The way we react
November 24th, 2008
Let me clarify this before I write further - I have always felt that if Dravid feels he still has enough cricket left in him he should take a break, go back to domestic cricket and then when he feels ready announce his availability. He should not have to “prove himself” by making big scores in domestic, although if he is in form that should happen automatically. But for players who have been tested internationally for a long time, such a condition should not be necessary. If he feels he is ready we trust him enough. Right now he is hardly visible in the game and has been like that for quite some time now. Personally, my “fan’s judgment” is his problems seem to to be in his mind. So a break for a series or two shouldn’t be a bad idea. There could be a situation where his replacements play so well that Dravid can’t even get in. That will be a good problem to have, but you don’t replace Dravid because some player X scored 150 on a flat track in India. The real test of who can replace Dravid will come only when India tours abroad - the next one outside the subcontinent is against New Zealand in March. Until then we can never be sure as on the subcontinental pitches the value of the replacement can’t really be judged. In either case Dravid should get a preference once he is ready. Having said that I find it surprising how we all react differently to similar situations involving two different players: Saurav Ganguly faced a similar situation 3 years back when he was making those scores in the range of 30-35 against Sri Lanka and Pakistan. He was subsequently dropped again. In general the public and press opinion was “Ganguly’s career is over”, “He is history” and so on. There were a few who sympathized (I can humbly brag that I was one of them) but the overall tone was that there was no need to consider Ganguly ever again. Now Dravid finds himself in a similar situation. But this time generally his failures are being played down. In general the critics are not bringing the issue to forefront. Even us, the supporters find ourselves ignoring it. Why could this be? Is it because of the personalities of the players involved? Ganguly always looked arrogant while Dravid has the quiet hardworking type image which Indian people typically support. There is no difference in the stature: Dravid will easily be amongst India’s top 5 batsmen ever. His captaincy didn’t click much or he didn’t get enough time, we will never know that. Ganguly will be amongst India’s top 2-3 captains ever and certainly the most successful one so far. We will never know how good a batsman he might have turned out if he was never given the captaincy, but his last two years definitely made us think there was something more than what we saw. So in a way they are players of same stature. That’s why I found it very surprising. May be Ganguly’s failures as a captain and a batsman coincided with the overall season of everybody being out of form and somehow he was held responsible for it. In Dravid’s case right from last year others like Tendulkar, Ganguly and Laxman are playing well so his failures are not costing the team that much. I think it’s just the personality that attracts a different reaction.