Pawar Replaces Dalmiya -- Analysis

puneets · Post by **puneets** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:21 am

I said 40 matches for ODIs.

Why are you taking out three not-out innings (only one was against B'desh).

Anyways, my whole point was that there was enough ground to drop Ganguly earlier too (this might have been true for some other players too). They chose not to drop him earlier (in tests). Now that he has been scoring runs lately, there is no reason to drop him suddelny.
The manner in which the selectors have dropped him this time is blatantly wrong, both to Ganguly and the cricket fans.

Post by **Dhruv** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 12:22 pm

Speaking of averages I hate them with a passion. Median is something more to my taste (as compared to average). Actually we should have a statistic that takes into account Std. Deviation and Average to give a better picture of the score. When we say average, people assume a normal distribution but that is rarely the case when it comes to batting averages and so it doesn't give the proper picture IMO.

Which batsman would you prefer:

One who scored 50 in every innings he played or
One that scores 0 in every 3 but 200 in the every 4th.

They'll have the same average.

genius · Post by **genius** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 1:55 pm

puneets wrote: there is no reason to drop him suddelny.
The manner in which the selectors have dropped him this time is blatantly wrong, both to Ganguly and the cricket fans.

For the umpteenth time, he was dropped for Yuvraj. This is not a numbers game.

In cases like this where you want to give a new guy a chance,the weakest batsman will be the target going on cricketing reasons alone. Ganguly was the one (due to the superior talent of his peers)and he fell. Its that simple. No use complicating things like last 20 blah blah.

As for waiting for a weak performance to drop him,they are usually no more than "excuses" to drop a player you don't want in the scheme of things.It has as much value in reality as the excuse of WMD to invade Iraq.Day to day operartions are often aligned with vision and strategy chalked out at the top and people at the top seem to have decided Ganguly has to leave and Yuvraj is in.

Should the management carry him just for the sake of uninformed public perception?

puneets · Post by **puneets** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 2:31 pm

Dhruv wrote: Which batsman would you prefer:

One who scored 50 in every innings he played or
One that scores 0 in every 3 but 200 in the every 4th.

They'll have the same average.

Yes, avgs are not the best statistics when it comes to cricket. It doesn't even take into account the match situation and the team requirements.

But the example that you mentioned has just 4 matches( a very short time series). Avgs do make some sense in the long run. Along with standard deviations, they can be a great tool for analysis.

*sridinats* · Post by ***sridinats*** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 2:47 pm

I have not been following this thread but it is heartening to know that fellow forum member have taken the analysis of Pawar replacing Dalmiya to the extent of caluclating the median,standard deviation and what not!

Btw,

i would be interested to kno Lara's performance this year...he got 5 centuries but i suspect too many low scores and thus wud come in the latter category in the options that Dhruv gave!

Sridhar

puneets · Post by **puneets** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 2:52 pm

*sridinats* wrote:i would be interested to kno Lara's performance this year...he got 5 centuries but i suspect too many low scores and thus wud come in the latter category in the options that Dhruv gave!
Sridhar

Sridhar - Check it out here.
Cricinfo StatsGuru for Lara

PKBasu · Post by **PKBasu** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:51 am

genius wrote:
puneets wrote: there is no reason to drop him suddelny.
The manner in which the selectors have dropped him this time is blatantly wrong, both to Ganguly and the cricket fans.
For the umpteenth time, he was dropped for Yuvraj. This is not a numbers game.

In cases like this where you want to give a new guy a chance,the weakest batsman will be the target going on cricketing reasons alone. Ganguly was the one (due to the superior talent of his peers)and he fell. Its that simple. No use complicating things like last 20 blah blah.

?

The weakest performer by a long way was Gambhir. If that was the criterion, Gambhir should have been dropped.

PKBasu · Post by **PKBasu** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:58 am

This report tells me that the Oreo cookies (white on the inside, brown outside) have definitely regained complete control of world cricket:

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/cont ... 29756.html

So Sharad Pawar is now President of the BCCI and the Asian Cricket Council, but Maharaja Dungarpur acts on his behalf. Dungarpur of course is a classic Oreo cookie (his ancestors helped the British win in 1857, he sabotaged India in the Nagpur test last year, he it was who appointed Azhar captain on a whim, and he it is who has controlled the BCCI during its most hapless periods). Ehsan Mani (President of the ICC) also appears to be an Oreo cookie, judging from what Wasim Akram has been saying about him recently. And Shahryar Khan of course is a classic old style Nawab (belonging to a khandaan that was solidly aligned with the Brits, and a first cousin of our own Nawab of Pataudi). So the old British Empire has regained complete control of cricket.

genius · Post by **genius** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 9:02 am

PKBasu wrote:
The weakest performer by a long way was Gambhir. If that was the criterion, Gambhir should have been dropped.

But this particular decision was one of those strategic long term decisions. This type of decision cannot be viewed through the prism of performances alone except partly (though performances are often used as the excuse to drive away an unwanted person).

Say if i am a selector or coach/captain and think Rayudu is ready fro international cricket . The moment Laxman slips , i will say "poor performance" for public consumption and bring in Rayudu into Laxman's regular slot.(this may well happen in a few years time)That's how Clarke got into Lehmann's slot isn't it?

At the moment they may be thinking Laxman has still some years left in him and Rayudu can do with more seasoning.

Yuvraj has been waiting for around 5 years now . But he was struggling to to find a slot and a stint at opening failed.

The obvious middle order slots available at the moment are Laxman and Ganguly. The slots occupied by Tendulkar and Dravid are no hopers until they are too old.

Laxman had a poor season. but he has show the rare ability of mastering australia's fearsome attack and hence rated more highly.That may have well saved him the axe ahead of Ganguly.Ganguly gave them the opportunity with a prolonged slump.

Hence they took this time as the opportunity to bring Yuvraj in ,though it was delayed by politics a bit.

I have been thinkin of this move for some years myself as i felt that it was Ganguly who had the least to offer as a test batsman. Hence a interesting coincidence the team management has taken the same !

Harsh that Ganguly himself had groomed Yuvraj.Ironical it is the attraction of Yuvraj's natural talent that has seen the exit of Ganguly.

As for Gambhir's slot, yes it is also still contentious.But Ganguly is no opener and so no point talking about that position.

shaili · Post by **shaili** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 9:22 am

shouldn't the above posts go in the ganguly thread?

sanjay8886 · Post by **sanjay8886** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:44 am

The problem is if the performance was really a criteria, then Agarkar should not have been in the team. Zaheer, Pathan and Balaji should have been the first choice amongst the fast bowler.

Kumble's axing from ODI especially in home series defies logic. It is not a question of Yuvraj vs Ganguly. See what happened here. Dravid got sick. Why do you have 14-15 members in your side? You always have somebody to choose from. If you just not consider SG home series with Pak, his performance has never been bad. Remember, you can't really compare him with Sachin and Dravid since he had added responsibility of captainship. And there are more people whom he made enemy then friends outside the team.

My major argument is "what selectors are trying to do here?". You can't really say SG is very old whereas every other indian batsman is young. How can you draft a player inside a team as an "allrounder" and don't give him bowling as well as enough chance to show his credentials. All of sudden all exceptions only apply to SG like "not disturbing winning combinations etc." Why can't Yuvraj stay in team alongwith SG. After all there are 13 other player whoose position in team should not be taken as granted.

The inconsistent argument/comments/behaviour of selector's is what driving me crazy. Forget about what others have to say on this. Can you just see a logic? A player comes as an "allrounder( who was always really a batsman)", doesn't gets enough chance, and gets dropped citing all sorts of nonsensical reasons( which only applies to one player).

This is cricket crazy nation. You can't really escape from such blatant politics. Well, we don't know inside politics. But as a outsider, it looks to me very clear, that there are people like Chappel, Dravid and politics of Pawar which forced selectors to take such action. It is hard to believe that it is SG vs Yuvi.

Kumar · Post by **Kumar** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 3:07 pm

sanjay8886 wrote:. But as a outsider, it looks to me very clear, that there are people like Chappel, Dravid and politics of Pawar which forced selectors to take such action. It is hard to believe that it is SG vs Yuvi.

I think motives attributed to Pawar for dropping Ganguly are very flimsy... When Ganguly was stripped as captain, it was attributed to More and Chappel and not Dalmiya... And today when Same Ganguly is dropped, we have the same two people in addition to Pawar and Dravid... I don't see Pawar getting on the phone to Kiran More and telling him, "Sack Ganguly or Else!!!"...

Blame Chappel or More or even Dravid, but stop pointing fingers at Pawar... And if you guys feel that Pawar should have interfered and ensured that Ganguly is not dropped, aren't we going down the same slippery slope that we have before?

Kumble's axing from ODI especially in home series defies logic.

Sanjay don't tell me that you are blaming the Kumble's axing on Pawar-More-Chappell-Dravid...And just in case you are, these are the stats comparing him with Bhaji from 2004-01-01 through 2005-08-01, when Ganguly-More-Dalmiya was at the helm.. You will observe that Kumble has just played 18 ODI(one in India) while Bhaji has played 35 ODIs (16 in India).. And You can observe that Kumble's average is 51.18 and nobody can really make a good case for him in the same period...ODI's nowadays is a young man's game with lot of importance on fitness... Further There is no point in wasting Kumble on these meaningless ODIs which takes a heavy toll on players...

filtered 18 70 24 14.00 0 0 16 3/38 51.18 0 3 0
35 170 41* 21.25 0 0 34 3/28 39.14 0 13 0

in India 1 - - - - - 2 2/54 27.00 0 0 0
16 84 37* 28.00 0 0 14 3/35 43.64 0 7 0

As to the issue of Agarkar always finding a spot over other deserving players, I agree with you entirely that Zaheer is probably a better bowler than Agarkar... And this has been happening for a whole lot more years than just now...Though the new team management thinks much more of him than the old one...But please note that both Balaji and Zaheer have been much more injury prone than Agarkar... And we have had instances when Zaheer was playing in the team, even though he wasn't 100% fit...

What we need is a professional set up of selectors, not just big cricketing names... We have had big names as coaches and selectors and we have not done that well (under Kapil as coach and Vishwanath as Selector)...

genius · Post by **genius** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:58 pm

The thing is its not only the new team management but Agarkar has support from Wasim Akram of all people.Till then i felt Agarkar is being persisted with for experience , questionable one day returns and just because most others are as mediocre.I thought i must be missing something.

But Akram certainly thinks Agarkar has talent and can do well.

Shows how different the perceptions of fans and international cricketer can become.

forpar · Post by **forpar** » Sat Dec 17, 2005 5:54 pm

I will never understand why Agarkar is given so many chances. He has been in for so long. If he has it in him, we would have seen it already.

jaydeep · Post by **jaydeep** » Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:28 pm

Over the next four years, the board would have earned an amount that would match the worth of Rahul Bajaj - 20th richest businessman in India.

“One and a half billion”, says Lalit Modi. Rupees? “Dollars,” clarifies Indian cricket’s new marketing moghul. Converted into ruppes, that is an astronomical 7,000 crore. Modi is confident that is eminently achievable. For half of that is already in the coffers.

Team Pawar eyes $ 1.5 billion

Jaydeep.