We deserved to win :M.S.Dhoni,indian captain

India captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni said his side was the deserving winner in the third one-dayer in Kanpur on Thursday though England gave the closest fight in the series so far.

India won the match by 16 runs under Duckworth/Lewis method to take a 3-0 lead in the seven-match series and Dhoni said the home team was always ahead even under the D/L method.

"It was a tough match and it was the closest so far but we were ahead at every stage," he said.

"In the morning when I went out for the toss I knew that D/L method could be applied as we know light fades away very fast at this venue after 4pm.

"So we were prepared, I had a chit of D/L calculations. Once we knew D/L method would be applied we decided to preserve wickets as we knew we were ahead and runs could be scored from the power play (to be taken by batting side)," he said after the match.

Dhoni said the pitch was a difficult one to bat on but his batsmen were up to the task by taking ones and twos and ensured that no wickets were lost once the D/L method came into picture.

"The pitch was slowing down and the odd ball turning. It was difficult to bat on. But we decided to preserve wickets and take the singles as D/L method was in mind," he added.

The India captain, however, warned his boys not to lower their guards, saying the series is far from over and they have to win one more match.

"We want to win the series, have to win four matches. That is the most important thing. We want to make it 4-0 first before thinking of anything else," he said

Sachin is Sachin

The family man beneath the champion cricketer came to the fore again and Sachin Tendulkar said he missed his deceased father after eclipsing Brian Lara's world record for most runs in Test cricket's history.
Once he reached the mark, Tendulkar took off his helmet and looked upwards, as if muttering a silent prayer.
"When I looked up, I had two thoughts in my mind. First I thanked the almighty for all he has given to me. Then I thanked my father. Today I miss him. Definitely he would have been a proud man today," Tendulkar said.
On this momentous occasion, none of his family members was around and the batting great explained, his family members don't believe in public display of emotions.
"I don't play for records and it's not that everyone has to be around. We'll celebrate. They all value this, they all must be extremely happy for me, I know. But it's not my family style to go over the top. As long as I know their feeling, it's important and I know that everyone must be extremely happy for me." Asked how his son would celebrate the feat, Tendulkar said, "Well, I'm not sure because he always surprises me." Tendulkar said today's historic feat was one of the proudest moments of his career.
"Of course it is. I mean whenever the team wins or does well, it's a fantastic feeling. Of course there was some excitement in mind but I had a big task ahead. It was an important knock for when I went into bat, we had lost three wickets in no time. It was important to get a partnership," Tendulkar said, of his 142-run stand with Sourav Ganguly.
It has finally happened. Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar has surpassed Brian Lara as the leading run-getter in Test cricket history.
It was almost destined that Tendulkar achieved the feat against his favourite opposition - Australia - against who he has amassed 9 Test centuries and over 2000 runs.
Tendulkar has become the 10th batsman in Test match history to hold the world record. Here is the list:-
Batsman Final Tally Record set Record held for C Hill (Australia) 3412 July 1902 22y-4m

JB Hobbs (England) 5410 Dec 1924 12y-6m

WR Hammond (England) 7249 June 1937 33y-5m

MC Cowdrey (England) 7624 Nov 1970 1y-4m

GS Sobers (West Indies) 8032 Mar 1972 9y-9m

G Boycott (England) 8114 Dec 1981 1y-11m

SM Gavaskar (India) 10112 Nov 1983 9y-3m

A Border (Australia) 11174 Feb 1993 12y-9m

BC Lara (West Indies) 11953 Nov 2005 2y-11m

SR Tendulkar (India) ????? Oct 2008

Allan Border held the record for the most number of years (in recen times). How long would Tendulkar hold on to it? Only time will tell.
Interestingly, when on 23 runs (on Monday) Sachin Tendulkar became the highest run scorer for a single team. Brian Lara has scored 11912 runs for West Indies alone. It may be recalled that Lara scored 5 & 36 for the World XI vs Australia in the Super Test. Tendulkar however was not part of the World XI side for the Super Test.It's been a fantastic journey: Sachin Tendulkar

With special inputs from PTI-Mohali

Sourav quit

“This will be my last series,” … “Before coming here, I spoke to my team-mates and hopefully I will go out with a winning knock” Sourav Ganguly, yesterday, announced his retirement from International Cricket after the upcoming Oz series. The decision might be surprise for a few but it was expected ever since his name was included in the test squad. Ganguly has mentioned in the press conference that he wants this series to end on a high note without any controversies. But there will be definitely lots of talks in media over his retirement. However, I don’t wish to talk about the same issue.

Sourav Ganguly, is unarguably the best left hander India has ever produced. He is India’s most successful captain, a leader with the killer instinct and innovation, batsman of highest ability, class and elegance. Many of us love him and many of us hate him. But to me Sourav Ganguly has been a real inspirational role model. Throughout his career Ganguly made it his habit to defy the odds.

When he was first selected in 1996, there were many who doubted his selection saying that he was included in the side not on his ability but due to the quota system. He made one of the most splendid debuts in the test cricket hitting consecutive centuries against England in England. Ganguly never looked back again and in the coming few years was crowned the title ‘Prince of Kolkata’ by legendary Sir Geoff Boycott for his unmatched timing on the cricket ball. Soon, he became one of the most destructive one day player.

After the failure of the home test series against South Africa, Sachin Tendulkar resigned from the captaincy. Sourav took over from him and lead India to win the ODI series. But soon after winning the one-day series, there were allegations of match fixing on few of the leading players in the team then. The ban and retirement of few players after the incident left the team in the doldrums. It was during this juncture the great leader emerged in the Cricketing arena by the name of Sourav Ganguly aka DADA.

Ganguly rebuilt the team with a great vision. He identified the youngsters who had the potential and backed them to the hilt. At the same time he understood the importance of the seniors and fought with selectors many time for their place. The faith in the ability of new guns and veterans did wonder for the captain and the team. His enthusiastic sporting action and his aggressive nature in the field made a new style in the world of Cricket. The team reached the finals of the 2003 world cup, won the Champions Trophy and the very famous Natwest victory, defeating Australia in 2001 test series and then drawing against them in 2003-04, beating Pakistan in Pakistan for the first time. These were few of the achievements of this great cricketer. He dared to look into the eyes of the opposition and fought fire with fire.

Saurav was possibly the first Indian captain who lacked any regional bias while selecting players to the Indian team. The players like Harbhajan, Zaheer, Yuvraj, Sehwag, Dhoni, Irfan Pathan who are holding the team currently have been backed by Sourav and he has left a rich legacy for the team. But they say that the life is not bed of roses and Ganguly was sacked from the captaincy and lost his place in the side after the spat with the infamous coach Greig Chappell. He defied all odds again and made a dream comeback to the national side in the late 2006 against South Africa. He amassed over 1100 runs, with 239 his career-best score against Pakistan in Bangalore in late 2007, at a fantastic average of 61.44 last year, which compares very favourably with his career average of 41.74 in 109 Tests. In the same period he scored at an average of over 45 in the ODIs. This comeback indeed made him a true legend. Ganguly finished his one-day career with 11,363 runs in 311 matches, one of only seven batsmen to reach the 10,000-run mark in limited-overs cricket.

Off late, Ganguly lost his place in ODIs and his place in test was also not sure. He has announced his retirement at the right time. I say right time because this is the time when you need to start the systematic phase out of the seniors so that young players can be drafted into the team. This has been trend which is followed by Australians and it is heartening to see that Dada has lead in this department as well. I must admit that I have never seen any Indian great retire with grace like an Australian by announcing in advance. The others were practically removed. Dada has been all grace while quitting captaincy and cricket.

The void that will be left by Dada’s absence can not be filled but then the show must go on. Let’s hope that Ganguly will script one of the best swan song. I wish the loving Dada all the best for the upcoming series.

Ganguly’s Cricketing Trivia:

Test:

* Captained India in a record 49 Test matches* Led India to a record 21 Test wins* His test average has never been less than 40

ODIs:

* Hold the record of most 200+ ODI partnerships (6 times) along with Sachin Tendulkar and Ricky Ponting.* Holds the record, shared with Sachin Tendulkar, for most 1st wicket ODI partnerships of 175+ runs (7 times).* Holds the record, shared with Mahendra Singh Dhoni, for the second highest score by an Indian cricketer in an ODI — 183, against Sri Lanka in 1999.* Held the record, shared with Sachin Tendulkar, for the highest first wicket partnership for India in an ODI match, 258, against Kenya in 2001. This record was bettered by Sri Lankan opening pair of Jayasuriya and Tharanga in 2006 at Headingley.* Was involved in the first 300 run ODI partnership with Rahul Dravid.* Sixth on the all time list with 31 Man of the Match awards.* He is also the only player to win 4 consecutive Man of the Match awards in ODIs.* India’s most successful ODI captain.* First Indian to score an ODI century against Australia in Australia.* Highest ODI runs scorer in the world (in a calendar year) in 1997,1999,2000.* Third in the list of hitting maximum number of sixes in ODIs.* Second in the list of highest number of centuries in a single calendar year ever. 7 centuries in 2000.
Ganguly has been 1 Indian Captain who has rewritten History of Indian Cricket Probably a few days back Dada announced that atleast 2 years cricket is still left in him .But after visiting the Bangalore camp and witnessing the attitute of other cricketers with him he probably felt why to linger abt to fight for coming into the team which has players that reaaly dnt want his presence in the team namely(Sehwag,Dhoni,Yuvraj)and probably the previous selection team as well( Dilip Vengsarkar never wanted him to be in the team nor did his predecessors Kiran More)
What does this signify ?What has Ganguly to prove to anyone?
He has simply got tired of all this in and then out and then again in to the team (He has proved his mental strength and composure infront of the whole world by his comeback in 2006.
He turned a bunch of talented but directionless individuals into a todays High profile Cricketers like
(Yuvraj,Zaheer,Harbhajan,Dhoni,Pathan,sehwag)
and look these crickters are paying back to him in his times when needs the team the most he has been Devastated by the Team.
He turned India into what is famously called as "Team India"
He showed how to give it back to Arrogant Aussies and Egoful England cricketers and rude Pakistanis .
Ganguly will be remembered as the Laying stone or Pillar Of Todays And futures Team India.........
I wish Sourav a lot of success in his coming life and and wish that he may be able to turn his last series into a proving point That he is still THE DADA OF INDIAN CRICKET..........
I wish a very happy family life with Sana his daughter and his wife Dona and his entire family .....
I wish that BCCI should give him a very famous FAREWELL IN RIGHT SPIRITS lest he will never ever come back to serve TEAM INDIA AGAIN AS A COACH OR A SELECTOR IN FUTURE..............
OK DADA BYE BYE . I AM PLEDGING TODAY THAT I WILL PROBABLY SOME DAY IN FUTURE MEET U AND MAKE A FILM ON U AND UR CAREER .......
BYE DADA WILL REMEMBER U THROUGH OUT MY LIFE....................

Should Zimbabwe be banned or Politics be keep separate from Cricket ?

In the late Seventies, when governments in southern Africa came in white racist flavours, Robert Mugabe was a hero. Leftish undergraduates in my university preferred him to Joshua Nkomo, his rival in the Rhodesian resistance movement, because Mugabe seemed more unequivocally red. And in the matter of winning liberation from white tyranny, Zimbabwe led the way: it achieved majority rule in 1980, more than ten years before its larger neighbour, South Africa. Just thinking about that time raises ancient memories: the wonderfully named first president of Zimbabwe, Canaan Banana, the leader of the Patriotic Front, Bishop Muzorewa, the new place names — Zimbabwe, Harare — that seemed so unlikely then, but which so swiftly replaced Rhodesia and Salisbury in our maps and minds.
If Mugabe was a famous resistance hero then, he’s a notorious Third World thug now. On the face of it, in this he doesn’t seem exceptional. North Korea’s deranged Stalinist regime, Saudi Arabia’s fanatical kleptocracy and Libya’s one-man State are measurably further removed from representative government than Mugabe’s Zanu-PF rule, which at least takes the trouble to hold elections before it steals them, as Mugabe has just done. Loathsome though he is, it isn’t clear that the State he runs is less democratic than China, which is going to host this year’s Olympic Games, an event which every country in the world will attend.
But Zimbabwe has been singled out by Western countries as uniquely obnoxious. Queen Elizabeth has withdrawn the honorary knighthood granted to Robert Mugabe on the advice of the British government, and Britain and America have imposed economic sanctions on Zimbabwe. Britain’s culture secretary, Andy Burnham, has instructed the European Central Bank to cut bilateral ties with Zimbabwe, and, specifically, to cancel Zimbabwe’s cricket tour of England next year.
This has led to some heated argument about Western hypocrisy, shored up by familiar accusations of inconsistency and partiality. Why hasn’t the West asked for Saudi Arabia to be banned from the World Cup, given that it’s run by fundamentalist despots? Why isn’t Israel sanctioned for brutalizing the West Bank and relentlessly stealing Palestinian land? Why hasn’t Andy Burnham instructed the British Olympic association to boycott the Games in the context of the Chinese ‘occupation’ of Tibet and its moral indifference to genocide in Africa?
This debate is relevant to Indian cricket in the context of the impending International Cricket Council meeting that will discuss, among other things, a proposal to strip Zimbabwe of full membership of the ICC and disbar it from playing international cricket at the highest level. The Board of Control for Cricket in India has declared that it will support Zimbabwe’s current status as a full member. The thinking behind the BCCI’s stand is straightforward: Zimbabwe’s board is a reliable supporter of the BCCI’s South Asian bloc in the conclaves of the ICC, and one vote in ten isn’t to be sneezed at.
In the debate about the rights and wrongs of sanctioning Zimbabwe, several thoughtful commentators, including John Traicos, a white cricketer who played Test cricket for both South Africa and Zimbabwe, have argued that excluding Zimbabwean teams from international matches would be to punish sportsmen for the sins of politicians, an argument that seems to shore up the BCCI’s position. They have also argued that banning Zimbabwe is a low-cost way of feeling self-righteous, but one that will do nothing to hasten the end of Mugabe’s regime. The fact that the main critics of Zimbabwe tend to be Western politicians and cricket administrators, notable for their selectively sensitive consciences, hasn’t helped the boycott cause either.
From an Indian point of view, there are two problems with the argument for keeping politics and sports apart. The Indian government, the Indian intelligentsia and the BCCI were in the vanguard of the campaign to ostracize South Africa and South African cricket for half a century, so we can’t now start being principled about the autonomy of sport. The question we need to answer is this: is Mugabe’s thuggish and predatory regime as evil as apartheid South Africa? In ideological terms, if we compare the regimes in terms of their ruling philosophies, the short answer to this question is "No". But if we were to compare the quality of life that the two regimes made possible, the answer is less simple.
Under Mugabe, the life expectancy of Zimbabweans, male and female, has been nearly halved, from 60 to the mid-30s. Ten per cent of its population is HIV positive, 20 per cent if you look at the band of people between 15 and 49. Its agriculture has collapsed, its money is worth nothing and there is a real danger of widespread hunger and starvation in a country that was once the most efficient grain producer in Africa. The redistribution of agricultural land, disproportionately held by white farmers, has been done corruptly and arbitrarily to enrich Mugabe’s political cronies and is one of the main reasons for the economy’s collapse.
Peter Chingoka, the president of Zimbabwe Cricket, is, unsurprisingly, close to Mugabe’s regime. Zimbabwe Cricket, in the last few years, has presided over an exodus of its best players and the weakening of the national team to the point where it has less competitive credibility than Bangladesh. An audit of its finances revealed serious irregularities. Under pressure from the BCCI, the ICC has done nothing to hold Zimbabwe to account.
The BCCI has to decide whether it wishes to be the patron-in-chief of a dysfunctional, politically compromised, and, in the light of the audit, very likely corrupt, Zimbabwean board. It has to work out whether it wants the ICC to continue to financially subsidize such an organization, a subsidy that, in effect, makes the ICC and the BCCI complicit in the violence of Mugabe’s regime (of which Zimbabwe Cricket is a client). It shouldn’t be a hard decision to make.
The views of the ECB and David Morgan on this matter are unimportant: what should be decisive for Pawar and Modi as Indians is the position taken by the South African cricket board, which has suspended all cricket relations with Zimbabwe. But more than the South African cricket board, the BCCI should take its cue from Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, who have both in recent days, condemned Robert Mugabe’s leadership. When the two greatest political leaders of South Africa’s struggle against apartheid are driven to disown a man who was once a comrade-in-arms in their struggle against racist tyranny, it’s time for the BCCI to take a break from ICC realpolitik and follow suit.
In the late Seventies, when governments in southern Africa came in white racist flavours, Robert Mugabe was a hero. Leftish undergraduates in my university preferred him to Joshua Nkomo, his rival in the Rhodesian resistance movement, because Mugabe seemed more unequivocally red. And in the matter of winning liberation from white tyranny, Zimbabwe led the way: it achieved majority rule in 1980, more than ten years before its larger neighbour, South Africa. Just thinking about that time raises ancient memories: the wonderfully named first president of Zimbabwe, Canaan Banana, the leader of the Patriotic Front, Bishop Muzorewa, the new place names — Zimbabwe, Harare — that seemed so unlikely then, but which so swiftly replaced Rhodesia and Salisbury in our maps and minds.
If Mugabe was a famous resistance hero then, he’s a notorious Third World thug now. On the face of it, in this he doesn’t seem exceptional. North Korea’s deranged Stalinist regime, Saudi Arabia’s fanatical kleptocracy and Libya’s one-man State are measurably further removed from representative government than Mugabe’s Zanu-PF rule, which at least takes the trouble to hold elections before it steals them, as Mugabe has just done. Loathsome though he is, it isn’t clear that the State he runs is less democratic than China, which is going to host this year’s Olympic Games, an event which every country in the world will attend.
But Zimbabwe has been singled out by Western countries as uniquely obnoxious. Queen Elizabeth has withdrawn the honorary knighthood granted to Robert Mugabe on the advice of the British government, and Britain and America have imposed economic sanctions on Zimbabwe. Britain’s culture secretary, Andy Burnham, has instructed the European Central Bank to cut bilateral ties with Zimbabwe, and, specifically, to cancel Zimbabwe’s cricket tour of England next year.
This has led to some heated argument about Western hypocrisy, shored up by familiar accusations of inconsistency and partiality. Why hasn’t the West asked for Saudi Arabia to be banned from the World Cup, given that it’s run by fundamentalist despots? Why isn’t Israel sanctioned for brutalizing the West Bank and relentlessly stealing Palestinian land? Why hasn’t Andy Burnham instructed the British Olympic association to boycott the Games in the context of the Chinese ‘occupation’ of Tibet and its moral indifference to genocide in Africa?
This debate is relevant to Indian cricket in the context of the impending International Cricket Council meeting that will discuss, among other things, a proposal to strip Zimbabwe of full membership of the ICC and disbar it from playing international cricket at the highest level. The Board of Control for Cricket in India has declared that it will support Zimbabwe’s current status as a full member. The thinking behind the BCCI’s stand is straightforward: Zimbabwe’s board is a reliable supporter of the BCCI’s South Asian bloc in the conclaves of the ICC, and one vote in ten isn’t to be sneezed at.
In the debate about the rights and wrongs of sanctioning Zimbabwe, several thoughtful commentators, including John Traicos, a white cricketer who played Test cricket for both South Africa and Zimbabwe, have argued that excluding Zimbabwean teams from international matches would be to punish sportsmen for the sins of politicians, an argument that seems to shore up the BCCI’s position. They have also argued that banning Zimbabwe is a low-cost way of feeling self-righteous, but one that will do nothing to hasten the end of Mugabe’s regime. The fact that the main critics of Zimbabwe tend to be Western politicians and cricket administrators, notable for their selectively sensitive consciences, hasn’t helped the boycott cause either.
From an Indian point of view, there are two problems with the argument for keeping politics and sports apart. The Indian government, the Indian intelligentsia and the BCCI were in the vanguard of the campaign to ostracize South Africa and South African cricket for half a century, so we can’t now start being principled about the autonomy of sport. The question we need to answer is this: is Mugabe’s thuggish and predatory regime as evil as apartheid South Africa? In ideological terms, if we compare the regimes in terms of their ruling philosophies, the short answer to this question is "No". But if we were to compare the quality of life that the two regimes made possible, the answer is less simple.
Under Mugabe, the life expectancy of Zimbabweans, male and female, has been nearly halved, from 60 to the mid-30s. Ten per cent of its population is HIV positive, 20 per cent if you look at the band of people between 15 and 49. Its agriculture has collapsed, its money is worth nothing and there is a real danger of widespread hunger and starvation in a country that was once the most efficient grain producer in Africa. The redistribution of agricultural land, disproportionately held by white farmers, has been done corruptly and arbitrarily to enrich Mugabe’s political cronies and is one of the main reasons for the economy’s collapse.
Peter Chingoka, the president of Zimbabwe Cricket, is, unsurprisingly, close to Mugabe’s regime. Zimbabwe Cricket, in the last few years, has presided over an exodus of its best players and the weakening of the national team to the point where it has less competitive credibility than Bangladesh. An audit of its finances revealed serious irregularities. Under pressure from the BCCI, the ICC has done nothing to hold Zimbabwe to account.
The BCCI has to decide whether it wishes to be the patron-in-chief of a dysfunctional, politically compromised, and, in the light of the audit, very likely corrupt, Zimbabwean board. It has to work out whether it wants the ICC to continue to financially subsidize such an organization, a subsidy that, in effect, makes the ICC and the BCCI complicit in the violence of Mugabe’s regime (of which Zimbabwe Cricket is a client). It shouldn’t be a hard decision to make.
The views of the ECB and David Morgan on this matter are unimportant: what should be decisive for Pawar and Modi as Indians is the position taken by the South African cricket board, which has suspended all cricket relations with Zimbabwe. But more than the South African cricket board, the BCCI should take its cue from Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, who have both in recent days, condemned Robert Mugabe’s leadership. When the two greatest political leaders of South Africa’s struggle against apartheid are driven to disown a man who was once a comrade-in-arms in their struggle against racist tyranny, it’s time for the BCCI to take a break from ICC realpolitik and follow suit.