The AllRounder Issue

Here are a few excerpts from Harsha Bhogle's column in the Indian Express. When Harsha writes, India reads. Which is why, I find it a pity he doesn't write even more candidly on the crucial issues in Indian cricket. But here are a few gems on the selection of Ganguly in the Indian side and in particular as an all-rounder. What kind of all-rounder was it again ? Batting or bowling ? I tend to forget, anyway here goes:

Producers of films faced similar problems too and came up with a solution that works for them. When they have a star with a small role to play, he cannot be top of the credits nor can he, therefore, be the third or fourth name. Some get by with a “guest appearance or special appearance” but my favourite is where the title sequence reaches a climax, the music, the drums, reach a crescendo, the screen goes momentarily blank and then suddenly gets filled with “and above all, Dharmendra!”

India’s selectors seemed to have done that; picked 14 and “above all, Sourav Ganguly”.

Hehe, amusing stuff. Here's more though and this is the crucial part:

The same committee that was bringing in fresh air has succumbed. They have displayed their weakness by calling Ganguly a “bowling all-rounder” or a “batting all-rounder” or both. They could have called him a reserve wicket keeper and wouldn’t have been much further off reality. The last time we heard something as funny was when Shane Warne said he took a diuretic because his mother asked him to.

That is so aptly put and yet makes me roll on the floor in laughter. Oh the brilliance of the man (Harsha that is, not Sourav)