comment, or the earlier comment saying that the Australian team was like that.

2. Double Standards. Kick SG out after 2 promising 30s (all indications that he was returning to form). Promote Kaif to test cricket again after two zeros.

Logged

Blwe_torch

  • Marketing Moderator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19,148
  • Last man standing
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #22 on: February 27, 2006, 09:18:59 AM »

As I had mentioned earlier...GC would have made an ideal coach for the under-19 or India-A team.
Logged

k-slice

  • Guest
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #23 on: February 27, 2006, 09:33:05 AM »

"GC began his presentation at the beginning"!!!!!!!!!!!!!1


hahahahaha
as opposed to starting it from the end and then working towards the beginging???!?!?!

kidding!!
Logged

nithya

  • Spectator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #24 on: February 27, 2006, 09:51:56 AM »

good post ....ppl get sensible and stop cribbing abt non inclusion a once upon a time great player.
SG  used to be  a good player . thats abt it.
Logged

keep-it-cool

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18,238
  • Thanda Thanda Kool Kool
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #25 on: February 27, 2006, 11:12:50 AM »

A sad day indeed for Indian cricket.


1. A captain who decides to avoid a crucial selection meeting because:
a. He likes to skirt controversy [ie, lacks moral courage]
b. He's too much in the thrall of the kangaroo court that he knew would judge and hang his former comrade
An option of my own here: c) he is up to date with more recent modes of communications - a la conference calls
2. A selection committee that basically acts as a rubber stamp for a hired coach who is a foreigner.
Or a group that is not dogmatic and weigh current form v/s past achievements ... where "is someone good enough" is a relative and not an absoulte concept. Hired Coach: Would you rather they act on behalf of a coach that is not hired? Maybe Amarnath, Yashpal Sharma, Chetan Chauhan, Madan Lal, Maninder Singh, Mudassar Nazar, Moin Khan, Aaquib Javed, Imran Khan, Krish Srikanth etc who are never bereft of the magic wand to cure Indian cricket when they have a camera in their face or a ghost writer helping them out. Who is a foreigner : who incidentally was the cynosure of all eyes when he helped one particular Indian captain regain his batting form some years ago; maybe you would want to consider some of the earlier non-foreigner names instead.
3. A blinkered selectorial policy that believes in the cult of youth [like the Nazis]
Which is probably the reason why SRT, RD, VVS, AK, WJ are still members of the team ...

and yes, check this "Nazi" out: Mahatma *hi understood the dynamics of social change that could be executed only through Youth Power Which he tried successfully during the Independence movement He had realised the tremendous potentialities in the youth. Youth have by nature greater fellow feeling and sympathy, which make them fit instruments of social change Ethical and spiritual values can provide a sure basis for a creative social order. Analyzing the social milieu, *hi must have thought that students and youth are the only sections where idealism is still a force to reckon with. The first and the foremost reason for according such high priority to youth power as a vehicle of social change lay in *hi's perception that the youth have got the least vested interest of all
4. A group of fanatic supporters that are ready to lap up anything served up to them, as long as their favourite media manipulated punching bag is finished careerwise and scarred psychologically.
Yeah, that description sure sounds familiar ...;) Guess you were in a room full of mirrors
5. And a particular fan [Teddy] who deems it his duty to start a thousand threads on innane issues in order that pertinent threads get hidden under the pile of trash!
Cant comment ... do not know Teddy well and am not much of a stats expert myself
The makings of a Bollywood potboiler, except that once again I have to emphasise, the end result is really tragic for Indian cricket!

Hmm ... Bollywood potboiler indeed ... tragic?? well, tried very hard, but the tears just dont come ... maybe you saw some tearful people around ... arre bandhu ghabra mat ... yeh to khushi ke aansoo hain!!!
Logged
Sachin Tendulkar gave the muhurat clap for 'Awwal Number' - that apart, he hasn't done much wrong in the last 20 yrs!

schumi

  • Test Match Star
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 490
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #26 on: February 27, 2006, 02:33:54 PM »

5. And a particular fan [Teddy] who deems it his duty to start a thousand threads on innane issues in order that pertinent threads get hidden under the pile of trash!
Anybody can start any number of threads. That is the idea of this discussion board. What is pertinent or not is upto the individual members to decide and in the worst case for the moderators to decide. For e.g. one member can find all the selection issue related threads (more so to do with SG) not pertinent at all.
Logged

suraj

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,032
  • How about a tattoo with my name??
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #27 on: February 27, 2006, 03:03:09 PM »

5. And a particular fan [Teddy] who deems it his duty to start a thousand threads on innane issues in order that pertinent threads get hidden under the pile of trash!
Anybody can start any number of threads. That is the idea of this discussion board. What is pertinent or not is upto the individual members to decide and in the worst case for the moderators to decide. For e.g. one member can find all the selection issue related threads (more so to do with SG) not pertinent at all.

To add to that I find Teddy's comments pretty insightful and interesting

Cardus' seems more scandalous with very little analysis
Logged

toney

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,991
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #28 on: February 27, 2006, 05:04:14 PM »

....
4. A group of fanatic supporters that are ready to lap up anything served up to them, as long as their favourite media manipulated punching bag is finished careerwise and scarred psychologically.
Yeah, that description sure sounds familiar ...;) Guess you were in a room full of mirrors
......

;D
The rest of the response was good too.
Logged
When intelligence matures and lodges securely in the mind it becomes wisdom. When wisdom is integrated with life and becomes action it becomes Bhakti. Knowledge when it becomes fully mature is Bhakti. To believe that Jnana and Bhakti, knowledge & devotion, are different from each other is ignorance.

toney

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,991
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #29 on: February 27, 2006, 05:05:37 PM »

Now, all of a sudden, Teddy has an agenda when he starts new threads!?!?!?!
Logged
When intelligence matures and lodges securely in the mind it becomes wisdom. When wisdom is integrated with life and becomes action it becomes Bhakti. Knowledge when it becomes fully mature is Bhakti. To believe that Jnana and Bhakti, knowledge & devotion, are different from each other is ignorance.

CLR James

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,007
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #30 on: February 27, 2006, 07:11:06 PM »

A sad day indeed for Indian cricket.


1. A captain who decides to avoid a crucial selection meeting because:
a. He likes to skirt controversy [ie, lacks moral courage]
b. He's too much in the thrall of the kangaroo court that he knew would judge and hang his former comrade
An option of my own here: c) he is up to date with more recent modes of communications - a la conference calls
2. A selection committee that basically acts as a rubber stamp for a hired coach who is a foreigner.
Or a group that is not dogmatic and weigh current form v/s past achievements ... where "is someone good enough" is a relative and not an absoulte concept. Hired Coach: Would you rather they act on behalf of a coach that is not hired? Maybe Amarnath, Yashpal Sharma, Chetan Chauhan, Madan Lal, Maninder Singh, Mudassar Nazar, Moin Khan, Aaquib Javed, Imran Khan, Krish Srikanth etc who are never bereft of the magic wand to cure Indian cricket when they have a camera in their face or a ghost writer helping them out. Who is a foreigner : who incidentally was the cynosure of all eyes when he helped one particular Indian captain regain his batting form some years ago; maybe you would want to consider some of the earlier non-foreigner names instead.
3. A blinkered selectorial policy that believes in the cult of youth [like the Nazis]
Which is probably the reason why SRT, RD, VVS, AK, WJ are still members of the team ...

and yes, check this "Nazi" out: Mahatma *hi understood the dynamics of social change that could be executed only through Youth Power Which he tried successfully during the Independence movement He had realised the tremendous potentialities in the youth. Youth have by nature greater fellow feeling and sympathy, which make them fit instruments of social change Ethical and spiritual values can provide a sure basis for a creative social order. Analyzing the social milieu, *hi must have thought that students and youth are the only sections where idealism is still a force to reckon with. The first and the foremost reason for according such high priority to youth power as a vehicle of social change lay in *hi's perception that the youth have got the least vested interest of all
4. A group of fanatic supporters that are ready to lap up anything served up to them, as long as their favourite media manipulated punching bag is finished careerwise and scarred psychologically.
Yeah, that description sure sounds familiar ...;) Guess you were in a room full of mirrors
5. And a particular fan [Teddy] who deems it his duty to start a thousand threads on innane issues in order that pertinent threads get hidden under the pile of trash!
Cant comment ... do not know Teddy well and am not much of a stats expert myself
The makings of a Bollywood potboiler, except that once again I have to emphasise, the end result is really tragic for Indian cricket!

Hmm ... Bollywood potboiler indeed ... tragic?? well, tried very hard, but the tears just dont come ... maybe you saw some tearful people around ... arre bandhu ghabra mat ... yeh to khushi ke aansoo hain!!!


You sidestepped the first issue awkwardly. Development in communications technology does not change the fact that RD did not have the guts to be present. The Mr. Clean continues to pretend that the muck surrounding him does not touch him. His task seems to be to leave the dirty work to others and issue the pretty, cliched soundbytes himself.

I agree with you that the fact of Chappel being hired and being a foreigner should not be a point of discussion. Unless one is being an ethnophobic.

The fact that Mahatma *hi (as many others) had something nice to say about youth does not change the fact that transforming youth into a cult, an Absolutist national obsession pertaining to purity and regeneration is something the Nazis did more significantly than anyone else. Besides why bring in *hi at all into this? Is he infallible? *hi supported the Zamindari system. Do you? He was staunchly against industrialization. Are you?

Your final answers are purely rhetorical, so I have nothing to say about them.

Logged

dextrous

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,763
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #31 on: February 27, 2006, 07:12:57 PM »

keep-it-cool,
did you just compare *hi's movement to youth cricketers? isn't that comparing elephants to apples --  ???
Logged

Cover Point

  • Member
  • Team of the Century
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,649
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #32 on: February 27, 2006, 08:42:54 PM »

keep-it-cool,
did you just compare *hi's movement to youth cricketers? isn't that comparing elephants to apples --  ???

No its like comparing Bhindi to Tinda.
Logged

keep-it-cool

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18,238
  • Thanda Thanda Kool Kool
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #33 on: February 28, 2006, 03:29:11 AM »

keep-it-cool,
did you just compare *hi's movement to youth cricketers? isn't that comparing elephants to apples --  ???

Did not compare *hi's movement to youth cricketers ... just added another reference point to the one (Nazis) that was already there
Logged
Sachin Tendulkar gave the muhurat clap for 'Awwal Number' - that apart, he hasn't done much wrong in the last 20 yrs!

keep-it-cool

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18,238
  • Thanda Thanda Kool Kool
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #34 on: February 28, 2006, 03:57:18 AM »

A sad day indeed for Indian cricket.


1. A captain who decides to avoid a crucial selection meeting because:
a. He likes to skirt controversy [ie, lacks moral courage]
b. He's too much in the thrall of the kangaroo court that he knew would judge and hang his former comrade
An option of my own here: c) he is up to date with more recent modes of communications - a la conference calls
2. A selection committee that basically acts as a rubber stamp for a hired coach who is a foreigner.
Or a group that is not dogmatic and weigh current form v/s past achievements ... where "is someone good enough" is a relative and not an absoulte concept. Hired Coach: Would you rather they act on behalf of a coach that is not hired? Maybe Amarnath, Yashpal Sharma, Chetan Chauhan, Madan Lal, Maninder Singh, Mudassar Nazar, Moin Khan, Aaquib Javed, Imran Khan, Krish Srikanth etc who are never bereft of the magic wand to cure Indian cricket when they have a camera in their face or a ghost writer helping them out. Who is a foreigner : who incidentally was the cynosure of all eyes when he helped one particular Indian captain regain his batting form some years ago; maybe you would want to consider some of the earlier non-foreigner names instead.
3. A blinkered selectorial policy that believes in the cult of youth [like the Nazis]
Which is probably the reason why SRT, RD, VVS, AK, WJ are still members of the team ...

and yes, check this "Nazi" out: Mahatma *hi understood the dynamics of social change that could be executed only through Youth Power Which he tried successfully during the Independence movement He had realised the tremendous potentialities in the youth. Youth have by nature greater fellow feeling and sympathy, which make them fit instruments of social change Ethical and spiritual values can provide a sure basis for a creative social order. Analyzing the social milieu, *hi must have thought that students and youth are the only sections where idealism is still a force to reckon with. The first and the foremost reason for according such high priority to youth power as a vehicle of social change lay in *hi's perception that the youth have got the least vested interest of all
4. A group of fanatic supporters that are ready to lap up anything served up to them, as long as their favourite media manipulated punching bag is finished careerwise and scarred psychologically.
Yeah, that description sure sounds familiar ...;) Guess you were in a room full of mirrors
5. And a particular fan [Teddy] who deems it his duty to start a thousand threads on innane issues in order that pertinent threads get hidden under the pile of trash!
Cant comment ... do not know Teddy well and am not much of a stats expert myself
The makings of a Bollywood potboiler, except that once again I have to emphasise, the end result is really tragic for Indian cricket!

Hmm ... Bollywood potboiler indeed ... tragic?? well, tried very hard, but the tears just dont come ... maybe you saw some tearful people around ... arre bandhu ghabra mat ... yeh to khushi ke aansoo hain!!!


You sidestepped the first issue awkwardly. Development in communications technology does not change the fact that RD did not have the guts to be present. The Mr. Clean continues to pretend that the muck surrounding him does not touch him. His task seems to be to leave the dirty work to others and issue the pretty, cliched soundbytes himself.

I agree with you that the fact of Chappel being hired and being a foreigner should not be a point of discussion. Unless one is being an ethnophobic.

The fact that Mahatma *hi (as many others) had something nice to say about youth does not change the fact that transforming youth into a cult, an Absolutist national obsession pertaining to purity and regeneration is something the Nazis did more significantly than anyone else. Besides why bring in *hi at all into this? Is he infallible? *hi supported the Zamindari system. Do you? He was staunchly against industrialization. Are you?

Your final answers are purely rhetorical, so I have nothing to say about them.


I did not side step the first issue .. because there is no issue, in my view. Getting things done through teleconferences - often much more important than the selection of a team - is not unheard of, and is in fact gaining traction everyday. Why would you want your captain, who has to go through 5 days of grind in the heat in a few days, to waste an entire day travelling - when he can be as involved from home? It seems to be a very common sense approach to me, and I would want more of the same to happen in future. I work in a company that has operations across continents and, believe me, much more important decisions are taken this way on a much more regular basis ... I am sure I am not the only one. If you or anyone else wants to construe this as lack of guts, it is clearly your call. Many may agree with you; many may not. I do not, for one. And, I am sure RD does not care what you or I think about this.

I am not saying *hi is infallible. And I am also not saying that I support all his views / ideals. Just wanted to place another reference point. In any case, the comparison with Nazis is much more far fetched. As I pointed out in my earlier response, SRT, VVS, RD, AK (all comfortably above 30) and WJ (nearing 30) are still in the team; so while the thrust is on youth (and very rightly so), it is not a "bull in a china shop" exercise. I however strongly share the view that unless an ageing player can either a) meet a certain base level of standards w.r.t. factors such as fielding, running between the wickets and fitness, or b) set the field on fire with clearly superlative displays of batting / bowling, he is in trouble, and rightly so. The sport is getting more athletic day by day, and you either adapt or you fall behind. VVS, to my mind, is another player who need to pull up his socks - he was never a great fielder, but was very good at slip. However, he did show the ability to score big. Things seem have to have fallen off a bit on the batting front, of late, and if he does not recover soon, I believe one should look ahead. Unfortunately, in India, we have generally found our new batting / bowling stars through accidents, rather than design. SG and RD, for instance, may never have made it had Sidhu not walked off on that infamous England tour and Sanjay Manjrekar not been injured. We may never have rediscovered the improved AK, had HS not become injured in Australia. Serendipity is fine, but not always bankable - it is time we begin to plan ahead.
Logged
Sachin Tendulkar gave the muhurat clap for 'Awwal Number' - that apart, he hasn't done much wrong in the last 20 yrs!

CLR James

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,007
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #35 on: February 28, 2006, 07:29:59 PM »

A sad day indeed for Indian cricket.


1. A captain who decides to avoid a crucial selection meeting because:
a. He likes to skirt controversy [ie, lacks moral courage]
b. He's too much in the thrall of the kangaroo court that he knew would judge and hang his former comrade
An option of my own here: c) he is up to date with more recent modes of communications - a la conference calls
2. A selection committee that basically acts as a rubber stamp for a hired coach who is a foreigner.
Or a group that is not dogmatic and weigh current form v/s past achievements ... where "is someone good enough" is a relative and not an absoulte concept. Hired Coach: Would you rather they act on behalf of a coach that is not hired? Maybe Amarnath, Yashpal Sharma, Chetan Chauhan, Madan Lal, Maninder Singh, Mudassar Nazar, Moin Khan, Aaquib Javed, Imran Khan, Krish Srikanth etc who are never bereft of the magic wand to cure Indian cricket when they have a camera in their face or a ghost writer helping them out. Who is a foreigner : who incidentally was the cynosure of all eyes when he helped one particular Indian captain regain his batting form some years ago; maybe you would want to consider some of the earlier non-foreigner names instead.
3. A blinkered selectorial policy that believes in the cult of youth [like the Nazis]
Which is probably the reason why SRT, RD, VVS, AK, WJ are still members of the team ...

and yes, check this "Nazi" out: Mahatma *hi understood the dynamics of social change that could be executed only through Youth Power Which he tried successfully during the Independence movement He had realised the tremendous potentialities in the youth. Youth have by nature greater fellow feeling and sympathy, which make them fit instruments of social change Ethical and spiritual values can provide a sure basis for a creative social order. Analyzing the social milieu, *hi must have thought that students and youth are the only sections where idealism is still a force to reckon with. The first and the foremost reason for according such high priority to youth power as a vehicle of social change lay in *hi's perception that the youth have got the least vested interest of all
4. A group of fanatic supporters that are ready to lap up anything served up to them, as long as their favourite media manipulated punching bag is finished careerwise and scarred psychologically.
Yeah, that description sure sounds familiar ...;) Guess you were in a room full of mirrors
5. And a particular fan [Teddy] who deems it his duty to start a thousand threads on innane issues in order that pertinent threads get hidden under the pile of trash!
Cant comment ... do not know Teddy well and am not much of a stats expert myself
The makings of a Bollywood potboiler, except that once again I have to emphasise, the end result is really tragic for Indian cricket!

Hmm ... Bollywood potboiler indeed ... tragic?? well, tried very hard, but the tears just dont come ... maybe you saw some tearful people around ... arre bandhu ghabra mat ... yeh to khushi ke aansoo hain!!!


You sidestepped the first issue awkwardly. Development in communications technology does not change the fact that RD did not have the guts to be present. The Mr. Clean continues to pretend that the muck surrounding him does not touch him. His task seems to be to leave the dirty work to others and issue the pretty, cliched soundbytes himself.

I agree with you that the fact of Chappel being hired and being a foreigner should not be a point of discussion. Unless one is being an ethnophobic.

The fact that Mahatma *hi (as many others) had something nice to say about youth does not change the fact that transforming youth into a cult, an Absolutist national obsession pertaining to purity and regeneration is something the Nazis did more significantly than anyone else. Besides why bring in *hi at all into this? Is he infallible? *hi supported the Zamindari system. Do you? He was staunchly against industrialization. Are you?

Your final answers are purely rhetorical, so I have nothing to say about them.


I did not side step the first issue .. because there is no issue, in my view. Getting things done through teleconferences - often much more important than the selection of a team - is not unheard of, and is in fact gaining traction everyday. Why would you want your captain, who has to go through 5 days of grind in the heat in a few days, to waste an entire day travelling - when he can be as involved from home? It seems to be a very common sense approach to me, and I would want more of the same to happen in future. I work in a company that has operations across continents and, believe me, much more important decisions are taken this way on a much more regular basis ... I am sure I am not the only one. If you or anyone else wants to construe this as lack of guts, it is clearly your call. Many may agree with you; many may not. I do not, for one. And, I am sure RD does not care what you or I think about this.

I am not saying *hi is infallible. And I am also not saying that I support all his views / ideals. Just wanted to place another reference point. In any case, the comparison with Nazis is much more far fetched. As I pointed out in my earlier response, SRT, VVS, RD, AK (all comfortably above 30) and WJ (nearing 30) are still in the team; so while the thrust is on youth (and very rightly so), it is not a "bull in a china shop" exercise. I however strongly share the view that unless an ageing player can either a) meet a certain base level of standards w.r.t. factors such as fielding, running between the wickets and fitness, or b) set the field on fire with clearly superlative displays of batting / bowling, he is in trouble, and rightly so. The sport is getting more athletic day by day, and you either adapt or you fall behind. VVS, to my mind, is another player who need to pull up his socks - he was never a great fielder, but was very good at slip. However, he did show the ability to score big. Things seem have to have fallen off a bit on the batting front, of late, and if he does not recover soon, I believe one should look ahead. Unfortunately, in India, we have generally found our new batting / bowling stars through accidents, rather than design. SG and RD, for instance, may never have made it had Sidhu not walked off on that infamous England tour and Sanjay Manjrekar not been injured. We may never have rediscovered the improved AK, had HS not become injured in Australia. Serendipity is fine, but not always bankable - it is time we begin to plan ahead.


Further clarifications:

1. It is not just about the functionality of teleconferencing. Presence here matters. It sends out messages and signals. It matters that you attend the meeting and face the music of the press after that. It shows that you a convinced and committed about what you are doing. Teleconferencing, in this respect, in this particular context, is like entering through the backdoor, attending the meeting, and then leaving through the fire exit with the public waiting at the gates.

2. Again, it is not about how old players actually are (Aussie players have always been much older; apart from Clarke, who has debuted before 30?). It is also not about fitness here (certainly SG and VVS deserved a rap on the wrist about that). It is about creating an aura with an obviously hyperbolic statement (23-24 years average age) and then using that as an apparent gospel truth to do anything, the latest being the dropping of SG and ZK (what did he do wrong as a test bowler in Pak)?

3. It is also about a megalomaniac's disturbing desire to ultimately bring everything under his control and build a team in his own image.
Logged

CLR James

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,007
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #36 on: February 28, 2006, 07:56:03 PM »


Another point:

This age aura has been primarily used to keep SG out of the ODI team. When all fo this started, with the SL ODIs, he could not be summarily ejected from the test team because of that century in Zim. I recall More saying that SG just had to prove his form and fitness to get back. SG, to his credit, did that, going back to the nets in a big way, hitting hundreds in domestics etc.  He has looked fitter and better recently than he did in years. Then it became "we must not change the winning combination etc.

Now SG is not a great test player, but he is definitely one of the greatest there ever was in ODIs. India has subsequently played about 15 ODIs after that. It is not that Kaif was in the greatest of form, or the youngsters like JPY (!!), GG, VGR, or Raina have settled the issue beyond doubt (collectively one 50 between them in all these matches). Did SG not even deserve 1-2 chances in rotation? With his record? No, because this 23-24 age aura has been systematically used against him.
Logged

Cernunnos

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,202
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #37 on: February 28, 2006, 08:38:56 PM »


Another point:

This age aura has been primarily used to keep SG out of the ODI team. When all fo this started, with the SL ODIs, he could not be summarily ejected from the test team because of that century in Zim. I recall More saying that SG just had to prove his form and fitness to get back. SG, to his credit, did that, going back to the nets in a big way, hitting hundreds in domestics etc.  He has looked fitter and better recently than he did in years. Then it became "we must not change the winning combination etc.

Now SG is not a great test player, but he is definitely one of the greatest there ever was in ODIs. India has subsequently played about 15 ODIs after that. It is not that Kaif was in the greatest of form, or the youngsters like JPY (!!), GG, VGR, or Raina have settled the issue beyond doubt (collectively one 50 between them in all these matches). Did SG not even deserve 1-2 chances in rotation? With his record? No, because this 23-24 age aura has been systematically used against him.


Chappell's ruses:

1) Cannot change a winning combination.
2) We need "good men".
3) Need sepcialist openers.
4) Need to play 5 bowlers.
5) Young legs.
 




Logged

CLR James

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,007
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #38 on: February 28, 2006, 09:11:38 PM »


Another point:

This age aura has been primarily used to keep SG out of the ODI team. When all fo this started, with the SL ODIs, he could not be summarily ejected from the test team because of that century in Zim. I recall More saying that SG just had to prove his form and fitness to get back. SG, to his credit, did that, going back to the nets in a big way, hitting hundreds in domestics etc.  He has looked fitter and better recently than he did in years. Then it became "we must not change the winning combination etc.

Now SG is not a great test player, but he is definitely one of the greatest there ever was in ODIs. India has subsequently played about 15 ODIs after that. It is not that Kaif was in the greatest of form, or the youngsters like JPY (!!), GG, VGR, or Raina have settled the issue beyond doubt (collectively one 50 between them in all these matches). Did SG not even deserve 1-2 chances in rotation? With his record? No, because this 23-24 age aura has been systematically used against him.


Chappell's ruses:

1) Cannot change a winning combination.
2) We need "good men".
3) Need sepcialist openers.
4) Need to play 5 bowlers.
5) Young legs.
 

C,

You forgot:

6) Must laugh at team jokes.
7) Must be introverted and prone to going into a shell if dropped (he used this to retain Gambhir after he averaged in single digits against SL).




Logged

Cover Point

  • Member
  • Team of the Century
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,649
Re: Anatomy of an omission
« Reply #39 on: February 28, 2006, 09:25:19 PM »

- Must not use political connections
- Should average more than 20's over a 2 year period
- Should not go crying to media when a frank opinion is shared.
- Should be able to cross over for a single if the ball goes almost as far as the boundary.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up