The manner of dropping Ganguly was gross

The supreme irony in Sourav Ganguly ouster from the Test team is that he is not an all-rounder. Had he been one, he would probably have retained his place. But with players like Irfan Pathan and Mahendra Singh Dhoni showing fine form with the bat to be regarded as all-rounders themselves, Ganguly became dispensable even as a batsman.

The truth is that the selectors had tried to bluff their way out of a messy situation by including him as an ‘all-rounder’ at the start of the series. This did not hoodwink anyone who knows his cricket, and Rahul Dravid knows it better than most.

In the two Tests, Ganguly bowled just two overs simply because the Indian captain did not see him in that role at all. He wanted runs from Ganguly, which came in modest numbers.

To retain Ganguly, one from Laxman, Gambhir, Yuvraj or Kaif would have to be sidelined.

Laxman and Yuvraj made timely runs, and Kaif has been distinctly unlucky not to make it to the playing eleven. Gambhir was the most vulnerable because of three poor innings on the trot, but the team management obviously values his potential, as also wanting specialists in the top two positions in the batting order, even though Dravid and Irfan both opened in Delhi.

That’s why Mumbai opener Wasim Jaffer’s selection in place of Ganguly is not unmerited. For the series’ against Pakistan and England - given their formidable pace attacks —- it was imperative to create a pool of openers to provide Dravid options. Jaffer, arguably the best back-foot player of the new ball in India and in superb form this season adds depth to the team, and also puts pressure on Gambhir to perform.

In effect, Jaffer should be seen as an alternative to Gambhir - perhaps in the next Test itself - while Ganguly’s problems have been caused by the comparatively high scores of Laxman and Yuvraj, and compounded by the rapid progress of Irfan and Dhoni as Test batsmen. If all above-mentioned players are in decent form, a sixth specialist batsman becomes redundant, and Dravid can include an extra bowler.

Purely from a cricketing point of view, therefore, Ganguly’s dropping can be argued with some logic. But the manner of his dropping has been gross. For instance, Jaffer should have been brought in as cover for Sehwag for the Delhi Test itself if the team management was looking ahead to the series against Pakistan and England. Also, there was no evidence during the Delhi Test that Ganguly was intimated about his position.

Suppose he was told, “Look mate, time’s running, give us something worthwhile to retain you,’’ his approach could well have been different. Instead, all kinds of pleasant noises were made of Ganguly’s presence in the team, giving him to understand that he had only to prove he was in reasonable touch to retain his place. That makes it unfair.

Does this mean the end of the road for Ganguly? At 32, he is not old enough to be written off completely, yet not young enough to wait a few years for another opportunity. It will take a string of strong performances from here to convince the selectors that he is good enough still. And please, not as an all-rounder, but batsman.

That was a fudge which has not done neither Ganguly any good nor Indian cricket any credit.